homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Special interest discussion   » Dead Horses   » All scripture is given by inspiration of God. (Page 4)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ...  15  16  17 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: All scripture is given by inspiration of God.
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hand-crafted? Ha ha ...

We're talking about predictive prophecy and all we're getting is predictive text ...

Blwyddyn Newydd Dda and God bless us every one!

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There might be something wrong with my predictive text, Jamat, but there's nothing wrong with my memory.

I was never convinced by Dispensationalism. I was not convinced by it when I encountered it among the Brethren. I'm not convinced by it now.

The way you argue for it here doesn't do anything to make me reconsider either. It simply reinforces my rejection of it as a dubious schema.

That doesn't mean I doubt the faith or integrity of those who hold to it.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
I think it is explicitly present

You cannot demonstrate that Isaiah was explicitly talking in terms of a virgin bearing a child unless you can demonstrate that 'almâ explicitly means virgin and not "young woman".

I do not believe this can be done.

Rather, I think your position is that since it is explicit in Luke that Mary is a virgin it must be implicit in Isaiah - and, more seriously, that translations should be tweaked accordingly to reflect, explicitly, that implication - regardless of whatever the original text actually says. This assault on the integrity of the work and ethics of translators is what has led me to keep asking the question you keep dodging (see again below).
quote:
and shown to be so in Luke 1
It is not "shown to be so in Luke 1". Luke 1 reports Mary as saying she is a virgin, but it does not say explicitly that Isaiah prophesied a virgin birth.
quote:
so it is, as you admit, in retrospect, a valid prophecy
What I will admit to beyond question is that the Gospel writer saw the nativity as a fulfilment of something Isaiah wrote. I'm unsure as to whether Isaiah actually foresaw this fulfilment of the prophecy and I'm sure he didn't predict a specifically virgin birth.
quote:
Anyhow, the bone has no meat left on it.
Yes it does. You still haven't answered the question.

I'm not asking you to admit Isaiah didn't prophesy a virgin birth. I'm asking you to imagine, for the sake of the argument, a scenario in which Isaiah didn't use the term for "virgin", but instead a less precise term, and tell us whether such a scenario would call into question the validity of his prophecy for you, and if so, why.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Eutychus: What I will admit to beyond question is that the Gospel writer saw the nativity as a fulfilment of something Isaiah wrote. I'm unsure as to whether Isaiah actually foresaw this fulfilment of the prophecy and I'm sure he didn't predict a specifically virgin birth
Which is what is important. Prophecy is actually only clear in retrospect and I think you are probably correct. Isaiah did not clearly grasp what Is 7 or 53 for that matter, was about. As Hebrews says, prophets struggled to understand what was signified by their revelation.

Gamaliel: you are determined to persevere with the labelling then? so be it. A true fundamentalist tends to behave quite differently. They tend to be very legalistic.

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
quote:
Eutychus: What I will admit to beyond question is that the Gospel writer saw the nativity as a fulfilment of something Isaiah wrote. I'm unsure as to whether Isaiah actually foresaw this fulfilment of the prophecy and I'm sure he didn't predict a specifically virgin birth
Which is what is important. Prophecy is actually only clear in retrospect and I think you are probably correct. Isaiah did not clearly grasp what Is 7 or 53 for that matter, was about.
Absolutely [Smile]
quote:
As Hebrews says, prophets struggled to understand what was signified by their revelation.
I believe you're actually referring to 1 Peter 1:10-12, but otherwise yes, absolutely again. However much they "saw", it was apparently, like us, "through a glass darkly".

[ 01. January 2018, 07:06: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Isaiah did not clearly grasp what Is 7 or 53 for that matter, was about.

I shoud perhaps explain that this is why I firmly believe we should not try and "improve" on what Isaiah wrote in our translations, even in the light of the fulfilment of prophecy reported by the Gospel writers.

The fact that the Gospels report that the Messiah was born of a virgin and that the Gospel writers saw this as a fulfilment of Isaiah 7:14 does not grant us a licence to retrospectively add that additional detail of virginity in our translations of the original prophecy if, as it seems we now agree, it goes beyond what the original text actually says.

