One of the great theological mistakes and teachings of Christian Fundamentalism and HWA/WCG in our own experience was "reading the Book of Revelation like a newspaper". How often, as students, did we hear Roderick Meredith affirm, "we have 3-5, 10 at the most, 20 tops" years left before Jesus comes. Conveniently, this range of possibilities generally fits the expected lifetime of all concerned. Gerald Waterhouse spent his entire life promoting the Book of Revelation to the churches as occurring within the boundaries of the life of HWA. When I, to his face, asked Gerald what he would think WHEN not IF, HWA would die. He simply replied, "I'll believe it after three days and three nights".
...and too...all these men have since died
A book that begins with...
1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
And ends with...
20He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Is not talking to us today
"Digging through the pages of history of the early church fathers, citing excellent commentaries from the late 19th and early 20th century, and taking Scripture with the seriousness that any scholar should, Gentry gives overwhelming evidence that Revelation was written prior to A.D. 70 and also gives us answers into some of the mysteries such as
Who is the Beast?
What is 666?
Is the tribulation past or still to come?
as well as demonstrating that the majority of Revelation, all of the Olivet Discourse and the 70 weeks passage in Daniel was fulfilled in the destruction of the Temple by the Romans. Dr. Gentry shows that, as should always be the case, that prophecy is easier to understand after it has been fulfilled than before. If you are into any view that calls for a tribulation of any kind, should you decide to read this book, you will definitely be affected and challenge to make a change of such a view."
---------------------------------
In short, The Book of Revelation was written in or around the summer of 69 CE (65 according to this study) and certainly BEFORE not after the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE. It was written to encourage the Jewish Christians in harm's way under the siege of Rome on the city. Revelation is a Jewish Christian Book. The 144,000 are Jewish Christians and the "innumerable multitude" are Jewish Christians who were not as righteous as the 144,000 but to be regathered nonetheless, not of the nations as gentiles, but "out of them" as Jewish.
Rome had grown weary of militant Jews and Zealots and militant Jewish Christians and with Judea under Roman control, was not going to put up with it anymore.
(I personally believe the Gospels and Paul's book of Romans reflect the fact that Rome had a great deal of input in the writing of the NT to pacify the militant Jewish Messiah and Jesus resulting in the Orthodox Judaism of today and a "turn the other cheek", "render unto Caesar..." and "Obey those that have rule over you (Rom. 13), pacifistic Jesus of the NT. Vespasian may have been the "Beast" and the Apostle Paul the "False Prophet" to Jewish Christians, but that's another story)
For a personal view of "Them not US" see:
"But back to the original question. To whom was Jesus speaking when he said the words and to whom did he mean for it to apply? The answer is within the context, plain and simple.
"Take heed that no man deceive you." (Matt 24:4)
"...ye shall hear of wars, and rumors of wars..." (Matt 24:6)
"Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted..." (Matt 24:9)
"When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation..." (Matt 24:15)
"But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter..." (Matt 24:20)
"Behold, I have told you before." (Matt 24:25)
The context in which Jesus spoke was his own. The "you" that he was addressing was the group he was addressing then and the group to which all these things would happen for, and soon. Jesus was telling those disciples that these things would happen in their time. Jesus made a mistake in his perceptions.
In our time, Christians read the same words and see the "ye" and "you" as "me" and "us" just as the original disciples would have. The only difference is that the disciples actually were disappointed and this generation has yet to realize their own disappointment to come.
The proof that Jesus himself meant the people he was talking to is found in the fact that the "this generation" comment is actually the tail end of a much larger, often overlooked quote taken in its entirety.
"So likewise YE when YE shall SEE ALL these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say unto YOU, THIS generation shall not pass, till ALL these things be fulfilled." (Matt 24:33-24 emphasis mine)
There is no reason to twist the words of Jesus to mean more than they were ever intended to mean. A scripture can never mean what it never meant. The early disciples and infant Church knew it meant them and we see the gradual deterioration of their personal confidence in the immediacy of the Second Coming promise throughout the NT.
I Thessalonians 4:15-17 "...For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout...Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air..." Meaning...some would die, but not us who tell you this. Jesus still means us.
