/ Topic > Re: Is DataRat God? / Newsgroup > alt.religion.apologetics / Date > 13 March 2000 /
.
> On 12Mar00 H Dan99955 wrote: If the christian religion is correct, then of course there is
> one interpretation of the Bible that is correct.
.
 erasmian answers: Dear Harvest Dancer, I think *that* is an altogether incredibly presumptuous assumption. It would be far more correct to simply affirm that while some interpretations are more valid and valuable than others, this does not necessarily mean that one (and only one!) interpretation can be "correct" (ie. as in 'infallible')!
.
> I can not think of a denomination that does not disagree with that statement.
> I even agree with that statement, I a non-christian.
.
 The denominations do not disagree with that statement because they all have a vested interest in making it so; that is, they can then go on to assert that their own unique brand of exegesis is, of course, that very same only-correct interpretation! Talk about arrogance.
.
 btw: What's your excuse, hdan ... As a non-christian, I mean?
.
> DataRat knows which interpretation is entirely correct.
.
 He consults with that great guru of biblical interpretation, John Calvin. In other words, his thinking is firmly embedded in the sixteenth century, and shows no signs of being at all uncomfortable all alone there; while the rest of the Faith zooms on by to embrace the future of the Kingdom.
.
> He knows so well the mind of his god that DataRat is completely infallable. If you disagree
> with DataRat you are disagreeing with god. If god disagrees with DataRat, it obviously wasn't
> god that was doing the disagreeing.
.
 Oh, obviously! ...  :)
.
> That is the height of arrogance, and a display of the sin of spiritual pride.
> Doesn't the christian faith teach that only god knows the mind of god?
.
 For the most part, yes. However, there are certain exceptions. And these exceptions tend be what are known as prophets (see the Holy Bible for details).
.
> According to DataRat, if you disagree with DataRat, you are a pagan, and you are Post
> Modern (a term he would throw at even an Absolutist Logician if that A.L. were to disagree).
.
 Yes, it's a convenient label for just about everything since just about everything in this post-modern era is, in fact, post-modern ...
.
> Tell me DataRat, when can we expect the divinely inspired Gospel according to
> DataRat to be added to the Bible?
.
 The Ratster would simply reply that the canon CANNOT be added to. The reason, I suspect, is that the Lord has conveniently forgotten how to write ... apparently ...  :)
.
                                                - the one who pokes holes in them - erasmian  ;>

/ Topic > Re: Is DataRat God? / Newsgroup > alt.religion.apologetics / Date > 15 March 2000 /
.
] Harvest Dancer previously wrote: <snipsome> That is the height of arrogance, and a display of
] the sin of spiritual pride. Doesn't the christian faith teach that only god knows the mind of god?
.
>> erasmian answered: For the most part, yes. However, there are certain exceptions. And these
>> exceptions tend be what are known as prophets (see the Holy Bible for details).
.
> On 13Mar00 H Dan99955 wrote: <snipsome>
> So does that make the always right DataRat a Prophet?
.
 erasmain answers: Certainly not! The other exception is that the mind of God is revealed in and through the scriptures; and it is by *that* means that Bro Rodent fancies himself an expert on the Mind of God.
.
> After all, DataRat has set himself up as the judge of who is and who is not christian.
.
 It is not the prophet's business (as such) to say who is, and who is not, a Christian. That is a judgment that only God can make; and this judgment is expressed in the NT. Having said that, however, it is certainly the duty of all believers to make known what the Lord has said on these important matters. One need not be a prophet to do that.
.
] Tell me DataRat, when can we expect the divinely inspired Gospel according
] to DataRat to be added to the Bible?
.
>> e: The Ratster would simply reply that the canon CANNOT be added to. The reason, I
>> suspect, is that the Lord has conveniently forgotten how to write ... apparently ...  :)
.
> HD: Good Point. Closed Cannons do save you from having to think.
> Glad my religion doesn't even have a cannon.
.
 The closing of the canon was a historical necessity, nothing more. It was needed for the health and survival of the Faith. The problem with this is that it tends to make people believe that God's ongoing revelation is finished and complete; which is absurd if you think about it for more than a minute. But in any case, it is this erroneous assumption that powers the popular view that there are no prophets left anymore. And *that* stupid opinion hands the Faith over to the corrupt hearts and diseased minds of the priests. Ha! No wonder the Faith is in such a mess! 2000 years of creeping corruption have left the churches holding an empty bag, with the Holy Spirit fleeing in disgust!

/ Topic > Re: Jeremiah's Underpants / Date > 8 March 2000 / NGZ > alt.religion.christian.biblestudy, alt.bible.prophecy /
.
> On 3Mar00 Jon Stammers wrote: Jeremiah 13:1-10 / RSV <snip fascinating pericope>
> This is a very bizarre passage, it seems to me.
.
 erasmian sayeth: Dear JR, does it? It's about par for stories concerning the ancient prophets, I think. Have you ever read the story about the prophet Balaam and his fabulous talking donkey? ...  Now there's a very bizarre (and hilarious) passage:
.
 Then God’s anger was kindled because he went, and the angel of the LORD stood in the way to oppose him. Now he was riding on his donkey, and his two servants were with him. And the donkey saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way with his sword drawn in his hand; and the donkey turned aside from the way and went into the field. And Balaam beat the donkey, to turn her back to the road. Then the angel of the LORD stood in a path among the vineyards, where there was a wall on either side. And when the donkey saw the angel of the LORD, she pressed herself into the wall, and crushed Balaam’s foot against the wall, and so he beat her again. Then the angel of the LORD went farther, and stood in a narrow place, where there was no way to turn either to the right or to the left. So when the donkey saw the angel of the LORD, she crouched down under Balaam. Then Balaam’s anger was kindled, and he beat his donkey with a staff. Then the LORD opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Balaam, "What have I done to you that you have beaten me these three times?" And Balaam said to the donkey, "Because you have made me look stupid; I wish there were a sword in my hand, for now I would kill you." And the donkey said to Balaam, "Am not I your donkey, upon which you have ridden ever since I was yours unto this day? Have I ever attempted to treat you this way?" And he said, "No."  -- Numbers 22:22-30 / NETbible
.
> He has to put on some underpants for an unspecified length of time, then travel SEVERAL
> HUNDRED MILES to Mesapotamia (where the Euphrates is) to bury the dirty underpants
> under a rock, then travel back there several days later to dig them up again!!
.
 These actions are meant to be symbolic, JR. The various activities of the prophets are altogether meaningless if we do not understand them as being symbolic (ie. as having a meaning beyond themselves). In fact, much of the time it is the prophet's actions that carry the Lord's message and meaning (ie. even more so than his words).
.
> (And was it supposed to be surprising that they were spoiled??)
.
 I think that was the point, JR. In fact, if you had read on just a little further you'd see that the prophet himself explains the meaning of these things:
.
 Then the LORD said to me, "I, the LORD, say: This shows how I will ruin the highly exalted position in which Judah and Jerusalem take pride. These wicked people refuse to obey what I have said. They follow the stubborn inclinations of their own hearts and pay allegiance to other gods by worshipping and serving them. So they will become just like these linen shorts which are good for nothing. For, I say, just as shorts cling tightly to a person’s body, so I bound the whole nation of Israel and the whole nation of Judah tightly to me. I intended for them to be my special people and to bring me fame, honor, and praise. But they would not obey me." -- Jeremiah 13:8-11 / NETbible
.
> I just want to ask two very simple questions: - Did Jeremiah really do this?
.
 I think that he did something very like it, yes.
.
> - Does it matter? -- Jon.
.
 Of course it does. You won't get very far in studying the prophets if you approach them with the attitude that their words and actions really don't matter. Cut the boys a little slack, why don't ya?

/ Re: Jeremiah's Underpants / 13March2000 / Ngz: alt.religion.christian.biblestudy, alt.bible.prophecy /
.
] On 3Mar00 Jon Stammers wrote: Jeremiah 13:1-10 / RSV <snip fascinating pericope>
] This is a very bizarre passage, it seems to me.
.
>> erasmian sayeth: Dear JR, does it? It's about par for stories concerning the ancient prophets, I think.
>> Have you ever read the story about the prophet Balaam and his fabulous talking donkey? ...
>>  Now there's a very bizarre (and hilarious) passage: <snip quote>  -- Numbers 22:22-30 / NETbible
.