As I see it, to do so constitutes a failure to treat Scripture with the respect it deserves, all the more so if we believe it to be inspired.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
RdrEmCofE
Shipmate
# 17511

 - Posted      Profile for RdrEmCofE   Author's homepage   Email RdrEmCofE   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
The fact that the Gospels report that the Messiah was born of a virgin and that the Gospel writers saw this as a fulfilment of Isaiah 7:14 does not grant us a licence to retrospectively add that additional detail of virginity in our translations of the original prophecy if, as it seems we now agree, it goes beyond what the original text actually says.

As I see it, to do so constitutes a failure to treat Scripture with the respect it deserves, all the more so if we believe it to be inspired.

Were the Christian Church to adopt such a responsibly theologically uninfluenced interpretation and translation of OT scripture with respect to NT material, it would probably also result in enhancing mutual respect and cooperation with Jewish scholarship and even helpfully narrow the gap between our respective theological differences.

Who knows?

[Shrugs shoulders, palms upward, in typically Yiddish gesture].

--------------------
Love covers many sins. 1 Pet.4:8. God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not holding their sins against them; 2 Cor.5:19

Posts: 255 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
As I have never met you in real life, Jamat, I can only write as I find from what I read in your posts.

From what I read I detect a particularly fundamentalist approach to the interpretation of scripture. That doesn't mean that you are 'legalistic' in your personal habits or treatment of other people.

Besides, getting into a debate about what constitutes a 'true fundamentalist' is a bit like the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy ...

If I've been ad hominem, then I apologise.

I will try to reserve my comments and labelling to your approach to scripture, not to you as a person.

[Hot and Hormonal]

I'm sure there are people out there are way, way, way more 'fundamentalist' or literalist than you are. For instance, people who wouldn't accept or acknowledge, as you have done, that Isaiah or Daniel weren't fully aware of how future generations would interpret their prophecies.

To listen to some folk you'd think they had some kind of sneak-preview of the entire sweep of human history from that point onwards!

Anyhow, be all that as it may, I still maintain that you adhere to a particularly 'fundamentalist' (for want of a better word) form of scriptural interpretation that 'demands' that some of these 'apocalyptic' writings and prophecies 'have' to have some kind of direct or literal future fulfilment otherwise the whole thing is compromised.

I don't see it that way.

Besides, it's not as if any of us are going to be able to verify whether or not this is the case unless we happen to be around when events uncannily similar to those 'foretold' or described in apocalyptic terms take place.

You've only got to look at how many interpretations there are of 'the abomination that causes desolation' to realise that these things aren't necessarily clear-cut.

I will take up your challenge on how we might understand and apply the verses you cite in Daniel 9.

I will start a new Kerygmania thread on that topic and invite other Shipmates to share their views. If I get any 'takers' then it will soon become readily apparent that there are a range of viewpoints available and that the issue isn't at all clear-cut in any neat, join-the-dots, Meccano-set sense.

I would argue that prophetic and apocalyptic texts don't 'work' in that kind of neat and linear fashion. That's not the point of them.

But I've said my piece on that elsewhere.

In the meantime, craving everyone's indulgence, I'll start a new thread as well as continuing to contribute here if I may.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Happy New Year all.

E, nice, your reply to me. I might 'know' I'm right, but it doesn't feel good, which perversely confirms I'm right! I'm cast high and dry up on the rocks. I wouldn't wish it on anybody. But yearn for fellow castaways! I yearn for simpler times too, 10 years ago, 6, encountering the emergent in evangelicalism. Happy Days! But the inertia of that tide had cast me 'up' here on this stark, de-inspired, unprophesied, brave new world

Jamat, delighted that you've lost the shackles of fundamentalism, that you're inspired to recognize that the age of the universe is over two million times greater than you forced it to be. Welcome!

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And of course no inspiration of foretelling prophecy occurs in Daniel 9-11, just history propagandized in apocalyptic.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
I cannot understand you guys to be honest. You agree with every rational assault on invincible ignorance but still believe that some ... Jungian thing could be going on.

Well sure. Rationality only gets us so far, and we’re in danger if we try to lay too much on it. Why, for example would some Jungian thing be irrational? Or why, to be more pertinent, is it irrational to say that God can know the future? You may think that’s wrong, but I don't see how it’s irrational.

