| Author |
Message |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 3615
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 8:45 pm: |     |
Bill, I believe I merely said that we can't normalize specific acts of God. Obviously I don't know how eternity will "look". I do know, though, that singular acts of God are not things we can expect to be repeated: i.e. the flood, Elijah's translation in a chariot of fire, the parting of the Red Sea and the drowning of the Egyptian army, Hezekiah's sundial moving backward 15 degrees, Jesus' incarnation, etc.
Obviously, God the Creator and the Source of all law can do what He wants, and we don't have to understand. But we cannot assume that because He performs a miracle for a specific purpose, we can expecte the act will be repeated. His promises are trustworthy; His miracles are simply ways He validates Himself to mortal humanity. |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 94
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 9:34 pm: | |
I believe that we see through a glass VERY darkly. That we interpret things through the words and totally inadequate senses we have and try to understand a being that defies logic (i.e it/he/she was ALWAYS THERE!
We think that we have the inerrant specifically dictated (not one word can be wrong) will, testament and communication of this being captured in ONE PLACE in writing and words that we understand. And amazing as it may seem - as soon as we have something that makes sense to us we start teaching that to others and making it like our understanding of it is TOTALLY and immutably correct and any other understanding or interpretation is wrong and God will not like the interpretation that is not OURS.
Amazing how each church thinks that they have this all powerful deity in a box isn't it?
I heard Tony Campolo give his idea of God and time - how Jesus is RIGHT NOW on the cross and looking at you and your sin and at the same time looking at Moses. How EVERYTHING is NOW to God. Interesting concept.
This whole idea of an everlasting hell and burning forever - certainly the right reason to go to heaven is NOT the avoidance of punishment or hell. By the time you get to hell it is too late for it to have ANY helpful or redeeming value. (We lesser mortals use punishment or prison to help the bad people learn not to be bad anymore and let them out to be good. Hell won't help you learn since by the time you get there it is too late.) The idea that there is some law that REQUIRES the sinner to suffer forever in my opinion is not rational. It would defy all laws that this wonderful creator has established and serve no purpose.
The great news is that (IMHO) while the discussion is interesting it serves as much purpose in "spreading the Gospel" as how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. So - let's get on with the wonderful Grace of God and tell our friends how wonderful it will be to see them in heaven.
Bill |
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis
Post Number: 637
Registered: 4-2000
| | Posted on Friday, March 24, 2006 - 6:05 pm: | |
Bill,
We can only appreciate God's amazing grace to the extent that we understand the depth of His divine wrath. Sin is a big deal to God. The sins of the wicked will be forever before our Heavenly Father. Since these sins were not confessed nor forgiven, they will never be forgotten. It is ONLY through our Savior and Substitute, Jesus Christ, that we can be pardoned from our transgressions--meaning that they are forgotten.
Think about it! If annihilationism (nonexistence as Adventists would call it) is true after death (during the intermediate state), then Jesus the God-man was annihilated and thus ceased to exist between his death and resurrection--reducing the Trinity into a Binity, or the resurrection of Jesus meant the re-creation of God the Son. In that case, Jesus would be a created or "derived" person. Nothing less than orthodox Christology is at stake. I conclude then that traditionalism, not annihilationism, correctly integrates Christology with the doctrine of hell.
In regard to the quick-fix of annihilationism as the final end of all punishment for the wicked, this too underestimates and trivializes the rigor of God's wrath. As God incarnate, Jesus was capable of suffering in six hours on the cross what we can suffer only over an infinite period of time. In other words, because of the infinite dignity of Christ's person, his sufferings, though finite in duration, were of infinite weight on the scales of divine justice (much as his righteousness, though displayed during his incarnation over a finite period, is of infinite weight).
All in all, annihilationism in both the intermediate state or as the final demise of the wicked, is unbiblical. The ungodly in hell would like for annihilation to be true, as Jonathan Edwards noted more than two centuries ago: "Wicked men will hereafter earnestly wish to be turned to nothing and forever cease to be that they might escape the wrath of God." The reality of an unending punishment has been the historic view of the Christian church--and for good reason because it is abundantly taught in Scripture. Most of what we know about hell was taught by Jesus Himself. Importantly, as we might expect of one aspect of God's truth, it coheres well with other biblical teachings. It helps us to see the BIG PICTURE about God's divine love and wrath. Indeed, the truths of God's Word fit neatly together like a completed puzzle.
Dennis Fischer |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 98
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Friday, March 24, 2006 - 6:30 pm: | |
God can have our sins ever before him whether or not we are alive or dead. I do not believe that it would make Him feel better to know that we are currently suffering. Would you feel better if YOUR children were suffering. Jesus came to END suffering - it would make no sense to miraculously prolong life so that you could torture.
I realize that you have read things that make you think that this is the only way that this works. I realize that you have texts from the Bible that seem to show that your belief has some validity. This is quite possibly one reason why I do not believe in the "inerrant" view of the Bible. I believe that you also would take a different view if you were to use the Bible that is used in Africa by many of the churches there since they have the Book of Adam included in their Bible. Not so "inerrant" then.
I do not see how death trivializes God's wrath.
Certainly your quoting Jonathan Edwards was intriguing - "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" certainly would back up your view though I guess.
Lets put it this way - I do not believe the way that you do. I see your point and your arguement and I disagree with it. Every time it is put out there I have the same difficulty and feel (for whatever reason) that I cannot sit idly by and not say "No - that is not my view of God or what I believe". Just in case there are lurkers out there who say - "Wow - everyone here believes that?" No - everyone here does not believe that.
Thank you for your reasoned approach.
Bill |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 3624
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 25, 2006 - 12:31 am: | |
Bill, I totally understand your reasoning; I shared it for a long time. My ideas didn't change suddenly, and they didn't change when I decided to leave Adventism. It was only after pursuing Bible study for several more years that I began to realize that it was not necessarily correct to see human life as the core value in the universe.
