Every so often along comes a book that resets the agenda and signals a weather change in the way people view their world. James Kugel's How to Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture, Then and Now
may be just such a book.Kugel is an effective writer, and his book is mercifully approachable by the non-specialist. But more than this, he is an intelligent and informed writer, not out to score cheap apologetic points. Kugel writes out of his own struggle with the Bible, as both an Orthodox Jew and a scholar. This is a book that will both challenge and appeal to people of faith and those who have moved away from biblical faith... and those in between.
How to Read the Bible
begins with a potted history of the way people down through history have viewed the scriptures - with particular focus on the Old Testament. On the cusp of change we meet a remarkable American Presbyterian called Charles Briggs, convicted of heresy a hundred years ago.From there Kugel begins a kind of survey of the Hebrew Bible viewed with the twin lenses of received wisdom and dogma on one hand (the "ancient interpreters"), and the fruit of modern biblical scholarship on the other. From the first section on the Creation, Adam and Eve, it's clear this is a journey of discovery even for those old hands who thought they already knew it all. Expect to find a few overturned apple-carts along the way.
For anyone fascinated or conflicted by the Bible (the two reactions aren't mutually exclusive!) this is a brilliant and utterly riveting read.
50 comments:
Gavin observes:
"For anyone fascinated or conflicted by the Bible (the two reactions aren't mutually exclusive!) this is a brilliant and utterly riveting read."
Thank you Gavin for expressing this phenomenon. How often do those who are soaking in Bible Literalism or God haunted lives say, "well, for someone who doesn't believe the Bible, you sure keep talking about it a lot."
Then they tend to assign the meaning that God still trying to tell one something. This is not so.
This is the position I find myself in that sometimes I really think I need to extricate myself from and just let it go, but then I miss finding out more I did not realize.
It's those piously convicted but marginally informed types that are making the world and individual lives miserable with their exclusive ideas and corner on the market of all things God, Jesus and Biblical.
The foolish side of Religion is leading us straight into Hell.
Personally, I realize the religion program still runs in my head and , for me, overwriting that program is accomplished by learning what was wrong with it in the first place. Thus the duality and the love/hate relationship with the Bible.
PS I was thinking of this very conflict a lot this week as I have to admit, the whole WCG member/minister experience still spins my head.
I had lunch yesterday with a Unity minister here in town who used to be a fundamentalist as well and the details are different, but the emotions and experience is the same. (Unity is very very liberal and only teaches that we are all one small part of the one big thing.) The rest is encouragement in living one's journey. I call Unity churches, "the Church of the Exiled."
I also was browsing through Bart Erdman's latest.."Misquoting Jesus" and I just sighed and said, "Now you tell me!."
I don't want to die fearing that I am defective and the Deity just couldn't get through to me.
I want to be able to look the Deity in the eye and say, "You didn't clearly state your case. You should never have used humans to try. It made you look bad and lazy. A nice luncheon, a slide show and a sermon no longer than one hour with a follow up question and real answer session should have been sufficient."
Dennis said:
I don't want to die fearing that I am defective and the Deity just couldn't get through to me.
Well Dennis, that is exactly what people like Neotherm here have stated they believe -- that you are defective and you are most likely not going "to make it."
Not to be picking on Neo, as there are zillions of "Christians" out there who believe in the same, dour, pessimistic "Good News." But I think I would find myself much more at home in the Unity Church that you mentioned than any other -- IF I were still a church going man.
And since I received my ministerial certificate from the Universal Life Church a few years ago, I may just start my own church. Hey, as the Armstrongs knew, that sure beats working for a living. :-)
"How to Read the Bible."
Is there a section about having colored pencils and a copy of "Mystery of the Ages" nearby?
Hey Stingerski!
I too am an officially ordained minister in the Universal Life Church as well! (Seriously!)
(BTW: FYI- anyone can be a legally ordained minister from the ULC, you can even do it online. In my case I was even able to print out my own "ministerial certificate". Believe it or not, it is actually a legal ordination!)
However, I am an EVANGELIST RANK Universal Life Ordainee and according to my computer records, you have not sent me your "Tithe of the Tithe of the Tithe" in yet.
This is outrageous BALDERDASH and POPPYCOCK, so get with the program! ;-)
Bill Lussenheide, Menifee, CA USA
I'm ordained, too! At times, I've carried my ordination certificate around with my Bible, and once or twice actually have shown it to people. Of course, then I must explain to them that while I was once a theology student at a cult college, my ordination at ULC is probably not recognized by God.
The strangest thing that's happened so far is that some Wiccans wanted me to perform their marriage. I declined!
BB
The forces of the universe seem to want to lock me out of blogs! I signed on with Google, but the danged thing doesn't seem to recognize me. This is a test, and I'm getting testy! Testes, one two, testes.
BB
A useful title for background to Bible study:
Brad H Young: Jesus, the Jewish Theologian (Hendrickson, 1995 and later)
I read "God does not make his case clear." Most of you know what the Church of God teaches on this. Why is that so hard to accept? Could someone explain this?
The idea that humans are defective and most have no idea what God is doing should be obvious, especially to those who have an understanding of what the Church of God teaches about God's plan.
(I know many have epileptic fits when even hearing that comment)
I know people don't like to admit we are defective and that we really don't have an intelligent clue as to the plan of God.
Look at the world and its people. People are defective and most have no clue as to the plan of God.
Even most "Christians."