I Corinthians 15:51,52 "...We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump..." Meaning...you will die, but we won't but it all works out...Jesus still meant us.
Romans 13:11-12 "And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent, the day is at hand..." Meaning...we had some doubts, but now we know it's almost here. Jesus still meant us.
James 5:8 "Be ye also patient; establish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh." Meaning...impatience was growing, hang in there. Jesus still meant us.
I John 2:18 "Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time." Meaning...Jesus still meant us.
I Peter 4:7 "But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer."
Revelation 22:20 "He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly...." Meaning...ok, it's been over 30 years, but Jesus still means us.
Obviously, every one of these quoted hopes and statements was wrong. Jesus did not return for them and to date has not returned for anyone. Paul and the early church who wrote in his name was just as wrong as the many COG prophetic types are wrong in this time. And it is based on the fact that Jesus himself was wrong which I know most Christians can never come to admit. For Paul it becomes....
" I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: 8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing." Meaning...Ok, I give up, Jesus didn't mean us, or at least not me. I was wrong. 2 Timothy 4:8-9
...and at best, this will also become the reality for those alive today seeing the imminent return of Jesus in every newspaper and on every turn of the dial in this dangerous and contentious world of ours."
I'm not scoffing. Being accused of scoffing was a label for those in the early Church who were really beginning to doubt the "soon" and "shortly" of it all. Rather than admit "Yeah, we get it", the powers that were simply blamed the "observer of reality", mocked them and said they didn't understand that "with God, a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day! Duh!" Of course, this little bit of information was not taught back in the day when it was obvious no Jesus was returning soon.
The disciples expected Jesus to return within days of his death and when they met him in Galilee, even doubted that. It's what you say to those that are becoming disillusioned but the others know that the return is still in their lifetime for sure.
Scoffers, i.e. "Noticers", were undermining the confidence of the early followers and disciples of Jesus. An observation is not scoffing. Observations are based on the passage of millennia. It's a 2000-year-old observation. To motivate with fear, false prophetic fulfillment's of non-prophecies and imagined prophetic accuracy on topics anyone could speculate somewhat accurately about, is simply foolishness and makes the Church, in any form, look stupid and ignorant. Jesus said his generation would not pass until the Son of Man be come. He was wrong too.
Revelation is a failed first-century prophecy. The Romans won again.
For an impressive recreation of The Fall of Jerusalem see:
Your author believes that Revelation was written before AD70 and that the destruction of the Temple fulfilled its prophecies? That sounds like the view of a Preterist believer, not of a historian or textual critic.
ReplyDeleteIt's an interesting hypothesis, but not as compelling as the idea that after the Temple was destroyed, Judaism had to be redefined in order to survive, and Revelation was one of many texts seeking to grab adherents for its particular definition.
But I think we all can agree that neither Gerald Flurry nor Bob Thiel are referenced in its pages, neither directly nor indirectly.
While I heartily endorse anything that takes the ACOGs to task for their obsession with prophecy (and the book of Revelation in particular), Dennis effectively throws the baby out with the bath water! Yes, First Century Christians were wrong about the timing of Christ's return, and most of the generations which have succeeded them believed that Christ would return in their day. I believe that this is due to a fundamental misunderstanding of prophetic literature, and the individual Christian's responsibilities relative to Christ's preaching.
ReplyDeleteFirst, it should be noted that most of the teachings recorded in the twenty-fourth chapter of the book of Matthew (and Mark 13 and Luke 21) and the book of Revelation dealt with the events surrounding the destruction of the temple and what would happen over the centuries which followed. Relatively speaking, only a small portion of these texts actually deal with the events surrounding Christ's return. The truth of this assertion is manifested by several of the scriptures which Dennis quotes in his post. Moreover, this understanding is NOT a modern invention. There are a number of traditional interpretations for the book of Revelation that do NOT see everything in the book as literal and future (e.g., preterist and historicist interpretations). In fact, the book of Revelation's wall-to-wall symbolism makes a mockery of the literalist perspective.