If human life is the ultimate value in the universe, then of course, it doesn't make sense that any indulgent parent-type or creator would fail to keep us comfortable. The idea of eternal punishment is not based on a smug satisfaction that those we hate will "get theirs" someday. Neither is anyone remotely suggesting that God delights in seeing "his children" suffer. The Bible is clear that it is not His will than any should perish.
But if hunman life is not the center of realityóif God Himself is the ultimate value, then everything changes. It doesn't make sense that the Creator would be limited by His creatures' desires. While the parent metaphor is very helpful, it doesn't go far enough. Parents and children all live in time and three dimensions. God, however, is in eternity and is sovereign over a great many dimensions we cannot conceive. We can't begin to see what would ultimately be best for us.
Our view of God is irrelevant to truth. What God is, IS. Whether or not we perceive Him accurately does not change reality or its outcome. For example, if I believed a teaspoon of sugar would prevent smallpox and, instead of receiving a vaccination, took sugar instead, my utter sincerity would never prevent me from contracting smallpox if exposed to it.
If in my humanity I believe I know what God would or would not do, I have assumed a position of superiority over Him. I have defined Him.
God, however, is defined by no one except Himself. The question is not "Why would God allow pain, evil, or eternal punishment if He is loving?" The real question is, "Why are fallen humans living blessed lives when their innate sin deserves death?"
God's grace literally saves the condemned. God's justice literally punishes the unrepentant.
It is really quite presumptuous, I've come to believe, for me to say that my view of God does not allow for Him to punish eternally or to do anything He chooses. I am a creature; He is the sovereign Creator. I do not measure eternal reality by ME. He is the measure of reality.
The great paradox is that when I finally submit to His sovereignty, justice, mercy, and grace, all the cognitive dissonance disappears, and I experience true freedom for the first time.
The fact that I do not see how something can be does not make that something invalid. God, not I, is the One for whom all creation exists. All glory is His. He, not I, determines what is true and plants me in reality.
Colleen |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 100
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 25, 2006 - 6:09 am: | |
I totally agree with you. I usually use a lemmings parable - that just because they do not believe that they will die when they fall off the cliff does not mean that they wont. Rules are rules. <g>
BUT - We are discussing things that we BELIEVE not because we have seen them happen but because they are written in in books - books that we believe because people have told us they are correct. There are different versions of these books. We are latching onto some very harsh passages in these books.
Now - WHY do you/we need people to know about this everlasting hell? Let me ask you Colleen - tomorrow afternoon if I told you that your dog was going to be incinerated alive - and there was nothing that you could do about it - what good would it do to tell you about this every 10 minutes - other than to make you suffer now? It may or MAY NOT be true - I certainly believe it to be true in this parable - but that does not make it true.
When studying the Bible and other ancient documents it becomes obvious that hell and the things associated with it were accentuated by the extant church to extort money from the public - (indulgences etc).
Now - lets say that there is not the hell as you describe it - then we have unnecessarily made people fret. If there is a hell then the only good it does now is to make people do things for the wrong reasons, and quite possibly move them AWAY from God. Yes, there are people in this world who like to be beaten and whipped but I certainly am not one of them and do NOT worship a God that enjoys that.
So - since we cannot PROOVE this hell idea (pictures - eye witness accounts etc) and it serves no basis for good - personally I focus on other things.
Tell me - WHY do you NEED to believe in this everlasting hell since you cannot do anything about it and cannot proove it does or does not exist? |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 3625
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 25, 2006 - 10:45 am: | |
No NEED to believe in it, Bill--and as you say, the bottom line is how we view Scripture.
My experience has deepened my trust in Scripture, not because it "suits me" but because I have experienced a deepening tangible relationship with Jesus the more I have submitted my life to what I learn through Scripture.
Scripture claims to be entirely "God-breathed"; like Jesus' claims about His own identity, Scripture's claims about it's veracity either must be based in self-serving deception or they must be true. Scripture is not powerful in itself; it reveals Jesus and the reality of God. That revelation is where the power is.
If I'm not willing to risk submitting myself to God's revelation of Himself facilitated by the Holy Spirit's teaching as I read Scripture, I will not experience the deepening reality of Jesus and His will and power working in my life. This doesn't necessarily mean I'm not saved; it means I'm missing the power of growing trust and intimacy with Him.
The degree to which I'm willing to trust His claims and submit to them is the degree to which the Bible increasingly makes sense and functions as a truly unified whole. This personal submission to Jesus as He is revealed through Scripture is the means by which all of Scripture's claims begin to make sense.
This submission is not a blind choice to leave my brain behind. It is a choice to believe God and put Him to the "test" by allowing Him to reveal Himself through it even though my brain might initially argue. If Scripture is alive and powerful, as it claims, then that power is from the Holy Spirit's power at work in us through His own words. If the claim is not true, submitting to Scripture will be fruitless and yield nothing but confusion.
I'm learning that Scripture really does reveal eternal reality that I could never figure out by analyzing text. Analysis is involved, to be sure, but submission to the Lord Jesus is the factor that makes the difference.
No, I don't NEED to believe in eternal punishmentóactually, it's not a pleasant thought in any way. But the longer I study the Bible and literally ask God to teach me truth, the more convinced I am that whatever the eternal reality will look like, God's word is true. His justice is eternal and absolute; His mercy is eternal and limitless. His grace is all-powerful, and His love is the mold from which every one of His attributes is shaped.
Colleen |
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis
Post Number: 638
Registered: 4-2000
| | Posted on Saturday, March 25, 2006 - 2:16 pm: | |
Bill,
We cannot PROVE that heaven exists either. However, we can fully trust the words of Jesus: "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life" (Matt. 25:46 NASB).
"For believers death means being AWAY FROM THE BODY and at home with the Lord" (2 Cor. 5:8). That is why He promised the penitent thief, "Today you will be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43). That is why Paul described departing the body to be with Christ as "better by far" than remaining in the body (Phil. 1:23). And that is why Scripture speaks of deceased human beings as souls "under the altar" (Rev. 6:9) and as the "spirits of righteous men made perfect" (Heb. 12:23).
