Have settled into my new life experience here at Earthaven Eco-Village in the Carolina Mountains. Made the long haul this past week across the country from Oregon. Went through a blizzard and had a coyote take out my travel partner's radiator. Spent a couple days waiting repairs out in Laramie, Wyoming. Nice town actually!
Gary brought this to my attention so I thought I'd give it a little attention until he can come up with more COG drama and trauma.
For a genuine historical and theological perspective on the Birth circumstances of Jesus a good read of "Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism by John Spong or "The Birth of the Messiah" by Raymond Brown might be enjoyable this time of year.
This post is for that apostate babbler Diehl who blasphemously asserted in his Nov 30th post, under "CCOG, things..." (Nov 29), that God broke the law by committing fornication when He impregnated Mary.
-----------------------------------------
The reason this perspective came up is because when pastoring, a teen came up to me and asked me about why God not being "married" to Mary or she to it/him would be considered to have fornicated by any definition. Kids don't meander around with theological apologetics in my experience. They tend to go by what the church/Bible is plainly telling them not to do.
Father Raymond Brown was disappointed in WCG's Dr. Ernest Martin for taking the birth narrative of Jesus , the star and such too literally and trying to explain it with Jupiter, Saturn and Mars conjunctions etc. He thought Dr. Martin should have known better.
Diehl is playing with danger by implying that Christ was born of fornication, since the Pharisees were put to shame by His resurrection from the dead. Not only that, he asserts that God doesn't exist, which makes him a double fool since the Pharisees at least believed in God's existence, even if they didn't believe in Christ.
--------------------------------------
Nothing combustible here. That Jesus was born of fornication is a Biblical theme in John 8. So much so that Jesus goes bonkers in the text ending up yelling back at them "Well, oh yeah...well you are of your father the devil, so there!" My translation. The story of Jesus forgiving the woman taken in adultery is a later addition to the text and meant to send the message that Mary was forgiven so leave mom alone. The fact that Matthew places four fallen women in Jesus genealogy, Rahab the harlot, Ruth the Moabite, Tamar who dressed as a prostitute and seduced her father-in-law in Gen 38, and Jezebel of David fame. Why? The message Matthew needed to send was that no matter what you say about Jesus birth circumstances, God can work through any woman of any reputation He wants. It was not exactly a denial of the circumstances. Just an apologetic.
Whether the Pharisees believed in God or not does make someone who does not a "double fool." But yes, I do assert to myself that I find no evidence save by faith in God or Jesus as presented in the Bible.
Secondly, Mary was impregnated in a divine supernatural way, not in the typical fleshly manner. It was a divine impregnation, not an act of illicit sexual intercourse. There is a difference here. It wasn't a case of one bearing an evil desire (lust) in order to commit a lawless act (fornication). It was a case of fulfilling a deliberate design (intelligence) in order to redeem mankind from its sins (goodness). God created the law; He doesn't break His own law (which is a higher law, Gal 5:23
). Otherwise, you wouldn't exist.
---------------------------------------------------
I'm not really concerned with the definition of fornication. I just know that what is wrong for geese in the world of the Bible teaching seems not wrong for the gander who came up with it. You do not really know how "divine supernatural way" works and can't prove anything about it. This is just Bible talk on your part. In reality it never actually happened as advertised but your apologetics as to how it all was and came about are just that, apologetics and you can prove nothing of it.
---------------------------------------------------
When a woman desires a child and goes to a semen bank to produce one, does the doctor commit fornication when he implants her with a fertilized egg, or is he simply a go-between? Does the woman commit fornication when she deliberately accepts the semen of a stranger into her womb? Or is it fornication if the doctor just mechanically inserts the semen alone without preparing a fertilized egg first? So how can it be fornication for the Godhead when all three decided to enter a human body? Who created and owns the soul and body? (1 Cor 6:19-20) Is Dietz saying that the holy Spirit illegally intruded into Mary's womb against her will? If so, why was Mary filled with the joy of the holy Spirit? Where is the sin since Paul says that fornication is a sin against the body? (1 Cor 6:18) Did God injure Himself or Mary by His actions? Is Dietz, like Job, accusing God of sin? Dietz, a former minister, not only doesn't know God, he doesn't know what the holy Spirit is, whether it is a person or if it is good (life-giving) or bad (fornication) for the body?
