|
Replies: 40
| visibility 401
|
Mascot [15]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 16
Joined: 2/13/24
|
Satan's Seat; Past, Present & Future
2
Feb 16, 2024, 9:24 PM
|
|
Hebrews 4:12
King James Version
12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Quick = alive...the Book is alive...past, present & future...
Revelation 1:8
King James Version
8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
Revelation 1:19
King James Version
19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;
If you do a little research, you will quickly come to the conclusion that there are conflicting accounts of the location of martyrdom for Saint Antipas of Pergamos. Some have the location listed as Pergamos. Others will tell you that Antipas was actually martyred in Geneva Switzerland at the temple of Appollyon. And some websites have mysteriously "edited" their information from Geneva to Pergamos. Secular historians & church history buffs can't seem to get on the same page; imagine that!
On the surface it seems obvious why some secular historians would want to prove that Geneva was Antipas place of martyrdom. They believe that this is a "GOTCHA" verse that debunks the Bible because the carnal mind reads the Bible as either all literal or all allegory. And on the other hand, many church historians who say that Antipas was martyred in Pergamos most assuredly recognize why some secular historians desire to claim Antipas died in Geneva. And if these church historians are not "wise virgins", then the likelihood that they run towards error out of fear exponentially increases.
The ultimate question for the Holy Spirit indwelt Christian (wise virgin) should be; where does the Bible point to as being Antipas place of martyrdom? Antipas means "For all or against all". Aka, neutrality. In peace time, Switzerland is allegedly "for all". In war, they are allegedly "against all". Switzerland's motto is "All for one and one for all". Geneva is known as the peace capital of the world. 1 Thessalonians 5's reference to "peace & safety" immediately comes to mind. The coming man of sin will show up peaceably and with flatteries (Daniel 11:21-24) and through peace he shall destroy many (Daniel 8:21-25).
Geneva claims no sister city but claims to be a brother to all. The brotherhood of man; freemason garbage Luciferian philosophy. Which is exactly what we see at the tower of Babel where the Bible first mentions brick masonry btw. Nebuchadnezzar's golden statue was also a view of this herd mentality philosophy and the beast system in Revelation 13 is it's culmination as the masons one eyed god (Zechariah 11:17》Revelation 13:3) takes center stage. The God of the Bible has 7 eyes btw (Zechariah 3:9/Zechariah 4:10/Revelation 5:6).
Geneva's motto is "After the darkness, the light". Satan transformed himself into an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14). After the darkness (Satan), the light (Lucifer). In Revelation 2:17 the Word of God promises to supernaturally feed the church of Pergamos at Satan's seat. In 1 Kings 19, the pre incarnate Word of God (Angel of the Lord) supernaturally feeds Elijah under a juniper tree. Geneva means juniper tree. Geneva is home to many Satanic globalist organizations. These include the WEF, the WHO, CERN, the WCC, GAVI, and the WTO just to name a few.
The carnal mind can not know or learn the things of God. It either reads the Bible at an all literal, surface level understanding like atheists do. Or it allegorizes everything like the gnostics & new agers do. Both are unavoidable false balances for the lost. The 7 churches live on spiritually in every era until the end. The easiest way to know this is the fact that divisions & denominations still exist today. At a basic, surface level understanding the 7 churches represent these divisions & denominations. If the end had already came as 70 ADeists tell us, then the body of Christ would have no divisions & denominations and we would be fully perfected in love. The 7 churches are not bound to their literal 1st century locations forever either. (The flesh profits nothing.) They live on spiritually in every age until the end.
Pergamos, Satan's seat WAS literal 1st century Pergamos where the altar of Zeus was originally located. Zeus is king of devils (1 Corinthians 10:20). Zeus is god of lightning (Luke 10:18). Pergamos, Satan's seat currently IS Geneva, where Antipas was martyred. Pergamos, Satan's seat IS TO COME; Jerusalem. Which we clearly see in Daniel 11:45 & Revelation 11:7-8. This also explains why Pergamos is the only one of the seven churches that includes the phrase, "children of Israel" in it's verses and why it's the only one that references Armageddon (Revelation 2:16) being fought there. Armageddon is a battle that was never going to be fought anywhere but in Israel. Not in Turkey where literal Pergamos is. Not in Geneva where Antipas was martyred in current spiritual Pergamos, but Israel. And our God doesn't just know geography, He created geography so an atheist minded, surface level reading of this prophecy leads one to create a god who does not know where Armageddon is fought.