The lead SDA-JW argument is that God is too loving and kind to extend His justice forever. This view wrongly teaches, in effect, that God does not view sin as being that big of a deal after all. With resulting quick-fix (annihilation) at the end of a wicked life, one may easily reason to accept the hedonistic lifestyle. If such a transitory fate is true, many would opt to embrace the worldly view (Ecclesiastes 8:15) to just eat, drink, and be merry today and quickly be extinguished tomorrow. Annihilation does not constitute the ultimate punishment. Rather, annihilation would constitute the END of punishment.
It is important to remember that Satan still does not want sinners to be concerned about eternal punishment--merely a slap on the wrist will suffice as a quick-fix to culminate a profane life. Interestingly and strikingly, the Scriptures portray how the wicked will actually be for annihilation in asking for the rocks and mountains to fall on them to hide them "from the wrath of the Lamb" (Rev. 6:16). However, despite their frantic pleas, suicide and/or annihilation will not be permitted to substitute for their "eternal punishment" (Matt. 25:46).
The theory of annihilation in which the wicked pass into nonexistence either at death or at the resurrection was first advanced by Arnobius, a fourth-century "Christian" apologist [see Baker's Dictionary of Theology, page 184]. The great reformer, John Calvin, devoted his first literary work to debunk this aberration of the Christian faith.
We serve a sovereign and righteous God. Indeed, we can fully place our trust in the Bible! Others will continue to deny the literal interpretation of Scripture because they don't want to face the literal realities that would reveal. Humanly speaking, God's ways may not always seem right or appealing to us. On the other hand, why not just believe what He says? Which view of death does Satan want you to believe in (be honest now)?
Dennis Fischer |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 101
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 25, 2006 - 2:30 pm: | |
Colleen - please define for me "scripture". What specifically is "God-Breathed" - please be specific and name the version/translation etc.
Thanks
Bill |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 102
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 25, 2006 - 2:38 pm: | |
Dennis - as you well know the meaning of Luke 23:43 can be changed easily with puctuation that did not exist in the time that the Bible was written.
Extending justice forever - hmmmm. . .again - how is death not justice?
Re: this view wrongly teaches (in your opinion)
Re: Satan does not want sinners to be concerned - well - I will bet that Jesus does not want you to be concerned with those thoughts either. <grin>
Re: we can fully trust what is in the Bible.
No - I can fully trust God. (See my question to Colleen regarding "scripture/Bible") Men put things in to the Bible and left other things out.
You will note that Muslims state that they can "fully trust" their Koran. All religious people fully believe that they can fully trust their God and their God's writings.
At this point I fully trust God. I do not fully trust anything else - perticularly things that other people are intent on making sure that I have THEIR understanding of <grin>.
I appreciate your belief - I do not hold it. Thank you for your effort in explaining it though.
Bill |
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis
Post Number: 639
Registered: 4-2000
| | Posted on Saturday, March 25, 2006 - 3:24 pm: | |
Catalyst,
Thank you for your comments. Regarding the words of Jesus in Luke 23:43, it is important to consider the grammatical accuracy of this passage as it is translated. The annihilationists have always been troubled by this text. Ignoring the rules of grammar and syntax, they erroneously state that the word "today" should modify Christ's words "I say" instead of referring to the thief's entrance into Paradise. Thus they attempt to translate verse 43 as follows:
Verily, I say to you today, you shall be with me in paradise.
The whole point of their rearranging the punctuation is to remove the fact that the thief was going to Paradise on that day. Lange points out that this is grammatically "senseless." Meyer calls it an "idle and unmeaning" attempt to avoid the emphasis in the original. Modern commentators such as Lenki do not see any grammatical grounds whatsoever for rearranging the punctuation.
In the midst of his suffering, the thief was comforted to know that he would be with Christ in Paradise by the end of that day. The emphasis is on the where (Paradise) and the when (today). Since it is obvious that Christ was speaking to the thief on that day and not "yesterday" or "tomorrow," there would be no reason for Christ to state, "I say to you today." Instead, the word "today" modifies when the thief would enter Paradise.
Dennis Fischer
|
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 103
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 25, 2006 - 5:10 pm: | |
First of all no one is "re-arranging the punctuation" - there is none to re-arrange, right?
Meyer can call it whatever he likes - he is putting it into the arrangement that fits what he wants it to fit.
Dennis - the thing that the Bible tells us is that God is LOVE. Everything that goes against that was probably added by man or if you must - the devil. It is the DEVIL's accusation that God is not fair and trustworthy and will punish you randomly and forever for a minor sin.
Re: "the thief was comforted" - what extrabiblical authority helped you with that?
There is nothing in the gramatical breakdown that would lead one to believe one of your translations over the other Dennis. Sorry.
But it really is a moot point. Again - the whole point of the Bible is communication with us - it is telling of a God of un-dying love. How much He loves us. I do find it interesting how each religion /theology has zealots that believe and need others to believe that everything that is written by the religion and its theolgians (and indirectly by its God) is inerrant and must be obeyed and believed as the zealots do.
The Muslims have such as well. SDA's have a faction or actually many breakoff factions <grin> also. I think that we all need to step back periodically and look - understanding this prophecy "better" or breaking down this verse or that verse is not as important as:
1. Sharing the Gospel with others
2. Love your neighbor as yourself.
Nowehere does the Bible or any other communication indicate that understanding a particular concept of Hell is important.
Have you read the Bible as it is in Africa? (It includes some of the Gnostic Gospels) Have you seen the books of the Bible that have been removed? Some of them were more "logical" and believeable than what actually made it in. Verses were added and left out. Some of the tales told were very popular in the early church. Do you really think that LETTERS written by Paul were designed by Him or God to be permanently part of theology? I think that certainly it can be used to help understand God or Paul's understanding of God. But - we need to be careful and use our head - this God of LOVE is exactly that. And He is trustworthy.
