Monday, May 25, 2020

LCG: Fearing COVID-19, Restricts Feast Site Attendance To 200 People



From a reader:

We got the following from the church the other day. HQ is limiting the number of attendees at all U.S. sites. I guess our leaders no longer have faith that God will protect them 4 1/2 months from now. Gone are the days of boasting that God is on our side and protecting us from Satan like he used to do in Jekyll Island. 
Limiting Numbers at Feast Sites (USA)
In his recent (May 11) member letter, Mr. Gerald Weston explained that we will be limiting numbers at this year’s Feast sites, lower than what we are normally used to. A number of questions have come up about this. Accordingly, here are several points to address these questions.  (Note: This discussion pertains most specifically to sites in the United States. If you live outside of the United States, please consult your Regional Office for specific instructions about your congregation.)
  • Why the number 200? If groups are restricted to 250 by government regulations, then our cap of 200 will be well within that range. If groups are restricted to 100, our benchmark of 200 will give us the flexibility to still continue with a Feast site by cutting the group in half and having morning and afternoon services of 100 each.
  • Why not set different maximum numbers for different states? There are wide swings of predictions by experts about the next four to five months, so it is impossible to predict where individual states will be at that time. Some that are now “open” may not be then, and some that are currently “closed” may likewise not be closed then. Thus, 200 is a reasonable, conservative, workable number that gives us flexibility for most places.
  • Why limit numbers when restrictions are being lifted? The possibility of a second wave is real, bringing new restrictions, and we can’t assume states will stay opened in October even if they are in July.
  • Having more sites of smaller groups means more people will be attending fairly close to home, which is much better for both the patient and the family if someone comes down with the virus.
  • Having smaller groups reduces the number of people who may be infected if someone does come down with the virus at the Feast. Because symptoms sometimes don’t show up for days with COVID-19, we must assume that if someone comes down with it at the Feast, they will have already exposed others to the virus even before they knew it. Thus, a smaller group limits that exposure. 
  • With many elderly brethren in the Church, we want them to feel safe and comfortable enough to attend the Feast. Smaller groups will help make that happen.
The Church is not alone in coming up with this type of guideline. Professional meeting planners around the country are expecting many conferences to be “small and local” over the next six to nine months, as everyone waits to see how the COVID-19 crisis levels out. One way or another, we know we’ll have the Feast! And the Festival Office is planning for as many brethren as possible to be able to join together and worship God. At the same time, the Church is trying to exercise due diligence to be prudent and prepare for potential problems, even as we hope and pray for a best-case scenario. Thank you for your patience, and for your prayers that God would guide and bless this year’s Feast planning.—Festival Office 

Prophet Bob of the Tabloid Church of God speaks out on Chinese eating while Americans and Brits starve


Every day in the mythical land of Thielism it starts off with one gasp-inducing headline after another.  99% of the time the topic that the self-appointed prophet of the improperly named "continuing" church of god breathlessly pops out is of little importance to anyone in the world, let alone his few thousand "followers" in Africa, who have more to worry about than the opinions of a privileged pill-pushing white American cult leader.

This is one of his latest headliners headbangers:


Will Americans and Brits Starve as the Chinese Eat?
 

Although Seventh Day Baptists (SDBs), Seventh-day Adventist (SDAs), and Messianic Jews keep some version of the seventh day Sabbath, are they Protestant or Church of God. What do they claim? What do they teach? What do SDAs and Messianic Jews teach about their history? Do SDBs cite groups who held Church of God (COG) and not SDB doctrines? Which group teaches the original biblical Christian faith? How do the SDAs, Messianics, and SDBs agree with Protestants on issues such as salvation, history, and the Godhead, which differ greatly from the Continuing Church of God (CCOG)? Are there really 613 laws of the Torah? Are the 613 mist What are 28 ways the SDBs differ from the CCOG? Are ‘Black Israelites’ right about Jesus being a black African? Was the Day of Atonement on October 22, 1844 according to Rabbinical or Karaite Jews? Did the SDAs or COG come out of the Millerite movement? Did Ellen White make false prophecies that she insisted came from God? If so, what were some of them? Did the SDA church send out literature it knew was clearly wrong? Was Ellen G. White’s sanctuary interpretation the “complete system of truth”? Did SDAs once teach crosses were pagan, but now include them in their official logo? Which of the 4 churches (SDB,SDA, Messianic, CCOG) doctrines have the most biblical and historical support? Dr. Thiel addresses these issues and more.
The self-appointed leader of the improperly named "continuing" church of god needs to have the name of his cult changed to The National Enquirer Church of God. It would be much more fitting for his tabloid prophecies.

Dr Bob Overreaches and Wonders: Does the Nazareth Inscription Refer to the Resurrection of Jesus?

Or maybe?

"Does overreaching desperately trying to prove issues of faith prove anything?" 

"Does Faith need proof?"