I recently heard a George Carlin interview. He commented he had given up on the "species" long ago. He then went on to explain, as only George Carlin can, why this is the only obvious conclusion. That is, human beings are extremely defective.
Again, can someone please explain why this is not obvious and what is so hard about accepting it?
To break down the three questions:
1. Is it not obvious, looking at the world and its people, that people are defective?
2. A more complex question yes, but is it not obvious that people really have not a clue, and cannot give an intelligent response to the question, how would you explain the plan of God?
3. Why are these two obvious realities so hard to accept?
I promise, I will not ask this question again on this blog.(grin)
Jim
"I don't want to die fearing that I am defective and the Deity just couldn't get through to me."
Dennis, I believe that God deals with every human being and has created a reality that optimizes their opportunities for salvation. I do not pretend to know all of the details of that reality, like many evangelicals seem to believe they know. For instance, there is the Final Option. I don't know if that is a part of how God deals with people or not.
I also know that in the reality God created, most people will reject him. Jesus Christ stated this clearly. In the last analysis, The Many will enter into desruction.
This rejection does not center on what God offers, such as peace, happiness and joy, but on God himself. That is why people will choose to be consigned to eternal punishment. They are people who do not mind their environment, whether heavenly or hellish. What they mind is the idea of God. So they will never relent in their rejection due to the hellishness of Hell. They will choose Hell forever because there will be a God forever.
We all know what Hell is like. Take this world, where the rain falls on the good and evil alike, and strip away all the good leaving only the evil. Good originates with God. If he is not present, there is no good.
-- Neo
Gavin said:
>>>From there Kugel begins a kind of survey of the Hebrew Bible viewed with the twin lenses of received wisdom and dogma on one hand (the "ancient interpreters"), and the fruit of modern biblical scholarship on the other.<<<
I may be able to understand why this book appeals to you, as you are still searching for the "Truth," or some form of belief system that you find congenial and conforms to your perception of reality. On the other hand, the complexity of your mindset might be beyond my ability to fathom. But as a former member of WCG, you were exposed to the truth of the gospel, although you didn't realise it.
However, I doubt Kugal's book outlines a system of belief which you or anyone can follow. It appears to be a critical survey of other people's perceptions of the the Scriptures, especially the OT. This is not surprising, as most Jewish people won't mention Jesus if their lives depended on it. Most of them still believe in the authority of Moses, and that the Messiah is yet to come.
The spiritual blindness of the Jews is the greatest proof of the divine origin of the bible. For Moses, whom they revere but don't understand, prophesied that God would blind most of them during the times of the calling of the Gentiles. And their views and behaviour are clear proof of the fulfilment of that prophecy.
In addition, the book is over-priced at $23.10. Also, there are cheaper and better books on the market that have objectively and impartially surveyed both the OT and NT, without the prejudices that undermine Kugal's impartiality. If I was a betting man I would wager that by 2009, if not before, it will be superseded by another book equally as biased against the teachings of Jesus and the apostle Paul.
Still, it might generate some discussion amongst those who are not totally fixated with "Armstrongism," whatever that is!
NEO said :
"most people will reject him. ..This rejection..center(s).. on God himself. "
Muslims have a zeal for God - they don't reject him !
Ah, but you'll say they reject your "Jesus". Well you shouldn't be too tough on people for rejecting the Jesus bit when the "inspired" biographies of him are so clearly fraudulent.
Hay Neo, doesn't the book of Hebrews say that faith involves 'evidence'? (not a bad idea). Well where's the evidence for the fantastical four gospel 'biographies' of jesus ?
Mr. Moron,
"Also, there are cheaper and better books on the market that have objectively and impartially surveyed both the OT and NT, without the prejudices that undermine Kugal's impartiality."
Tom, do let us know WHAT book(s) you have in mind. Mystery of the Ages perhaps?
Spock
Neo said:
"I also know that in the reality God created, most people will reject him. Jesus Christ stated this clearly. In the last analysis, The Many will enter into desruction."
This is the very reason one has to say that God does not present a convincing case. No human would reject an obvious Deity who was live and in color explaining clearly that the plan is real and this is how it works.
The utter confusion of Christianity as expressed is proof that the same book leads to hundreds of differing conclusions.
The Deity needs to have a personal appearance campaign and I DO NOT mean to return with a final rod of iron after letting humans and organizations that lie, redact, edit and promote their own agendas be the only means of communicating the "Good News."
I also believe that humans are NOT defective. That is the fear, guilt and shame scam religion pours into the mind for control. If one could grasp they born right the first time, how liberating.
I may change my mind tomorrow, but today this is the present truth..a term that even Paul used. Truth is not Plain when only humans get to explain it.
"1. Is it not obvious, looking at the world and its people, that people are defective?"
Perhaps it's the defective ideas, religious concepts and false answers to real questions that are what is defective in the world of people. The people are fine. The information if bogus.
"2. A more complex question yes, but is it not obvious that people really have not a clue, and cannot give an intelligent response to the question, how would you explain the plan of God?"
And WHOSE fault would this be? The People's? If I cannot give an intelligent explanation of what a teacher has just taught me, then can we not question whether or not the teacher is "apt to teach?"
"3. Why are these two obvious realities so hard to accept?"
Because they are neither obvious nor acceptable concepts.
Neotherm, it's good that you have - at least for the present - sorted out for yourself the mangled logic of christianity - a mess resulting from 10,000 years of evolving superstition, which alarmingly retains one of the earliest elements: Human Sacrifice !