Finally, for believers, Dennis' statement that "A scripture can never mean what it never meant" has to be rejected. If we believe in the existence of the Holy Spirit, then we must believe that it can guide interpretation of Scripture. As I've noted before, communication requires a message, sender and receiver. And, if it's plausible that the message and sender were Divinely inspired, it must follow that Divine inspiration of the receiver is possible as well (most of us would say it is required). In fact, there are many instances within Scripture where a message or teaching was not understood by the folks to whom it was first presented - that it was only understood later within the context of subsequent events or explanation/elaboration/interpretation.
Still, Dennis is absolutely right to point out the absurdity of this Christian obsession with the end times. Christ said that the timing of God's plans was unknown to anyone but God himself. He went on to say that our job is to be prepared/ready at all times. We should live our lives in the moment, not worrying about what might happen in 5, 10, 15, or 20 years! As others have observed, none of us knows the day or the hour when we will draw our last breath - and that will be the end for us as individuals. What if Christ's return doesn't happen for another five hundred years? Should the answer to that question matter to a real Christian?
neither Gerald Flurry nor Bob Thiel are referenced in its pages
ReplyDeleteApart from GF's plagiarized and re-edited "little book", Malachi's Message, does he claim any reference to himself in Revelation? And does Bob Thiel? Or are they content with the titles the gave themselves from other parts of the Bible?
Any one of us could die tonight.
ReplyDeleteEven if Bobaniah is correct and Christ's return cannot occur until 3 or 4 years from now at the earliest, no Christian can count on waiting for even one more day before it's time to repent, accept Christ's sacrifice, etc.
Yes, even the hippie prophet who proclaimed "Be Here Now" was closer to Christ's actual command than Bobaniah ever will be. Christians need to be Christians NOW and not get sidetracked into speculations about end-time minutiae that may all be the mistaken literalizing of a figurative text.
Prophecy means NOTHING! The future is what you make of your life in the here & now.
ReplyDeleteBooklet that all the COGS need to have...
ReplyDelete"The WCG -- Unveiled At Last"
What code will that carry 'Tonto'.
DeleteMJ/LCH noted: "Finally, for believers, Dennis' statement that "A scripture can never mean what it never meant" has to be rejected. If we believe in the existence of the Holy Spirit, then we must believe that it can guide interpretation of Scripture. As I've noted before, communication requires a message, sender and receiver. And, if it's plausible that the message and sender were Divinely inspired, it must follow that Divine inspiration of the receiver is possible as well"
ReplyDelete===========================
Yes, if we believe in ghosts, leprechauns and magic, scripture can be made to mean what it never meant or was intended originally to mean. We can adjust them to our "feelings" about what it really means and go with the voices in our heads.
This concept is merely a belief made up to explain the far simpler concept of taking what the Bible says for what it actually says and when and why it said it.
Beliefs are not knowing nor are they actual factual knowledge. They are just beliefs and often adjusted to fit the times one believes them in.
"Every religion claims to believe as they do because of reason, education, or intelligence given by their god in revelation. But whether they admit it or not, all of them are assuming their preferred conclusions on faith and this would still be true even if all their gods exist. Believe as hard as you want to but convincing yourself, however firmly, still can't change the reality of things. Seeing is believing but seeing isn't knowing. Believing isn't knowing. Subjective convictions are meaningless in science and eyewitness testimony is the least reliable form of evidence."
Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism pg. 123
...and too, What if Christ's return doesn't happen for another five hundred years? Should the answer to that question matter to a real Christian?"
ReplyDelete================================================
Of course not. With upgrades to the fact that NT Jesus did not return soon or quickly and now Christians going to Heaven upon death without even having to wait in the grave, it's all good!
The disappointment of the NT has been erased by tweeking the truth of the NT and finding a way around the problem and question we all have about death being "What's going to happen to ME?"
Now you don't have to worry about "we shall not die". We all will. But we forgot to tell you about Heaven (and Hell) and how soon you get to go anyway so don't worry of it! :)
Please know I do, with my Dutch Reformed upbringing, understand what you say and mean. I grew up with that. One can't have had to memorize the Westminster Confession of Faith Catechism, as I had to do, and miss the point of divine revelation and the work of the Holy Spirit in the minds of men through history and to this day.
I simply have moved on from, in my view, "when I was a child...I thought as a child..."
Herbert W Armstrong would be disappointed in UCG because they lack what he taught.