And to be honest, I don't know that it can be said I "agree with every rational assault on invincible ignorance," at least if that means you take me to be agreeing with your arguments, which I’m afraid often seem irrational or selectively rational to me. I may end up in the same place as you from time to time, but I may have gotten there by a different path.

I’m not discounting the need for rationality at all. But as I said, it can only go so far for me. The things in life that matter most, at least to me—love, beauty, music, story, food, comraderie, for example—can’t be fully analyzed rationally. There’s more there.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sorry chaps, but I can't, in my Aspyesque way, square the circle that all but one of you goes with redaction criticism and historical-critical analysis, debunking any unnecessary foretelling claims which aren't even there in some obvious cases (Cyrus for one), but you STILL say that's how the Naiad inspires it? Despite a deep understanding of hydrology, hydrodynamics and turbulence (which even God doesn't understand) explaining a stream in the woods.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Sorry chaps, but I can't, in my Aspyesque way, square the circle

Unless it's the Incarnation. Because reasons.

[ 01. January 2018, 18:53: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oooh, a good cross-post Nick.

Rationality, aye, it's only one of the three legs of the stool of our rhetorical minds. Why would a Jungian thing (mmmmm****) be irrational? Because Jungian things are. Knowing without knowing how, that sort of thing. It's not necessarily irrational to say that God can know the future, because He's clever and powerful, but it is irrational to say He can know without knowing how.

It's not that you agree with my badly put arguments, but I've not seen you disagree with historical-critical analysis. And I couldn't agree more on the things that really matter to us. But none of those things are supernatural, except in the ultimate ground of their being.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Of course Eutychus! Dash it all. There has to be some Jungian mystery left after all.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
. . . but you STILL say that's how the Naiad inspires it? Despite a deep understanding of hydrology, hydrodynamics and turbulence (which even God doesn't understand) explaining a stream in the woods.

I'm afraid I really have no clue what, or what Naiad, you’re talking about.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This one. I think.

(which FWIW elicited this response from me).

[ 01. January 2018, 21:22: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Martin 60: I'm cast high and dry up on the rocks. I
Where you have put yourself.. as surely as a stranded whale who resists all attempts to refloat it. If you believe as you say, that God can incarnate himself in Christ, you have opened a window for the supernatural. One little window ventilates a whole house. You might as well open the rest of them if it’s hot in the kitchen.
The Naiad invented natural processes so he need not live by their laws. I Fear you fear the ghost of Herbert W or Garner Ted will haunt your battlements and halls if you open any more chained up doors.

[ 01. January 2018, 22:16: Message edited by: Jamat ]

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
This one. I think.

(which FWIW elicited this response from me).

Ah. Thanks.

I'm with you.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That's more like it Jamat. A lot more like it. With submission to the Incarnation one needs nothing else. One certainly doesn't need to homeopathically dilute that grain of wheat with a blizzard of dispensationalist or evangelical chaff. When one has Christ alone, why does one need tea leaves?

It took the miracle of 20 years of inspired rational mind surgery for 30 years of fundamentalism to be stripped away, nothing can put it back but Alzheimer's. If I'm up on the stark Rock alone, why would I want the comfort of narcotic delusion? Why should I want to be a dog that returns to its vomit? And even further to the madness of a Wednesday universe?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yeah but.

As far as I can see, you allow your "better magic" of the Incarnation because it's NT, foundational, and, well, Jesus-like. You won't accept any "inferior magic" auguries (sic) in the OT because you think they can only mean God must have been micro-managing all along and that opens up too many cans of worms relating to "God the Killer" for you.

It seems to me you take quite a higher-criticism approach to the OT to resolve the God the Killer problem out of necessity rather than out of conviction. You rule out predictive prophecy, not on rational grounds (after all, if the incarnation and resurrection are possible, anything else is, surely?), or on textual grounds really, but on the emotional grounds of what it implies for you.

I'm not sure I can do any better, but I still quite like my "Quantum sovreignty" approach.

And, as stated above and with welcome backup from RdrEmCofE, I'd like to start with the text and try to work out what I'm supposed to understand about God from it.

Take a break from Cyrus and Daniel. What about the name Josiah being prophesied in 1 Kings 13:2 (not to mention an altar splitting in two a few verses later)?

