MadJW,
Maybe you and I should compare our libraries (soft and hard copy) to see whether your accusation is hot air that "most" scriptures are being ignored.
Doug
just about all of them; far too many to post!.
MadJW,
Maybe you and I should compare our libraries (soft and hard copy) to see whether your accusation is hot air that "most" scriptures are being ignored.
Doug
just about all of them; far too many to post!.
Actually, the WTS focuses on a very few "proof" texts. They touch on an infinitesimally small number of passages, and then never in depth. Usually the WTS writes a paragraph of its own ideas and then it pokes a verse reference at the end. More often than not, the reference is irrelevant. With this process, rather than providing a contextual exegesis, they start with a conclusion and then "provide" a support.
I have several books that do discuss every verse of Scripture, with each book providing hundreds of pages of indepth discussion and exposition.
The WTS books have a very narrow focus and they cover only very few subjects -- just those that are misinterpreted to keep the ruling autocrats in power.
Doug
i seem to have been causing some grief with my posts and threads.
humble apologies!.
i think it is mostly because i was using firefox and at times i was pasting from word.
transhuman68,
The simple answer is "no". These views are generally held by those known as Arminian, as against those who are Calvinist. I suggest a search of the www under those terms.
These Arminianist views are well promoted in the book, "Life in the Son", by Robert Shank.
Doug
i have been researching the "70 sevens" prophecy at daniel 9:24ff.. one topic relates to determining the date when daniel was written.
the www provides unnumerable hits on the subject.. i wondered if everyone who promotes the earlier 6th century bce date of composition interpret chapter 9 as referring to jesus christ.. i likewise i wondered whether everyone who promotes the later 164 bce date says chapter 9 refers to antiochus epiphanes.. is it possible that anyone who believes in the earlier date of the composition of daniel also believes that the writer was predicting the activities of antiochus epiphanes?.
doug.
I have been researching the "70 sevens" prophecy at Daniel 9:24ff.
One topic relates to determining the date when Daniel was written. The www provides unnumerable hits on the subject.
I wondered if everyone who promotes the earlier 6th Century BCE date of composition interpret Chapter 9 as referring to Jesus Christ.
I likewise I wondered whether everyone who promotes the later 164 BCE date says Chapter 9 refers to Antiochus Epiphanes.
Is it possible that anyone who believes in the earlier date of the composition of Daniel also believes that the writer was predicting the activities of Antiochus Epiphanes?
Doug
i seem to have been causing some grief with my posts and threads.
humble apologies!.
i think it is mostly because i was using firefox and at times i was pasting from word.
(Referring to the subject of "Eternal Life").
The passage you need, and it is my favourite, is 1 John 5:11-12:
"And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life." (NIV)
Notice that it is written in the present tense. When you read the context, including the first chapter, you see that Eternal Life resides innately within Jesus, and that a believer shares in that Life -- here and now. When a person stops believing in Jesus (ceases being a believer), they no longer share in that Life.
Eternal Life speaks of its qualities, not its length.
How do we know that we already have Eternal Life? Because God says so (see 1 John 5:10). It is not proven by emotion, or by feelings.
A most helpful reference is "Life in the Son", by Robert Shank, pages 301 to 305. Do you have accessto that book?
Doug
i seem to have been causing some grief with my posts and threads.
humble apologies!.
i think it is mostly because i was using firefox and at times i was pasting from word.
Hi,
I seem to have been causing some grief with my posts and threads. Humble apologies!
I think it is mostly because I was using Firefox and at times I was pasting from Word. Although, when I think about it, in this particular instance I did a copy and paste from a Pradis software accessing the NIV.
In particular, in the following Post (if all goes according to Plan A), I repeat the post that I made to the Thread on "Eternal Life", for which I am probably responsible giving it eternal death (using IE this time and typing directly).
Doug
i will go out on a limb and say that this has probably been discussed alot.
but for my own personal benefit i'd like to hear everyones "favorite" bible contradiction.
i'd also like to hear any refutes that anyone has to any of these contradictions.
It all relies on one's understanding of the Bible. It is a collection of books written over about 900 years by many people from divergent communities and edited by many during the ages. Each writer and editor had their eye focused on directly influencing their own immediate community.
When recording history, for example, their purpose was to use their interpretation of history to influence their community, rather than being concerned with literal accuracy. Their records were theological history.
The NT Gospels are not intended to be a literal documentary record. They were shaped by the objectives of the original authors, employing their own local cultural understandings, idioms, language, etc.
Since each group of writers had a different background and outlook, their records differ. Each group invented the birth and crucifixion stories in a way that suited the purpose of each community. None of them was there to provide an eyewitness account of either event. Similarly with the Temptation and with Christ's baptism.