Tom said:
This is not surprising, as most Jewish people won't mention Jesus if their lives depended on it. Most of them still believe in the authority of Moses, and that the Messiah is yet to come."
There are reasons why they believe this, and while a mystery to you, are not much of a mystery to them.
Tom said:
" On the other hand, the complexity of your mindset might be beyond my ability to fathom. But as a former member of WCG, you were exposed to the truth of the gospel, although you didn't realise it."
One man's 'complexity' is another's critical thinking. Gavin and all of us were exposed to an idea of truth. One of hundreds of such Christian endeavors.
Tom said:
"For Moses, whom they revere but don't understand, prophesied that God would blind most of them during the times of the calling of the Gentiles"
You haven't spoken to very many well educated Rabbi's about their own book have you Tom..
Tom said:
"In addition, the book is over-priced at $23.10. Also, there are cheaper and better books on the market that have objectively and impartially surveyed both the OT and NT..."
And of course, cheaper means better which is why the shallow booklets cranked out by the COG's on all things Biblical are the purest form of truth available.
Would "How to Read the Bible" be more credible if,say, we could get you a discount?
Tom, Why don't you sit down for Lillian C Freudmann's, Antisemitism in the New Testament and see how long your views of the Jews not understanding their own book lasts.
Let her explain to you how the annonymous Gospel writers and Paul were masters at making the OT mean what it never meant.
However, this book is somewhat overpriced and extremely well written correcting just about all of the NT misconcpetions about the Jewish religion, scriptures, and the meaning of those scriptures.
She makes ham (beef) burger out of Paul's reasoning and understanding of the Jewish faith and what Pharisees really believed and understood. If Paul was a Pharisee, he was one of a kind and would have flunked OT survey.
The annonymous Gospel writers wither under her calm and clear explanations of how not to read the OT. There is not a better explanation of how the 'amazing prophecies of Jesus' in the OT are simply not prophecies at all and were never about a Jesus.
Actually, I'm only using this opportunity to advertise to those who really wish a great resource on the topic of how much ignorance went into the NT explanation of the OT scriptures.
Whatever your beliefs may be, it is very obvious that virtually all people, in all societies of the world, do not have a consistent idea as to what the plan of God is, or even if there is one.
Well know scientist, and one time atheist, Fred Hoyle, who became an agnostic, and eventually expressed a belief in a higher power, was quoted as saying “There is a coherent plan for the universe, although I admit I have no idea what it is." Most people don’t even get that far.
Why is this? If God is God, capable of creating a universe, and diffuse life on this planet, then Dennis’s idea of “A nice luncheon, a slide show and a sermon no longer than one hour with a follow up question and real answer session should have been sufficient." is a reasonable request (although personally I feel the number of questions I have would take several hours to answer).
But God, who could have done this, didn't do it. Do we then blame God, and say "You didn't clearly state your case. You should never have used humans to try. It made you look bad and lazy”?
Isn’t it a more rational answer that humans do not understand the plan of God, because God doesn’t intend them to at this time.
This is a simple answer, and a logical one which fits the reality. It means that everyone will then have their lifetime of experience living life without knowing the reason for their lives. Is that a good thing? God must think so.
Without something beyond the grave, a resurrection, certainly this would make no sense – equally God condemning the vast majority of people to some form of ‘hell’, which Neotherm seems to favour, because they didn’t understand, gives a terribly worrying picture of what such a God would be like.
But a life beyond the grave, and at that time an understanding of God’s plans and intentions, together with the knowledge of previously living life without understanding, seems to be the way that God knows will be the best way to do things.
Corky & co, without an understanding of even the existence of God, will natural think this is a hilarious idea, presumably preferring to think their life is extinguished at death. Fortunately for them, they will have a happy surprise in finding they are wrong – so it’s all good.
Lussenheide said:
However, I am an EVANGELIST RANK Universal Life Ordainee and according to my computer records, you have not sent me your "Tithe of the Tithe of the Tithe" in yet.
Sorry, Rev. Luss, but I've got you beat. I am of the APOSTLE rank. You should be sending your tithe to ME.
A few years ago a forum buddy turned me onto the ULC and urged me to get my preaching license. He then went onto have the ULC "ordain" him as an Apostle. He then ordained me to the same rank but of different stripe. He was known as the "First Apostle" while I took up my commission as "Apostle to the Lost Sheep of the House or Armstrongism."
And so far, we two apostles have pretty much divided the loot among ourselves, have not started any new churches, nor have we engaged in bloodshed over who out ranks whom. (Hell, for all I know he and I may actually be the TWO WITNESSES.)
My biggest concern is that St. Tom here is not responding to my apostolic authority and direction to come out of his silly Amrstrongology and stop his false preaching. And if he does not soon heed my warning I am going to consign his soul to Hell, the same hell where all the rest of those lost souls Neotherm sez end up.
Stay tuned.
Sting said:
"Sorry, Rev. Luss, but I've got you beat. I am of the APOSTLE rank. You should be sending your tithe to ME."
Sorry Sting..I have an ordination signed by Herbert W. Armstrong, David Antion and Garner Ted. Mine goes all the way back through time to the original 12.
You are an Apostle, falsely so called, coming up the back stairs.