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's utter conviction. And utter rationality. The certainty of the incarnation-resurrection has no relation, no category comparison with oracular fortune telling, reading the future that hasn't happened in tea leaves isn't a rational proposition. If God does it, He uses magic. As I keep saying and as you agree in your Quantum Sovreignty (sic), God doesn't intervene except in milestones. For me there's only one milestone on Earth. Eschatology can't happen down here. For God to be able to predict the Kings of the North and South He would HAVE to micromanage history for four centuries from the time of a real Daniel. He couldn't passively see them in His tea leaves. God micromanages nothing in, through Jesus apart from local to Him and He's pretty deft around Him in ever attenuating, exponentially decaying circles. In no other regard does He inspire, prophesy, intervene except by quantum tunnelling faith. As a 99.99..% rule. Why waste time on the 0.0..9% where He might have done otherwise, although you'd never know?

As for 1 Kings 13, if The Man of God From Judah foretold Josiah and his righteous murders three hundred years in advance, then yeah, all bets are off. But if it was all written from Josiah's reign... you choose.

[ 02. January 2018, 12:42: Message edited by: Martin60 ]

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Why are you so sure the Gospel accounts are reliable?

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
They do appear to have been written closer to the events they describe than appears to have been the case for the OT books - although oral tradition would certainly kick in there.

Thing is, if we were going to be completely dead-pan 'rational' then we'd immediately dismiss the Gospel accounts per se because none of us have ever seen miracles happen nor someone rising from the dead ...

Ultimately, faith comes into it wherever we draw the line.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Thing is, if we were going to be completely dead-pan 'rational' then we'd immediately dismiss the Gospel accounts per se because none of us have ever seen miracles happen nor someone rising from the dead ...

Ultimately, faith comes into it wherever we draw the line.

Agreed. What makes me uncomfortable is that Martin's system draws the line rather too neatly between the OT and the NT, though. For him, altars splitting in the OT are primitive enhancements and later additions, while veils being rent in twain in the NT are straight-up convincing proof a) of the Ultimate Supernatural Event b) that all that stuff in the OT is redundant.

(Martin I realise you haven't said all this in so many words but that's what it feels like).

It seems to me that Martin dismisses anything remotely supernatural in the OT a priori because it offers a convenient get-out from all the heavy problems of God the Killer, and that he brings in textual theories of late dating etc. to buttress this view, rather than the view emerging from analysis of the text itself.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
E., G. I'd say that the OT books were actually initially written or sourced at least as close if not closer in time to all the history they contain. They were built up over centuries and we have late redactions. Which explains all the alleged impossible prophecy.

Why am I sure that the gospel accounts are reliable? They weren't written by official prophets, pseudonymous and anonymous scribes and priests over centuries. Mark reads like a newspaper report, it isn't even finished. The flaws, the theological agendas, of 'Mark', Quelle, 'Matthew' and 'Luke' as a group add to the credibility for me. And as I repeatedly say, I couldn't care less how unreliable they are, they contain, with John and Acts, the greatest story ever told. The greatest magic. The greatest claim. That survives the most ruthless postmodern analysis untouched, shorn of all prophecy and inspiration.

Whoops! Dinner time.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Crossed in the post E. Nice one. There are enormous, incomparable cultural differences between the testaments. So much so that the charges against the Old cannot be made against the New, the main charge being redaction for propaganda purposes, by inspired, Godly men, to turn contemporary history in to prophecy.

That emerges from the text. The alternative is Jamat.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
the main charge being redaction for propaganda purposes, by inspired, Godly men, to turn contemporary history in to prophecy.

That emerges from the text.

How? Simply because you find the alternatives unthinkable? You haven't pointed to any other evidence.
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Crossed in the post E. Nice one. There are enormous, incomparable cultural differences between the testaments. So much so that the charges against the Old cannot be made against the New, the main charge being redaction for propaganda purposes, by inspired, Godly men, to turn contemporary history in to prophecy.

That emerges from the text. The alternative is Jamat.

Nah. That's about as binary as some of Jamat's posts.