ReplyDeleteWouldn't the apostles know that the day in Gen 3:5 meant 1000 years, knowing that Adam died at age 930? Wouldn't they suspect the days of Hosea 6:2 were 1000 years each? Otherwise Hosea made no sense. And Peter did write (before 70 AD?) about the 1000 years/one day. THAT generation will be resurrected. Think big. It's only been 2 days since Jesus was here in the flesh.
ReplyDelete1201 Asks: "Anonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteWouldn't the apostles know that the day in Gen 3:5 meant 1000 years, knowing that Adam died at age 930? Wouldn't they suspect the days of Hosea 6:2 were 1000 years each? Otherwise Hosea made no sense. And Peter did write (before 70 AD?) about the 1000 years/one day. THAT generation will be resurrected. Think big. It's only been 2 days since Jesus was here in the flesh."
===================
Genesis 3:5 and Adam dying at 930 years old
No humans really live to be 930 years old or 969 for the record, any more than the list of 8
Sumerian kings' ruling for 240,000 years on the cuneiform cube.
Hosea 6:2 " After two days He will revive us; on the third day He will raise us up, that we may live in His presence." has nothing to do with 1000 year any things. If you are making it refer to Jesus' resurrection, there is NO connection. Hosea is merely saying that Israel, for all her troubles, will be renewed in a short time. It is not any kind of prophecy 3 thousand years into the future of Jesus.
2 Peter is considered pseudepigrapha and not written, in high Greek, by any Peter the Galilean fisherman. It is an author writing in the name of Peter much later and certainly after 70 AD when it was now obvious Messiah/Jesus was not coming and going to save anyone from the Romans.
The "Thousand years as a day" is an apologetic by the author of Peter for why Jesus has not returned. He calls those who notice "Where is the promise of his coming" "scoffers". He informs them of this truth about God not seeing time as humans do. This concept only came up and is made up to cover the fact that Jesus did not come in the lifetimes of many promised he would. It is made up after the fact and would never have been taught in the early times of Jesus imminent return.
No humans really live to be 930 years old or 969 for the record, any more than the list of 8
ReplyDeleteSumerian kings' ruling for 240,000 years on the cuneiform cube.
Dennis, do you have access to cable television? You need to watch a few episodes of Ancient Aliens. If you think a "God of the gaps" approach is unsatisfactory, you'll howl with either derision or hilarity watching a bunch of men in nice suits answer every unexplained mystery around them with the same retort: "It must be ALIENS!" How can we know that the Sumerian kings didn't rule for that long? They might have been ALIENS. Or maybe they were just really diligent about taking Babylon Bob's pre-Flood health supplements.
Verse (Click for Chapter)
ReplyDeleteNew International Version
“If those days had not been cut short, [[no one would survive]], but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.
New Living Translation
In fact, unless that time of calamity is shortened, [[not a single person will survive]]. But it will be shortened for the sake of God’s chosen ones.
English Standard Version
And if those days had not been cut short, [[no human being would be saved]]. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.
Berean Study Bible
If those days had not been cut short, [[nobody would be saved]]. But for the sake of the elect, those days will be cut short.
Berean Literal Bible
And unless those days had been shortened, [[no flesh would have been saved]]; but because of the elect, those days will be shortened.
King James Bible
And except those days should be shortened,[[ there should no flesh]] be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
New King James Version
And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.
the Vaxeen has already killed and maimed a lot of people, they have more diseases and vaxeens waiting for us. Prince Charles says they need an army to deal with the climate change enforcement, the excuse they will use to subdue the population. We have our rumors of wars, and childish governments , and much more misery looming.
Christ will have to return to save man alive. Common sense is now a thing of the past, and truth is dead . The only truth men have left, is the Holy Bible, and the only chance that men will be saved from utter destruction is Christ return to the earth.
If you really think that the direction that the world is heading now will end up with us all in a better place , dream on. Men may not want Christ to return, but God is man's only hope.
Dennis:
ReplyDeleteThe NT authors mistook the timing of the Eschaton. They understood that the tribulation would come first, and the Parousia would be next. I would guess they thought that time horizon for both was somewhere in the Thirties AD. But by 50 AD, two decades later, the Jerusalem Council was held. And Christianity was still forming. And I would expect that earlier on all the people who held things in common had gone home and resumed their normal lives.