Again - thank you for your comments.
Bill |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 3630
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 25, 2006 - 11:33 pm: | |
Scripture: the canon accepted since the early days of the churchóno apocrypha or gnostic gospels. Inerrant in the original manuscripts...
Tranlsations vary a few shades of meaning, but considering how many centuries and into how many languages and how many revisions it has been translated, the meanings and nuances have changed remarkably little.
The canon we have meshes with itself in remarkable ways, considering how many writers participated and over how many centuries.
Without trust in the Bible, how does one know what Gospel to share? I learned one "gospel" as an Adventist; I now see quite another in the Bible. Upon what do we base our understanding of what we're supposed to share if only parts of the Bible are "valid"?
Who decides what's left outóor what's added in?
There is faith involved in accepting the Bible. We have to believe that God has protected His word. But faith is not blind; faith is based on the promises of God who cannot lie, and in the act of submitting to God by faith, He confirms Himself and His word. (He really does!)
Colleen |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 106
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 26, 2006 - 3:37 am: | |
So pretty much nothing that we can actually read is "God-breathed". (Unless you read latin or greek.)
Yes - I agree that there is remarkable agreement with what was written between different peoples.
I did not say that I did not trust the Bible - merely that I do not need its "inerrancy" to believe it.
Your question about who decides what gets left out or in is an interesting one. There have been MANY meetings to decide what got left out or put into each version that was published. It is truly interesting to see what got left out and what stories got put in in the new testament and why. You should find out more about that. The early church had MANY books about and from the apostles that were popular and used for actual teaching and reproof. Some would make you laugh.
I have a TOM TOM (GPS device) that I trust when I get to a new place (I travel a lot). Periodically it gets me to a place by a more circuitous route than would have been necessary, sometimes it takes me to a place that is incorrect (sometimes that is my fault). Sometimes it takes me a route that is no longer open (or tries to). I trust it, but it is not infallable. It is a good map and generally reliable and I trust it but it is not perfect. I believe that the Bible is like that, it is a good guide - it shows me (darkly because it is MAN's interpretation) God, certainly as good as I am going to understand God here on earth.
No - I do not need it to be inerrant. The people and tools used to get it written and translated and saved for me to read were certainly not inerrant.
Bill |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 107
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 26, 2006 - 4:14 am: | |
Here are SOME reasons why I do not need the Bible to be "inerrant". Note - because it has inconsistancies, an inerrant view would invalidate it for me.
(a) "... and the sons of Zerubbabel; Meshullam, and Hananiah, Jusha-bhesed, five." (1 Chron. 3:19-20). How can there be five sons of Zerubbabel when 7 males and one female are listed?
(b) "And it had for its inheritance Beer-sheba, Sheba, Moladah, Hazar-shual, Balah, Ezem, Eltolad, Bethul, Hormah, Ziklag, Beth-marcaboth, Hazarsuah, Beth-lebaoth, and Sharuhen- thirteen cities with their villages" (Josh. 19:2-6 RSV). Fourteen cities are listed, not 13.
(c) "The cities belonging to the tribe of the people of Judah in the extreme South, toward the boundary of Edom, were Kabzeel, Eder, Jagur, Kinah, Dimonah, Adadah, Kedesh, Hazor, Ithnan, Ziph, Telem, Bealoth, Hazor-hadattah, Kerioth-hezron (that is Hazor). Amam,Shema, Moladah, Hazar-gaddah, Heshmon, Bethpelet, Hazar-shual, Beer-sheba, Biziothiah, Baalah, Iim, Ezem, Eltolad, Chesil, Hormah, Ziklag, Madmannah, Sansannah, Lebaoth, Shilhim, Ain, and Rimmon; in all twenty-nine(29) cities, with their villages" (Josh. 15:21-32 RSV). Thirty-six cities are listed, not 29.
(d)"...and the sons of Shemaiah; Hattush, and Igeal and Barial, and Neariah, and Shaphat, six" (1Chron. 3:22). Five names don't total six.
(e) "...the sons od Jeduthun; Gedaliah, and Zeri, and Jeshiah, Hashabiah, and Mattithiah, six, under the hands of their father Jeduthun,..." (1 Chron. 25:3). Again, five names do not total six.
(f) "And in the lowland, Eshtaol, Zorah, Ashnah, Zanoah, En-gannim, Tappuah, Enam, Jarmuth, Adullam, Socoh, Azekah, Sha-araim, Adithaim, Gederah, Gederothaim: fourteen cities with their villages" (Josh. 15:33-36 RSV). Fifteen cities are listed, not 14.Bibical authors not only counted inaccurately but often added with comparable precision.
(g) "The whole congregation together (those who returned from the Captivity-Ed.) was forty and two thousand three hundred and threescore (42,360)" (Ezra 2:64). The number of people in each tribe that returned from the Captivity are listed from Ezra 2:3 to Ezra 2:60. One need only total the figures to see that 29,818 returned, not 42,360- an error of 12,542.
(h) A similar problem is encourntered in Neh. 7:66, which says, "the whole congregation together was forty and two thousand three hundred and three-score (42,360)." One need only add the figures between Neh. 7:8 and Neh. 7:62 to see that the total for all the tribe should have been 31,089, not 42,360-- an error of 11,271. Besides adding inaccurately, Ezra and Nehemiah can't agree on what the total should be. The former supports 29,818 while the latter asserts 31,089.
(i) "And this is the number of them: Thirty (30) charges of gold, a thousand (1,000) charges of silver, nine and twenty (29) knives, Thirty (30) basins of gold, silver basins of a second sort four hundred and ten (410), and vessels a thousand (1,000). All the vessels of gold and of silver were five thousand and four hundred (5,400)" (Ezra 1:9-11). Even if all these items were composed of silver and gold, they would not total 5,400 (30+ 1,000+ 29 + 30 + 410 + 1,000=2,499 not 5,400).
