Reconciliation, an accomplished fact

This is an interesting pic, posted by someone. I've seen it bandied about on ATS more than once, IIRC. It suits the agendas of many to depict the Bible as a circularity, the implication being that it's like a circular argument and therefore, false. Bull$hit!

The Bible is not a circularity, it is a Singularity, a self-validating document. We have these points:

1. The Bible is the most well-preserved document from antiquity, by orders of magnitude. This is humanly impossible - only a Being who knew the original autographs could have overseen its preservation.

2. The Bible relates historical information which was once lost (cities and peoples), but in recent years, is now revealed. This argues sharply for an accurate original document.

3. Fulfilled prophecy argues strongly for an Author who knows past, present, and future. We look for fulfillment in the Book itself, (see #2), or in reliable secular sources.

4. The highly-complex, multi-layered, multi-dimensional mathematical coding in the Hebrew and Greek text of the Bible argues inescapably for a Divine origin of that text. Again, it is humanly impossible - the coding is orders of magnitude beyond what any carnal, three-dimensional human mind is capable.

5. The moral and ethical lessons we see displayed before us in the Bible speak of a moral/ethical Sensibility which is quite beyond what any carnal human mind could conceive.

These five points are all interdependent, and stand indivisible and irrefutable. Scoffers and skeptics will reject it, but their minds have been blinded by facile arguments and shallow understanding.

"Mr Luther, in antiquities, in providence, in everything.. the history of an object, the reason why it was made...that is its true value."

Smallville season 7 episode 19. I find there is truth to that statement. So my question is...why were we made?

reply to post by Lazarus Short

1. The Bible is the most well-preserved document from antiquity, by orders of magnitude. This is humanly impossible - only a Being who knew the original autographs could have overseen its preservation.

Or...the original manuscripts were disposed of by persons unwilling to relinquish such an undeniably influential tool. Where money and power is worth far more than morality, it is almost expected that such artifacts be utilized to the full potential of their political gravity.

2. The Bible relates historical information which was once lost (cities and peoples), but in recent years, is now revealed. This argues sharply for an accurate original document.

One could argue that any number of fictional works are based on real events, considering the numerous amounts of realistic places and people featured within their plots.

It argues for geographical accuracy, not conversational accuracy.

3. Fulfilled prophecy argues strongly for an Author who knows past, present, and future. We look for fulfillment in the Book itself, (see #2), or in reliable secular sources.

I don't see any psychics being hailed as a messenger of "God".

4. The highly-complex, multi-layered, multi-dimensional mathematical coding in the Hebrew and Greek text of the Bible argues inescapably for a Divine origin of that text. Again, it is humanly impossible - the coding is orders of magnitude beyond what any carnal, three-dimensional human mind is capable.

Nor does it support the context of your god. Unless you wish to prove such a case with further details?

5. The moral and ethical lessons we see displayed before us in the Bible speak of a moral/ethical Sensibility which is quite beyond what any carnal human mind could conceive.

And yet our constitution is not based on the Bible. Interesting.

These five points are all interdependent, and stand indivisible and irrefutable. Scoffers and skeptics will reject it, but their minds have been blinded by facile arguments and shallow understanding.

If such were the case, it would be the skeptics preaching faith and the Christians touting science.

The last sentence of my last post stands confirmed.

As expected.

reply to post by Lazarus Short


Veracity of the source material aside, the logic is flawed to the point of idiocy. Why is reconciliation necessary? What do we have to be sorry for?

Veracity?
Logic?
You have yet to realize that these questions are not answered by the intellect, but by the spirit.

Yeah, I changed my mind about moving on...

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Lazarus Short

 

Veracity of the source material aside, the logic is flawed to the point of idiocy. Why is reconciliation necessary? What do we have to be sorry for?