Pergamos; eating things sacrificed to idols...cross reference Isaiah 66:13-17. Setting: Jerusalem, Day of the Lord. Verse 17 sees people eating things sacrificed to the "abomination" (desolation) behind 1 tree in the midst of the gardens...cross reference Genesis 3...1 tree in the midst of the garden...they're worshipping the serpent. Pergamos, hidden manna...cross reference Revelation 12:6 & 14. Verse 14 tells us that the woman is fleeing the "face" of the serpent. If his face is there, the rest of him is too because it's his seat & dwelling place...which is Pergamos...which is spiritually Jerusalem in the tribulation. This tribulation era church of Pergamos is the Israeli remnant that New Testament Danites (dispys) claim is separate from the church. If Pergamos is on earth during the tribulation the rest of the churches will be too because as 1 Corinthians 12:12-25 tells us; there can be no schism in the body. We will not be divided. God dwells in New Jerusalem (Revelation 3:12). Satan wants to be like God (Isaiah 14:14) so he ultimately plants his palace in earthly Jerusalem; Sodom & Egypt spiritually. She is the harlot who is burned & made desolate. Thrown down never to be found again. (Revelation 17:16-18/Revelation 18:21/Zechariah 14:12 & Revelation 18s many references to "standing off afar for fear of her torment")
|
|
|
|
 |
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Satan's Seat; Past, Present & Future
1
Feb 16, 2024, 9:59 PM
|
|
You make an excellent point about the desire to see the bible as all literal or all allegory. The cynic insists on all literal, as fodder for fake 'gotcha' questions. The pseudo intellectual insists on all allegory: nothing is taken at face value. You point out excellent examples of this.
I am not ready to say this means we can exactly identify what happens before Jesus's return, or where Satan resides today, if in any one place. Regarding pre or post millennialism, I suppose I am a pan millennialist: it will all pan out end the end. If we agree Jesus reigns on that day, as He does now, there is not much of importance on which to disagree. I enjoy hearing what you have to say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1387]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 2097
Joined: 4/23/15
|
Pro tip for ya
2
Feb 17, 2024, 2:31 AM
|
|
Your posts are VERY wordy
Few are gonna read though all that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24306]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12367
Joined: 9/1/14
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2165]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2581
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Satan's Seat; Past, Present & Future
3
Feb 17, 2024, 9:05 AM
|
|
“Hebrews 4:12
King James Version
12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Quick = alive...the Book is alive...past, present & future...”
What book are you referring to?
The writer of Hebrews couldn’t have been talking about the Bible as it was far from canonized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Horry #####.
1
Feb 17, 2024, 1:03 PM
|
|
Circle this date. We agree. At the time he was writing that, you are right. That doesn't mean that, say, John's gospel doesn't now fit the description, but yes you are right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2165]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2581
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Horry #####.
1
Feb 17, 2024, 3:58 PM
|
|
What do you mean “now”?
The actual writer of Hebrews, and every other New Testament writer when they referred to the “scriptures“ or “word of god” were referring to something they already knew.
So what were they referring to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Horry #####.
2
Feb 17, 2024, 5:25 PM
|
|
Doesnt have to be something written, but of course could be. God's communication is whatever it is, past, present and future. The writer said only "word of the God". If the NT is that, it has the characteristics described, but obviously cant be what Hebrews was specifically thinking about at the time, as you pointed out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2165]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2581
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Horry #####.
1
Feb 17, 2024, 6:20 PM
|
|
Fair enough.
So you don’t believe the “bible” as a whole is the word of god?
Or you believe it is and there are other words from god? That would seem to make more sense. Why wouldn’t a god speak in a lot of ways?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Horry #####.
2
Feb 17, 2024, 9:50 PM
|
|
Good question. All i have is my flawed personal take, so:
There is nothing wrong with saying 'word of God' (if he says something, that's what it is), but today that and other terms are religious phrases to both believer and atheist alike, with all sorts of implied meanings. So, as to the bible, I'll say it like this: I believe it tells a true story of God's redemptive plan, and is provided to us for that purpose.
As to other communication from God, sure, can and does happen. If it does happen, it is as authoritative, to the hearer, as the bible: that is one role of His Spirit in us. To a third party, it does not carry the authority of the bible.