(j) "And these were the sons of Levi by their names; Gershon, and Kohath, and Merari" (Num. 3:17) and "Those that were numbered of them (the Gershonites-Ed.)...were seven thousand and five hundred (7,500)" (Num. 3:22) and "...these are the families of the Kohathites...eight thousand and six hundred (8,600)" (Num. 3:27-28) and "...these are the families of the Merari. And those that were numbered of them,...were six thousand and two hundred (6,200)" (Num.3:33-34), versus "All that were numbered of the Levites,...were twenty and two thousand (22,000)" (Num. 3:39). The author of Numbers added inaccurately, since 7,500 + 8,600 + 6,200 equals 22,300, not 22,000.
(a) David took seven hundred (2 Sam. 8:4), seven thousand (1 Chron. 18:4) horsemen from Hadadezer;
(b) Ahaziah was 22 (2 Kings 8:26), 42 (2 Chron. 22:2) years old when he began to reign;
(c) Jehoiachin was 18 (2 Kings 24:8), 8 (2 Chron. 36:9) years old when he began to reign and he reigned 3 months (2 Kings 24:8), 3 months and10 days (2 Chron. 36:9);
(d) There were in Israel 8000,000 (2 Sam. 24:9); 1,1000,000 (1 Chron. 21:5) men that drew the sword and there were 500,000 (2 Sam. 24:9), 470,000 (1 Chron. 21:5) men that drew the sword in Judah;
(e) There were 550 (1 Kings 9:23), 250 (2 Chron. 8:10) chiefs of the officers that bare the rule over the people;
(f) Saul's daughter, Michal, had no sons (2 Sam. 6:23), had 5 sons (2 Sam. 21:6) during her lifetime;
(g) Lot was Abraham's nephew (Gen. 14:12), brother (Gen. 14:14);
(h) Joseph was sold into Egypt by Midianites (Gen. 37:36), by Ishmaelites (Gen. 39:1);
(i) Saul was killed by his own hands (1 Sam. 31:4), by a young Amalekite (2 Sam. 1:10), by the Philistines (2 Sam. 21:12);
(j) Solomon made of a molten sea which contained 2,000 (1 Kings 7:26), 3,000 (2 Chron. 4:5) baths;
(k) The workers on the Temple had 3,300 (1 Kings 5:16), 3,600 (2 Chron. 2:18) overseers;
(l) The earth does (Eccle. 1:4), does not (2 Peter 3:10) abideth forever;
(m) If Jesus bears witness of himself his witness is true (John 8:14), is not true (John 5:31);
(n) Josiah died at Megiddo (2 Kings 23:29-30), at Jerusalem (2 Chron. 35:24);
(o) Jesus led Peter, James, and John up a high mountain after six (Matt. 17:1, Mark 9:2), eight (Luke 9:28) days;
(p) Nebuzaradan came unto Jerusalem on the seventh (2 Kings 25:8), tenth (Jer. 52:12) day of the fifth month.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What was the sign on Jesus' cross?
This is Jesus
The King of the Jews.
(Mt 27:37)
The King
of the Jews.
(Mk 15:26)
This is the
King of the Jews.
(Lk 23:38)
Jesus the Nazarene
The King of the Jews. (Jn 19:19)
1. How many Gods are there?
(GEN 1:26) God said "LET US MAKE MAN IN OUR IMAGE ACCORDING TO OUR LIKENESS",
(GEN 3:22) God said "MAN HAS BECOME LIKE ONE OF US."
(DEUT 6:4) God is one God
2. When was God first called Jehovah?
(Genesis 4:26) long before Moses, men began to call on the name of the Lord, "Jehovah",
(Genesis 22:14) Abraham named a place Jehovah-jireh. "The Lord will provide."
(Exodus 6:2-3) God informed Moses that previously His name (Jehovah) had been unknown even to the patriarchs such as Abraham Isaac and Jacob
3. When did the Nephilim live?
(Genesis 6:4) The Nephilim (giants) lived on earth prior to the Flood
(Genesis 7:23) Only Noah and his family, and the animals on the Ark, survived the Flood.
(Numbers 13:33) Long after the Flood, the Nephilim (Giants) still lived.
4. Does God repent?
(Genesis 6:6) God does repent.
(Numbers 23:19) God does not repent
(I Samuel 15:11,35) God does repent.
5. Who has ascended to heaven?
(Genesis 5:24) Enoch was taken bodily into Heaven.
(II Kings 2:11) Elijah ascended to heaven in a whirlwind.
(John 3:13) Jesus said that no man but himself has ever ascended to heaven.
(Hebrews 11:5) Enoch was taken bodily into Heaven.
6. Math quiz: How many animals went on the Ark?
(GEN 6:19-20) God told Noah to take with him on the ark two of every king of animal to include birds, animals and creeping things
(GEN 7:2-3) God told Noah to take with him on the ark seven of every clean animal and bird and two of every unclean animal.
7. Math quiz: How long was the flood?
(GEN 7:17, 8:6) The flood was on the Earth 40 days and nights
(GEN 7:24, 8:3) The flood was on the Earth 150 days CONTRADICTS
(GEN 7:11) the flood began during the 600th year, 2nd month, 17th day of Noah's life and finally dried up
(GEN 8:13) during the 601st year, 1st month, 1st day of Noah's life (1 solar year from the date given in Gen7:11).
8. When did the world develop many different languages?
(Genesis 11:1,6-9) In the days of Babel, generations after the Flood, the world had one common language. God "confused the tongues" to create many.
(Genesis 10:5) Prior to Babel, the Bible speaks of many "nations", each with its own language
9. Does God cause confusion?
(GEN11:9) God confused the language of all the Earth at Babel
(EX15:24) God troubled (CONFUSED BY SOME TRANSLATIONS) the army of Egypt.
(1SAM7:10) God thundered upon the philistines so as to confuse them
(1COR14:33) God is not the author of confusion
10. Math quiz: How long did Terah live?
(Genesis 11:26,32) Terah lived 135 years after begetting Abraham (he begat Abram at age 70 and lived 205 years total).