Peter made a statement quite early in church history that must have been alarming to some. He stated from Solomon's Portico that the Parousia was conditional:
"Repent therefore and turn to God so that your sins may be wiped out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Messiah appointed for you, that is, Jesus, who must remain in heaven until the time of universal restoration (apokatastasis) that God announced long ago through his holy prophets. (Acts 3:19-21, NRSV)"
This veered sharply away from the idea of a fixed time for the Parousia and made its timing contingent on developing conditions on earth. And we have that same situation today in spite of the careful computations apocalyptic Millerites do to determine the time of the Parousia.
As for the Book of Revelation, I am wavering. First, I am a partial preterist and believe that most of the events in Revelation have already happened. But even so, I am not certain about the status of Revelation in the canon. Gregory of Nyssa felt that Revelation did not rise to the level of scripture. When Athanasius drew up the list of books that formed the canon, only about half the churches thought Revelation was scripture. Luther put it at the end of his Bible organization, which we have today, because he was uncertain of its status. The Book of Enoch is clearly something that does not belong in the canon. With Revelation it is a little difficult to determine. It is clearly from the apocalyptic genre but not as fantastical as the Book of Enoch.
I would not hesitate to say that no denomination should become preoccupied with the Book of Revelation. There are other books in the NT of greater substance and with better pedigrees.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
"Vaxeen" sounds like she should be a comic book villain who makes her enemies ignorant and illiterate.
ReplyDeleteYes, Dennis, I understand your reasoning. I understand why you rejected the traditional concepts of God and religion. And, yes, Christians accept the evidence of faith, belief and personal experience which you reject. For you, Scripture is an entirely human production - a product of an ignorant and superstitious past. From this perspective, your statement about Scripture is perfectly reasonable/logical.
ReplyDeleteHowever, from the perspective of those who BELIEVE that Scripture had Divine input, your statement is unreasonable/illogical. Moreover, from a secular perspective, your logic would exclude artistic interpretation - if a song, poem, narrative or painting can only mean what the original artist intended it to mean. By the way, most authors, song writers and artists reject such a notion (and even encourage others to find their own meaning(s) in what they have produced).
You are much too dismissive of other perspectives on these issues (kinda like those Christians who dismiss all atheists as fools). When you suggest that you have moved beyond this foolishness, you not only offend many folks - you also preclude them from entertaining the points you are trying to make. How does that help anyone on either side?
Dennis wrote, "This concept is merely a belief made up to explain the far simpler concept of taking what the Bible says for what it actually says and when and why it said it."
ReplyDeleteYou description of this process makes it sound far more simplistic and seat-of-the-pants than it actually is. The Bible has been interpreted in many different ways. A good interpretation requires that hermeneutic principles be established. There is rationality and vetting behind these principles.
This is true also of your side of the house. Hawking and Hartle floated the idea that the universe had no beginning back in 1983. You might call this a hermeneutic for interpreting the Cosmos. The idea of an eternal universe is vitally important to atheist materialists. This is because if there is no creator then there is nothing. So, if there is no creator then the Cosmos must have always been. This, in my view, is the weakest point of materialism. So, Hawking and Hartle were doing atheist materialists a big favor by developing a plausible theory of and eternal cosmos.
But, alas, some other scientists with a different hermeneutic examined the eternal Cosmos theory. Neil Turok from the Perimeter Institute of Theoretical Physics took issue. This from Quanta Magazine:
"In their 2017 paper, published in Physical Review Letters, Turok and his co-authors approached Hartle and Hawking’s no-boundary proposal with new mathematical techniques that, in their view, make its predictions much more concrete than before. “We discovered that it just failed miserably,” Turok said. “It was just not possible quantum mechanically for a universe to start in the way they imagined.”