Besides, I could get more on Ebay for my certif than you could! :)
Dennis said:
Sorry Sting..I have an ordination signed by Herbert W. Armstrong, David Antion and Garner Ted. Mine goes all the way back through time to the original 12.
Whoa! Just a ministerial pickin' minute here! As you know, Armstrong was a defrocked minister. And as far as I know, nobody at all ever "frocked" him again, save hisself. (Altho he had been know to going around and frocking many people.)
Therefore, his "apostolic" line was broken in the late 1930s, when such defrocking took place. So Armstrong just can't have any line back to no Jesus!
And also therefore, since my certificate is from a genuyine church of whatever it is, I say I out rank you all here. eBay be damned!
And may the best certificate win!
And may the lost sheep of the house of Armstrongism heed my call to repent of not throwing away their signed copies of M.O.A., rather than selling them to Gerry & Co. Or worse, putting them on eBay! Shame on you, you greedy sheep.
Dennis, if you sell your certificate on eBay, will you accept papal?
On another note...
I'm still waiting for one of the splinters to come up with the slogan:
"WE'RE THE TRUTHIEST!"
Oh I know, they all kind of say that already...
The spiritual blindness of the Jews is the greatest proof of the divine origin of the bible.
This is a self-contradictory statement which makes no sense. As Perry Mason would say that it is "unresponsive, without proper foundation, incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial".
On the other hand, the complexity of your mindset might be beyond my ability to fathom.
Given that the writer of this nonsensical gem wrongly accused our host of colluding with Dixon Cartwrite to kick him off the forum and then provided a provisional apology ["if I were mistaken" -- an unresponsive non apology apology], it is a given that such a writer with such poor connections across the corpus callossum really could not fathom the sophistication of the mindset of our host.
However, I doubt Kugal's book outlines a system of belief which you or anyone can follow. It appears to be a critical survey of other people's perceptions of the the Scriptures, especially the OT.
and
In addition, the book is over-priced at $23.10. Also, there are cheaper and better books on the market that have objectively and impartially surveyed both the OT and NT, without the prejudices that undermine Kugal's impartiality.
An accurate critic without actually reading the book is nearly impossible and certainly renders the critic's credibility moot.
But as a former member of WCG, you were exposed to the truth of the gospel, although you didn't realise it.
At no time has it ever been established that the WCG had much of anything which came close to even being construed as "the truth". 1975 in Prophecy is much more problematic and downright unexplainable as "truth" after the reality of history is taken into account. It was a lie and a really big one. It has been amply demonstrated that British Israelism is utterly nonsensically stupid. A strange admixture of old wine of Old Testament ceremonial laws with the New Testament teachings in a dysfunctional pick and choose / mix and match theology rich with empty rituals devoid of faith can hardly be called the truth.
For Moses, whom they revere but don't understand, prophesied that God would blind most of them during the times of the calling of the Gentiles.
The Bible nowhere says that. Moses did not prophesy that God would blind the Israelites during the time of the calling of Gentiles. The allusion is a synthesis of irreconcilable ideas chosen carelessly and randomly from imperfect memories of what other people said about the Bible. It's not in Scripture anywhere that Moses even hinted at saying that, but of course, we would expect that of a Biblical Illiterate hypocrite. Not only has the poster not read James Kugel's book, he doesn't even seem to have read the Bible, which is cheaper and various translations are online on the Internet for free. Chapter and verse, please.
It is the case that Dr. Robert Hare has a explanation of such hair brained addle headed doofuses in his book, Without Conscience: There is a class of beings who have poor connections across the corpus callosum who form ideas separately independently in the two hemispheres of the brain. The end result, while convincing, makes no logical sense. When he made studies of the EEG of such individuals for his thesis, his teacher accused him of falsifying the brain scans observing that they were not brain waves of human beings. The subjects were called "psychopaths".
Now it is a simple matter for our illustrious nonsensical illogical poster of the above bon mots to prove that he is not a psychopath: All he needs to do is go to a qualified neurologist and have an examination. It would remove all doubt. Proof would be refreshing from such a worthless fool who wants to be honored and respected for any discernible reason that a normal person could begin to fathom.
Unless or until that happens, our assumption should be on the side of caution, given his bad behavior.
In the meantime, How to Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture, Then and Now is rather irrelevant to such an individual, since freebased thoughts continue to agitate through his brain like an unexpected flash lightening storm on a hot summer day which came out of nowhere. It is unlikely anything beneficial could ever come from pondering the ruminations of bull posited by this apparently brain damaged individual without conscience.
Anyone looking for understanding of Scripture who seek to understand God, need to look elsewhere for any kind of wisdom from such a chaotic and dysfunctional individual: A true mark and definition of Armstrongism.
Such a person isn't even embarrassed by his incompetence because it doesn't cause him immediate physical pain, though the damage to the brain continues unabated as each deliberate lie destroys millions of brain cells with each telling.
I think I'll be an Apostle - maybe even a witness or two. Hey, it beats working for a living.
As my first Apostolic admonition to the Brethren:
God's way is GIVE. TIME IS VERY SHORT.
Brethren can begin sending their 1st, 2nd and 3rd tithes, tithe of tithes, offerings, emergency fund offerings, holy day offerings and all building fund contributions to Church of God Nineveh's Hope, Jonah's Whale and Wailing Members at PO. Box 3049, Crofton, Maryland 21114.
Please update your estate plans leaving all your worldly possessions to Church of God Nineveh's Hope, Jonah's Whale and Wailing Members. After you have done so, please leave the world soon!