(Genesis 12:4) Abraham was 75 years old when he departed Haran.
(Acts 7:4) Abraham departed Haran when his father (Terah) was dead.
11. Who has seen God?
(Gen 18:1) The Lord appeared to Abraham.
(GEN 32:24-30) Jacob saw and wrestled with God
(EX 24:9-11) Moses & 73 elders gazed upon God.
(Exodus 33:11) God spoke to Moses face-to-face.
(Exodus 33:22-23) God allowed Moses to see his "back parts".
(Deut 34:10) God spoke to Moses face-to-face.
(IS 6:1-13) Isaiah stood before God and saw him
(Ezekiel 1:27-28) Ezekiel saw God in a vision and described Him in some detail.
(Amos 7:7) Amos saw God.
(John 1:18, 6:46) No one has ever seen God.
(1 TIM6:16) God is un-seeable
(I John 4:12) No one has ever seen God.
12. Is God a fair and righteous judge?
(GEN 18:25) God claims to judge right
(GEN 22:1-2) God commands Abraham to sacrifice his own son.
(EX 20:5) God admits jealousy
(DEUT 32:4) God is perfect, just, true, righteous, upright,
(PSALM 92:15) God is not unrighteous
(IS 45:7) God claims to do good AND evil; all things
(JER 18:11) God threatens disaster to make a people be good
(EZEK 18:25) God claims to be fair
(AMOS 3:6) God admits he makes calamity
(ROM 2:11) God is impartial
(JAMES 1:13) God is not tempted by evil and tempts no one with evil
13. Who was Keturah?
(GEN 25:1) Keturah was Abraham's wife
(1 CHRON 1:32) Keturah was Abraham's concubine.
14. Who sold Joseph into slavery?
(Genesis 37:36) The Midianites sold Joseph in Egypt to Potiphar, the courtier of Pharaoh
(Genesis 39:1) The Ishmaelites brought Joseph to Egypt and sold him to Potiphar, the courtier of Pharaoh.
15. Where was Jacob buried?
(Genesis 50:13) Jacob was buried in Canaan. in a cave which Abraham had purchased from Ephron the Hittite.
(Acts 7:15-16) Jacob was buried in Sychem. in a sepulchre which Abraham had purchased from Emmor.
16. Does God condone or condemn lying?
(EX 2:18-20) God deals well with midwives for lying to the King of Egypt.
(EX 20:16) Lying forbidden
(JOSH 2:4-6) Rahab hides two men from the King of Jericho and lies to him and is dealt well with by God
(PROV 12:22) Lying is an abomination to God
(JAMES 2:25) James preaches that Rahab was justified for hiding two men and lying,
(REV 21:8) all liars will burn in the lake of fire
17. How about stealing?
(Exodus 3:21-22) plundering commanded.
(Exodus 20:15) Stealing forbidden
18. Does God afflict people with illnesses?
(Exodus 4:11) God admitted He is the cause of blindness, deafness, dumbness.
(Lamentations 3:33) God does not willingly cause grief or affliction.
19. Did God kill off the Pharoah's livestock, or didn't he?
(Exodus 9:3-6) God killed all the cattle (field animals) of the Egyptians with a grievous murrain including the horses, asses, camels, oxen and sheep. None survived the plague
(Exodus 9:19-21,25) Later, at least some of the Egyptian field animals were mysteriously alive again, to suffer a plague of hail.
(EX 14:9) Pharaoh later chases Israel with all his horses and chariots.
20. Is God peaceful?
(EX 15:3) He is a God of war.
(1 COR 14:33) He is not a God of confusion but of peace
21. How does God feel about the making of images?
(Exodus 20:4) Image-making forbidden
(Exodus 25:18) God commands the making of two cherubim.
22. Who pays for sins?
(Exodus 20:5) God blames children for the iniquities of the father. even for four generations.
(Deuteronomy 5:9) His curse or punishment may extend far beyond the third or fourth generation.
(Deuteronomy 24:16) The son should not be punished for the father's sin. Every man bears guilt only for his own transgressions.
(II Chronicles 25:4) The son should not be punished for the father's sin. Every man bears guilt only for his own transgressions.
(EZEK 18:19-20) Each is responsible for his own actions, a son does not bear guilt for his father's sins
(Romans 5:12,14.19, 6:23) All men are considered sinners because of Adam's sin. Death, the punishment for sin, is inflicted even on those who did not sin, because Adam sinned.
23. How does God feel about selling one's daughter?
(EX 21:7) conditions are set up for selling one's daughters.
(Lev 19:29) It is forbidden to sell a daughter
24. Who inscribed the commandments on stone?
(Exodus 34:27-28) God dictated the second set of 10 commandments to Moses while Moses inscribed them.
(Deuteronomy 10:1-2,4) God inscribed the second set of 10 commandments on stones which Moses made
25. So, did God say it, or not?
(Leviticus chapters 1-7) After delivering the Jews from Egypt, God went into minute detail regarding sacrifices and burnt offerings.
(Jeremiah 7:22) God denied that he ever said anything about sacrifices or burnt offerings.
26. Where do the rules on what types of food to eat come from?
(Leviticus 3:17, 11:1-47) God gave many rules about what may be eaten or handled
(Colossians 2:20-23) Such rules come from man, not God.
27. Should we judge others?
(Leviticus 19:15) You must judge your neighbor in righteousness
(Matthew 7:1) Judge not or you will be judged.
28. Can I wear long hair and still be "clean?"
(Numbers 6:2-6) Describes the process for being clean in order to consecrate an offering; involves not allowing a razor to come upon his head and letting the locks of his hair grow
(I Corinthians 11:14) Paul preaches that it is a shame for any man to have long hair.
29. Does God keep his word?
(NUM 23:19) God does not change, Makes good his promises
(I SAM 2:30-31) God admits not keeping his promise
(II KINGS 20:1-6) God says one thing, then changes his mind and says another
(JONAH 3:10) God doesn't keep his promise to destroy
30. Has God ever lied?
(Numbers 23:19) God cannot lie
(I Kings 22:20-30) God deliberately sent a "lying spirit" into the mouth of Ahab's prophets
(II Chronicles 18:19-22) God deliberately sent a "lying spirit" into the mouth of Ahab's prophets
(II Thessalonians 2:11-12) God sends delusions on people to make them believe false things and be damned
(Titus 1:2) God cannot lie
(HEB 6:18) It is impossible for God to lie
31. Is God loving, merciful, kind, etc.?
(NUM 25:4) God commands Moses to hang the leaders in the sun to calm God's anger
(DEUT 4:24) God is a consuming fire, a jealous God
(I SAM 6:19) God strikes 50,070 dead for a sin with no compassion
(I SAM 15:2,3) God commands utter destruction of a nation of people for one man's sin,
(II SAM 21:1) God causes a three year famine because of the doings of one man's house.
(I CHRON 16:34) God is good and merciful
(Psalm 25:8) God is good and upright
(Psalm 145:8-9) God is gracious, compassionate, slow to anger, merciful, and good to all
(JER 13:14) God will not pity, not spare, not show mercy, but destroy them
(JER 17:4) God will be angry at Judah forever
(EZEK 18:32) God finds no pleasure in death
(JAMES 5:11) God is very compassionate and merciful
(1 JOHN 4:16) God is love
32. Did the Midianites survive or not?
(Numbers 31:7.9,15-18) The Israelites slew all the Midianites except the female virgins
(Judges 6:1-5) Later, the Midianites invaded the Israelites.
33. Can we love AND fear God?
(Deuteronomy 6:5) We must love God
(Deuteronomy 6:13) We must fear God
(Matthew 22:37) We must love God
(I Peter 2:17) We must fear God
(I John 4:18) Perfect love cannot be mingled with fear.
34.Did Ai burn, or not?
(Joshua 8:28) Joshua burnt the city of Ai, making it an ash heap forever
(Nehemiah 7:32) Ai is counted among the existing cities of Jerusalem approx. 1000 years later.
(Message edited by catalyst on March 26, 2006) |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 108
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 26, 2006 - 6:53 am: | |
Dennis - Are you saying that "Today you will be with me in paradise" means that Jesus was in Paradise that day? Is that something that you believe?
Bill |
Wolfgang
Registered user
Username: Wolfgang
Post Number: 69
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 26, 2006 - 11:59 am: | |
I guess Im in the Bill and Jason camp on this topic as well. I also think this is a topic as Christians we can agree to disagree because it's not a salvation issue.We can trust that God is a just and merciful God and know He's in control.
Dawn |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 110
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 26, 2006 - 5:54 pm: | |
Colleen - please elucidate for me where the scriptures claim that they are inerrant.
Thank you,
Bill |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 3633
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 26, 2006 - 11:18 pm: | |
Bill, I will refer to material from Wayne Grudem's Bible Doctrines in my response.
Before I refer to Grudem, the list you used in your above post uses many texts out of context and sets up invalid contrasts. I will not address each of them, but I will address a few. For example:
10. Math quiz: How long did Terah live?
(Genesis 11:26,32) Terah lived 135 years after begetting Abraham (he begat Abram at age 70 and lived 205 years total).
(Genesis 12:4) Abraham was 75 years old when he departed Haran.
(Acts 7:4) Abraham departed Haran when his father (Terah) was dead.
Genesis 11:26 says, "After Terah had lived 70 years, he became the father of Abram, Nahor and Haran."
As in the case of the names of Noah's sons Shem, Ham, and Japeth (see Gen 9:24 and 10:21), this list of Abram, Nahor, and Haran may not reflect chronological order. This text does not state that Terah was 70 when Abram was bornómerely that he was 70 before he had his first of three sons. It does not state birth order.
In this question:
3. When did the Nephilim live?
(Genesis 6:4) The Nephilim (giants) lived on earth prior to the Flood
(Genesis 7:23) Only Noah and his family, and the animals on the Ark, survived the Flood.
(Numbers 13:33) Long after the Flood, the Nephilim (Giants) still lived.
Genesis 6:4 states: "The Nephilim were on the earth in those daysóand also afterwardówhen the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. The were the heroes of old, men of renown.
That phraseóìand also afterwardîódoes not give a specific time frame, but it certainly leaves the door open for evil to have interacted with humanity sometime after the flood. It doesn't specifically say, of courseóbut it's clearly not a closed case.
Further, Numbers 13:33 describes the 10 faithless spies reporting that Canaan was full of Nephilim and that they themselves were like grasshoppers beside them. Caleb and Joshua, however, did not agree that they could not overtake them.
This verse does not necessarily describe a statement of genetic fact but an emotional statement of fear on the part of the faithless spies. For them to be overcome and to consider themselves mere grasshoppers is a show of their lack of faith in their God who had already performed miracles that had awed the nations as they observed the slow progress of Israel through the years. Some commentators believe that this passage was an exaggeration reflecting the 10 spies cowardice rather than actual fact. Either way, the text in Genesis is open-ended.
And so on.
As for inerrancy:
1. The definition of biblical inerrancy is: "The inerrancy of Scripture means that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything which is contrary to fact."
2. "The Bible can be inerrant and still speak in the ordinary language of everyday speech." For example, the Bible can speak of the sun rising and rain falling because from the speaker/writer's perspective, this is what it looks like. Similarly, a reporter commenting on war casualties may report that 8,000 men were killed. That does not mean the reporter counted every one and knows positively that it was not 7,999 or 8,001. etc. The general number is reported, and the meaning is not twisted from the truth.
3. "The Bible can be inerrant and still include loose or free quotations." NT Greek had no quotation marks, and standard procedure for quotes included an "accurate citation" of what a person said, rather in the manner of what we consider indirect quotes, as long as the content is not false to the original statement.