It's not as if there's a polar opposite choice between Sponginess on the one side and Jamat's brand of Texan literalism on the other. There are tropics and temperate zones in between.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
the main charge being redaction for propaganda purposes, by inspired, Godly men, to turn contemporary history in to prophecy.

That emerges from the text.

How? Simply because you find the alternatives unthinkable? You haven't pointed to any other evidence.
Martin60 let’s assume you’re right and the issue is propaganda. Redactors want to create prophecy. (Goodness knows why they’d take the trouble despite all the integrity issues)
How could they get away with it given the incredible detailed knowledge the Jews had of their Bible and the value they put on preserving it?
And
Should there not be more historical evidence that it occurred. eg You’d expect to find untampered materials alongside the tampered with/corrupted ones. For mine, the Dead Sea scrolls are evidence that such tampering did not occur.

Basically, the case is yours to make if you want a project for your retirement.

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
E. The text is the evidence. It refers to contemporary history in intense, accurate NEARLY to the last detail. You cannot believe that the accounts of the Kings of the North and South are prophetic without believing that God is Killer as in Josiah and Cyrus. If God is Killer then we don't know Him in, through Christ alone by orders of magnitude. Then Jamat is right.

[ 02. January 2018, 20:31: Message edited by: Martin60 ]

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Check your facts, Jamat.

If redaction did took place, it took place long before the Dead Sea Scrolls were tucked away.

The Dead Sea Scrolls show a remarkable degree of continuity in these ancient texts but they don't prove that redaction and addition took place over time.

Besides, the ancients didn't see anything wrong in adding and redacting nor in attributing quotes to people without necessarily having first hand evidence available - Herodotus, Tacitus, Bede, they all did it.

They didn't have the kind of notions of authorial integrity that we have. Pseudographia was fine.

You are projecting later models of authorial integrity back into antiquity.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I meant 'does not mean that texts weren't redacted or added to over time.'

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sorry guys, I will respond in one post tomorrow (desktop editing is easier than on a tablet) to all issues raised from E's 'other evidence'. Although G. has done half my work for me better than I could!

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Gamaliel: If redaction did took place, it took place long before the Dead Sea Scrolls were tucked away.

The Dead Sea Scrolls show a remarkable degree of continuity in these ancient texts but they don't prove that redaction and addition took place over time

Do you mean ‘never took place’?
You seem to be agreeing with me. I thought the bid revelation of the DS scrolls is the consistency noted with the more ancient texts. If redactions occurred, they are the ideal places to look as they are later copies? But ..no evidence there it seems.

Martin 60: If all we have are the texts and you are merely using internal content of them, as evidence they are corrupted, then this is not actually convincing. You are arguing in a circle.

‘The predictions in these are simply too precise to be credible..ergo they are incredible because as we know, God could never supervenes to inspire such precision..so we can dismiss them..case closed’

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, I did mean 'never took place' and no, I'm not agreeing with you.

Whatever else they tell us, and they are certainly highly significant of course, they don't prove that redaction or pseudographia didn't take place.

As far as I know, the Scrolls mostly date from between 300 or 480 BC and around 100 AD (or CE).

They don't date from 600 BC or 800 BC for instance.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Yes, I did mean 'never took place' and no, I'm not agreeing with you.

Whatever else they tell us, and they are certainly highly significant of course, they don't prove that redaction or pseudographia didn't take place.

As far as I know, the Scrolls mostly date from between 300 or 480 BC and around 100 AD (or CE).

They don't date from 600 BC or 800 BC for instance.

The point is that any redaction, if it occurred would likely show up there. It is not a matter of proof. There’s a great old scholar EB Pusy who in his ‘Lectures on Daniel the Prophet,’ (1870)does a pretty good job of justifying Daniel’s existence in Babylon.

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've read plenty of material arguing the case for both early and late dates for Daniel.

Same for Isaiah.

There are authors who make out a good case on both sides of the argument.

My current take would be that some of the Higher Critics went for unfeasibly late dates whereas some conservative commentators and scholars go for unfeasibly early ones.

That said, I have no difficulties whatsoever with the idea of there being pseudographia and an accumulation of texts written across a considerable period or there being later written versions of oral material.

That seems to fit the evidence and also make sense from what we know of the historical context.