Did I mention we take Visa, MasterCard, American Express and Paypal?
Richard
DennisDiehl said...
>>Tom said:
This is not surprising, as most Jewish people won't mention Jesus if their lives depended on it. Most of them still believe in the authority of Moses, and that the Messiah is yet to come."
DD>>>>There are reasons why they believe this, and while a mystery to you, are not much of a mystery to them.<<<
I didn't say that there were not reasons. I was just stating a fact, which you have not challenged or rebutted.
>>Tom said:
"On the other hand, the complexity of your mindset might be beyond my ability to fathom. But as a former member of WCG, you were exposed to the truth of the gospel, although you didn't realise it."<<
DD>>>One man's 'complexity' is another's critical thinking. Gavin and all of us were exposed to an idea of truth. One of hundreds of such Christian endeavors.<<<
The term "complexity" was not intended as a criticism. It was an expression of the processes of the mind in its search for the truth. The human mind is indeed very complex, and what it is capable of defies comprehension, as man is inscrutable to his fellow man. Psychologists and psychiatrists might deceive some people into believing that they can understand the workings of the human mind, but our prisons and mental institutions bare testimony of their ignorance.
>>>Tom said:
"For Moses, whom they revere but don't understand, prophesied that God would blind most of them during the times of the calling of the Gentiles"<<<
DD>>>You haven't spoken to very many well educated Rabbi's about their own book have you Tom..<<<
Actually, I have, and their greatest Rabbi told me that they don't understand the significance of the OT.
BTW, later I will post proof that the Jewish people, to this day, don't understand the OT.
>>DD: This is the very reason one has to say that God does not present a convincing case. No human would reject an obvious Deity who was live and in color explaining clearly that the plan is real and this is how it works.<<
EYES TO SEE...
...that which is known of God is manifest in them; for God manifested it unto them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse:
Rom 1:21 because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools
>>DD: This is the very reason one has to say that God does not present a convincing case. No human would reject an obvious Deity who was live and in color explaining clearly that the plan is real and this is how it works.<<
GOD's PLAN in a nutshell:
Gen 3:15 and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
Did someone say the book was too expensive?
41 used and new
Dennis says:
"Personally, I realize the religion program still runs in my head and , for me, overwriting that program is accomplished by learning what was wrong with it in the first place."
Such true truth it bears repeating! ;)
Dennis wrote: "This is the very reason one has to say that God does not present a convincing case. No human would reject an obvious Deity who was live and in color explaining clearly that the plan is real and this is how it works."
I was writing a response last night and mid-way through, Windows Vista started updating itself and logged me off. I lost all the "brilliant" text.
God is not going to show up in our lives in a dramatic way at this time. I cannot expect to walk out into my back yard and see a pillar of fire or some other theophany. This is the time for the academic consideration of the existence of God.
God could easily show up in person and validate his existence (and will do this eventually.) He could have structured the geological record in such a way that his existence would be undeniable. Like having the strata reflect the beginning of the Adamic period with no past eons of flora and fauna reflected. (In principle, this has happened with the Cambrian Explosion).
But why would he not do this? Because the present reality requires faith and belief. And that faith and belief is initiated by the grace of God. But people may choose to respond to it or may choose to reject it.
Atheists are fond of citing that existence of God cannot be validated by the Scientific Method. This is not actually true but I believe the way the Atheists would like to construct the experiment, they will never "discover" God.
But there is an essential dishonesty here. Atheists do not cling to Scientific Method because it is tool of inquiry but because it is their supposed insurance against the existence of God.
There is a mystical, faith-based, experiential beginning point in understanding that God exists. It requires a pre-disposition of the will. Consequently, some people will never get it because they do not have the will to get it. Their will is obstructed by the worship of Self.
I have encountered many people who are in a desperate, sometimes agonized, search for meanining in life. They sit at the feet of a great variety of religious gurus or presumptuous academics in this grand and life long search. But the pre-condition to their seeking is that God cannot exist, at least the Christian God. It is not surprising that they never find God.
People do not believe in God for many putative reasons. But all these reasons simplify to the principle that they do not want to believe in God. Most are comfortable with this idea and do not say much about it. Others are uncertain and spend a lot of time in proselyting for atheism in the pursuit of self-affirmation. It is as if they believe that if they say it enough it will be true.
I would be the first to admit that many of the statements made by Christians, and the statements I have made in this post, about atheists can be reversed. (Just like I can say of the statement "when one already knows what one thinks, one has no problem at all stacking the evidence to prove it", that this is really a good description of Darwinian evolution.)
Atheists can look at Christian faith and say that it is delusional. Ultimately, we must turn to the fact that God is in the life of some people and not others. And at this point all the arguing ceases, at least from the Christian perspective.
God is sovereign but he limits his sovereignty to permit humans to decide about him. Ultimately, he will say to those who reject him "Not my will, but thy will be done."
-- Neo
Speaking of religious programming still running in one's head, I've always wondered why spiritual fiends with huge Herbal egos, rather than having messed with our heads in the first place, didn't simply get into some other creative art.
Drama certainly comes to mind. God knows these guys can and do put on a heck of an act every sabbath and Bible Study. Poetry?
Rock n Roll? Hey, now there's the ticket! I could really get behind Ronnie and the Weimereiners, or Little Joey and the Cutwinds! Man, these guys could probably really get outrageous on stage, and obtain all the adulation they covet through their ministry!