Consider the arguments that Paul's philosophising had with with the Jewish Christians' legalistic requirements. Contrast Paul's view on the Law with "no joy or tittle will be removed from the Law".
There were several disconnected NT Christian groups, often at odds with one another. For several centuries, each held on to its preferred written records until the 4th century, when the state church accepted the list prepared by Athanasius. Given his preference for Paul's philosophising over James' and Peter's Jewish legalism, this influenced the dominating list of NT books. Learn the history.
The "generations" of Jesus as given are different because they are theological lists. Look at their structure.
Regarding a "virgin" mother, I suggest that when you read the second chapter that I have provided, that you remember the chronological sequence (Paul, then Mark, then Matthew, etc).
http://www.filesend.net/download.php?f=92180179253f98a4785829a3dc302e1b
Wait 25 seconds for the "Download" button to appear.
The reapplication of Isaiah's "maiden" of his own time into the "virgin" of the NT writers shows how they handled the Hebraic material.
We must not read the Bible through Western eyes of the 21st century. The words must be read through the eyes and ears of the culture that composed the text. It is not a technical, scientific, document but a record produced by many people. After all this, we should be amazed there is as much agreement between the books.
An interesting book might be: "The Unauthorized Version: Truth and Fiction in the Bible", by Robin Lane Fox.
Doug
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:donotshowrevisions /> <w:donotprintrevisions /> <w:donotshowmarkup /> <w:donotshowcomments /> <w:donotshowinsertionsanddeletions /> <w:donotshowpropertychanges /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-us</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp /> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables /> <w:dontvertalignintxbx /> <w:word11kerningpairs /> <w:cachedcolbalance /> </w:compatibility> <w:browserlevel>microsoftinternetexplorer4</w:browserlevel> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 10]> <mce:style><!
/* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"times new roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} [endif].
Hi Leo,
Thank you!
I look forward to your help --- which you give so freely.
Doug
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:donotshowrevisions /> <w:donotprintrevisions /> <w:donotshowmarkup /> <w:donotshowcomments /> <w:donotshowinsertionsanddeletions /> <w:donotshowpropertychanges /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-us</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp /> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables /> <w:dontvertalignintxbx /> <w:word11kerningpairs /> <w:cachedcolbalance /> </w:compatibility> <w:browserlevel>microsoftinternetexplorer4</w:browserlevel> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 10]> <mce:style><!
/* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"times new roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} [endif].
I am looking for help to locate three articles written by Roger T. Beckwith for the magazine Revue de Qumran in 1980 and 1981:
“The Significance of the Calendar for Interpreting Essene Chronology and Eschatology.” (Volume 10, No. 38, in May, 1980, pp. 167-202)
“The Earliest Enoch Literature and Its Calendar: Marks of their Origin, Date and Motivation.” (Volume 10, No. 39, February 1981, pp. 365-403)
“Daniel 9 and the Date of Messiah’s Coming in Essene, Hellenistic, Pharisaic, Zealot and Early Christian Computation.” (Volume 10, No. 40, December 1981, pp. 521-542).
Many thanks,
Doug
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:donotshowrevisions /> <w:donotprintrevisions /> <w:donotshowmarkup /> <w:donotshowcomments /> <w:donotshowinsertionsanddeletions /> <w:donotshowpropertychanges /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-us</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp /> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables /> <w:dontvertalignintxbx /> <w:word11kerningpairs /> <w:cachedcolbalance /> </w:compatibility> <w:browserlevel>microsoftinternetexplorer4</w:browserlevel> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 10]> <mce:style><!
/* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"times new roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} [endif].
A search of the www shows a long list of sites devoted to the “70 sevens” prophecy at Daniel 9. This prophecy is notable for the specific time periods, people and events it foretells.
Using a range of starting events and dates, most of these interpretations of the prophecy land on some event in the ministry of Jesus Christ and on his death. This interpretation is lauded by them as proof that Jesus Christ is the prophesied promised Messiah.
If the prophecy specifically points to Jesus Christ, why did no NT writer use Daniel 9 in this way? The NT writers were quite prepared to freely reapply so many other OT passages to Jesus, yet not one writer applied Daniel 9 to him. Why?
Hint #1. The apostle Paul, who died in 64 CE before the destruction of Jerusalem, at 2 Thessalonians 2 applied Daniel 9:26-27 (also 11:31, 45; 12:11) to events as imminent, but still future.
Hint #2. The Gospels were written after the Roman attacks on Jerusalem (66-70 CE). When they referred to the prophecy, with Matthew clarifying that Mark meant Daniel, they applied it to that the destruction of Jerusalem.
What does this tell us?
Doug