What needs to be understood about the book of Acts is God’s everlasting account validating the partial blindness that had come upon that nation. With the stoning of Stephen, God validated having set Israel aside nationally. Were the Gentiles not supposed to be coming to Israel to learn about God? Were the Gentiles not supposed to be coming through Israel’s rise as prophecy had proclaimed, but Israel had not risen! Israel had fallen. Israel had been blinded in part. Had the leadership of Israel repented in Acts 3, it would have started the next events on the prophetic calendar, namely the time of Jacob’s trouble; followed by the second coming of Christ.

This is what Jesus Christ meant when he said he gave Peter the “keys” to the Kingdom. Peter had the ability to “unlock” and “open the door” to the Kingdom, he proclaimed the message they had to believe. Jesus Christ gave himself a ransom for MANY. Who are the “many” spoken of here? Israel! Israel’s sins were going to “be blotted out”; the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of Jesus, at his second coming. He was going to be their High Priest and King, sitting on the throne of David, ruling and reigning over the nation Israel. God raised him up in order for him to sit on that throne. However, an open door does no good if no one walks through it, and that is exactly what happened. The leadership of the Nation did not walk through it. The Pharisees sat in Moses’ seat as the authority over the Nation. The kingdom program did not happen, but it certainly will in a day yet future, when God resumes the kingdom program, and sets Israel at the forefront again.

With Israel's earthly program being set aside, during this age of grace, no nationality enjoys special favor in the eyes of God; all must come alike to God today. God did not lift up the Gentiles, who had been without God, and put them on an equal or higher plain, than belonged to Israel. He concluded Israel in unbelief, as he had previously concluded the Gentiles in unbelief, both of them down on the same level, so that he might have mercy on all, and that is where it is today, according to Paul. It is man who needs to be reconciled to God, not the other way around. God is already reconciled to us, where our sins are concerned. It is not a sin issue, it is a son issue.

reply to post by newnature


According to the scriptures, he created us as imperfect beings. If he's not satisfied with that, I don't see how it's my fault. If I am designed imperfect, I shouldn't be condemned for it. In fact, I think anyone who holds my lack of perfection against me is an idiot for not realizing how much more potential being imperfect gives all of us.

God created us perfect, but imperfection came in through our own choice.
However, God takes responsibility for that, and initiated a Plan to correct it.
The fault is in us, but it is "not our fault."
You will not be condemned for it - God's Plan is to redeem you and bring you into His Kingdom.
You should give more heed to the perfection of Christ than to your own imperfection.

reply to post by Lazarus Short

God created us perfect, but imperfection came in through our own choice.

Perfectly ignorant and constrained within the bounds of his paradise? The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and it appears his were the best. However, an emotionally compromised position of power does not always yield the most logically sound fruit.

However, God takes responsibility for that, and initiated a Plan to correct it.
The fault is in us, but it is "not our fault."

Who says that it is a fault? What's wrong with being imperfect? Who says we're not good enough? Who says the human condition isn't good enough? We are sentient creatures, you can't just decide that we're not deserving or competent. We're flawed, but many times, those flaws produce our greatest strengths.

You will not be condemned for it - God's Plan is to redeem you and bring you into His Kingdom.
You should give more heed to the perfection of Christ than to your own imperfection.

Perhaps our imperfections have more to teach us than the perfection of a man who places such importance on immortality and subjugation. Something tells me that any man who gives such weight to such ideals might be playing host to entirely the wrong sort of values.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

Something tells me that any man who gives such weight to such ideals might be playing host to entirely the wrong sort of values.

Seriously? After side-stepping and otherwise evading every argument against your self-centered value system, you dare to question mine?! That's quite a hubris you have there...

reply to post by Lazarus Short

Seriously? After side-stepping and otherwise evading every argument against your self-centered value system, you dare to question mine?! That's quite a hubris you have there...

What arguments? Link them.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

What arguments? Link them.

See the top of this very page for an example. You've read this thread, at least I hope you have, so why do I need to link anything?

reply to post by Lazarus Short

See the top of this very page for an example. You've read this thread, at least I hope you have, so why do I need to link anything?

Can you explain how there's a dozen strikingly similar versions of the Bible's main doctrines, characters, and symbols preceding Christianity by thousands of years?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Lazarus Short

 

See the top of this very page for an example. You've read this thread, at least I hope you have, so why do I need to link anything?