Oh, well. Atheism lost one of its best supports there. They could almost claim the academic high ground that they have so long cherished and many times assumed they already had. And the high priests of physics are still squabbling - still interpreting and reinterpreting the Cosmos like a bunch of Jewish scholars engaged in midrash. The arguments that you use against theism can be reversed and used against materialism. There is no net gain for either side when one looks for God in the material realm. Atheists expect to find him there. Theists expect to find only hints of his presence and mostly look elsewhere.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
I watched a television program on THE SCIENCE CHANNEL in which longevity was discussed by various researchers and by chance they mentioned the book of Genesis and it was pointed out that Adam most likely lived 93 years and Methuselah lived 96 years & 9 months. Either way what I can remember of it seemed more plausible.
ReplyDeleteNeoT Belief in a Deity or not is not connected, justified or now able to be dismissed because of the strength or frailty of any cosmological theory. There is no connection with the need to believe or not between the pursuit of the truth of an open, closed, eternal, flat and does or doesn't expand into itself or something else. Belief is not connected to whether there is one Universe, multi-verses, branes or many worlds. Perhaps if it is all a simulation then the Deity is just the ultimate gamer :)
ReplyDelete"oh well, atheists lost one of its best supports there" is meaningless approach to what either is or isn't and has nothing to do with the reality or mythology of the gods.
PS Perhaps for some few science types there is a need for it to show them personally there are no gods but that would be a personal psychological need based on who knows what.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the motive in the search for what is, I am sure, never is that. But the proof of the gods can also be a motive for the scientist/christian just as well. The search for what is has no motive but to know what actually is, like it or not.
The typically human habit of upgrading what God really said, means or wants is the normal human approach to explaining why they can still hold on to that which can only ever be understood and maintained with faith and not facts.
Whenever the actual facts challenge the literal text of scripture, the need to believe needs to upgrade "what it really means" or what God really is saying to fit the times and new factual information as if it all is still part of the same old beliefs that one can never bring themselves to set aside. It is normal in belief to imagine one knows the mind of God if new information challenges old beliefs and can easily explain why what a problem to that belief really is, is not a problem at all.
Belief in anything is probably stronger than new information that challenge beliefs. Beliefs are deep and the cost of giving them up can be very high. That is not something most want to pay. Notice that historically it was the church burning those who challenged them at the stake. Scientists have never burned priests at the stake for their ignorance.
Though Denis Diderot did say in the 18th Century: "“Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.”
Dennis wrote, "Belief in a Deity or not is not connected, justified or now able to be dismissed because of the strength or frailty of any cosmological theory."
ReplyDeleteI don't know if you are speaking empirically or theoretically. Empirically, that is true with our present state of knowledge of physics. Theoretically, it may be false. Christians believe in Creatio ex Nihilo, that God created the Cosmos from nothing. For that reason, the created Cosmos reflects the nature of God. Even though it may be now in a fallen state, the clear implication is that God will redeem it. Hence, we have Jesus speaking of the renewal of all things. And that statement in John 3:16, "For God so loved the Cosmos ...".
Likewise, for materialists there is a God connection in that the purpose of materialism, as invoked by atheists, is to deny the existence of God. Materialism has to be a closed system if it is to be tenable explanation for everything. It must be the theory of everything to posit the denial of God. So far it is not. It is actually pretty weak, dealing through a narrow aperture that has only matter and energy in view.
I do not think you can separate belief in the numinous, or the disbelief, from some notion of where the Cosmos came from. I suppose out there in pagandom there are belief systems that acknowledge the supernatural but have no creation story. But they are not evidence of this separation between religion and the cosmos. They are just incomplete.
******* Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Dennis wrote, "The typically human habit of upgrading what God really said, means or wants is the normal human approach to explaining why they can still hold on to that which can only ever be understood and maintained with faith and not facts."
ReplyDeleteI believe in the incarnational model of the Bible and you simply believe the Bible is false. The incarnational model acknowledges that the Bible contains literature, poetry, figures of speech and also shows the evidences of human curation. If God can become a human being in earthly context then the Bible can be a book in earthly context with all the difficulty that incarnation implies. An in spite of the human curation, the Bible remains the message from God but does not substitute for the Word of God himself. (I should add at this point that I have a personal belief that the Bible as a written vehicle for the Word of God is punitive. God intended to be personally present in the lives of Adam and Eve and their descendants. But that disappeared with the loss of Paradise.)