It's not simply a case of deciding on later dates simply because I'm squeamish about the idea of predictive prophecy, rather it's a conclusion based on my reading of several sources - and I don't claim to be an expert - and discussions I've had with people who have studied these things at both conservative and liberal theological colleges.

If the Dead Sea Scrolls proved beyond any shadow of doubt that there were no redactions or additions then don't you think that the entire academic world, whether liberal or conservative would have arrived at a consensus on that?

Or are you so committed to your particular take that you suspect those who hold a different view of rejecting solid evidence to the contrary?

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[QUOTE] It's a conclusion based on my reading of several sources/QUOTE]
Who exactly?

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Mostly conservative sources.

The main one was R K Harrison's 'Introduction to the Old Testament' which I think I may have given away (it's no longer on my shelves).

It was the main source text for a short correspondence course on the Pentateuch I did from the Evangelical Bible College of Wales.

I've also read a number of IVP commentaries over the years.

On the liberal side I've read Barton, Karen Armstrong and some Jewish material.

I don't pretend to be an expert on any of this but I have read material from a range of courses.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So while we're waiting for Martin's reply, Gamaliel, what's your take on the dating arguments.

Specifically, to what extent are they driven by assumptions one way or the other about predictive prophecy, and to what extent are they informed by purely textual, lingustic elements?

[ 03. January 2018, 09:50: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Unthinkable alternatives: Aye. They are and have been reasonably so for over two hundred years in theology and four hundred in science. We do lag so. No other evidence is rationally needed. Wanting it to be so – 'faith' – isn't evidence. The work all has to be done the other way, to prove that anything was prophetically foretold given how fast and loose everyone played for reasons of faith, including Jesus and the gospel writers and the editors before them of the texts they in turn played fast and loose with. THE unthinkable alternative is that God went beyond working stuff out (Agabus' famine) or nudging Cyrus or Artaxerxes to produce edicts or decrees or warrants to start the clock ticking for 70 'weeks' till Jesus' death – and even that is suspect to say the least – to puppet mastering centuries of war. Beyond that unthinkability of the nature of God, that He doesn't look like Jesus, there's the irrational unthinkability of reality where there are tea leaves in God's cup that show what hasn't happened. Magic.

Poles apart: I'm in the northern temperate zone. The north Icelandic cost. One step more and I'd be in the northern frigid zone I'm sure and would keep on going. Spong has no credibility at all. The tropics and temperate zones all include centuries, millennia of divine intervention or beyond: magic.

Tampering: it went on for centuries in the Isaiah school, the Samuel-Kings-Chronicles school, the Daniel (who?) school. And to them it wasn't tampering. To me neither. The past is another country. The Dead Sea scrolls are evidence of late publishing. Why would there be older copies than the most recent? There isn't a specific prophecy in them that wasn't fulfilled by the time of publishing. 99% Funny that. The tale-end 1% is wrong or indecipherable.

Retirement plan: I have no case to make, the dialectical synthesis has been done for centuries. Please demonstrate a miracle. That God puppet mastered the Kings of the North and South. Anything you like. That the rocks lie. Anything.

'...all we have are the texts': And history. And science. And human nature. And the insurmountable theological, philosophical, moral, existential, scientific problems if God is puppet master.

As for the rest, it should be so easy to demonstrate a no-holds-barred prophecy. Which couldn't convince me anyway of course, just as my Dad walking in the door wouldn't. I admit that it means that the editors played incredibly fast and loose by our standards, the contemporaries of Josiah adding him to a prophecy allegedly given to Jeroboam three centuries before, but that is infinitely more FAITHFULLY believable than believing that God murderously micromanaged ancient history.

And is that all you got E.? Josiah (who? In the mouth of two or three witnesses?) allegedly in Jeroboam's time? You don't believe that Isaiah 7 is slam-dunk prophetic by a country mile, what do you believe is? Beyond, way beyond, the suffering servant and the Psalms?

And I lie. My Dad walking in the door would be preferable to proving that God murderously micromanages history, piles suffering on suffering He could therefore do something about.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Check your facts, Jamat.

If redaction did took place, it took place long before the Dead Sea Scrolls were tucked away.