Can you explain how there's a dozen strikingly similar versions of the Bible's main doctrines, characters, and symbols preceding Christianity by thousands of years?

edit on 9-4-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

Easy.

When Noah and his family stepped off the Ark, they shared the same language, culture, customs, and religion. When they moved further from the landing site, they took all that with them. All that affected the very early cultures which left written records. If everything happened as the book of Genesis relates, and it did, we should expect this to be true, and it is. I assume you're still operating with the frame of reference of separate civilizations arising separately from neolithic roots.

reply to post by Lazarus Short


Ah, but Noah's adventure raises a plethora of new questions. Let's see how you handle those, eh? It's a very long list, so I'll just post a link below and let you go over the material on your own time. But perhaps, when you return, you could answer some of them for us. Seems like your answer to my previous question raises more questions than it answers.

The Noah Mystery

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Nice way to sidestep once again, without answering what I said directly! What you bring up is a huge arena of scientific/philosophical/religious contention, and we will never be able to settle it here. There is another sub-forum for that anyway, and I'm just not going to tackle it here with you or anyone else.

reply to post by Lazarus Short


You provided a rebuttal and I provided a rebuttal for your rebuttal. I notice you are avoiding answering a single question from the numerous issues that are raised by your simple solution. Ergo, your solution is not nearly as clear cut as you imply. There's much more to the story, and a little digging reveals that perhaps the story isn't anything like what we've been told.

Either way, it's relevant in that reconciliation has been perverted by generations of greedy, fearful men - and this is proven in that the entire context of reconciliation in this matter is produced by the plagiarism of ancient cultures who would never have agreed with the basic premise of the Christian philosophy.

Simply said, the forefathers of religion would be confounded by what has happened to their philosophies.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Lazarus Short

 

You provided a rebuttal and I provided a rebuttal for your rebuttal. I notice you are avoiding answering a single question from the numerous issues that are raised by your simple solution. Ergo, your solution is not nearly as clear cut as you imply. There's much more to the story, and a little digging reveals that perhaps the story isn't anything like what we've been told.

Either way, it's relevant in that reconciliation has been perverted by generations of greedy, fearful men - and this is proven in that the entire context of reconciliation in this matter is produced by the plagiarism of ancient cultures who would never have agreed with the basic premise of the Christian philosophy.

Simply said, the forefathers of religion would be confounded by what has happened to their philosophies.

No, it is not clear cut at all, and the controversy rages on and on - that is why I don't care to open that particular can 'o worms just here. The Genesis account is what it is, but the story told by bones, stones, soils, rocks, and all the rest is viewed and interpreted differently by just about everybody. The Genesis account is fairly simple, remember, and leaves lots of room for detail and complexity. Most folks miss that - they think Noah built the ark, put the animals on it, and that was that. No, there was a lot more to it, and keep in mind that the world in which Noah built and provisioned the ark was a VERY different world than than the one we inhabit today. I dare say you would not recognize it as the same planet.

"...it's relevant in that reconciliation has been perverted by generations of greedy, fearful men..."
"...the forefathers of religion would be confounded by what has happened to their philosophies..."

I mostly agree with the two quotes of yours above. Are you sure you're not just disgusted with men, rather than with God?

reply to post by newnature

The kingdom program did not happen, but it certainly will in a day yet future, when God resumes the kingdom program, and sets Israel at the forefront again.

That's the pet theory of your cult but it isn't taught in the New Testament.
If you want to quote Paul, then you should quote Galatians, where he says the promises to Abraham were made better, by expanding them to encompass all the people of the world.
There is nowhere in the NT that describes a resurgent kingdom of Israel.
The kingdom "plan" did go forward, and it is the church which Jesus commissioned his disciples to found.
Jesus, today, is the Messiah, and the King, and the Lord.
What you are peddling is cult philosophy designed to deny Jesus, the church and the Kingdom, for the sake of a man-made entity merely calling itself Israel, and illegally occupying the country of Palestine.