--------------------------------------------
The priests who actually wrote the Pentateuch in the 6th Century BCE while on vacation in Babylon were not writing knowing anything about artificial insemination, so your point is moot. Stick with the Bronze age concept. The name is Diehl. I doubt God injured himself or Mary herself in the act. Perhaps a chuckle?
Correct, I do not know God and according to my former dominators, I knew a lot about Jesus but did not know Jesus. I grew up in the "give your heart to Jesus" and "Know God" etc, so it holds no fascination with me. It has no real meaning and no one has ever actually explained giving hearts and knowing Jesus works in real life. I found over 26 years that people are just people and don't change much internally unless their health is threatened and then not very often either.
I am pleased that you have all these mysteries understood clearly and solved.
Even your definition of fornication as an act of intercourse between the unmarried or gods is incorrect. In the infamous example of 1 Cor 5 the woman fornicater is married.
------------------------------------------
A woman sleeping with the son of her husband is called "sexually immoral" and the text labels it as "incest" though it is not really technically. The woman would be committing adultery, the man would be as well in a rather obtuse way. Boy is dad going to be pissed. And too, I doubt it was really such a shock to the pagans as the text makes it out to be. HWA , it is said, slept with his son's sister, and I also hear they weren't sleeping.
The other fool who asked if God was married when He impregnated Mary doesn't know who or what God is when he asks that question. God isn't married to anyone. God is the great Husbandman who planted the first seed (Christ) so that the church could be married to His Son.
-------------------------------------
The other person.... Not "the other fool." You need, as a Christian to avoid calling other's fools if I read the NT text correctly. However, I guess the OT gives permission to not be aware of that one yet if those that deny the existence of God are "fools." They are not. They are not God haunted, faith restricted and simple folks who need more than "He that comes to God MUST BELIEVE THAT HE IS...." That is simply not good enough for the critical thinker in this world. For the go along to get along types? Yes, perfectly understood approach.
I do understand your rancor but please understand that I am neither faith restricted in my beliefs and observations nor into the apologetics necessary to get around obvious textural, historical and theological problems in the stories.
And that teen that first asked me what seemed to be an obvious Goose/Gander problem in the story of Mary was not going to let me bullshit him. I told him that was a very question.
Im going to skip a step, bypass the present messes of the world, and head to "Mars Haven"
ReplyDeleteLove this place. Just had bears and copperheads orientation😂😳
ReplyDeleteDennis - I think your Bible knowledge might be getting rusty.
ReplyDeleteJezebel was Ahaz's wife and Ahaz was not part of the Davidic line.
I have been watching the great course - how did Jesus become God - on Amazon Prime.
Apparently during this time period there were a number of men who became God - wise as children and resurrected at death.
It also covers how the narrative of the gospels kept changing the later they wee written.
The course also showed how the passover history changed from Jesus keeping the Passover to being killed the day before as our passover lamb.
The biblical narrative about Christ's nativity is only a problem for Atheists and Fundamentalists. The notion of being pledged to marry someone is a manmade invention. I've pointed out before that there is NO biblical ceremony specified relative to marriage. The biblical formula is a man and woman 1. leave their parent's home, 2. cohabitate with each other, and 3. have sexual intercourse with each other - PERIOD! Engagements, wedding feasts, vows, rings, licenses and ministers as part of the mix are all traditional elements introduced by various cultures down through the eons of time.
ReplyDeleteIf the gospel narrative is literally correct about the role of the Holy Spirit, who's to say that God didn't use Joseph's semen to complete the act? According to Scripture, Mary's pregnancy and delivery were otherwise very normal - the usual human gestation process. In a very real sense, aren't we all God's children? Is Holy Spirit semen required by the biblical account?
As for whether or not what happened to Mary constituted fornication, doesn't the biblical text always imply that anything which perverts sexual intercourse constitutes fornication? Once again, there isn't ANYTHING in Scripture that specifically labels consensual intercourse outside of marriage as sinful! In other words, our association of "fornication" with premarital sex is exactly that - OUR notion!
Finally, I posted something a while back that addressed this debate over the nativity of Christ. For those who are interested in a different perspective on that debate, you can check out my thoughts on the subject here: https://godcannotbecontained.blogspot.com/2020/12/the-imagery-of-nativity.html
My mistake TLA, I meant Bathsheba not Jezebel.
ReplyDeleteHow many crimes have been committed by "men of God" using the Bathsheba excuse?
ReplyDeleteDennis, we both know that some of the posters here would have a heart attack if they had to live next to a "Dancing Shiva" neighborhood, but I'm going to guess that you'll get used to their woo without too much trouble, considering where you've been. Are you trading your massage skills for some sort of community service credit, or are you allowed to be a capitalist and seek paying customers?
ReplyDeleteDennis, you wrote: "I'm not really concerned with the definition of fornication. I just know that what is wrong for geese in the world of the Bible teaching seems not wrong for the gander who came up with it."
ReplyDeleteIf I understand your argument, the fact of the virgin birth is not at issue but the governance of the mechanism by which it occurred is a concern. Copulation between a man and a woman exists within a legal context in theocratic Israel. It is governed by Biblical law. And your contention is that the act as portrayed in the Bible violates that legal construct.
The problem is that in the accounts provided in the NT, there is no mention of copulation. This is a presumption on your part. Jesus had family members who were prominent in the early church community. Surely the conception event would have been a subject that would have been a matter of curiosity, just as it is in modern times, and some clarification would have been sought. Jesus' family members would have been asked for this clarification. And the historical account would have contained this finding in the two gospels that deal with Christ's infancy. The descriptions contained other nuances. Or it would have been carried forward as a tradition. But there is no such statement and no early church midrashic controversy on this topic.
In the final analysis, the historical current is that the conception event was a supernatural event that required no act of copulation and was therefore outside the boundaries of generally accepted legal definitions and prohibitions.
Love this place. Just had bears and copperheads orientation
ReplyDeleteUh, oh, Dennis! Please don't mock Elisha. Apparently it's safe to mock Bobus, though, as Bobus lacks God's power and God seems to bless those who mock Bobus.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteDennis, we both know that some of the posters here would have a heart attack if they had to live next to a "Dancing Shiva" neighborhood, but I'm going to guess that you'll get used to their woo without too much trouble, considering where you've been. Are you trading your massage skills for some sort of community service credit, or are you allowed to be a capitalist and seek paying customers?
---------------------------------------
The neighborhoods, most of which one never sees scattered over these 325 acres, are an eclectic group of various ages. There are 100 adults and 25 kids on the property. I am comfortable with views and have been through a couple of them myself. It's quite an amazing place. The night sky is incredible for my telescope hobby and interests. There are three streams that run through the property. As for massage, I gave up my Oregon license moving briefly back to SC where I still have a license. I will not pursue one here at this stage in NC. I can trade work as there is bartering if one wants to for other goods grown. Farmers come in once a week with their goods so there is a cool farmer's market day. Covid pretty much ended my actual massage practice. It's ok. I hit 70 and finally had to take SS which is adequate for this lifestyle. I just put all the retirement WCG provided into the bank.... :) Little joke there....
This home that my housemate wants to buy after the year of seeing how it feels here is beautiful. All the wood is from the property. I have internet phone and computer so it's not primitive. Some things are less convenient but very eco friendly. Have to learn the rules on recycling, composting and trash. I am surrounded by cows, sheep, goats, copperheads and bears. Life is good! lol.
NEO, you're straining. Let's look at it another way.
ReplyDeleteIf a married couple today are childless, is it ethical for the wife to obtain a baby (by whatever means, but for now let's say by adoption) without the husband's participation or even his consent?
Your Bible shows that God and Mary agreed to have the baby BEFORE gaining Joseph's consent. An angel supposedly appeared to Joseph in a dream AFTER he learned about Mary's pregnancy, and only then did he consent.
The problem with the virgin birth isn't just the question of sexual fidelity. It involves the very notion of spousal trust and intimacy.
Anyone want to bet on how long it will be before the members of the commune ask Dennis to leave because of his narcistic need to influence their beliefs?
ReplyDeleteSince the group must be all open to diversity of thought, accepting of people's current place in life, and loving toward all humanity - I give it four months before Dennis makes them turn.
So we should spend our time reading Dennis's apostate books. As if we don't have better things to do.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteShould we spend our time reading Dennis's apostate books. As if we don't have better things to do.
Apparently, you don't.
Rather than rescue the bible from fundamentalism we should rescue fundamentalists from the bible and throw that book of plagiarism and DEMON-strable lies in the trash bin.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteAnyone want to bet on how long it will be before the members of the commune ask Dennis to leave because of his narcistic need to influence their beliefs?
---------------------
Not to worry. I was responding here to a personal lecture on how the Virgin Birth really happened and how it all really was accomplished by someone who felt the need to influence my beliefs about it all.
Do you view every book you read as the author's need to influence your beliefs? Do you consider the author of the various books and letters in the Bible to have the narcistic need to influence your beliefs? How about the Gospels? Is that narcissistic Jesus expressing his personal need to influence your beliefs? How about every poster here who explains their perspectives to others here?
I think so! :)
And too...Earthaven is not a "commune". It has no "gurus" and no religious or political leanings. Just people with a different vision for themselves who happen to end up in a place for them to independently explore that with others of like mind. I would hope more to be the guy with the great telescopes that will show anyone who wishes what is available to see in the amazingly clear night skies from the mountains of NC. :)
Dennis is not tilting with windmills. The Virgin Birth is quite controversial. Not as much time is devoted to the birth as to the death of Christ among Christian writers. But there are several viewpoints about what happened and what it means. The creedal statement that Christ is fully god and fully man stems from a specific understanding of his birth. Dennis' idea is not new, I discovered - it is one viewpoint among many that have been around or a while. And Raymond Brown is not an apostate. He is a reputable Catholic theologian who writes extensively on the topic of Christology.
ReplyDeleteThe Bible defines this event up to a point and goes no further. So we are left to analyze it with what frail tools we have. The important bifurcation is between supernaturalism and naturalism. That is where the debate begins and seems to hover there.
Note: I tried to find what HWA believed about the mechanism of the Virgin Birth but nothing was in the index of the "Mystery of the Ages." But I seem to recall that he wrote somewhere that the Logos was turned into a sperm cell. Maybe someone else remembers this. I think theologians would have a field day with that disconcerting idea.
******* Click on my icon to view my Disclaimer
Dennis:
ReplyDeleteI know nothing about Earthhaven. But I saw some photos. It looks like the Big Sandy, TX area. Same pale, grainy soil and skinny trees. But with more rocks and hills.
A little disillusionment. Earthhaven may have not "gurus" and "religious or political leanings" but it does have the real danger - people. I have a friend who was in the commune movement back in the Sixties and Seventies. You know, "love the earth" and "smile on your brother." She raised goats. And other communitarians would steal them. So then she had to start carrying a pistol. Utopia would be achievable if you didn't have to have people involved.
******* Click on my icon to view my Disclaimer
I found this about Earthhaven. Interesting read!
ReplyDeletehttps://www.google.nl/amp/s/greenalternative.blog/2017/11/20/my-experience-at-earthaven-ecovillage-north-carolina-asheville-part-1/amp/
I have a (former YOU) female friend in the area who's quite the impressive organic farmer over there in the asheville area. I would not be surprised if she is one of the preferred supliers of the abode.
ReplyDeleteKarma goes around as this wonderful being might suply Dennis with nutrients in return for the former spiritual manna.
Redmoonherbs.com
Nck
I have a (former YOU) female friend in the area who's quite the impressive organic farmer over there in the asheville area. I would not be surprised if she is one of the preferred suppliers of the abode.