As a cautionary tale, though, I'm reminded of how one young man got the wrong message at Ambassador College. He was into music. As he was leaving college, he told his friends that he had taken a Nazarite vow so that he could grow long hair, and he considered it his calling to warn the world through some apocalyptic songs which he had written. Now, none of us have ever heard of him since, as he kind of fell off the ACOG earth so to speak, but I often wonder what became of him. I mean, I knew some other folks that pursued musical careers with some local club success, but our little Nazarite buddy was the only one I ever knew to combine the ACOG apocalypse with a musical career!
BB
Tired Skeptic said...
TM>>The spiritual blindness of the Jews is the greatest proof of the divine origin of the bible.
TS>>>This is a self-contradictory statement which makes no sense.<<
Why not post an explanation of the contradiction, so that we can all be enlightened?
The rest of your diatribe(I almost described it as celebrated, but it wasn't that good)is nothing more than a striving for eloquence to the absence of content.
But you may be surprised to learn, that eloquence, which is the garish of thought, is coy. She must be long courted and is seldom won, unless her suitor is a man of virtue, understanding and wisdom. Your premature and sudden attack on her is tantamount to the attempted rape of a chaste woman, who was forced to resist you to preserve her purity.
Anon wrote:
GOD's PLAN in a nutshell:
Gen 3:15 and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
Nutshell indeed! This passage is a perfect example of interpreters letting their imagination run away with them. There's no prophecy here, just an observation about the dislike humans feel for snakes... and what happens if you step or stomp on one.
If you want to suggest otherwise you have to go way beyond the obvious literal meaning of the text.
All
Here is the proof that the Jews don't understand the OT.
Paul was inspired to write: "For Moses of old time has in every city them that preach him, being read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day"(Acts 15:21). Although this was written nearly two thousands years ago, it could have been written today, for the Torah is read every Sabbath day in thousands of Synagogues around the world. So for the Jews nothing has changed! But do the Jews understand what they are reading? Not according to Paul.
Note again what Paul was inspired to write: "For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not," the "him" refers to Jesus, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every Sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him"(Acts 13:27). Please note the phrase, "the voices of the prophets," which we are told they don't understand, but are read every Sabbath day in their Synagogues. Paul goes on to prove their ignorance of what they are reading by inferring, 'for if they had understood "the voices of the prophets," that is, the meaning of their message, they would not have condemned Christ, while calling for the release of Barabus.'
Now if I was writing this for the benefit of people who might be capable of understanding the bible, I would cite several more Scriptural texts to prove conclusively that most Jews have been blinded during the times of the calling of the Gentiles, though at this time a remnant is being called according to the election of grace. But from my experience here, most contributors tend to ignore the substance of my posts, and hurl abuse at Mr. Armstrong.
To anon quoting Genesis, I have a companion quote for you:
"As a further protection against them Ra promised to impart to magicians and snake-charmers the particular word of power, hekau, with which he guarded himself against the attacks of serpents, and also to transmit it to his son Osiris. Thus those who are ready to listen to the formulae of the snake-charmers shall always be immune from the bites of serpents, and their children also."
Tom Mahon said...
All
Here is the proof that the Jews don't understand the OT.
Paul was inspired to write:
Now hold on just a cotton pickin' second there soothsayer. You said,
"For Moses, whom they revere but don't understand, prophesied that God would blind most of them during the times of the calling of the Gentiles"
The last time I looked, Paul is not Moses. We want to see where Moses "prophesied that God would blind them during the times of the calling of the Gentiles".
Either that or admit to being a lying goof-ball.
I want to be able to look the Deity in the eye and say, "You didn't clearly state your case. You should never have used humans to try. It made you look bad and lazy. A nice luncheon, a slide show and a sermon no longer than one hour with a follow up question and real answer session should have been sufficient."
"He who created you without your consent will not save you without your consent" -- St. Augustine of Hippo
Corky said:
>>>The last time I looked, Paul is not Moses. We want to see where Moses "prophesied that God would blind them during the times of the calling of the Gentiles".<<<
Amazing coming from you, when you think the bible is fiction. However, Paul referring to the Jews' blindness said, "First, Moses said, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation will I anger you"(Roms.10:19 and Duet.32:21). The "no people" and "foolish nation" refer to the Gentiles whom God began to through the ministry of Jesus and it continued under Paul's dispensation. So when Paul was sent to preach to the Gentiles, it angered and provoke the Jews jealousy. As a consequence, the Jews followed Paul from city to city persecuting him.
In addition, when Moses came down from mount Sinai his face was shining, and he covered his face with a vail. This prophetic event was explained by Paul thus: "And not as Moses, who put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end" (the "end" here means the fulfilment or outcome)"of that which is abolished: But their minds were BLINDED: for until this day" (17 Feb. 2008)"remains the same vail untaken away in the reading of the OT." That is why I said that the Jews do not understand the meaning of the OT.
However, during the times of the Gentiles, a Jewish remnant is being called, but the majority have been blinded. Paul sums it up thus: "What then?" (meaning what conclusions should we draw from what has been said so far?), he added, "Israel has not obtained that which he seek for; but the election has obtained it, and the rest were BLINDED."
This sublime doctrine began with the question, "What advantage then has the Jew?" And after God revealed the answer to Paul, it ended with, "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out"(Roms.11:33).
Sadly, I doubt that you are able to understand what I have just written, but the odd lurker might.
Tom saith :
Sadly, I doubt that you are able to understand what I have just written, but the odd lurker might.
Well, this "odd lurker" understands that you have no idea of what you are talking about!
"And not as Moses, who put a vail [sic] over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end" (the "end" here means the fulfilment [sic] or outcome)"of that which is abolished: But their minds were BLINDED: for until this day" (17 Feb. 2008)"remains the same vail [sic] untaken away in the reading of the OT." That is why I said that the Jews do not understand the meaning of the OT.
Excuse me, but Paul got it wrong again (as he sometimes did). This veil has nothing to do with the Jews and their understanding, or lack thereof, of their own scriptures. Please go back and re-read the account in the Jewish testament. (But take off your own veil first, see below.) You are as far off base here as Paul was.
Amazing coming from you [Corky], when you think the bible is fiction.
This is more bad logic on your part. We know that Grimm's Fairy Tales are fiction, with a nugget of truth in each. The same with Aesop's Fables. But we can still discuss the merits of such books. You don't need to believe that the Bible is not fiction in places (which it certainly is, unless you want to believe in talking animals, i.e. back to Aesop) to be able to discuss it.
Your problem, Tom, is that while you think the Jews are blinded by this veil that only Moses wore, you are wearing an even more obfuscating veil, a veil which has a large capital A on it. Now I will let you go and ponder what that means. But first you must remove your veil so you can at least look at it. But I doubt that is possible, just as you doubt that anybody but you can understand the Jewish scriptures.
What an arrogant toad you are, sir.
Stingerski shouts:
>>>But first you must remove your veil so you can at least look at it.<<<
Your capital "A" may apply to yourself, but I will let you be the judge of that.
>>>But I doubt that is possible, just as you doubt that anybody but you can understand the Jewish scriptures.<<<
You have not said anything to indicates that you have the faintest understanding of them. But I knew that before you limped to the keyboard to shout at me!
>>>What an arrogant toad you are, sir.<<<
Truth is never arrogant, it is ignorance that is arrogant about things it doesn't understand.
Tom saith,
"First, Moses said, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation will I anger you"(Roms.10:19 and Duet.32:21). The "no people" and "foolish nation" refer to the Gentiles
WRONG! The "no people" and "foolish nation" refers to Israel, not the gentiles. It is the gentiles who are provoked to jeaslousy by God choosing Israel out of all the nations even though Israel was the smallest of all.
The song of Moses is addressed to heaven and earth Deut. 32:1 and not the Jews. I bet you don't quite get that part, do you.
St. Tom saith:
You have not said anything to indicates [sic] that you have the faintest understanding of them. But I knew that before you limped to the keyboard to shout at me!
That's because you can't read, Tom. Nor do you even have a fundamental understanding of the Jewish scriptures. All that you know about such can be summed up in one word:
Armstrongology
As for shouting, no need for that here, as you are (spiritually) deaf anyway.
Corky claimed: The "no people" and "foolish nation" [of Deut. 32:21] refers to Israel, not the gentiles. It is the gentiles who are provoked to jeaslousy by God choosing Israel out of all the nations even though Israel was the smallest of all.
Sorry, but there is absolutely no way that your interpretation of Deut. 32:21 could be correct, Corky. The preceding verses describe Israel's unfaithfulness to God, leading up to a statement that Israel offered sacrifices to idols, to things that are not God. Starting in verse 8:
When the Most High assigned the nations their heritage, when he parceled out the descendants of Adam, He set up the boundaries of the peoples after the number of the sons of God;
While the LORD's own portion was Jacob, His hereditary share was Israel.
He found them in a wilderness, a wasteland of howling desert. He shielded them and cared for them, guarding them as the apple of his eye.
As an eagle incites its nestlings forth by hovering over its brood, So he spread his wings to receive them and bore them up on his pinions.
The LORD alone was their leader, no strange god was with him.
He had them ride triumphant over the summits of the land and live off the products of its fields, Giving them honey to suck from its rocks and olive oil from its hard, stony ground;
Butter from its cows and milk from its sheep, with the fat of its lambs and rams; Its Bashan bulls and its goats, with the cream of its finest wheat; and the foaming blood of its grapes you drank.
(So Jacob ate his fill,) the darling grew fat and frisky; you became fat and gross and gorged. They spurned the God who made them and scorned their saving Rock.
They provoked him with strange gods and angered him with abominable idols.
They offered sacrifice to demons, to "no-gods," to gods whom they had not known before, To newcomers just arrived, of whom their fathers had never stood in awe.
You were unmindful of the Rock that begot you, You forgot the God who gave you birth.
When the LORD saw this, he was filled with loathing and anger toward his sons and daughters.
'I will hide my face from them," he said, "and see what will then become of them. What a fickle race they are, sons with no loyalty in them!
"Since they have provoked me with their 'no-god' and angered me with their vain idols, I will provoke them with a 'no-people'; with a foolish nation I will anger them.
Follow the narrative: Israel is chosen by God and becomes the Covenant People, but they are unfaithful to the covenant and instead worship foreign gods, to "no-god" -- so God upbraids them as "sons with no loyalty in them" and announces that he will provoke them with a "no-people" and will anger them with a foolish nation.
Since the sons with no loyalty are the Israelites, the "no-people"/foolish nation cannot be Israelites, and hence are Gentiles.
So, whether or not you agree with St. Paul's interpretation of Deut. 32:21, there can be absolutely no doubt that Deut. 32:21 is talking about Gentiles making the Jews jealous, not Jews making Gentiles jealous. Your interpretation is in conflict with the meaning and flow of the words leading up to verse 21.
Jared said :
He found them in a wilderness, a wasteland of howling desert.
Er, excuse me there Jared. But YHVH found them in comfy Egypt, not the god forsaken barren desert he later "led" them into. (Which is no wonder why his "chosen" people did not want to go there.)
With a god like that, who needs a Satan?
Ok, I know it's just another Bible contradiction you can explain away, depending upon what phase the moon is in today. But you really got your religious tit caught in a ringer there -- quoting "scripture."
Stinger said: Er, excuse me there Jared. But YHVH found them in comfy Egypt, not the god forsaken barren desert he later "led" them into.
Wrong. The Torah plainly says that the encounter between God and Israel took place at Mount Sinai, in the desert, not in comfy Egypt. The covenant was made with Israel in the desert, not in Egypt.
Ok, I know it's just another Bible contradiction you can explain away, depending upon what phase the moon is in today.
It's not a contradiction -- it's just a failure on your part to read carefully and with comprehension. But then you've lately been showing yourself incapable of reading the Scriptures in any but the most tendentious and invidious of manners.
I'm gonna let you have that one Jared, because I don't have the time or the inclination to show you the contradictions to your understanding of that verse from Jeremiah.
Suffice to say that Israel is called the foolish people with no understanding. The gentile nations are never called "a nation" etc. foolish or otherwise. Plus, it is the gentiles who are jealous of Israel's location on the trade routes between the east and north and south.
You have to remember that it is not Moses who wrote this story but the returners from the Babylonian exile.
I'm gonna let you have that one Jared, because I don't have the time or the inclination to show you the contradictions to your understanding of that verse from Jeremiah.
Or rather, from your interpretation of Jeremiah. But I rather doubt there's any more merit to your reading of Jeremiah than there is to your reading of Deut. 32.
Suffice to say that Israel is called the foolish people with no understanding.
No, in Deut. 32:28 the reference is not to Israel, but to Israel's Gentile enemies (v. 27) who would mistakenly boast that their victory over Israel was due to their own strength, and that the Lord had nothing to do with it. But the Gentiles "are a people devoid of reason, having no understanding. If they had insight they would realize what happened, they would understand their future and say, 'How could one man rout a thousand, or two men put ten thousand to flight, unless it was because their Rock sold them and the LORD delivered them up?'"
Your interpretation of verse 28 would turn verse 30 on its head -- if Israel is the people devoid of reason in verse 28, then it is the pagan Gentiles who are delivered up by the Lord, their Rock, in verse 30. But the pagans were not the chosen people, so the Lord is not their Rock, as it says in verse 31, "Indeed, their 'rock' is not like our Rock, and our foes are under condemnation."
The gentile nations are never called "a nation" etc. foolish or otherwise.
They are in Deut. 32.
Plus, it is the gentiles who are jealous of Israel's location on the trade routes between the east and north and south.
There's not a hint of that in Deut. 32, which is concerned with Israel's faithfulness and unfaithfulness to his covenant with God, not with geopolitical matters such as trade routes.
You have to remember that it is not Moses who wrote this story but the returners from the Babylonian exile.
For our purposes it doesn't matter who wrote Deut. 32. It only matters what Deut. 32 is talking about -- and it's not talking about what say it is.
You need only consider the poetic parallelism of verses 16 and 21. "They provoked him with strange gods and angered him with abominable idols" -- pagan foreigner Gentiles cannot provoke God with "strange" (foreign) gods, as those gods are the Gentiles own, not strange to them at all. Verse 16 is talking about Israel worshipping gods other than the Lord, and the parellism (not to mention the story flow) shows that verse 21 us talking about Israel, not Gentiles, worshipping gods other than the Lord, and God responded by "provoking" and "angering" Israel with Gentiles, who are "no-people" because they are not in a covenant with God and thus are not the chosen people, and are a foolish nation because they do not know and worship God. (The next few verses go on to describe Israel's defeat and captivity at the hands of Gentile conquerors -- so in its primary meaning verse 21 isn't referring to all Gentiles in general, but to specific Gentile nations, that is, Assyria and Chaldea.)
By the way, Isa. 55:5 refers to the Gentiles, non-Israelite peoples, as "a nation you knew not" and "nations that knew you not." There is similar language in Deut. 28, which speaks of "a nation which you know not" attacking Israel as punishment of unfaithfulness to the covenant.
Jared saith :
It's not a contradiction -- it's just a failure on your part to read carefully and with comprehension. But then you've lately been showing yourself incapable of reading the Scriptures in any but the most tendentious and invidious of manners.
Well, with that coming from you, it's for sure that my tendentiousness and invidiousness is taking me down the right road.
You can prove anything you want to from the Bible (as you just did) because it is one long string of contradictions, one after another. For almost any scripture you can throw around, with your "Thus saith the Lord!" routine, I can throw another one around that says, "Thus saith the Lord NOT!"
Everybody does that which is right in his own eyes -- and all the time. And everybody likes to think that their opinions and fantasies are the "correct" ones to have. And anybody who denies this is a liar. Which makes Christians some of the biggest liars around.
Now you have yourself a nice day there, Jared.
Post a Comment