"Can faith really be left as the substance of what we hope is true?  The evidence based on no visible evidence that it is true?" 

"Does closing the barn door after the horse gets out really keep the horse in the barn forevermore afraid ever to leave again. Lesson learned? "




Dr Bob writes: 

"… the Nazareth Inscription speaks of moving corpses–note the plural from the tombs. (Note: Irrelevant to Bob's "proof" It is the correct word to use in a decree and implies "any corpse" ) 

Bob continues..."Incidentally, Matthew 27:52 states when Jesus was resurrected: “The tombs of many were opened and the bodies of many holy people who had died were resurrected.” The use of the plural in the Nazareth Inscription is thus easily explained in terms of the resurrection of Christ  …"

 (Note: Whoa...Watch that "easily" stuff Bob. Matthews account is fantasy by the author. No other Gospel author notes this amazing event because Matthew made it up. None of the resurrectees were ever mentioned again or made it into Church history as so much as a Deacon. 

And too, someone thought it more doctrinally correct to insert "after his resurrection" into the text (:53) since Jesus later was noted to be the "first born of many brethren."  In Matthew's account, these raised "saints" were implied to have risen at his death as part of Temple Curtain rentings and earthquake drama. Unless one thinks they lay alive in their uncovered graves for three days and nights until given permission to get up. 

Dr Bob continues: 

"The Nazareth Inscription is believed by many conservative Bible scholars to be a version of the Jewish High Priests’ explanation for the resurrection of Jesus Christ as is found in the Gospel of Matthew 28:11-15; in other words, Jesus’ disciples stole his body and perpetrated a fraud pretending that he had resurrected from the dead. …

"It is likely that the Nazareth Inscription was ordered by the Emperor Claudius to be posted in Nazareth in order to counter what he considered to be a dangerous political-religious movement that said that their Jewish “king” had resurrected from the dead.  The Nazareth Inscription threatens with death anyone who takes corpses from tombs in order to perpetrate a fraud."


In actuality...

"The Nazareth Inscription" is a bit misleading. It was not discovered in an archaeological context in Nazareth. It was merely named that as it was associated with Nazareth as the place from where it was sent on to Paris. 

Concerning the origins and intent of the Nazareth Inscription we find it to have been more likely issued as a result of a rather nasty and vengeful desecration of the grave of King Nikias of Kos, considered a tyrant in his rule. 


The epigrammatist Crinagoras of Mytilene wrote:[9]
"Tell me not that death is the end of life.
The dead, like the living, have their own causes of suffering.
Look at the fate of Nicias of Cos.
He had gone to rest in Hades, and now his dead body has come again into the light of day.
For his fellow-citizens, forcing the bolts of his tomb, dragged out the poor hard-dying wretch to punishment."

The marble tablet measures 24 by 15 inches, with the koine Greek inscription appearing in fourteen lines. It was acquired in 1878 by Wilhelm Fröhner (1834–1925), and sent from Nazareth to Paris. Fröhner entered the item in his manuscript inventory with the note "Dalle de marbre envoyé de Nazareth en 1878." Though indicating that the marble was sent from Nazareth, the note does not state that it was discovered there. Nazareth was a significant antiquities market in the 1870s, as was Jerusalem,[7] and may have been "nothing more than … a shipping center" for the item.[8] Since 1925 it has been in the Bibliothèque nationale, Paris, displayed in the Cabinet des Médailles.
(Note: Bob seems to acknowledge the inscription was not inscribed in Nazareth)
The inscription, with a facsimile, was published in 1930 by Franz Cumont,[9] who had been alerted to it by Rostovtseff.[7]
The text reads as follows.
"The Greek used in the inscription is relatively poor.[10] Clyde E. Billington provides the following English translation:[11][12]
Edict of Caesar 
"It is my decision [concerning] graves and tombs—whoever has made them for the religious observances of parents, or children, or household members—that these remain undisturbed forever. But if anyone legally charges that another person has destroyed, or has in any manner extracted those who have been buried, or has moved with wicked intent those who have been buried to other places, committing a crime against them, or has moved sepulcher-sealing stones, against such a person, I order that a judicial tribunal be created, just as [is done] concerning the gods in human religious observances, even more so will it be obligatory to treat with honor those who have been entombed. You are absolutely not to allow anyone to move [those who have been entombed]. But if [someone does], I wish that [violator] to suffer capital punishment under the title of tomb-breaker."
Cultural background of the day

 Violatio sepulchri ('tomb violation') was a crime under Roman law, as noted by Cicero (d. 43 BC). The Nazareth Inscription prescribes the death penalty for the offense.[13] A tomb at which funeral rites had been duly performed became a locus religiosus, belonging to the divine rather than to the human realm.[14][13]:144 Roman Imperial tombstones are often inscribed with a curse (defixio) against anyone who desecrates the grave.[13]:144

Analysis
Scholars have analyzed the language and style of the Nazareth inscription and attempted to date it. It has been discussed in the context of tomb-robbery in antiquity.
Francis de Zulueta dates the inscription, based on the style of lettering, to between 50 B.C. and A.D. 50, but most likely around the turn of the era. As the text uses the plural form "gods", Zulueta concluded it most likely came from the Hellenized district of the Decapolis. Like Zulueta, J. Spencer Kennard, Jr. noted that the reference to "Caesar" indicated that "the inscription must have been derived from somewhere in Samaria or Decapolis; Galilee was ruled by a client-prince until the reign of Claudius".
It was once of interest to historians of the New Testament. Some authors, citing the inscription's supposed Galilean origin, interpreted it as Imperial Rome's clear reaction to the empty tomb of Jesus and specifically as an edict of Claudius, who reigned AD 41-54.[ If the inscription was originally set up in Galilee, it can date no earlier than 44, the year Roman rule was imposed there.
However, the 2020 isotope study of the marble published in the Journal of Archaeological Science clarified the origin of the tablet and points to another interpretation.[18] The scientists took a sample from the back of the tablet, and used laser ablation to help determine the isotope ratio of the stone.[6] The enrichment of carbon 13 and depletion of Oxygen 18 allowed a confident identification of the source of the marble as the upper quarry in the island of Kos. The team proposed that the edict was issued by Augustus  (27 BCE to 14AD) after the desecration of the tomb of the Kos tyrant Nikias.

In March of 2020 the Smithsonian also commented on recent analysis as well. 

"In the 1930s, a mysterious marble tablet held at the Louvre in Paris started catching the attention of religious scholars. Etched with a warning to keep grave robbers away from tombs and accompanied by a cryptic note that claimed it “came from Nazareth,” the slab was soon linked to Jesus’ death—a written reaction, many theorized, to his body’s disappearance and biblical resurrection."

"...A more unsavory scenario might exist as well: that the tablet was inscribed by a well-informed forger in the 19th century, just before it was acquired by a French collector named Wilhelm Froehner in 1878, archaeologist Robert Tykot of the University of South Florida tells Science News.

At some point, Froehner (or his seller) was probably duped into an expensive buy—though as Harper tells Science News, “how exactly Froehner acquired the stone will probably always remain obscure.”


Hobby Lobby and its Biblical Artifact obsessed  owners recently got a taste of the problem with
forgeries in their Dead Sea Scroll fragments debacle


  Dr Bob concludes:

"Excluding its journey by sea, the total overland shipping of the Nazareth Inscription from its quarry on Kos to Nazareth would have been only about 25-30 miles total; the fastest, easiest, and the least expensive way for King Herod Agrippa I to obtain and to post the Nazareth Inscription in Nazareth."

(Note:  I have my doubts that Herod Agrippa was concerned about postage)

"In summation, based on the shipping routes of that day, King Herod Agrippa I could have easily ordered this Decree of Caesar to be inscribed on white marble at Kos and then had it shipped by sea to Ptolemais and from there overland to Nazareth where it would have been posted.  This decree, that threatens with death anyone who removes corpses from tombs in order to perpetrate a fraud, fits very well with the story of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, but it does not at all fit the story of Nikias the Tyrant."

Note: It actually fits the story of Nikias the Tyrant, as motivation but not exclusive intent very well. Like with Jesus, that horse was already out of the barn and closing the barn door on an event that has already happened is rather moot.  This decree was for all future antics on the part of anyone for any reason thinking to desecrate a grave in the Roman Empire. 

The committing of "Fraud" was only one of a number of reasons for this decree. A Roman decree of the sort had much more to do with respect for the dead than debunking already past stories about Jesus resurrection or preventing anymore such shenanigans by Christians in the realm as if they had more bodies to be stolen from graves in mind to tell the story of Jesus.  

  A decree forbidding, upon pain of death, anymore grave robbing or desecration  is certainly closing the barn door after the horse gets out if the motive in the day was to counter the story of Jesus resurrection. It would be an ineffective decree unless just repeating the story now was a crime of grave desecration punishable by death.  

Nothing this specific about Christians or the Jesus story is remotely implied by the decree. It was most likely written and mailed postage paid somewhere before the story of Jesus to begin with. Or a long time after if proven to be a forgery after all.  We may never know, but Bob cannot be as sure to know as he makes out to know. 

Bob also fails to notice that Jesus was supposed to be resurrected from the dead in Jerusalem not Nazareth so one would expect to find multiple copies of such a decree plastered all over Israel of the day warning all Christians and not in just the backwater town of Nazareth as if Nazareth was the hotbed of the problem with Christians in the Empire. One might rather expect such a decree to be obvious in the town of Sepphoris, a mere four miles away from Nazareth, much much larger, totally Roman and never once mentioned in the OT or NT.  


Cry not heard all over the realm.  "Hey!  Why didn't we get one?"