ReplyDeleteKarma goes around as this wonderful being might suply Dennis with nutrients in return for the former spiritual manna.
Redmoonherbs.com
--------------------
Even more interesting NCK, one of the community home owners I worked with today stacking wood had her Redmoonherbs shop downstairs below where we now live. She sold her business a few years back, probably to your friend in Weaverville just north of Asheville :)
NEO said: A little disillusionment. Earthhaven may have not "gurus" and "religious or political leanings" but it does have the real danger - people. I have a friend who was in the commune movement back in the Sixties and Seventies. You know, "love the earth" and "smile on your brother." She raised goats. And other communitarians would steal them. So then she had to start carrying a pistol. Utopia would be achievable if you didn't have to have people involved.
ReplyDelete—————
So true NEO. You can never escape human nature. This is why it surprises me that successive American administrations have sought to disarm the American populace as if we live in a utopia. Reality is we don’t. So until we do we’ll always need guns to defend our loved ones and property from attackers. And thus the timeless wisdom of the Founding Fathers to embed in the Bill of Rights the God given inalienable right for the people to arm themselves.
Yes Dennis.
ReplyDeleteWe are speaking about the same person.
A lady for whom I would move my armies on the battlefield to face a Roman Legion. She would giggle and shake her head at the foolishness and I would depart the field in the full knowledge of my insignificance in the great scheme of things.
If I would descend from Valhallah and ask her indignantly, :"What eartly thing are you doing there, you are an Angel a Valkyrie you know.....?"
She would rise, give me the stare and with a kind backward waving gesture of her hand she would reply: "How can that be nck, I have soot on my wings?!"
Disclaimer: the above are complete poetic liberties to sing the praises to her virtues
Nck
I say they’ll kick Dennis out in less than six months!
ReplyDeleteDennis:
ReplyDeleteI am very interested in how your Earthhaven experiment goes. I live in an area where the commune movement of the Sixties and Seventies flourished. There is still a little town back in the mountains where many communitarians from that time live. I think most are involved in selling crafts. Some former communitarians were members of the local, now defunct WCG congregation so I had a small aperture view into this surviving subculture.
I always felt that the communitarians had a better way of life if they did not go completely off-grid. To me the issue was finding the right balance of traditional and alternative living. And if you were at that sweet spot, it was better than being a purist at either end of the spectrum. But I don't know that this is true - just a feeling. Maybe you can eventually give us some feedback on this.
******* Click on my icon to view my Disclaimer
Oh common 3:44.
ReplyDeleteThat will only happen if you would point out to the management that that kind elderly man sitting at the brook with his rocks, always ready for a talk and sharing his telescope is the former High Priest of Marduk.
Now will you proceed with such an evil deed that will stain your steuben character for eternity?
nck
Neo: We've only been here a week and there is lots of orientation. This next 6 most to a year is a trial period to see if all of it is a good fit all concerned. That is how the entire place seems to work. It is not totally off grid as a "commune" might be. We have good phone service and Internet. I have to work 16 hours a month on various projects which is good for me and them. Still learning the ropes. Asha and I are sharing this experience together platonically and she considers me "my guardian angel and nanny" lol. I have to say, I have not had this kind of experience or relationship ever so new territory. She has an 8 year old here .
ReplyDeleteThere is a mix of people of course and that is easily seen in just a short time. I believe having worked around thousands of off the wall and eclectic church members over the decades will finally come in handy! lol. I made it to the place of final training! Will have to see what the future holds but only when it arrives. Being present and living each day seems to be the rule. Lots to learn. I did cut, throw and stack a boatload, and I mean a boatload , of wood yesterday. Felt pretty good today too! Had about 10 of us and once the line got going it worked pretty well. That is only a once a month need here through the winter.
It's not for everyone for sure, but I do like my circumstances at the moment. The night sky, when clear up here in the mountains is my telescope heaven. It's wonderful and unlike I have seen in a very long time. Summer will be different I suspect as they don't call it "the smokies" for nothing. Will keep those that like informed on how it's going.