4. "It is consistent with inerrancy to have unusual or uncommon grammatical constructions in the Bible." Some original statements are rough-hewn and written with flawed grammar, but they are still inerrant because they are true. "God used ordinary people who used their own ordinary language. The issue is not elegance in style but truthfulness in speech."
5. "Inerrancy does not imply dictation from God as the sole means of communication." Although all Scripture is "God breathed" (2 Timothy 3:16), not all Scripture was dictated. There are some instances of dictation, for example, John the Revelator. Heb. 1:1 says that God spoke to the prophets "in many and various ways." On the other end of the scale from dictation, Luke used historical records to compile his gospel (see Luke 1:1-3). God providentially equipped and raised up the writers of Scripture so that "their abilities to evaluate events in the world around them, their access to historical data, their judgment with regard to the accuracy of information, and their individual circumstances when they wrote were all exactly what God wanted them to be, so that when they actually came to the point of putting pen to paper, the words were fully their own words but also fully the words God wanted them to write, words God would also claim as his own."
The Bible asserts that its words are from God. When the prophets say, "Thus says the Lord", they are claiming to be messengers from Sovereign God. The NT is also full of quotes attributing to God the words of the OT.
In the NT, 2 Peter 3:15-16 clearly calls Paulís writings Scripture, and in 1 Timothy 5:18, Paul writes, "For the scripture says, 'You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain,' and 'The laborer deserves his wages.'" The first quote is from Deuteronomy 25:4, but the second quote is from Luke 10:7 where Luke records the words of Jesus.
As previously mentioned, 2 Tim. 3:16 claims ALL Scripture is God-breathed. "Since the words of Scripture are 'self-attesting,' they cannot be 'proved' to be God's words by appeal to any higher authority. If we make our ultimate appeal, for example, to human logic or to scientific truth to prove that the Bible is God's Word, then we assume the thing to which we appeal to be a higher authority than God's words and one that is more true or more reliable. Therefore, the ultimate authority by which Scripture is shown to be God's words must be Scripture itself."
While some argue this is circular reasoning, there is no defense for personal belief which is not some form of circular reasoning. For example, "Logical consistency is my ultimate authority because it is logical to make it so." or "The findings of human sensory experiences are the ultimate authority for discovering what is real and what is not, because our human senses have never discovered anything else: Thus, human sense experience tells me that my principle is true." All are circular.
The argument for the Bible as God's Word and our ultimate authority, however, is not a typical argument. "The process of persuasion is perhaps better likened to a spiral in which increasing knowledge of Scripture and increasingly correct understanding of God and creation tend to supplement one another in a harmonious way, each tending to confirm the accuracy of the other."
Bottom line: "Our ultimate conviction that the words of the Bible are God's words comes only when the Holy Spirit speaks IN and THROUGH the words of the Bible to our hearts and gives us an inner assurance that these are the words of our Creator speaking to us. Apart from the work of the Spirit of God, a person will not receive or accept the truth that the words of Scripture are in fact the words of God."
If we cannot completely trust the words of the Bible to be God's words for us, we fall into the trap of relying on a human interpreteróhence Ellen, the Book of Mormon, etc. For two millennia the Bible alone has yielded the same understanding of God and of salvation and of sin and evil and of human nature and of eternity, etc. To be sure, people who do not wrestle with the text, praying for God to teach them truth, comparing the Bible with itself throughout its pages, will come up with widely varying ideas.
But if God is the Bibleís true Source, its message will be consistent in all the core revelations about reality, regardless of culture or time. This consistency has been demonstrated over and over as people who are submitted to Godís Spirit derive the same amazing picture of reality as they commit themselves to being taught through the words of Scripture.
Colleen |
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis
Post Number: 640
Registered: 4-2000
| | Posted on Sunday, March 26, 2006 - 11:34 pm: | |
Bill,
Indeed, I believe that Jesus' spirit went to paradise or heaven that very day (Friday--the sixth day of the week). We can trust the words of Jesus when he committed his spirit to the Father a moment before he drew his last breath (see Luke 23:46). Likewise, Stephen prayed earnestly that his spirit would be "received" into heaven (see Acts 7:59). If the "spirit" is merely the breath in one's nostrils that AUTOMATICALLY returns to God at death, as SDA-JW apologists claim, then why the frantic, "loud" pleas of Jesus and Stephen?
Yes, there is punctuation that annihilationists would like to rearrange in Luke 23:43 due to their presuppositions alone. Punctuation is necessary when translating passages into modern languages. The grammar and syntax do not allow moving the comma to accommodate the preconceived notions of annihilationists. Bible translators have correctly translated this passage from multiple manuscript sources. There is absolutely no mistranslation involved here. Truly, "...in the multitude of counsellors there is safety" (Prov. 11:14).
Dennis Fischer |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 112
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 27, 2006 - 3:42 am: | |
Dennis -
So - when He says that "I have not yet ascended to my Father?"
Bill |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 113
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 27, 2006 - 3:43 am: | |
Colleen - I think after reading your post that no matter what is said you will feel that the Bible is still inerrant. That no problems what so ever can be found with it. That is your belief. I do not share it.
Thank you for your studied reply.
Bill |
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis
Post Number: 641
Registered: 4-2000
| | Posted on Monday, March 27, 2006 - 7:03 am: | |
Bill,
The passage your are referring to is found in John 20:17. Mary did not want to lose Jesus again. She had not yet understood the Resurrection. Perhaps she thought this was his promised second coming (John 14:3). But Jesus did not want to be detained at the tomb by her clinging or holding unto him. If He did not ascend to heaven, in bodily form as well as in spirit, the Holy Spirit could not come. Both He and Mary had important work to do.
Dennis Fischer |
Catalyst
Registered user
Username: Catalyst
Post Number: 115
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 27, 2006 - 8:16 am: | |
Dennis -
We believe differently - the good news is that I do not believe it to be salvific <g>.
Thank you again for your information.
Bill |
|