I think you would regard the incarnational model as a way of simply side-stepping the fact that the Bible bears all the evidence of being fictive. While there are cogent thematic strands that run the the OT and NT that I might invoke, I do understand your viewpoint. The Bible is a diverse document, but it is not disheveled. But I recognize from the atheistic literalist perspective that a paradox is a paradox and if you can find one in the Bible, then the Bible falls.
I have to side with Miller Jones on this. There is a ministry of the Holy Spirit. And the Holy Spirit comforts us in many ways including comforting us concerning the scriptures. I can explain why materialism is inadequate. I can explain why the Bible is incarnational. But I cannot explain to you the reality and operation of the Holy Spirit.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Neo therm, I was just looking at one of your Answers to Denis, It lighted me to the verse ..1Co_1:26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:.
ReplyDeleteI can understand why God say's and does this. To have academic knowledge is of great prize to many in this world as it does give one an advantage with things pertaining to this world, and a certain amount of respect and acceptance from other scholars. In regards to the bible , it helps understand how some words were used in the days that the bible was written, and how they are used today. It can go towards having a clearer understanding of what God was saying on the physical level.
Yet despite having all this knowledge it does nothing toward attaining God's objective for His book of instruction, to those who pursue just academic knowledge of His word. God in fact shows us with examples in the word that knowledge of his word is not all that is needed..Heb 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
Here Paul referring to the Israelites in the wilderness, showed that even though they had knowledge of God, and had seen His great miracles. Also even though they had the Gospel preached to them it did no good , as they had no faith.
Knowledge has to be combined with faith in God to benefit us. It is then a vain thing to pursue knowledge of God just for academic acquirement. If it is not to please God, Why do it? What are your objectives? Is it to please God, or is it just satisfying the self?
If it is to please God then one must accept that as Jesus said , Mat_4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by ((every)) word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. This takes faith that The creator God will give, if one is sincere. He is able, and will direct and guide those He has called, into His truth.
If it is to please self, To be able to argue a point from what may be perceived to be higher ground? Then one has to examine oneself to determine who one really serves. and what the outcome will be. Jas_2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
If God can become a human being in earthly context then the Bible can be a book in earthly context with all the difficulty that incarnation implies.
ReplyDeleteThere's one big problem with that analogy. It allows imperfections in the Bible that would not be acceptable in a perfect Savior.
Dennis is a spiritual wolf in atheist's clothing. No genuine atheist would put out as much effort as he does in these anti-bible articles.
ReplyDeleteTrue atheist's don't have a crusading religious spirit.
Well, 9:19, you might be right in that hes somewhat overproductive. But I would link that more to his constant need to be the center of attention.
DeleteAn eisegesis of Hosea 6:2: 3 days = 3000 years, beginning when Hosea received the prophecy, about 750 BC, give or take 50 years. 3000 years are 750 BC - 2250 AD. I predict Jesus will return before 2300 AD.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 9:15
ReplyDeleteChrist was not imperfect and that is is not the implication of incarnation. He did "empty himself" (kenosis) and become one of us. He did not come as a great Warrior-King. Instead, he won victory by dying a humiliating death.
The Bible is also perfect but humble. It perfectly serves its purpose. It contains theology and spiritual principles. It is full of moral allegories. It speaks to humans in language that they can understand as in the anthropomorphisms describing God. And the fact that it says in one place that David killed Goliath and another place that Elhanan killed Goliath makes you ask how this could be and draws you to the Bible. The fact that the Bible has been handled and edited by humans does not diminish this humble perfection. The impoverished atheistic view is that the Bible is just an agglomeration of errors. But this is a case study in the difference the Holy Spirit can make in someone's life.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Anonymous 8:54
ReplyDeleteI believe you are right. It takes more than just hearing and accumulating knowledge to walk in The Way that leads to salvation. It also takes more than faith (or maybe a certain kind of faith - faith that actuates good works) like James said. It is a big package that cannot be subdivided. And Paul refers to it as Jesus living his life over within you. My two cents...
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Some thoughts on: "A scripture can never mean what it never meant." AND "Revelation is a failed first-century prophecy."
ReplyDeletehttps://godcannotbecontained.blogspot.com/2022/02/understanding-meaning-of-gods-message.html