Nathan_Jr

RAF is more succinct than I.

41 minutes ago, Charity said:

Yes, but I heard it taught in twi without, I think, any mention of Oral Robert.  The thought just came to me that this topic was discussed on GSC and with a search, it shows 160 places where it has. 

So, my question was how did the continuity of this idea make its way all through the OT.  This is one of the points that was used to show God had to have been its author.

The original was from Oral Roberts, I think. This idea may go back to the early church fathers - Augustine, maybe? Maybe not. I don't know. Someone does.

The gospels deliberately linked their narratives and theologies to the OT (and to Virgil and Homer, according to D.R. MacDonald, et.al.) The writers of the epistles did the same. This is obvious, right? Connect it backwards so you can now connect it forward.

It's an interpretive framework. It's reading into the text something not conceived by the OT authors and editors. It's a theological perspective. It's academic. Pretty neat way of looking at it.

But it doesn't mean God wrote anything. It just means the writers were clever, as was Oral Robert's. I'm not knocking this interpretive perspective. That's just what it looks like to me. Again, it's academic. It's a glove. If it fits, wear it.

54 minutes ago, Charity said:

 

Yes, I also see that Genesis 3 is a story and a lot more than just that one chapter as well.  What I still wonder about is how the man-made story called the "red thread" of the messiah was kept going through all the years of the OT writings.  Any comments or suggestions?

Like the Oral Robert's sermon?

36 minutes ago, Charity said:

...it is a story that ancient mankind came up with...

Yes

So good!

I don't think there is a scripture that mentions five days. It's arbitrary, like one or two days. The implication is that one or two days of survival is enough to get the slave owner off the hook, after that (five days, two weeks...), if the slave dies from the wounds, well, too bad -- the only loss is the slave owner's money. Only need to ensure your sex slave survives one or two days.

Like beating your slave to within  an inch of her life is righteous, as long as that inch carries her life through day two post beating. Let her die from her wounds on day five. 

27 minutes ago, Charity said:

You're saying then that because the bible says he was sent by God means he was a manipulator just as God was.  Cool - I can definitely see this.

What I'm saying is what I've said many times: The one claiming to speak for God is surely the one who does not.

There is wisdom in the Bible, for sure. There are ideas worth contemplating, meditating on. There are beautiful turns of phrase, poetry.

But It's not the only contemplative book of wisdom, ancient or modern, worth reading.

On 4/20/2024 at 5:10 PM, Charity said:

I've heard a few different people take issues with Paul's epistles.  Have you learned something about him or his writings that makes him out to be a manipulator? 

All I know is that he was sent by God.

How do I know this? Paul himself says so of himself. He said it, that settles it, I believe it. 

Yeah, well, mogadishu rafa calamari peshwari naan. I would that you all SIT as much as I do.

He said Jesus sits at the right hand of God. God is sitting next to his seated son, Jesus. Neither needs to stop working at any time. They can work while sitting. Neither requires rest because neither gets tired, probably because they are sitting. Though God and Christ are absent, take comfort in knowing that they are sitting down

2 hours ago, Charity said:

"what-if-I'm-wrong"

I look forward to Raf's answer, but I just want to say, what if you're right? Consider letting go of this sinister, manipulative dilemma.

This is possible: The freedom, the liberty, to look clearly at anything, unencumbered by forgone conclusions and beleefs.

17 minutes ago, Charity said:

Again, I find this fascinating because when I began to deconvert, I did not want to give up on the idea that the world was created by a powerful being leaving evolution as the only other option. The beauty of nature and the incredible way our bodies work and the order of the universe are all realities I marvel at - thinking that it all evolved on its own seems too incredulous.  (I admit though, I have not studied the theory of evolution.)  

Thanks Nathan for sharing about your mother. 

You might read WordWolf’s excellent treatment of Genesis 1 in the Doctrinal forum.

I may have misunderstood him or didn’t read it carefully the first time, but my takeaway is that evolution is not incompatible with creationism. 

10 minutes ago, Charity said:

Has she shared with you whether she believes in heaven or hell? 

I know she doesn’t believe in hell. Not sure what she thinks about heaven other than she doesn’t see it as a geographical destination. I know she believes life is eternal and death is powerless and Christ Jesus proved it.
 

11 minutes ago, Charity said:

Witnessing was such an obligation in twi, although I don't think it was ever called evangelism.  The focus was on moving the word over the world via selling the class to people, not on God's commandment to go out and make disciples (i.e., the great commission of Matt 28:19-10).  Feeling the need to get those you care for to accept Christ and be born again

She doesn’t feel obligated to witness. Maybe she sees her life as a witness. I don't think she believes she can make anyone see what she sees. Again, she sees it as a personal journey for each and everyone. But she’s a universalist, so she believes everyone, eventually, will come to the truth. 
 

I thought Matthew was Old Testament written TO the Jews, according to TWI. How could the Great Commission apply to anyone other than the eleven disciples, who were dirty Judeans, according to TWI?

There’s probably a glove for that. 

1 hour ago, Charity said:

…or striving to believe enough to please God. 

I missed this part.

No. I don’t think she is striving to believe anything. I don’t think she sees God as being displeased.

Again, for her, it goes back to Genesis chapter 1 as foundational. God saw everything that he had made. And it was very good.

52 minutes ago, Charity said:

It sounds like she's not burdened down with the issue of "sin" or striving to believe enough to please God.  That would make a difference.  I find it hard for her to be like this though if she goes to a church.  Does she?

 

She's not at all burdened by sin. Church? Not really. I'm sure she would be considered a heretic or something like that by some here. She doesn't talk about her faith unless asked, even then, sparingly. She doesn't evangelize. She doesn't talk about or judge others’ religious beliefs, even when she disagrees. She sees it all as very personal and private.

She has two best friends since childhood. She talks to them daily. Amazing love and loyalty among them. One is Methodist, the other Episcopalian. 

My mother is a devout Christian. She walks with tremendous peace, compassion, grace and power. I've witnessed her receive countless healings and revelations. She is not a proseltizer/evangelizer. She is not a fundamentalist inerrantist. She knows God isn't in the publishing business and didn't write the books of the Bible. Genesis chapter one is foundational to her theology/philosophy. Chapter 2 on, not so much.

10 hours ago, Charity said:

It's just that the horrendous acts of God's wrath in the O.T. and the wrath of God that Jesus spoke of in the Gospels and revealed to John in Revelation are so different from the grace and salvation from God's wrath that Paul writes about in his epistles.  However, despite what Bullinger and Wierwille taught about focusing on what is written to us, it does not change the truth that in the Bible disobeying God is a very frightening thing. 

Horrendous. Yes, indeed.

I'm not a Jew. I'm not subject the wrath of the Jewish god. (Nor are they.) Nor will I be manipulated by a Pharisee like Paul that simply beleeeving what he says will save me from the  horrendous acts of the god of Abram.

Do you likewise think that serpent is perfect?  Or when and how is it that fallen creature excluded?
And if everything is perfect... why do you suppose God gave instructions to the man to not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil?
Did evil already exist at the time of this instruction... or didn't it?
Can this be explained?"and that we needed a savior"

Saved from what?

"Do you likewise think that serpent is perfect?  Or when and how is it that fallen creature excluded?
And if everything is perfect... why do you suppose God gave instructions to the man to not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil?
Did evil already exist at the time of this instruction... or didn't it?
Can this be explained?"

Good questions, but presumptive. It's a different author, a different god, a different creation myth. In the first creation story, chapter one, El saw that ALL he made was very good - ALL without exception or distinction, whichever you prefer. 

5 hours ago, Charity said:

One more thing about Genesis 3… 

Gen 3:10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. 11And he said, Who told thee that thou was naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou should not eat?

Did God really not know what had happened until Adam told him?  Did God not know the serpent was in the garden tempting Eve?  Did he not foreknow that the serpent would try to tempt Eve? According to Paul, 4 thousand years later, God knew about Christ’s redeeming blood and that we’d be chosen of him before the foundation of the world.  So why was Genesis 3:10 written this way?

Another thing, did God even warn Adam and Eve about Satan and how crafty, subtle and evil he was? There is no record of him doing so.  So Eve is deceived by the serpent and decides to eat of the fruit giving it also to Adam who believing Eve (or for some other unstated reason), decides to eat as well.  Could there have been a different outcome if Eve knew she was talking to a great deceiver? 

This is why I believe this record in Genesis is a story made up by man to explain why there was such evil in the world.  How could a truly all-knowing and perfectly loving God have been so asleep at the wheel as well as so punitive to have let this all play out as it did?

The wrath of God is something to consider as well.

You skipped 3:9. 

“And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?”

Really?? Lord God can’t see them?

6 hours ago, Charity said:

Was anything written to Christ-believing people who lived decades or centuries later?

Sure. Of course. Paul’s letters and the epistles of the apostolic fathers and I’m sure other lettres that are long gone. In some churches 1 & 2 Clement were read as scripture alongside the gospels and Paul.

I’m making a point about the To/For Bullingerism. Hey, it’s a novel, systematic theology contrived in the 19th century. If it helps, go with it, but I find it to be narrow, shortsighted, and un inspired. 

Paul wasn’t writing TO you, either. He was writing TO members of his ekklesia in Thessalonika, Galatia, Corinth, Phillipi… 

There are two creation myths in the Bible: Genesis 1–2:3; Genesis 2:3–… Inerrantists do not or will not see it. And that’s just fine. But it’s not hard to see.

The language and style are different. The gods are different - El and Yahweh El. The first describes a perfect creation, the second describes a carnal, corrupted creation. 

16 hours ago, Charity said:

Hi Cman, I like many others, had to deconstruct from the wrong doctrine of twi after being involved for 11 years.  Now, I'm wondering which of the following is not what we as Christians are to believe.  In the Old Testament, the goodness of God towards His own people was mostly based on obedience to Him; otherwise, you see them suffer curses, deaths, killings, punishments, etc. 

With the gospels, you have Jesus coming again to his own people and saying "If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple."  Then, in order to save mankind from sin, God needed him to be tortured and crucified for three hours because that was how God set everything up from the beginning.  

The Epistles say we are saved by grace which is groovy for us considering what God did to his people under the law in the OT but not so groovy for those who may be saved during the great tribulation which God will allow to happen.  Then, there's the power which we have access to during this period but only if we trust in God and even then, it seems to come down to His prerogative whether it's manifested.  

Finally, there is the rapture which while again groovy for us, is not so for those left behind since they shall see "great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened."

Fair observations. When one steps back to take an unfiltered look at it, the absurdity gets pretty gnarly. And, careful, that five-fingered glove won’t fit that twelve-fingered hand.

I always wondered: what am I being saved from?

19 hours ago, Charity said:

If based on the accepted belief that there is no God, then does valuing even more the one life we have now all that awful?

No. The whole point is to value this life, to be alive.

19 hours ago, Charity said:

And what about the pain and suffering that does happen in this one life - how are we to see it when there is no relief to look forward to in heaven?

Gracefully. With compassion.

Where is heaven? Above? In the sky? How do you know where or what this heaven is? What will you do there? Show off your rewards? Demonstrate what an obedient slave you are?

Jesus said, “If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you.”

And a few related quotes from Henry Miller,

“Every moment is a golden one for him who has the vision to recognize it as such.”

“The moment one gives close attention to any thing, even a blade of grass it becomes a mysterious, awesome, indescribably magnificent world in itself.”

“The aim of life is to live, and to live means to be aware, joyously, drunkenly, serenely, divinely aware.”