"I just got a job offer, and I think I'm going to take it. What do you think?"
"I don't know, bro. It seems to me God has you in this current direction."
"I get it. But this is what I think He is saying to me."
"Well, if that is what you believe you are hearing, I'm behind you. Let me know how it works out."
Next day a friend asks, "Hey, how about Jason taking that job?"
"Yeah, a bit sudden, eh? But he believes he's following Jesus in this, and he thinks this is the direction. I hope so."
Authoritative to Jason, not to me. Cults develop when we believe another person is right because he says, "God told me so." Unless we re-enter a prophet phase, which we wont (His Spirit is here), a person who claims that authority is violating the 3rd commandment, imo. We all violate all of them; I'm just saying why it is we cant use "God told me", as a trump card to influence others. All that can do, imo, is convey one's own personal conviction, which is his alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2165]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2581
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Horry #####.
2
Feb 18, 2024, 8:34 AM
|
|
Thanks for the explanation. Seems like a logical way to look at it. I know when I was a christian I loved reading CS Lewis, and would think to myself that god could be speaking through this man just like he could the bible.
But that would frustrate me that people put so much authority on the bible, with seemingly no reason to do so. Then of course when I started studying into the history behind it myself, and discovered that there were other christian writings, and saw what seemed to be contradictions I felt like I had been lied to. And there are things that don't add up. Fordtunate Son is great at pointing these out.
Christianity just seems more about being "right" than actually doing what Jesus said to do, which is love your neighbor as yourself.
The response to this is usually "well people aren't perfect", but it's not about being perfect. It's not an individual problem, it's a culture problem to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Horry #####.
1
Feb 18, 2024, 8:57 AM
|
|
The validity of the other 'Christian writings', and whether that means anyone lied to you, is a decision only you can make for yourself.
I would propose that is the wrong way to approach it, because it begins with this assumption: "If God inspired men to write anything about Him, He would also prevent anyone from writing anything else about Him, so there would be only one message about Him. If I find any contradiction, all writing about Him is therefore false. Or it is all true."
That premise might be false. It is just as possible that there are accounts that are authoritative, and those that are not. People do what people do, which says nothing about the authoritative documents, or whether they do or don't exist.
If someone wants to begin with the 'all documents must agree' premise, that is their choice. With that premise, no aliens have visited earth (many contradictory accounts), or thousands have, from many places and purposes. If instead it is possible that there are some visitations, with some true accounts and some false, the same is true about anything.
Determining what is true has to be approached differently. But as I said, how you decide what is true, and what conclusions you reach, is determined only by you.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2165]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2581
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Horry #####.
Feb 18, 2024, 1:41 PM
|
|
When you get down to the nitty gritty you realize that "authoritative" is highly subjective.
You are correct that there being "fake" writings doesn't mean there aren't accurate accounts, but even a lot of the writings that made it into the New Testament are believed to possibly be forgeries, contain added passages to confirm doctrines that were up for to debate in the early church, and they seem to contain contradictions.
Further, Jesus is never recorded endorsing Paul, so why does his word hold so much weight anyway? What makes the books that he wrote authoritative? That is the question. So he claimed to have a vision? Ok, so did Muhammad...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Horry #####.
Feb 18, 2024, 4:37 PM
|
|
All those are valid comments/questions. My first take, in order:
No, to me it is not as subjective as you might think. I have objective reasons for thinking the NT accounts are accurate. That is another subject, am just saying that my viewing John's gospel as authoritative, but not "The Gospel of Thomas", is not subjective, and not because of the content. Not by a long shot.
Some people do say some of the NT documents are not written by the claimed authors. That is open to debate. If the subject is the accuracy of the basic NT claim - the execution and resurrection of Jesus - I am very willing to rely on only the documents atheists agree were written by the claimed authors. As to the word "forgeries", that is another term entirely, and I'm not sure you actually meant that.
Yes, Paul claimed a personal encounter with Jesus. However, that is not the reason his letters are considered to be authoritative. Lots of people have claimed to see Jesus, and to be Him, and those claims fail a rational examination for the same reason Muhammad's claim fails. So, do not think anyone, then or now, gives weight to Paul simply because he claimed to see Jesus. My giving weight to that claim because of who Paul is, is not the same as my giving weight to him because of that claim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2165]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2581
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Horry #####.