The Dead Sea Scrolls show a remarkable degree of continuity in these ancient texts but they don't prove that redaction and addition took place over time.

Some do. Others indicate that there were variant versions in circulation as late as the first century.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
So while we're waiting for Martin's reply, Gamaliel, what's your take on the dating arguments.

Specifically, to what extent are they driven by assumptions one way or the other about predictive prophecy, and to what extent are they informed by purely textual, lingustic elements?

I can only hazard a guess by way of an answer, Eutychus as I'm no expert and am only an interested amateur.

My guess would be that there's a bit of both.

For instance, I've read very conservative accounts that argue that there is no reason to give a late date for Daniel on linguistic or textual grounds.

I've read more liberal treatments that argue for a late date precisely on textual or linguistic grounds.

To what extent either side were driven by a desire to maintain or deny the possibility of predictive elements I am unable to say. I suspect it will have been a factor in both cases.

I'd have to mug up a heck of a lot more on the textual and linguistic arguments in order to come up with a definitive answer.

At the moment I'd be in the position of reading a conservative source and thinking, 'Golly, that's a good point ...' then reading a more liberal take and thinking, 'Goodness me, that's a good point from the other direction ...'

As I'm not a Hebrew or Greek scholar all I can do is weigh up the varying takes in my own mind.

All I can say - and here I stand, I can do no other - the balance of possibility for me at the moment lies more towards later dates than early ones - and this accounts for the apparent predictive element.

Beyond that, I can't speculate.

It's not that I'm ignoring anything or parking it all on one side as being too difficult - which is what Jamat accuses me of doing. It's work in progress and at a time when I've got a lot of other things on my plate.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
The work all has to be done the other way, to prove that anything was prophetically foretold given how fast and loose everyone played for reasons of faith, including Jesus and the gospel writers and the editors before them of the texts they in turn played fast and loose with.

So the Bible (or at least the OT) is about on a level with Pi's narrative in The Life of Pi?

[mild spoiler alert]

The story we'd prefer as opposed to the real and far less palatable one? "And so it goes with God"? Does it?

[ 03. January 2018, 17:55: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I
quote:
Gamaliel: ..and here I stand, I can do no other - the balance of possibility for me at the moment lies more towards later dates than early ones - and this accounts for the apparent predictive element.

Beyond that, I can't speculate.

It's not that I'm ignoring anything or parking it all on one side as being too difficult - which is what Jamat accuses me of doing. It's work in progress and at a time when I've got a lot of other things on my plate

I think I’d call this doing the splits actually with one foot on the wharf and the other on a boat moving out to sea.
Where does it leave your ‘high’ view of the Bible if you are prepared to listen to the likes of Karen Armstrong?

Martin 60: As always killer God is the killer of your faith. As we’ve had this discussion many times I only suggest you think of ways others handle the issue.

Contrary to what you seem to believe it is not by ignoring. It is necessarily by justifying but how that is done varies. If one looks at the pattern of killing.. eg, the flood, with people knocking at the door of the ark crying, ‘at least take my baby’ etc, the thing that strikes more than anything is in fact the seriousness of sin..a view reinforced by the crucifixion where God includes himself in his own ‘flood’ ..(kind of,)in order to deal with it.

[ 03. January 2018, 19:21: Message edited by: Jamat ]

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Aye E. Superb analogy. But what's real about the OT? Apart from its humanity?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I said I'd read Karen Armstrong, Jamat. That doesn't mean that I agree with her necessarily.

I've also read R K Harrison. You didn't comment on that.

Surely, the point is that we read material on various sides of these issues?

What word be the point of only still our own echo-chamber authors and not reading alternative view-points?

I assume you must have read material outside of Millenarian and Dispensationalist circles?

Or perhaps you haven't?

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
J. Faith in God the Killer prevents faith in Jesus. Show me God the Killer in Him and I'm your man. Show me Him in God the Killer, the same.

[ 03. January 2018, 19:55: Message edited by: Martin60 ]

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
J. Faith in God the Killer prevents faith in Jesus. Show me God the Killer in Him and I'm your man. Show me Him in God the Killer, the same.

The last sentence I wrote. The inclusion of himself in his own ‘flood’ . If the cross does not speak then there is no plan B.
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ...  15  16  17 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools