Jump to content


Photo

Arguments the Christian apologist should avoid


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#1 Ken Gilmore

Ken Gilmore

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 3,808 posts
  • LocationBrisbane, Australia

Posted 14 July 2011 - 05:16 AM

What are the apologetics strategies and arguments that make you shudder with contact embarrassment? Of the top of my head, these would be:

* The Liar, Lunatic or Lord trilemma: popularised by CS Lewis who argued:

"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. ... Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God.

I am not fond of this one as it is a false dilemma - there may be other options such as the Gospel accounts do not accurately report his life. I don't hold to that argument, but one needs to employ arguments that hold up to critical examination, and the Trilemma no longer cuts it for me as it is logically weak.

* Pascal's Wager: Terry Pratchett lampooned it far better than I could in Small Gods:

"Upon his death, the philosopher in question found himself surrounded by a group of angry gods with clubs. The last thing he heard was 'We're going to show you how we deal with Mister Clever Dick around here...'"

* The argument from design: One word. Rhymes with revolution. (Design is arguably better employed at the cosmological level, but in biology, it's been DOA for 150 years).

* Jesus fulfilled many OT prophecies, and the odds of that occurring by chance are remote: Poor argument which founders on the fact that many of the "prophecies" in Matthew were not predictive prophecies, but rather the typological use of the OT in a standard 2nd Temple Judaism manner.

What other poor apologetic arguments are there which we need to bury in an unmarked grave at the crossroads at night?

Edited by Ken Gilmore, 14 July 2011 - 05:18 AM.

“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.” - Galileo Galilei

#2 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Moderator

  • Admin
  • 34,729 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 06:36 AM

What other poor apologetic arguments are there which we need to bury in an unmarked grave at the crossroads at night?


* Impeccable harmony of the Biblical text: despite being written by over 40 different writers, over more than 1,000 years, there are absolutely no contradictions!
* Complete support of archaeology: no section of the Bible has ever been contradicted by a single archaeological discovery!
* Identification of the available Biblical text as synonymous with the autographs: I'll now quote from the original Hebrew/Greek

Edited by Fortigurn, 14 July 2011 - 06:37 AM.


#3 Russell

Russell

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 883 posts
  • LocationCoffs Harbour Australia

Posted 14 July 2011 - 04:59 PM

Jesus fulfilled many OT prophecies, and the odds of that occurring by chance are remote[/b]: Poor argument which founders on the fact that many of the "prophecies" in Matthew were not predictive prophecies, but rather the typological use of the OT in a standard 2nd Temple Judaism manner.

What other poor apologetic arguments are there which we need to bury in an unmarked grave at the crossroads at night?


Sorry Ken. But I cannot agree with your point that this is a fallacious argument. I have said it before, but I'll repeat it now:

1Co 15:3-8 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, (4) that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, (5) and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. (6) Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. (7) Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. (8) Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

Luk 24:25-27 And he said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! (26) Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?" (27) And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.

To a first century Christian the evidence of scripture to the resurrection of Christ was of at least equal weight to that of the witnesses. There are a number of examples in the OT of the message "that Christ died for our sins" and "that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day". The argument is convincing to me. I don't see it as coincidence that Moses on top of a hill, with a companion on either side, with his arms raised, affected the outcome of the battle between Joshua and the army of evil. Nor that Daniel though thrown into the lion pit was not destroyed; the jealous people who orchestrated this however were themselves thrown into the same lion pit in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70. There are a number of other examples. And yes, the odds of this happening by chance were remote.

Edited by Russell, 14 July 2011 - 04:59 PM.


#4 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,173 posts
  • LocationCoventry

Posted 14 July 2011 - 05:29 PM

"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. ... Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God.


Does he not change the question half way through?

Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God.


Apparently it is possible to be completely normal, never experience hallucinations or any form of mental illness yet the moment you fall to your knees in private, repent of your sins and ask for the Holy Spirit to immediately have a once in a lifetime schizophrenic episode involving the Holy Spirit/angel. So that would depend on what type you were talking to. The Sadducees are today's obsessive reductionist types. To them intelligence or intellectualism draws them back when a reductionist view can be maintained. They will believe and accept nothing but the most seemingly obvious rational reason. Today they would believe or have no truck with anything (beyond) an explanation the known medical or psychological, and would use this as a blanket answer for all, which is actually anti-intellectual as it is as unsophisticated and unsubtle as generalizations usually are.

Sadducee = reductions
Pharisees = their exact opposite, i.e belief in many gods/trinity etc

The whole battle of Christianity and indeed humankind are between two main intellectual types, the reductions/Sadducee type and Pharisees/Catholics who are the extreme opposites. Both are extremists, the truth lies in between the two types/POVs - Todays Sadducee type would believe that they would have to react to the Pharisee type/RCC in an extreme way (where possible a reductionist way). But neither were right, the truth was moderate, subtle, sophisticated, not reductionist but not the far opposite either.

The argument from design: One word. Rhymes with revolution. (Design is arguably better employed at the cosmological level, but in biology, it's been DOA for 150 years).


Without doubt.
What sort of a thinking Christian imagines that God or Holy Angels were intimately involved in the design of a river maggot that blinds children? or any other number vile insects they foolishly imagine God calls 'good' in the Creation account and yet 'vile creeping things' in Ezekiel? OBVIOUSLY this in another intentional paradox that is plainly revealing...

1. The Creation account is NOT the natural creation
2. God was NOT intimately involved in designing creatures He ten calls vile

Thinking Christians must embrace evolution by random mutation as it gets God off the moral hook as no other explanation could, for being intimately involved in designing creatures one could only imagine a monstrous amoral mind creating.

Nothing but evolution works on both the moral and free will level, it HAD to be that way.

Jesus fulfilled many OT prophecies, and the odds of that occurring by chance are remote: Poor argument which founders on the fact that many of the "prophecies" in Matthew were not predictive prophecies, but rather the typological use of the OT in a standard 2nd Temple Judaism manner.


That is true or all the well known ones but sometimes in devotional reading I will see some typological gems and a whole underlying allegorical narrative that for me, without doubt is beyond the witt of the most sophisticated human conspiracy. I urge you all to switch from academic to devotional study at appointed times.

Edited by Mercia2, 14 July 2011 - 05:39 PM.

"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” = "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" = "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who maketh His angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire" Psalms (104:1) = "They saw what seemed to be flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Acts 2 - the secret is over, your ministering angel you need to be saved is the Holy Spirit.

Who Is the Holy Spirit?
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20950-holy-spirit-mercia/

Mark Of The Beast - his Name is the charachter/image of the medievil popes (now modern man)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/4997-mark-of-the-beast/page__pid__439951__st__120#entry439951

Historicists - Dual Fulfillment (seven thunders = more literal warning)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/14248-historicists-revelation-has-a-dual-fulfillment/

#5 Ken Gilmore

Ken Gilmore

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 3,808 posts
  • LocationBrisbane, Australia

Posted 15 July 2011 - 02:02 AM


Jesus fulfilled many OT prophecies, and the odds of that occurring by chance are remote[/b]: Poor argument which founders on the fact that many of the "prophecies" in Matthew were not predictive prophecies, but rather the typological use of the OT in a standard 2nd Temple Judaism manner.

What other poor apologetic arguments are there which we need to bury in an unmarked grave at the crossroads at night?


Sorry Ken. But I cannot agree with your point that this is a fallacious argument. I have said it before, but I'll repeat it now:

1Co 15:3-8 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, (4) that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, (5) and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. (6) Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. (7) Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. (8) Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

Luk 24:25-27 And he said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! (26) Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?" (27) And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.

To a first century Christian the evidence of scripture to the resurrection of Christ was of at least equal weight to that of the witnesses. There are a number of examples in the OT of the message "that Christ died for our sins" and "that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day". The argument is convincing to me. I don't see it as coincidence that Moses on top of a hill, with a companion on either side, with his arms raised, affected the outcome of the battle between Joshua and the army of evil. Nor that Daniel though thrown into the lion pit was not destroyed; the jealous people who orchestrated this however were themselves thrown into the same lion pit in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70. There are a number of other examples. And yes, the odds of this happening by chance were remote.

There are some predictive Messianic prophecies, I agree. What I am objecting to is the apologetic argument that says there are n Messianic prophecies, and the odds of them being fulfilled by chance is 2n, which if there are 200 Messianic prophecies means the odds are 1:1060. The problem is that some of these prophecies aren't predictive, but typological fulfillments (as per Matthew's use of the OT). I'm not arguing against the use of predictive prophecy, but the conflation of typological use of the OT with predictive prophecy, and using them to boost the number of predictive prophecies in order to boost the odds. (I should have been clearer in what I said to avoid this confusion.)
“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.” - Galileo Galilei

#6 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,173 posts
  • LocationCoventry

Posted 15 July 2011 - 06:18 PM

The problem is that some of these prophecies aren't predictive, but typological fulfillments (as per Matthew's use of the OT). I'm not arguing against the use of predictive prophecy, but the conflation of typological use of the OT with predictive prophecy, and using them to boost the number of predictive prophecies in order to boost the odds. (I should have been clearer in what I said to avoid this confusion.)


I agree with Ken, Jesus had to show He was Israel at the start of His ministry to fulfill the prophecies in Isaiah that the Jews still interpret as Israel.

As an atheist that would seem cleverly contrived. To me it teaches that probably all prophecies everywhere have dual fulfillment (God has to be consistent or He leaves us blind).

It also teaches me that the revelation is unfolding from OT to NT because, apart from the OT personifying nations as men, you or I would have had almost zero chance of persuading any one that they were also prophecies about Jesus. That is why it says you have to have the Holy Spirit to (correctly) interpret prophecy - because unless an angel told you that a prophecy in Isaiah about Israel that reads like a prophecy about Israel was actually a dual fulfillment prophecy about Jesus, you would have no evidence to persuade anyone prior to its fulfillment, it ONLY works in hindsight.

It then becomes blatantly obvious to any honest minded person that the Jews are being punished/mocked for not recognizing the context and plan of their Christs ministry including two comings/dual fulfillment when they had zero chance of it on any intellectual/eschatology level, but ONLY if they had the Holy Spirit - Can everyone not PLAINLY see this is self evident? ...and just to boil that down to what it actually means in pain language, it means that if you lived in OT times you had practically zero chance of recognizing a prophecy about Israel as a prophecy about Jesus or that Messianic prophecies contradicting meant dual fulfillment unless an angel/your ministering angel either tells you or impresses this on your mind as you read the verse. No other way.
It is important we are honest with ourselves about that

So typological prophecies only look convincing in hindsight and never before the event UNLESS you have the Holy Spirit/your ministering spirit actually tell you. I have said it before and I will say it again - can anyone say in all honesty they think they could have predicted Christs ministry as suffering servant when so many allude to conquering hero? Which is nationalistically desirable to believe? Yet if I said in OT times to you lot also in OT times, 'look fellas! the messiah must come twice as its the only way to explain why some prophecies see Him as triumphant King and others as downtrodden and despised' - would you have taken me that seriously? At best you would have thought it one of many interesting theories, but unlikely, or think it pure speculation? That is my point - you have to have the Holy Spirit to fully understand the Bible.

So no one is ever going to find a prophetic smoking gun because every prophecy is (intentionally) vague and on top of that often has multiple fulfillments.

The reason Ken is right and these apologists claiming proof from prophecy are wrong, is obvious - Unambiguous and undeniable prophetic fulfillment that atheists could not deny would go too far toward destroying free will and autonomy. So the prophecies in the Bible must also give some room for doubt, there is no other way if you think about it.

For example, I believe my ministering angel/Holy Spirit has shown me that the seven thunders in Rev 10:3 are seven additional prophecies that we are to "prophesy again" Rev 10:11 after trumpet 6 was fulfilled in Historicist understanding - and that this is why the seven additional thunders/prophecies are delivered (after) trumpet 6 but (before) trumpet 7 which is the consummation of things. So they are now being fulfilled in our time and as John in Rev 10 was told not to write them down Rev 10:4, so they must already be written down or whats the point of even mentioning John is told them! The symbols and Johns actions of going to write them down PROVES they are seven additional prophecies. So seven of the prophecies John had already written down in the Revelation therefore have a dual fulfillment in our time. The fact there are seven links it back to a dual application of 6 trumpet prophecies and Revelation 13, as they are delivered before trumpet 7 is fulfilled.

I have attempted to persuade Christadelphians of some of this, such as mans worst ever (man made) disaster, Chernobyl as Wormwood, which a stand at the Chernobyl museum confirms. So it was a star (nuclear reactor) that literally killed many because of the waters (it rained heavily for 3 weeks over europe), Rev 8:10-11. But while the translation cannot be denied anymore, someone would say something like 'aha, yes a star is nuclear but it's fusion not fission' and therefore consider the prophecy debunked.
Yet is their a better natural symbol found in the Bible that God could have used to specifically identify fission from fusion? Obviously not, but a star/sun is still a nuclear reactor.

Now imagine you are in OT times and you had this wacky idea that the prophecies that spoke of the Messiah contradicted as to whether He would be mighty King or suffering servant for a reason, INTENTIONALLY because it was a dual fulfillment (a classic example of an intentional paradox to force a spiritual interpretation) So would you really expect anyone to buy that idea as most likely explanation? I doubt it.

The truth is the skeptical will always find holes because holes or alternative possibilities have been designed into the prophecies to protect free will and autonomy. Yet here we have the very nature of Christs ministry as suffering servant being the biggest reminder possible of the dual fulfillment nature of prophecy, yet when I bring as a gift from the Holy Spirit, the news and eschatological explanation of a dual fulfillment in our time, (which I am supposed to reveal to you in order to motivate you) to "prophesy again" the things so far revealed by this dual fulfillment which is (pollution, danger of nuclear proliferation and the mortal danger of celebrity worship in materialistically imbued 'consumer' societies). It is met with the same level of technical criticism that would also debunk just about all messianic prophecies.

We are also about to literally lose a third of the sea life due to pollution (Rev 8:9), just as an area roughly a third of the earth was affected by Chernobyl (Rev 8:11) and a third of all shipping was sunk during WW2 (Rev 8:9), something like 36000 from 105000 merchant shipping and during that war in Europe (the great mountain cast into the sea burning on fire), Nazi Germany (Rev 8:8).

So all this talk about prophecies being obvious in hindsight is nonsense. The reason the Jews look at messianic prophecies today and see something else is because they do not have the Holy Spirit telling them. The reason Christians without the Holy Spirit (i.e who have not requested angelic help) or asked for the Holy Spirt (luke 11:13), the reason they see Jesus is mainly cultural prejudice and bias, they are deluded to think they will ever be able to present a perfect prophetical fulfillment as irrefutable evidence.

I know that many Christadelphians believe the 1948 rebirth and subsequent events are the prophetic smoking gun, and it is certainly powerful testimony thatb history and so the Bible repeats and if I was an atheist I would be forced to acknowledge the wisdom of the Bible writers in knowing this, but it can never be the smoking gun whether it is right or wrong because there is another way of interpreting the prophecies of Israel in a method that can be demonstrated elsewhere.

Likewise, I believe their is a dual fulfillment of Rev 13 in which global consumerism/capitalism is seen as the prevailing obstacle and system of things prior to the Second Coming that are to be abolished for literally destroying the earth.

The fact we now have a global code or mark on everything we buy and sell which has been their for decades, right under our noses, identifying the final opposition at Christs coming as consumerism and the love of it the road to destruction. In which the creator of the Universal Product Code admits he used the two lines that correspond to a left number 6, for the three guard bars (the only part of the UPC that remains the same on every barcode world-wide). Even an atheist debater of high repute that I used to debate with could not believe this was coincidence. Why pick the two lines that correspond to a 6 for the guard bars? why not a 2,or a 5? and why 3 guard bars? He reasoned the UPC designer must have done it as a joke, until I showed him claims the designer was not conscious of intentionally doing so and it has been a PR disaster,the Russian Church lobbied government to prevent its use. But if a Christadelphian cannot accept this spectacular dual fulfillment they would say something like 'aha, but the computer does not read the guard bars as sixes', but how does that debunk the fact to the human eye the two lines, the weight and space apart correspond exactly to the left number 6 and the UPC designer admits this?

No one can prove prophecy to any other human unless both parties have the Holy Spirit, not even in hindsight. If this was not so then all these big gun prophecies like Deuteronomy 28-32, Jeremiah 30:11; Ezekiel 6:8 would convert atheists but they rarely do, because they are intentionally vague just enough to give them a get out of believing clause, they are not quite smoking guns - and it has to be that way.

The bottomline is we have to pray and ask for help to understand or even see the deep important spiritual things and I think my examples prove it.

There are a number of other examples. And yes, the odds of this happening by chance were remote.


That is the get out clause for atheists, your word 'remote'. You can make a case for likely probability that is very persuasive but others will see it in a different way. It is the HS that imbues prophetic certainty.

Edited by Mercia2, 16 July 2011 - 03:49 AM.

"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” = "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" = "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who maketh His angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire" Psalms (104:1) = "They saw what seemed to be flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Acts 2 - the secret is over, your ministering angel you need to be saved is the Holy Spirit.

Who Is the Holy Spirit?
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20950-holy-spirit-mercia/

Mark Of The Beast - his Name is the charachter/image of the medievil popes (now modern man)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/4997-mark-of-the-beast/page__pid__439951__st__120#entry439951

Historicists - Dual Fulfillment (seven thunders = more literal warning)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/14248-historicists-revelation-has-a-dual-fulfillment/

#7 Huldah

Huldah

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,590 posts
  • LocationPleasantville

Posted 16 July 2011 - 05:12 AM

OK Mercia, I'll bite.

I know someone who says that he has the Holy Spirit, and that his Holy Spirit is Jesus, not an angel. He doesn't believe that Jesus is physically coming back to the earth - he says it is all spiritual.

Who do I believe, you or him? You each claim to have the Holy Spirit, and that God's word can't be understood without it. You both understand God's word *very* differently.
"But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life." John 4.14

#8 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,173 posts
  • LocationCoventry

Posted 16 July 2011 - 07:33 AM

OK Mercia, I'll bite.

I know someone who says that he has the Holy Spirit, and that his Holy Spirit is Jesus, not an angel. He doesn't believe that Jesus is physically coming back to the earth - he says it is all spiritual.

Who do I believe, you or him? You each claim to have the Holy Spirit, and that God's word can't be understood without it. You both understand God's word *very* differently.


I am happy to answer that and of course it is very easy to answer, but I would first just point out that all my other points would need to be addressed because they by themselves prove this POV. Those points include the fact prophecy is intentionally unspecific and that it would have been practically impossible in OT times to work out the intentional contradictions in the outcomes of the prophecies concerning Christ ministries pointed to a dual fulfilment/second coming without the Holy Spirit. I feel your position is far more incredulous than mine unless you can tackle that.

Now for your question, you can see how it works from the example of the prince of Persia in Daniel, the prince of Persia like everyone else has his own will and ideas and beliefs, if he resists the Holy Spirit/an (angels influence in trying to impress thoughts and ideas in his mind) then he will still persist in the ideas he already had. Your POV seems to be rather extremist, you are claiming that having the H/S = infallibility in ideas and beliefs, I know not even Christadelphians who accept the apostles as having the H/S believe that. So you cannot say that because someone 'has the Holy Spirit' that this means their ideas are infallible. First of all you would have to work out who has really repented of their sins and asked for the Holy Spirit, because if they do so in an environment in which everyone was doing the same (i.e middle America), then it is likely to be false, socially imbued or in the former Presidents case probably political. As you know I had zero born again influences, I just did what the Bible told me to do in utter sincerity and most importantly, alone.

Ok, so we have just had this discussion on here about VPI and the apostle Paul, clearly Paul is injecting some of his own ideas in to the text as Fortigurn will tell you, but Fortigurn will also not deny he had the Holy Spirit, at least at times. So your appeal or this rather extremist Christadelphians appeal to some sort of born again infallibility is clearly nonsense and a straw man, the truth as always is far more subtle and sophisticated than that.

Let me give you an example. If you are alone and you pray to God before a devotional Bible study "please God guide me and help me understand the deep spiritual things of your Word as I study" and then allow yourself to be influences with subtle impressions upon your mind as you study (i.e if your prayer is answered), who do you suppose is answering your prayer? Obviously God, but how? What is the power of God? As you know the Holy Spirit which is a generic term for the Church in heaven/the great company of angels, which boils down to what the Bible calls your ministering angel, the one the Bible says everyone must have who is saved.

I will tell you now Huldah, if you never pray like that and mean it before you study the Bible because you are swallowed up with the idea (that goes with intellectual pride and ego), that you can work out all these things yourself then there will be no way God will allow you to see what I see when studying the Bible. You know this deep down. You are all just stubborn, like the Pharisee. Everyone is, but you will remember this and what I have said at a pivotal moment of your life, in private, and give in - and be saved.

As for the idea that Born Again Christians have, like I say I would first need to know if his repentance was sincere and in private before God before I took him or his views seriously, but as far as I can tell, the few born again Christians I have met we do all pretty much seem to believe on large part the same things but sometimes have different ways of expressing it. Also, born again Christians are usually very careful in referring to the God concept as the Bible teaches yet our use of language is likely to confuse literalists like Christadelphians. For example, I will talk of Jesus as God in the context the Bible intends (character/purpose and post his death, power), but that does not literally mean I believe Jesus is God, neither does the Bible in that sense, yet in the more important sense it does (same way it speaks of angels as God). Now Christadelphians know this but will almost fight it, born again Christians like me will not fight it but follow this narrative even if it confuses literalists and Christadelphians at times. So while it is fair to say that the Holy Spirit is Jesus in the sense that our ministering angels are from His spiritual body and speak in His Name and perhaps the initial visitation is from Jesus and then your ministering angel takes over (I do not know for sure but I have had those exact beliefs quite recently), I have also come to believe that the second coming almost certainly is spiritual or at the very least is spiritual in its important sense and happens now in everyone life (should they repent and ask for the Holy Spirit), but their is still a small possibility is could ALSO be literal, but I doubt it.

Like I say, 9 times out of 10 our beliefs are almost the same, I have noticed on the few occasions I have met another BAC, but even when not, as you know that proves nothing and any claim that it does prove something absolute is just pure extremism, on your part. You would have to present me with thousands of case studies of beliefs that I could examine not just refer to one or two who claim to be BAC that you know, and even if this could be done you are hardly going to persuade me who has experienced what happened the moment I repented in private and asked for the Holy Spirit and therefore knows for a fact He came, whether He abided or not I cannot say for sure, but I know He came not for me, but mainly for you and what I am now telling you and have said before.
"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” = "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" = "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who maketh His angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire" Psalms (104:1) = "They saw what seemed to be flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Acts 2 - the secret is over, your ministering angel you need to be saved is the Holy Spirit.

Who Is the Holy Spirit?
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20950-holy-spirit-mercia/

Mark Of The Beast - his Name is the charachter/image of the medievil popes (now modern man)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/4997-mark-of-the-beast/page__pid__439951__st__120#entry439951

Historicists - Dual Fulfillment (seven thunders = more literal warning)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/14248-historicists-revelation-has-a-dual-fulfillment/

#9 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,173 posts
  • LocationCoventry

Posted 16 July 2011 - 07:50 AM

You both understand God's word *very* differently.

That is very untrue.

I think that those who do have the Holy Spirit as to wisdom and understanding (and no one has it any more for miracles or witnessing gifts) are probably only given insight in a specific context related to their mission or ministry. I would have to admit that I have never prayed "please teach me whether Jesus is God or not", because it is almost too personal for me to ask something so personal and private to God and I feel it is too presumptuous of me to do so. So all I can say is that from my studies of the Scripture it appears that the Holy Spirit (can be the raised again Jesus or can be any angel), as Gods Name is in them, but I would have to be honest and say that if Jesus is literally God and if this is a mystery that can only be revealed by the Holy Spirit, then it has not been revealed as such to me. Although clearly we are either being taught to perceive in a certain way or it is indeed some sort of mystery only the Holy Spirit can reveal because anyone claiming trinitarians are not pointing toward something are deluding themselves. That is why I say I believe in a tri-unity of purpose, intent and character but not a trinity in the Christendom sense. Evangelion has spent a lifetime on this subject and I do believe if he prayed about it he would be answered for that reason. My mission and ministry is not the same so I would more likely to have prayers answered/holy spirit inspiration on matters related to my specific calling.

The fact I have no special insight into this matter by no means rules out the possibility that my current POV could be wrong and if you are all honest you would have to admit the same as me. Especially as it is not something I have specifically prayed about and it would make sense that something so monumental as the nature of God may indeed only be revealed by revelation. We all have to admit that may indeed be the case, it may not as well.

Edited by Mercia2, 16 July 2011 - 12:53 PM.

"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” = "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" = "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who maketh His angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire" Psalms (104:1) = "They saw what seemed to be flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Acts 2 - the secret is over, your ministering angel you need to be saved is the Holy Spirit.

Who Is the Holy Spirit?
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20950-holy-spirit-mercia/

Mark Of The Beast - his Name is the charachter/image of the medievil popes (now modern man)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/4997-mark-of-the-beast/page__pid__439951__st__120#entry439951

Historicists - Dual Fulfillment (seven thunders = more literal warning)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/14248-historicists-revelation-has-a-dual-fulfillment/

#10 luke

luke

    Mu

  • Christadelphian
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,025 posts

Posted 16 July 2011 - 01:03 PM

What are the apologetics strategies and arguments that make you shudder with contact embarrassment? Of the top of my head, these would be:

* The Liar, Lunatic or Lord trilemma: popularised by CS Lewis who argued:

"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. ... Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God.

I am not fond of this one as it is a false dilemma - there may be other options such as the Gospel accounts do not accurately report his life. I don't hold to that argument, but one needs to employ arguments that hold up to critical examination, and the Trilemma no longer cuts it for me as it is logically weak.

It goes some of the way to being useful, though. It's not a total write off; just needs some tweaking, right? I think Timothy Keller (although I might be confused) in The Reason for God adds the bit in bold to C. S. Lewis' initial idea.

#11 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,173 posts
  • LocationCoventry

Posted 16 July 2011 - 01:19 PM

Ok Huldah said:

I know someone who says that he has the Holy Spirit, and that his Holy Spirit is Jesus, not an angel. He doesn't believe that Jesus is physically coming back to the earth - he says it is all spiritual.

Who do I believe, you or him? You each claim to have the Holy Spirit, and that God's word can't be understood without it. You both understand God's word *very* differently.


Here Huldah, I just found this for you from the other board.
On April 4th 2011, moved by the Holy Spirit (probably) I said this,..

So they are the same in the context spoken and Jesus said to them that they would witness His coming in their lifetimes i.e when they asked for the Holy Spirit and were born again.
http://www.thechrist...showtopic=16060


On the same day I said this..

Two conclusions, most of which organised religion have been skillfully persuaded to ignore.
1. you confess your sins to Jesus, which means addressing Him in that context
2. the Holy Spirit is Jesus which is why He said the Holy Spirit could not come until He had gone/died, or rather THE Holy Spirit is Jesus as He is now the holiest of the spirits/angelike beings, although their are many Holy spirits.
http://www.thechrist...showtopic=16060


It is remarkable how identical they actually are.
So as with previous wildly incorrect CD assumptions, far from being 'very different' they appear in fact almost identical.

I think by force of repetition and CD appeals' to ridiculous extremes, you and all CDs are being prevented salvation by whoever is repeating to you this assumption you expressed above. i.e that true born again Christians have 'very different views'. Why let them drag you to the grave with them based on something demonstrably untrue?

Also, I have zero influence from BACs, apart from God my only influence is infact CDs, I never even read their forums, that way God can work through me as I am unpolluted.

I think many years ago, refusing to define my beliefs in terms of man made words, Fortigurn said my view was 'modalist'or modalism. Tonight, prompted by your ideas I googled 'what do most born again Christians believe' and the answer I got was most are modalist. Although even the defined belief of modalism is not exactly what we believe but is probably closest.

It is so sad that all so called 'Bible based' religions actually refuse to do what it tells them to do, Luke 11:13, Rev 3:20. I believe this is what the NT defines as cowardice, scared to lose their free will and receive absolute personal proof. It would be better if you all were honest enough to admit that than mock it. Maybe you will all still be saved and I am the one who will now be judged the harshest as to me absolute proof was given? Perhaps I am already quickened and will not be judged, just the unreformed. Rev 3:20 is telling those who are already Christians to ask (Luke 11:13) in order to be saved, it seems.


.

Edited by Mercia2, 16 July 2011 - 02:01 PM.

"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” = "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" = "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who maketh His angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire" Psalms (104:1) = "They saw what seemed to be flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Acts 2 - the secret is over, your ministering angel you need to be saved is the Holy Spirit.

Who Is the Holy Spirit?
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20950-holy-spirit-mercia/

Mark Of The Beast - his Name is the charachter/image of the medievil popes (now modern man)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/4997-mark-of-the-beast/page__pid__439951__st__120#entry439951

Historicists - Dual Fulfillment (seven thunders = more literal warning)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/14248-historicists-revelation-has-a-dual-fulfillment/

#12 Huldah

Huldah

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,590 posts
  • LocationPleasantville

Posted 17 July 2011 - 04:31 AM

Thank you for expanding Mercia. You are more similar in belief to this other person - who is an ex-christadelphian - than I initially thought, so perhaps you are both right and we are all wrong. ;)

I will tell you now Huldah, if you never pray like that and mean it before you study the Bible because you are swallowed up with the idea (that goes with intellectual pride and ego), that you can work out all these things yourself then there will be no way God will allow you to see what I see when studying the Bible. You know this deep down. You are all just stubborn, like the Pharisee. Everyone is, but you will remember this and what I have said at a pivotal moment of your life, in private, and give in - and be saved.


You don't know my heart so don't assume how I go about studying the Bible. I have known lots of people who claim to be born again, some who have treated me very badly whilst simultaneously painting me as the Pharisee. Why do people love to paint the "others" as the Pharisees? It is so tiresome. The Pharisees didn't accept Jesus in any way shape or form as the messiah.

It is so sad that all so called 'Bible based' religions actually refuse to do what it tells them to do, Luke 11:13, Rev 3:20.

That's because they read their Bibles and trust that the words mean what the words say - are they supposed to get God to tell them that the words mean something else that the words don't usually mean? In Luke 11, Jesus is addressing his disciples. The parallel account in Matthew has Jesus addressing the multitudes, but there is nothing about them receiving the Holy Spirit, just "good things". Why the difference? The Revelation quote is specific to a particular church. I'm not sure why advocates of the Sinners Prayer always use that one.

Edited by Huldah, 17 July 2011 - 04:37 AM.

"But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life." John 4.14

#13 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,173 posts
  • LocationCoventry

Posted 17 July 2011 - 01:10 PM

You don't know my heart so don't assume how I go about studying the Bible

Sorry, it was meant generally. From what I know you are a wonderful person.

I have known lots of people who claim to be born again, some who have treated me very badly whilst simultaneously painting me as the Pharisee. Why do people love to paint the "others" as the Pharisees? It is so tiresome. The Pharisees didn't accept Jesus in any way shape or form as the messiah.

I meant the stubborn Pharaoh not Pharisee, sorry my mistake. I never call Christadelphians typological Pharisees, thats the RCC, maybe more typological Sadducee but really you are very close to being perfect BACs, far far closer than those two typological examples and God knows it.

You have all already done the hard bit and become Bible experts, now just that one last step. I feel you are all destined to be saints. God does not forget those devoted to studying his Word and sends you signs in the form of people, like me.

Bible study before repentance and asking for the Holy Spirit is the one prerequisite to asking after sincere personal repentance and so very few deserve it more than the Christadelphians. Well God has seen this and is trying to do something about it.

What I was trying to say was at some point in our lives we are all the stubborn Pharaoh (not Pharisee) - the Pharaoh would not let go of His will, that story relates to every human that goes through this process of giving into God.

That's because they read their Bibles and trust that the words mean what the words say

The Bible says Spirit witnessing gifts have ceased not the Holy Spirit has ceased, the Holy Spirit is not equal to 'witnessing gifts'. So on this devastatingly obvious error, almost the entire CD idea that the Holy Spirit has ceased (not just an aspect of an effect of the Holy Spirit), but the "Holy Spirit", the full implications of this they have obviously not thought through.

As we can see from the Bible the Holy Spirit is a generic personification of any holy angel/spirit with Jesus 'the' holiest. We are also told in the Bible the Holy Spirit is Gods power to work His will in the world and we are told the angels are Gods power to do the same, with of course Jesus the most powerful and most Holy Spirit, (so we are obviously talking about the same), i.e angels holy spirits, Christ = THE Holy Spirit or holiest spirit.

So you have to have the Holy Spirit to be saved and the book of Hebrews says everyone who is saved has their own ministering spirit/angel. So you need two spirits/angels to be saved? The Holy Spirit and your ministering Spirit? No obviously your ministering angel is your Holy Spirit of course. So how are prayers answered? By Gods power and what is Gods power? His angels. So Christadelphian theology is saying here that it is no longer possible to have prayers answered and angels have withdrawn completely? Pretty much all based on a colossal extrapolation and logic leap in 1Corinthians 13:10, seemingly in an unintellectually dishonest way to get out of doing what is then said in Luke 11:13?

The full context of 1 Corin 13 which I love and recently chose as a reading in church, is that we still "prophecy in part", which is what I was saying in my last posts, we are inspired in part related to our calling. Also, this has to mean in this present time because the last verse says "And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is love" and this is describing our current state today, so this idea that this verse refers to the Bible "But when that which is perfect is come , then that which is in part shall be done away" cannot mean the formation of the Bible, Ken and Fortigurn will tell you its not perfect for a start, infact we all know its not perfect in its translated form.

are they supposed to get God to tell them that the words mean something else that the words don't usually mean?


You must be born again, see what I mean? How can a man climb back in his mothers womb? The Bible is written like this Huldah. As long as you remember the rule is - what is natural is used as a symbol for whatever it spiritually corrosponds with.

The parallel account in Matthew has Jesus addressing the multitudes, but there is nothing about them receiving the Holy Spirit, just "good things". Why the difference. The Revelation quote is specific to a particular church. I'm not sure why advocates of the Sinners Prayer always use that one

You do not trust Lukes Gospel? What Jesus says to that church (and all of them) to do is repent and ask/knock and He will come to them. Have you ever wondered why Jesus is telling those who re already in organised religions to repent and ask? We cannot change the context to say that verse is no longer talking to them/Christians.

Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent. 20 Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me.


"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” = "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" = "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who maketh His angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire" Psalms (104:1) = "They saw what seemed to be flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Acts 2 - the secret is over, your ministering angel you need to be saved is the Holy Spirit.

Who Is the Holy Spirit?
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20950-holy-spirit-mercia/

Mark Of The Beast - his Name is the charachter/image of the medievil popes (now modern man)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/4997-mark-of-the-beast/page__pid__439951__st__120#entry439951

Historicists - Dual Fulfillment (seven thunders = more literal warning)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/14248-historicists-revelation-has-a-dual-fulfillment/

#14 Huldah

Huldah

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,590 posts
  • LocationPleasantville

Posted 17 July 2011 - 09:37 PM

Yes, the version of cessationism as popularly understood by CDia isn't quite right, I know that.

are they supposed to get God to tell them that the words mean something else that the words don't usually mean?


You must be born again, see what I mean? How can a man climb back in his mothers womb? The Bible is written like this Huldah. As long as you remember the rule is - what is natural is used as a symbol for whatever it spiritually corrosponds with.

Yes, but that is explained in the Bible. In fact a lot of things which aren't initially clear at the start of a passage are explained later in the passage. Am I supposed to get God to tell me that the words[of the explanation] mean something else that the words don't usually mean?

The parallel account in Matthew has Jesus addressing the multitudes, but there is nothing about them receiving the Holy Spirit, just "good things". Why the difference. The Revelation quote is specific to a particular church. I'm not sure why advocates of the Sinners Prayer always use that one

You do not trust Lukes Gospel? What Jesus says to that church (and all of them) to do is repent and ask/knock and He will come to them. Have you ever wondered why Jesus is telling those who re already in organised religions to repent and ask? We cannot change the context to say that verse is no longer talking to them/Christians.

Not sure how you have extrapolated me not trusting Luke's gospel from that. I am saying that *in* Luke's gospel, Jesus says this to the 12 - the disciples, later the apostles. Therefore, you shouldn't be surprised that the parallel account in Matthew doesn't mention the Holy Spirit because Jesus is talking to everyone there.
"But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life." John 4.14

#15 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,173 posts
  • LocationCoventry

Posted 18 July 2011 - 10:30 AM

Yes, the version of cessationism as popularly understood by CDia isn't quite right, I know that.

No, it is wrong exactly in the context I have described it.

So who is going to sort it out then? The potential salvation of 100.000 people is at stake. If this was a business their would be a team delegated to the task.

Am I supposed to get God to tell me that the words[of the explanation] mean something else that the words don't usually mean?


Can you give me an example of the Scripture you are referring to when you say this? Because it is not what I believe.

Not sure how you have extrapolated me not trusting Luke's gospel from that. I am saying that *in* Luke's gospel, Jesus says this to the 12 - the disciples, later the apostles. Therefore, you shouldn't be surprised that the parallel account in Matthew doesn't mention the Holy Spirit because Jesus is talking to everyone there.


Well Jesus could not have told them to ask for the Holy Spirit at that time as He was still their, infront of them infact. As you know it does not work like that, one Gospel adds information for us and another adds a bit more, we do not need two or three or four to repeat the same thing before we act on it?
"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” = "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" = "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who maketh His angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire" Psalms (104:1) = "They saw what seemed to be flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Acts 2 - the secret is over, your ministering angel you need to be saved is the Holy Spirit.

Who Is the Holy Spirit?
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20950-holy-spirit-mercia/

Mark Of The Beast - his Name is the charachter/image of the medievil popes (now modern man)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/4997-mark-of-the-beast/page__pid__439951__st__120#entry439951

Historicists - Dual Fulfillment (seven thunders = more literal warning)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/14248-historicists-revelation-has-a-dual-fulfillment/

#16 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,173 posts
  • LocationCoventry

Posted 18 July 2011 - 10:45 AM

I get the impression you think asking (Luke 11:13) is optional? Maybe it is, but that is a big risk to take is'nt it?
It only takes a minute.
"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” = "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" = "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who maketh His angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire" Psalms (104:1) = "They saw what seemed to be flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Acts 2 - the secret is over, your ministering angel you need to be saved is the Holy Spirit.

Who Is the Holy Spirit?
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20950-holy-spirit-mercia/

Mark Of The Beast - his Name is the charachter/image of the medievil popes (now modern man)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/4997-mark-of-the-beast/page__pid__439951__st__120#entry439951

Historicists - Dual Fulfillment (seven thunders = more literal warning)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/14248-historicists-revelation-has-a-dual-fulfillment/

#17 Richard

Richard

    Omicron

  • Christadelphian
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6,197 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 11:17 AM

Basing a doctrine and the salvic health of 100,000 people on one single verse, and your own interpretation of that verse, is foolish.

#18 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,173 posts
  • LocationCoventry

Posted 18 July 2011 - 02:45 PM

Basing a doctrine and the salvic health of 100,000 people on one single verse, and your own interpretation of that verse, is foolish.


Where did I say it was on one verse? What basis do you claim the right to ignore it? What is this other inteprretation to the word "ask" that you are implying by claiming the verse is open to interpretations?

That is 3 questions to answer Richard, along with these previous ones no one can answer...

I agree with Ken, Jesus had to show He was Israel at the start of His ministry to fulfill the prophecies in Isaiah that the Jews still interpret as Israel.

As an atheist that would seem cleverly contrived. To me it teaches that probably all prophecies everywhere have dual fulfillment (God has to be consistent or He leaves us blind).

It also teaches me that the revelation is unfolding from OT to NT because and you ad no chance of interpreting the first and second coming, apart from the OT personifying nations as men, you or I would have had almost zero chance of persuading any one that they were also prophecies about Jesus. That is why it says you have to have the Holy Spirit to (correctly) interpret prophecy - because unless an angel told you that a prophecy in Isaiah about Israel that reads like a prophecy about Israel was actually a dual fulfillment prophecy about Jesus, you would have no evidence to persuade anyone prior to its fulfillment, it ONLY works in hindsight.

It then becomes blatantly obvious to any honest minded person that the Jews are being punished/mocked for not recognizing the context and plan of their Christs ministry including two comings/dual fulfillment when they had zero chance of it on any intellectual/eschatology level, but ONLY if they had the Holy Spirit - Can everyone not PLAINLY see this is self evident? ...and just to boil that down to what it actually means in pain language, it means that if you lived in OT times you had practically zero chance of recognizing a prophecy about Israel as a prophecy about Jesus or that Messianic prophecies contradicting meant dual fulfillment unless an angel/your ministering angel either tells you or impresses this on your mind as you read the verse. No other way.
It is important we are honest with ourselves about that

So typological prophecies only look convincing in hindsight and never before the event UNLESS you have the Holy Spirit/your ministering spirit actually tell you. I have said it before and I will say it again - can anyone say in all honesty they think they could have predicted Christs ministry as suffering servant when so many allude to conquering hero? Which is nationalistically desirable to believe? Yet if I said in OT times to you lot also in OT times, 'look fellas! the messiah must come twice as its the only way to explain why some prophecies see Him as triumphant King and others as downtrodden and despised' - would you have taken me that seriously? At best you would have thought it one of many interesting theories, but unlikely, or think it pure speculation? That is my point - you have to have the Holy Spirit to fully understand the Bible.

So no one is ever going to find a prophetic smoking gun because every prophecy is (intentionally) vague and on top of that often has multiple fulfillments.

The reason Ken is right and these apologists claiming proof from prophecy are wrong, is obvious - Unambiguous and undeniable prophetic fulfillment that atheists could not deny would go too far toward destroying free will and autonomy. So the prophecies in the Bible must also give some room for doubt, there is no other way if you think about it.

For example, I believe my ministering angel/Holy Spirit has shown me that the seven thunders in Rev 10:3 are seven additional prophecies that we are to "prophesy again" Rev 10:11 after trumpet 6 was fulfilled in Historicist understanding - and that this is why the seven additional thunders/prophecies are delivered (after) trumpet 6 but (before) trumpet 7 which is the consummation of things. So they are now being fulfilled in our time and as John in Rev 10 was told not to write them down Rev 10:4, so they must already be written down or whats the point of even mentioning John is told them! The symbols and Johns actions of going to write them down PROVES they are seven additional prophecies. So seven of the prophecies John had already written down in the Revelation therefore have a dual fulfillment in our time. The fact there are seven links it back to a dual application of 6 trumpet prophecies and Revelation 13, as they are delivered before trumpet 7 is fulfilled.

I have attempted to persuade Christadelphians of some of this, such as mans worst ever (man made) disaster, Chernobyl as Wormwood, which a stand at the Chernobyl museum confirms. So it was a star (nuclear reactor) that literally killed many because of the waters (it rained heavily for 3 weeks over europe), Rev 8:10-11. But while the translation cannot be denied anymore, someone would say something like 'aha, yes a star is nuclear but it's fusion not fission' and therefore consider the prophecy debunked.
Yet is their a better natural symbol found in the Bible that God could have used to specifically identify fission from fusion? Obviously not, but a star/sun is still a nuclear reactor.

Now imagine you are in OT times and you had this wacky idea that the prophecies that spoke of the Messiah contradicted as to whether He would be mighty King or suffering servant for a reason, INTENTIONALLY because it was a dual fulfillment (a classic example of an intentional paradox to force a spiritual interpretation) So would you really expect anyone to buy that idea as most likely explanation? I doubt it.

The truth is the skeptical will always find holes because holes or alternative possibilities have been designed into the prophecies to protect free will and autonomy. Yet here we have the very nature of Christs ministry as suffering servant being the biggest reminder possible of the dual fulfillment nature of prophecy, yet when I bring as a gift from the Holy Spirit, the news and eschatological explanation of a dual fulfillment in our time, (which I am supposed to reveal to you in order to motivate you) to "prophesy again" the things so far revealed by this dual fulfillment which is (pollution, danger of nuclear proliferation and the mortal danger of celebrity worship in materialistically imbued 'consumer' societies). It is met with the same level of technical criticism that would also debunk just about all messianic prophecies.

We are also about to literally lose a third of the sea life due to pollution (Rev 8:9), just as an area roughly a third of the earth was affected by Chernobyl (Rev 8:11) and a third of all shipping was sunk during WW2 (Rev 8:9), something like 36000 from 105000 merchant shipping and during that war in Europe (the great mountain cast into the sea burning on fire), Nazi Germany (Rev 8:8).

So all this talk about prophecies being obvious in hindsight is nonsense. The reason the Jews look at messianic prophecies today and see something else is because they do not have the Holy Spirit telling them. The reason Christians without the Holy Spirit (i.e who have not requested angelic help) or asked for the Holy Spirt (luke 11:13), the reason they see Jesus is mainly cultural prejudice and bias, they are deluded to think they will ever be able to present a perfect prophetical fulfillment as irrefutable evidence.

I know that many Christadelphians believe the 1948 rebirth and subsequent events are the prophetic smoking gun, and it is certainly powerful testimony thatb history and so the Bible repeats and if I was an atheist I would be forced to acknowledge the wisdom of the Bible writers in knowing this, but it can never be the smoking gun whether it is right or wrong because there is another way of interpreting the prophecies of Israel in a method that can be demonstrated elsewhere.

Likewise, I believe their is a dual fulfillment of Rev 13 in which global consumerism/capitalism is seen as the prevailing obstacle and system of things prior to the Second Coming that are to be abolished for literally destroying the earth.

The fact we now have a global code or mark on everything we buy and sell which has been their for decades, right under our noses, identifying the final opposition at Christs coming as consumerism and the love of it the road to destruction. In which the creator of the Universal Product Code admits he used the two lines that correspond to a left number 6, for the three guard bars (the only part of the UPC that remains the same on every barcode world-wide). Even an atheist debater of high repute that I used to debate with could not believe this was coincidence. Why pick the two lines that correspond to a 6 for the guard bars? why not a 2,or a 5? and why 3 guard bars? He reasoned the UPC designer must have done it as a joke, until I showed him claims the designer was not conscious of intentionally doing so and it has been a PR disaster,the Russian Church lobbied government to prevent its use. But if a Christadelphian cannot accept this spectacular dual fulfillment they would say something like 'aha, but the computer does not read the guard bars as sixes', but how does that debunk the fact to the human eye the two lines, the weight and space apart correspond exactly to the left number 6 and the UPC designer admits this?

No one can prove prophecy to any other human unless both parties have the Holy Spirit, not even in hindsight. If this was not so then all these big gun prophecies like Deuteronomy 28-32, Jeremiah 30:11; Ezekiel 6:8 would convert atheists but they rarely do, because they are intentionally vague just enough to give them a get out of believing clause, they are not quite smoking guns - and it has to be that way.

The bottomline is we have to pray and ask for help to understand or even see the deep important spiritual things and I think my examples prove it.

There are a number of other examples. And yes, the odds of this happening by chance were remote.


That is the get out clause for atheists, your word 'remote'. You can make a case for likely probability that is very persuasive but others will see it in a different way. It is the HS that imbues prophetic certainty.


The fourth question for you to answer which is detailed above, is do you think that you, (if you lived in OT times as a Jew) and regularly studied the Scripture, could you or would you have believed the Messiah would be both despised, rejected and killed, as well as be mighty conquering king by proclaiming a first and second coming/dual fulfillment?
"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” = "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" = "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who maketh His angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire" Psalms (104:1) = "They saw what seemed to be flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Acts 2 - the secret is over, your ministering angel you need to be saved is the Holy Spirit.

Who Is the Holy Spirit?
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20950-holy-spirit-mercia/

Mark Of The Beast - his Name is the charachter/image of the medievil popes (now modern man)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/4997-mark-of-the-beast/page__pid__439951__st__120#entry439951

Historicists - Dual Fulfillment (seven thunders = more literal warning)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/14248-historicists-revelation-has-a-dual-fulfillment/

#19 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,173 posts
  • LocationCoventry

Posted 18 July 2011 - 05:29 PM

Am I supposed to get God to tell me that the words[of the explanation] mean something else that the words don't usually mean?


Huldah, I do not believe that, its another straw man argument a few Christadelphians have said to me over the years. i do not believe in a trinity, what are these things which say something other? Just look at the last post, a Christadelphian is attempting to say that Luke 11:13 is saying something other, but open to interpretation. I have even heard Christadelphians say that Jesus was talking to the Jews, or the apostles, it is not meant for us, which would mean the entire Gospel seeing He was talking to the Jews. It is not me who is trying to get the Bible to say something different is it. What did I previously say about the logic leap in 1 Corinthians 13 in which cessation of Spirit gifts ceasing becomes the Holy Spirit has ceased.

I will try and explain it better.
A good example are the Historicist prophecies identifying the pagan and papal Rome. The truth is their in a correct interpretation of the symbols, but you will not really believe it and see it within the Bible without the Holy Spirit, in the same way I am claiming that Jews prior to the first coming had zero chance of correctly interpreting Christ ministry by understanding the contradictory (intentional paradox) pointed to two different outcomes meaning it had to be dual fulfillment (two comings), unless by the Holy Spirit, why is it no one can be honest enough to admit that? Sure you could have a sort of hunch that maybe the prophecies of the messiah implied a dual fulfillment but you would not be as certain of it as I am the seven thunders for example, without the Holy Spirit impressing this within my mind during study, that is to say my ministering angel. Everything is according to the Bible but it is not possible to prove anything to another without the Holy Spirit in the same way it would have been impossible for me to say persuade cautious reductionists like Fortigurn, had we both lived in that time, that the prophecies of the coming of the messiah were an intentional paradox having different endings and so must mean a dual fulfillment/second coming. Would this idea of seriously impressed Fortigurn or most other conservative minded Christadelphians? Or anyone for that matter? Surely you can see what I am revealing here?

The way it works is you first have to read the entire Bible, then the Holy Spirit will literally inspire you in devotional study to see allegories and corrospondances and keys, these are not things that are not their in the Bible but they are not easily seen unless prompted by your ministering angel. You know this anyway you just want to hang on as bit longer which is fine. It is personal to you and none of my business.
"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” = "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" = "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who maketh His angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire" Psalms (104:1) = "They saw what seemed to be flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Acts 2 - the secret is over, your ministering angel you need to be saved is the Holy Spirit.

Who Is the Holy Spirit?
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20950-holy-spirit-mercia/

Mark Of The Beast - his Name is the charachter/image of the medievil popes (now modern man)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/4997-mark-of-the-beast/page__pid__439951__st__120#entry439951

Historicists - Dual Fulfillment (seven thunders = more literal warning)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/14248-historicists-revelation-has-a-dual-fulfillment/

#20 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,173 posts
  • LocationCoventry

Posted 18 July 2011 - 05:39 PM

Am I supposed to get God to tell me that the words[of the explanation] mean something else that the words don't usually mean?


Huldah, I do not believe that, its another straw man argument a few Christadelphians have said to me over the years. i do not believe in a trinity or what is not Biblical, what are these things which say something other? Just look at the last post, a Christadelphian is attempting to say that Luke 11:13 is saying something other. I have even heard Christadelphians say that Jesus was talking to the Jews, or the apostles, it is not meant for us, which would mean the entire Gospel was not meant for us seeing He was talking to someone else everywhere. It is not me who is trying to get the Bible to say something different is it. What did I previously say about the logic leap in 1 Corinthians 13 in which cessation of Spirit gifts ceasing becomes the Holy Spirit has ceased?

I will try and explain it better.
A good example are the Historicist prophecies identifying pagan and papal Rome. The truth is their in a correct interpretation of the symbols, but you will not really believe it and see it within the Bible without the Holy Spirit, in the same way I am claiming that Jews prior to the first coming had practically zero chance of correctly interpreting Christ ministry by understanding the contradictory (intentional paradox) in the two different outcomes of the messianic prophecies, meaning it had to be dual fulfillment (two comings), unless by the Holy Spirit.

Why is it no one can be honest enough to admit that? Sure you could have a sort of hunch that maybe the prophecies of the messiah implied a dual fulfillment but you would not be as certain of it as I am the seven thunders for example, without the Holy Spirit impressing this within my mind during study, that is to say my ministering angel.

Everything is according to the Bible but it is not possible to prove anything from the Bible to another without the Holy Spirit in the same way it would have been impossible for me to say persuade cautious reductionists like Fortigurn, had we both lived in that time prior to the first coming, that the prophecies of the coming of the messiah were an intentional paradox having different endings, therefore must mean a dual fulfillment/second coming. So the Jews were blind because they did not have the Holy Spirit. Would this idea of seriously impressed Fortigurn or most other conservative minded Christadelphians of a dual fulfillment of the messianic prophecies had I proposed that idea prior to Christs coming? Or anyone for that matter? Surely you can see what I am revealing here?

The way it works is you first have to read the entire Bible, then the Holy Spirit will literally inspire you in devotional study to see allegories and corrospondances and keys, these are not things that are not their in the Bible but they are not easily seen unless prompted by your ministering angel. You know this anyway you just want to hang on as bit longer which is fine. It is personal to you and none of my business.
"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” = "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" = "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who maketh His angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire" Psalms (104:1) = "They saw what seemed to be flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Acts 2 - the secret is over, your ministering angel you need to be saved is the Holy Spirit.

Who Is the Holy Spirit?
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20950-holy-spirit-mercia/

Mark Of The Beast - his Name is the charachter/image of the medievil popes (now modern man)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/4997-mark-of-the-beast/page__pid__439951__st__120#entry439951

Historicists - Dual Fulfillment (seven thunders = more literal warning)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/14248-historicists-revelation-has-a-dual-fulfillment/




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users