Feb 19, 2024, 9:32 AM
|
|
I've read a lot on this subject from evangelicals. The bottom line is the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were accepted by the church over the other ones. That in itself gives more validity to those IMO. So i'm not saying there's a case to be made for another writing to be included and one to be kicked out, but the fact that these were accepted over the others may be for theological reasons more than historical ones. There is evidence after all that other sources that are lost were earlier, such as the Q source and Marcion's gospel who was eventually considered heretic.
It's easy to see though how these theological differences could have been more important than historical accuracy. An example from the modern church...
I grew up in a southern baptist context. Every church I've attended had an unwritten rule that alcohol was a no-no. Some church members who disagreed would jokingly hide their use, but they hid it none the less. Others were more radical and declared it downright sinful.
All this despite the fact that Jesus is clearly recorded as saying he drank wine in Luke chapter 7 and of course the famous mircale where he turned water to wine in the gospel of John.
Some even resort to claiming the word "wine" in the New Testament means two totally different things when Jesus is drinking it even though the actual writings never make that distinction.
So this is a perfect example of theological presumptions outweighing the historical truth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Horry #####.
Feb 19, 2024, 9:57 AM
|
|
Sure. Many Christians - most, imo - believe that the mere existence of denominations, let alone their differences, is a damaging result of the point you are making. The only truth the Church should claim as dogma is the minimal truth of the Gospel. Perfection, Fall, Incarnation, Atonement, Redemption. That's it. Everything else is between the individual and Jesus, imo.
If we wanted to get into the weeds in this discussion, I might agree that a small transitional area exists between the minimal truth and individual authority. For instance, a guy openly cheating on his wife should be told to cease: he is destroying other people. That is another discussion, I suppose. But those are few, imo.
But in the general sense, sure, I agree with you. If one is assessing the practice of Christianity, it might in the best cases get a C-, with many worse examples. Nasty people came to faith and started meeting together to help each other follow Jesus. What could go wrong? That has nothing to do with who Jesus is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2165]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2581
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Horry #####.
Feb 19, 2024, 10:15 AM
|
|
“If we wanted to get into the weeds in this discussion, I might agree that a small transitional area exists between the minimal truth and individual authority. For instance, a guy openly cheating on his wife should be told to cease: he is destroying other people. That is another discussion, I suppose. But those are few, imo.”
You won’t get an argument from me on the dangers of alcohol.
The question then becomes though did Jesus not know of the dangers?
Surely someone became intoxicated and made a bad decision after a second helping of wine, that was even better than the first, at the wedding in Cana…
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Horry #####.
Feb 19, 2024, 10:31 AM
|
|
Perhaps so. Probably so.
Edit: "Probably" refers to whether some bad decisions were made. As to whether he knew (your actual question), sure, he did.
Would be fun to discuss what bad decisions those might be. Wont drive a donkey through a red light. Domestic violence is elevated, and that is reason for some to not drink, but the underlying problem is separate. Bad things happened, obviously, but in small religious community of that day, the boundaries were narrower and higher.
This is totally in the weeds, but we view the manger scene as idyllic, two happy if inconvenienced parents. I dont think that was the scene at all. In that community (less than 1000 people), in that day, getting pregnant while single was not a good thing. A thing like that divided accepted from outcast. The 'woman at the well' had to go get water alone. I think this answers the question, "Why would Mary walk 5 days while 9 months pregnant"? She didnt want to be alone in that village with those wagging tongues, imo. 'But her family was there.' Ha, worse. Mary and Joseph knew the drill, but it was not a fun time.
Anyway, yes, Jesus knew. First hand, he knew.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1012]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1458
Joined: 11/15/23
|
Re: Horry #####.
Feb 18, 2024, 1:53 PM
[ in reply to Re: Horry #####. ] |
|
>Determining what is true has to be approached differently. But as I said, how you decide what is true, and what conclusions you reach, is determined only by you.
Are you saying there is no objective criteria to determine authoritative Christian text?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94262]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95530
Joined: 12/25/09
|
God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word.
1
Feb 18, 2024, 2:25 PM
|
|
Anyone thinking they can differentiate between that which comes from God and that which comes from man is foolish.
It has to do with faith. Intellect will never cut it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1012]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1458
Joined: 11/15/23
|
Re: God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word.
Feb 18, 2024, 3:02 PM
|
|
To be clear, the only way to know, is for God to tell me? There is no criteria for me to see for myself?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word.
1
Feb 18, 2024, 4:46 PM
[ in reply to God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word. ] |
|
I agree with you. To clarify what you and I are saying, let's see if you agree with this:
1. The NT documents can be shown to be accurate by the same tests applied to any other historical document. In fact, they fair better than others against the generally used standards. The evidence for accuracy is overwhelming, imo.
2. However, nothing can 'prove' that a person did this or that 2000 years ago. There are no photographs. The proof is in what Jesus has done for me, and the fact that He lives in me. "You ask me how I know He lives ...". That is proof for me. Everyone else has to deal with God and Jesus themselves, and God grants them that choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94262]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95530
Joined: 12/25/09
|
I've heard a lot of touching testimonies in my life.
1
Feb 18, 2024, 4:54 PM
|
|
None comes close to God's testimony during fellowship with Him.
I suspect most of what history teaches about Jesus the man will change again and again. My God won't change so what is history's records to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: I've heard a lot of touching testimonies in my life.
Feb 18, 2024, 5:11 PM
|
|
If by 'history', you mean the rise and fall of the Bart Ehrmans, I agree,
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1012]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1458
Joined: 11/15/23
|
Re: God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word.
Feb 18, 2024, 6:13 PM
[ in reply to Re: God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word. ] |
|
>The NT documents can be shown to be accurate by the same tests applied to any other historical document. In fact, they fair better than others against the generally used standards. The evidence for accuracy is overwhelming, imo.
As you are aware, historians assess historical documents piecemeal and do not claim they as all-or-nothing "accurate". So I'd be curious what you mean when you say the evidence for their accuracy is overwhelming. Are you referring to specific claims? The entire books?
Furthermore, historians don't have the tools to assess supernatural claims and they don't. This isn't particular to the bible either. We believe a lot of the accounts of Caesars life are historical, but we don't think he ascended to heaven either.
So are you including supernatural claims as well?
>However, nothing can 'prove' that a person did this or that 2000 years ago. There are no photographs.
This is true, but there are differing levels of evidence. We have artifacts of some historical events which give them more weight. In some cases, we even have the bodies of historical figures (although I admit this would be unfair in Jesus' case as the claim is he rose from the dead).
>The proof is in what Jesus has done for me, and the fact that He lives in me. "You ask me how I know He lives ...". That is proof for me.
That's fine. I agree if you have person experience of Jesus, then you are justified in your belief.
>Everyone else has to deal with God and Jesus themselves, and God grants them that choice.
Here though, you are making an unsubstatiated claim, it would be nice to see this backed up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word.
Feb 19, 2024, 1:06 AM
|
|
Your comment about Caesar is relevant. If one begins without bias for or against the resurrection, the evidence for the NT documents being sincere and truthful accounts is very strong. On the negative side, the alternative explanations for their existence are very weak. All this is similar to that of other accounts we consider to be historical.
From that point, one is left with whether he will accept the conclusion of a supernatural event. Some are so biased against it that they demand proof that cannot be provided: I have seen some demand "scientific" proof, IE reproducible tests, which very few historical events can provide. That is certainly fine, within one's right to hold that degree of bias. Again, I cannot talk someone into believing a thing, and will not try to.
I hold nearly the same bias against alien visitations. Reported sightings have yet to convince me. However, I am willing to grant the sincerity of the accounts, and thus their accuracy from their perspective. I admit to the possibility. I would need to see one, but would open mindedly consider one if presented. If I see one, the accounts were true all along, but the only proof is my own experience.
I have 'seen' Jesus. So, I know. Whether anyone sees Jesus is a matter of choice. The Rev 3:20 knocking is universal, imo. Some say it is not. We'll see.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1012]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1458
Joined: 11/15/23
|
Re: God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word.
Feb 19, 2024, 8:39 AM
|
|
>Your comment about Caesar is relevant. If one begins without bias for or against the resurrection, the evidence for the NT documents being sincere and truthful accounts is very strong. On the negative side, the alternative explanations for their existence are very weak. All this is similar to that of other accounts we consider to be historical.
What bias against the resurrection are you referring to? My point about the Caesar example is that there is a supernatural claim there, history can't assess either. From my point of view, historians and I have a consistent view of the supernatural that we don't have the tools to ##### them. You seem to have a pro resurrection (or more broadly christian) bias as you accept those claims but no other supernatural ones from history.
As you can see, historians can ##### the mundane claims just fine. We think Ceasar probably crossed the Rubicon, but we don't think he ascended to heaven. Similarly, we think Jesus existed and was killed, but not that he rose and ascended to heaven.
Where is the bias or inconsistency on the part of historians? The harsh reality is, even if the resurrection did happen, we have no way to verify it historically.
As for the sincerity of the accounts, think about it this way. I think you, CT88 and others on this board are as sincere as it gets. I'd bet if it came down to it, you'd be willing to die for the claim that Jesus rose from the dead. Here's the important bit: you guys are 2000 years removed from the event and didn't see any of it, yet you are extremely sincere. So, people 2000 years ago being sincere about something doesn't require them to have actually seen or experienced an actual resurrection.
So when you say alternative explanations are weak, I have no idea how you are doing that math. We have billions of examples of people who think the resurrection happened without seeing it, and a handful of people saying they did in the bible, and you think it's more likely that a supernatural event happened then those people were simply sincerely mistaken? That is your prerogative, but it certainly isn't backed up by the available data.
>From that point, one is left with whether he will accept the conclusion of a supernatural event. Some are so biased against it that they demand proof that cannot be provided: I have seen some demand "scientific" proof, IE reproducible tests, which very few historical events can provide.
Replace the resurrection with other non-Christian supernatural claims and see if you feel the same way about your statement, I'd bet you don't.
>I hold nearly the same bias against alien visitations. Reported sightings have yet to convince me. However, I am willing to grant the sincerity of the accounts, and thus their accuracy from their perspective. I admit to the possibility. I would need to see one, but would open mindedly consider one if presented. If I see one, the accounts were true all along, but the only proof is my own experience.
See this is strange to me, I hold nearly this same position with respect to the resurrection and any other fantastic claim, but you think I'm the one being biased when I apply it to your religion. The only thing I'd change is I don't hold a bias against them, I'm perfectly willing to grant they may in fact happen, I simply don't have evidence for them. As you said, I would need to see one and would open-mindedly consider one if presented. That's exactly how I feel about the resurrection. I don't hold any pre-suppositions that it absolutely didn't happen, I simply have no convincing evidence that it did.
>I have 'seen' Jesus. So, I know. Whether anyone sees Jesus is a matter of choice. The Rev 3:20 knocking is universal, imo. Some say it is not. We'll see.
These seem contradictory: How is it my choice to see Jesus if you are saying he knocks first. If I haven't heard a knock, where is the choice?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word.
Feb 19, 2024, 9:35 AM
|
|
There is nothing more to be said. The NT tells an historical story, per reasonable assessments. What anyone does with that is a personal matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1012]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1458
Joined: 11/15/23
|
Re: God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word.
Feb 19, 2024, 9:44 AM
|
|
Anyone can do with it what they please, sure, but it's not true that the supernatural bits can be assessed historically whether they happened or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1012]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1458
Joined: 11/15/23
|
Re: God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word.
Feb 19, 2024, 9:48 AM
[ in reply to Re: God's Holy Spirit testifies to His Word. ] |
|
Forgot to add, using your same criteria btw: "I hold nearly the same bias against alien visitations. Reported sightings have yet to convince me. However, I am willing to grant the sincerity of the accounts, and thus their accuracy from their perspective. I admit to the possibility. I would need to see one, but would open mindedly consider one if presented. If I see one, the accounts were true all along, but the only proof is my own experience."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Horry #####.
Feb 18, 2024, 4:24 PM
[ in reply to Re: Horry #####. ] |
|
I didnt come close to saying that. I addressed the assumptions underlying certain claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1012]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1458
Joined: 11/15/23
|
Re: Horry #####.
Feb 18, 2024, 6:07 PM
|
|
That's why it was a question.
Given, that I'd be curious, what are some objective criteria we could use?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94262]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95530
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Who here has not done things which have results which are unexpected?
1
Feb 18, 2024, 2:14 PM
[ in reply to Re: Satan's Seat; Past, Present & Future ] |
|
I don't think Moses expected his composition of Genesis through Deuteronomy to ever be called the Torah and be accepted as recorded history by millions from every generation since. The audacity of God to have worked in Moses to produce the most read, historical and well known document without telling him.
It's not the violin, it's the master whose hands hold it, son. That violin can't play itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2165]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2581
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Who here has not done things which have results which are unexpected?
Feb 18, 2024, 2:26 PM
|
|
What I'm saying is the writer of Hebrews was referring to something tangible at that time. When Jesus referred to the "scriptures" he was referring to the Old Testament. The New Testament's authority comes from who?
The Jesus Seminar concluded that Jesus never said a lot of what the gospels report that he said, including John 3:16.
Was salvation by faith a later invention? The earlier gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) never mention Jesus teaching that. It was always love your neighbor and keep the commandments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94262]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95530
Joined: 12/25/09
|
You are 100% correct in that Jesus and all the apostles spoke of the...
Feb 18, 2024, 4:51 PM
|
|
Torah, prophets and Psalms as being The Bible at that time. The evidence of that is the multiple times each of them said, 'as written.' Jesus preaching was almost exclusively for Hebrews and 11 of the 12 gave much of their time reaching out to their fellow Hebrews.
The book we call Acts of the Apostles might more descriptive of the times in those men's lives if we referred to the book, Acts of The Holy Spirit. For, it was He who directed them, empowered them to endure and He who gave them testimony to Jesus divinity.
The Bible calls God's Holy Spirit 'the earnest,' of the promise. Earnest is defined as something of value given by a buyer to a seller to bind a bargain when used as a noun. Pledge, is considered close but earnest is more than a symbol of the bond.
The Gospels are all about faith in Christ for they are simple expositions of His work on the cross being the key to our salvation when coupled with our trust (faith) in Him, His virgin birth, death, burial, resurrection and ascension up to God.
I am confident that my God was able to produce, protect and provide His Holy Word to me. Past that, I have no need of understanding. I read it to learn more about Him. As I learn more I realize who I am in comparison to Who He is.
Other knowledge, while entertaining, is not edifying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24515]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13987
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Who here has not done things which have results which are unexpected?
Feb 18, 2024, 5:09 PM
[ in reply to Re: Who here has not done things which have results which are unexpected? ] |
|
I would hope you are aware that the criticism of the Jesus Seminar on the basis of its methodology, suppositions and bias is greater than its support. It was a very flawed process. But beyond that, quoting them as reason to believe a certain thing is the 'appeal to authority' error. One knows why he believes a thing, or he searches for agreement to support his bias.
As to whether Jesus made gospel claims in accounts other than "John" ... how much time do you have? One of the most watched evangelistic films of all time was made solely from "Luke".
You can certainly believe what you want, with no interference from me. But if you want me to understand why you do or dont believe a certain thing, something more than "he/she said" is needed, unless you want me to know that is your reason for believing what you do.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1012]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1458
Joined: 11/15/23
|
Re: Who here has not done things which have results which are unexpected?
Feb 18, 2024, 6:17 PM
|
|
> But if you want me to understand why you do or dont believe a certain thing, something more than "he/she said" is needed
Surely you jest? What evidence do we have for do we have for the resurrection that doesn't amount to "he/said said?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94262]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95530
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Christians have the testimony or God through His Holy Spirit.
Feb 20, 2024, 2:37 PM
|
|
One Word from Him is enough to dissipate all doubt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1012]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1458
Joined: 11/15/23
|
Re: Christians have the testimony or God through His Holy Spirit.
Feb 20, 2024, 6:52 PM
|
|
That falls under "he/she said" unless you can show me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2165]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2581
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Who here has not done things which have results which are unexpected?
Feb 19, 2024, 9:13 AM
[ in reply to Re: Who here has not done things which have results which are unexpected? ] |
|
"I would hope you are aware that the criticism of the Jesus Seminar on the basis of its methodology, suppositions and bias is greater than its support. It was a very flawed process. But beyond that, quoting them as reason to believe a certain thing is the 'appeal to authority' error. One knows why he believes a thing, or he searches for agreement to support his bias."
Yes they were heavily criticized by evangelical scholars, of course.
I would say the side that already believes it to be true has much more reason to be biased, wouldn't you?
"As to whether Jesus made gospel claims in accounts other than "John" ... how much time do you have? One of the most watched evangelistic films of all time was made solely from "Luke"."
What passage from the synoptic gospels affirms salvation by faith?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mascot [15]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 16
Joined: 2/13/24
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 40
| visibility 401
|
|
|
50