> On 8Mar00 Jon Stammers replied: Oh yes, I realise there are MORE bizarre passages! How about 1Kings
> 20:35-36: "About this time the LORD commanded a prophet to say to a friend, "Hit me!" But the friend
> refused, and the prophet told him, "You disobeyed the LORD, and as soon as you walk away, a lion will
> kill you." The friend left, and suddenly a lion killed him."
.
 erasmian answers: Ha! [timeout for ROTFLMAO] Hey, serves him right for not heeding the prophet ... :)
.
> ... not to mention Ezekiel being commanded to lie on his side for a year and cook bread using human
> dung as fuel! I half-wonder whether God was having a bit of a laugh to himself while he commanded
> the prophets to do these bizarre things!
.
 Oh, I have no doubt about that myself ... After all, how could any enlightened entity *not* laugh at the endlessly absurd antics of these silly little naked apes! :)
.
] JS: I just want to ask two very simple questions: - Did Jeremiah really do this?
 .
>> erasmian:  I think that he did something very like it, yes.
 .
] Does it matter? -- Jon.
 .
>> Of course it does. You won't get very far in studying the prophets if you approach them with the
>> attitude that their words and actions really don't matter. Cut the boys a little slack, why don't ya?
.
> It was just something my Old Testament lecturer said. He pointed to Jer.13 and another bit in
> Jeremiah and said that these events couldn't relly happened. He was saying that the important
> thing really is not that these reported things actually happened but the prophetic message as
> it exists now in its written form.
.
 I agree that the text in its written form (ie. as we now have it) is important; but chiefly because it is (more or less) all that we have left. Feeble little remnants of formerly great things ... So I would hardly say that the question of historicity is *altogether* irrelevant.
.
> In Jonah, for instance, the actual events seem spectacularly unlikely,
.
 Not only that, but the book of Jonah is *in no way* based upon real persons or events (ie. it was written just prior to the Greek period), so the question of historicity need not even arise; except in the minds of those committed to a literal (ie. simple-minded) reading of the texts!
.
> but the message it makes is quite brilliant.
.
 Oh yes. Well ahead of the general thinking of the Persian period. That's what makes this little short story 110% pure prophetic literature!
.
> The other bit of Jeremiah he pointed to was Jer 25:15-26. Did Jeremiah really go round
> among all these kings from far-away lands with a cup telling them to drink from it?
.
 It's possible that some measure of exaggeration and enhancement went into the retelling of the events in questions. ... Perhaps it is the questions you ask that contain the flaw? Perhaps you should rather be asking whether or not such actions are consistent with the temperament and personality of our good brother Jeremiah?
.
> It would have taken many decades to travel round all this distance. Thanks a lot. --  Jon.
.
 Maybe a few years of events were stretched out to more impressive proportions, but there is no reason not to suppose that there is some small substantial core of historical truth to these strange prophetic events.

/ Forum: TheologyOnLine - Religion / 27Sept2000 / Ngz: alt.religion.christian.biblestudy, alt.religion.christian.anabaptist.brethren /
.
 "So then you are no longer foreigners and non-citizens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of God's household, because you have been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets,33 with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone." -- Ephesians 2:19-20/NETbible
.
  Note to Reader >  In the NETbible, footnote #33 reads as follows: "*Apostles and prophets*. Because the prophets appear after the mention of the apostles and because they are linked together in 3:5 as recipients of revelation about the church, they are to be regarded not as Old Testament prophets, but as New Testament prophets."
.
 ... Huh? ... "New Testament prophets"?! ... Wutz *that*?!!! ...
.
 How many Christians today are aware there were such creatures in the early Greek churches? How many even know that most of the NT documents were actually written by these mysterious non-entities? That Paulos of Damascus was *also* numbered among these? ...
.
 Judging by the appalling ignorance of today's People of God about these early Christian prophets, one would have to say that there are no Christians who are aware of such creatures; let alone appreciative of the vital role they played in the formation of the churches, the scriptures, *and* the essential prophetic nature of the Faith! Yet these verses (Eph.2:19-20) could not possibly be more clear or straightforward. The author of Ephesians (ie. not Paul) tells us plainly that God's household (ie. *all* the churches) were "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets". In other words, they were NOT built upon priests and bishops and popes; as the Lying Whore would have you believe. Apostles and prophets (the distinction is purely one of degree (eg. in authority), not one of kind) are thus linked to the Lord (the cornerstone) in ways that no other human creature (ie. priests, preachers, teachers, scribes, scholars, etc) can ever hope to match.
.
 If the apostles did not last beyond the early decades of the second century, it certainly was not because the priests superseded them owing to their greater magnificence and abounding spiritual superiority. No. The successors of the early apostles were the Christian prophets of Egypt who continued and developed the Christian prophetic traditions right up to the time of Clement of Alexandria, and the infamous heretic Origen (being also the Father of the Biblical Sciences).
.
 After these giants passed into the past, the prophetic spirit was ruthlessly strangled by the corrupt new masters of the People of God: the priests (who forthwith made *themselves* the foundation of the household of God)! Having thus banished the prophets into the realm of non-being, is it any wonder that the history of the churches thereafter is one long, sad story of unrelenting corruption and spiritual desolation? This is because the People of God have lost their true foundation to the lies and deceptions of pious frauds and priestly charlatans!
.
 And so complete is their total eradication of all traces of the former glory of the authentic prophetic traditions (that so shaped and energized the apostolic Faith of the NT churches) that today's Christians are not even aware that their churches are firmly built on shifting sands, having lost all sight of their true foundations in the apostles and prophets ... Even when faced with the crystal clear testimony of the Word of God!

/ Topic > Re: On Remembering the Forgotten Ones-2 / Forum: TheologyOnLine - Religion /
/ Newsgroups > alt.religion.christian.biblestudy, alt.religion.christian.anabaptist.brethren / Date > 1 Oct 2000 /
.
> On 28Sept DonW replied: Long time no see, Erasmus;
.
 erasmian answers: Dear DonW, it must indeed have been a long time (actually only three months off-line), since you have already forgotten my name! :)
.
> welcome back!
.
 Thx. It's good to be back ... I hope!
.
> I do agree that there is no such priesthood in the Church of Jesus Christ.
> Permit me to disagree with the NETBible footnote and your critique.
.
 That is your right and privilege, of course. But only be well aware of the risks you take in daring to disagree with the Lord's worthless one ...  :)
.
> Peter says that the "more sure word of prophecy" is that "in old time," i.e., recorded in the
> Hebrew scriptures. He was comparing the ancient prophets to his eyewitness testimony of
> the Transfiguration (2Peter 1:16-21).
.
 Your rejection of the correct interpretation of Ephesians 2:20 on the basis of 2Peter strikes me as highly irrational and altogether contrary to what the prophet is saying:
.
 "Moreover, we possess the prophetic word as an altogether reliable thing. You do well if you pay attention to this as you would to a light shining in a murky place ..." -- 2Peter 1:19 / NETbible
.
 Are you *sure* you're paying attention?
.
> I suppose you will claim that 2Peter isn't a genuine writing of the Peter of Jesus' appointed Apostles, etc.
.
 If you mean the illiterate fisherman Simon-Peter, who died many decades before 2Peter was written by an anonymous prophet in his name (as is common practice among the NT documents), then yes, you are quite right. It is a fact that Simon-Peter did not write 2Peter. Only those who are blissfully able to ignore historical realities and all the scriptural evidence can read the text "literally" (ie. after the manner of small and ignorant children).
.
 So how do we know that what I have just said is indeed a fact, and not merely an opinion? Easy. Facts are based on reliable knowledge derived from the available evidence; (in this case the evidence comes from early church history and the text of Second Peter). Belief or opinion is based firmly on nothing more substantial than pious feelings and unfounded assumptions arising from an unenlightened, uneducated, simplistic, and fundamentally irrational reading of what is very clearly a complex and densely value-laden text. In other words, prophetic literature (such as 2Peter) *cannot* be grasped by those satisfied with a superficial understanding of things!
.
 In any case, the fact that 2Peter was not actually authored by Simon-Peter does NOT make it irrelevant or inconsequential. On the contrary, I hold it in *very* high esteem, and consider it to be every bit as authoritative as the earlier apostolic documents (ie. Mark, Paul's authentic epistles) precisely because it *is* the inspired work of an authentic Christian prophet. The question of who and when it was written is not relevant to the matter of inspiration and authority; although it is obviously very relevant to pointing out the many inadequacies of a childish and simplistic interpretation of 2Peter.
.
> That is surely just as much a "cop out" as the invention of the unscriptural "Christian
> priesthood" you have correctly skewered.
.
 Since when is acknowledging the truth of things a cop-out?
.
> The primary example we are given is Agabus.
.
 Agabus is a primary example of what exactly?
.
> His work is practical, spurring men to action, confirming and strengthening them.
.
 Is this how *you* define the ministry of the prophet?
.
> Acts 13:1 seems to put NT prophets on a level with teachers.
.
 "Now there were these prophets and teachers in the church at Antioch: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius the Cyrenian, Manaen (a close friend of Herod the tetrarch from childhood) and Saul." -- Acts 13:1
.
 Since the prophets are mentioned first, and teachers second, it is just as easy to conclude that the NT prophets are *not* on a level with teachers. Indeed, if we wish to remain faithful to the biblical teaching as a whole, we would have to admit that your view (that they are on a level) is NOT biblical!
.
> Speaking to the Corinthians, Paul says that prophecy is (or should be) something
> normal to the Christian experience.
.
 That is correct. This is because the authentic Faith of the early Greek churches was profoundly prophetic in essence and nature. The fact that there are so few prophets today only demonstrates just how far we have fallen away from the faith of the inspired NT writers.
.
> Granted that the prophet's role is more than just the gift of prophecy this one verse
> from Ephesians should not be stretched out of proportion.
.
 I am not stretching it out of proportion. It merely confirms what I have always thought, ever since I first came across a similar statement among the first words of the earliest NT document (ie. letter one of the four Thessalonian letters):
.
 "For you became imitators, brothers and sisters, of God's churches in Christ Jesus that are in Judea, because you too suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they in fact did from the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and persecuted us severely." -- 1Thessalonians 2:14-15 / NETbible
.
 In other words, Paulos and Silvanus here acknowledge the presence of Christian prophets (after the Lord's death) among the earliest churches in Judea (specifically in Jerusalem). What we can conclude from all this is that Ephesians 2:20 is NOT an isolated statement at odds with the rest of the NT witness, but is, in fact, perfectly consistent with the biblical revelation as a whole.

P.S. "Pursue love and be eager for the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy. For the one speaking in a tongue does not speak to people but to God, for no one understands; he is speaking mysteries by the Spirit. But the one who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouragement and consolation. The one who speaks in a tongue builds himself up, but the one who prophesies builds up the church. I wish you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you would prophesy.  -- 1Cor.14:1-5 / NETbible

/ Topic > Re: On Remembering the Forgotten Ones-3 / Forum: TheologyOnLine - Religion /
/ Newsgroups > alt.religion.christian.biblestudy, alt.religion.christian.anabaptist.brethren / Date > 8 Oct 2000 /
.
> On 4Oct DonW wrote: Well you were originally registered as "Tondaar" and later as "Textman."
.
 textman answers by LOL: ... Dear DonW, I am called by many names, apparently; but I prefer 'textman'. Say, are you of the opinion that names don't really matter? ... In any case, it is difficult to see how anyone could mistake a mere erasmian for the great scholar of Rotterdam, Desiderius Erasmus (d.1536). Actually, that's quite a compliment there, DonW; though perhaps it was purely unintentional? :)
.
 BTW: I should point out two notable errors in your opening statement. Firstly, I was only registered in TOL under the names 'Tondaar' and 'erasmian'. Secondly, I was never registered anywhere as "Textman", as I always use my name without the capital 'T'. These are both minor and insignificant details to be sure, but they illustrate how carelessness in the little things quickly adds up to carelessness in the big things.
.
> I have forgotten little, but was sloppy in my typing.
.
 Oh I see; you mean to say that it was just a typo, right?  :)
.
> Agabus is a primary example of the NT prophet as exhorter rather than as a diviner
> of new revelations of the caliber represented in the Hebrew prophets.
.
 I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. Are you suggesting that the NT prophets are somehow of a lower caliber than the great Hebrew prophets? That would seem to be moving things in the wrong direction, I think. Besides, there was a great variety in quality and caliber even among the Hebrew prophets. The same thing clearly applies to the NT prophets as well. Accordingly, I'd say that Paul is much more suited to being "a primary example of the NT prophet". More so than this nebulous Agabus of yours, 'nes-pa'?
.
> I disagree with your analysis of what sketchy historical information exists. That Jesus' Apostles
> were "uneducated and untrained" simply referred to the exclusive schooling of the priests, the
> upper classes, and the promising scholars (of whom Paul was an exemplar).
.
 Are you saying that there's just not enough evidence to conclude that Peter was illiterate? You may well be right about that. The evidence is certainly meager either way. So lets say Peter was literate. Guess what? It doesn't matter. Even if Peter was literate in Greek he could not have authored 1&2Peter because these documents were written well after Peter's death in the 60's. He also could not have authored them because two different men wrote these books; and neither of them bears much resemblance to the man of action portrayed so vividly in the Gospel of Mark (which is the only NT document that really *does* show signs of Peter's direct involvement in the collaboration of composition). You can't have it all three ways, DonW. It's just too unrealistic to suppose that the same 1 man could have three different personalities. Oh, but you will now say that you do not see three different men in these books, but the same man throughout all three! Good Grief! It's no wonder that you disagree with my analysis, for my analysis depends upon the assumption that the careful bible student will have studied 1&2Peter enough at least to realize that there is no way in Hades that the same man wrote both! Check it out ...
.
> The poor historical record of 2 Peter
.
 You mean the witnesses to that document among the early Christian literature? Very revealing evidence there! The scholars prefer not to notice it (because it is so at odds with the ever popular myth that all the NT documents were finished by the end of the first century), and the average Christian simply ignores it (because they can't see its relevence, and automatically assume that such "minor details" could not possibly matter to *their* faith)!
.
> reflects the biases of the early Greek church, which considered James, 2 Peter, and a
> couple other books as "Jewish" and not addressed to them as Gentiles.
.
 You seem to be suggesting here that the evidence from canonical history (which suggests a *late* date (ie. mid-2C)) is not to be trusted because of bias, and that we can forthwith dump facts down the toilet because they don't agree with *your* biases! No. The facts are the facts, and the witnesses must be taken seriously. If these books were penned in the early 60's or before, as Fundies love to fancy, you can bet your bottom dollar that there would NOT be a *total* absence of witnesses, regardless of any biases (real or imagined).
.
 And besides all that, the only bias on the part of the early Greek churches towards 1&2Peter, James, etc, that I can see is that they were held to be authoritative *because* they believed them to have been written by the original apostles and disciples. That is how these documents were named (ie. given their canonical titles) and how they finally got to *be* canonical (when the time came).
.
> In fact, that is the primary content of later discussions about the canonicity of these very books.
.
 Got any juicy quotes for us along those lines there bud? It would be good for people to see just how these things were decided. In any case, these "later discussions" are evidence for these later centuries, and the thinking thereof cannot be projected backwards into previous centuries just because it seems well and good for you to do so ... The ever-present Fundy principle of unconscious anachronism strikes again!

P.S. Dear Jay, "But I feel like a worm, not a man; people insult me and despise me. All who see me taunt me, they mock me and shake their heads. They say, 'Commit yourself to the LORD!'" (Psalm 22:6-8 / NETbible).

/ Topic > Re: On Remembering the Forgotten Ones-4 / Forum: TheologyOnLine - Religion / 17Oct2000 / Newsgroups > alt.religion.christian.biblestudy, alt.religion.christian.anabaptist.brethren /
.
> On Oct12 DonW wrote: RE: Names. Yeah, whatever, Tondasmian. Re: Prophets. No, I am
> only saying that prophecy as the means of conveying critical revelation of God's character
> was superseded by the appearance of the Word made flesh.
.
 textman asks: Dear DonW, is "superseded" the right word here?
Or does "superseded" automatically imply "negated"?
.
> He invested Himself in the Apostles, and taught disciples numbering in the hundreds.
> The Holy Spirit evidently used the written word of prophecy extant to inspire Paul, as
> shown in his writings.
.
 Not just Paulos and Silvanus, but many others as well; including Jesus (who announced his public ministry by reading from Isaiah).
.
> Paul cites direct revelation of material twice, and both times there is no "new" information but
> rather confirmation of the Lord's Supper (1Cor 11:23) and "the gospel which was preached by
> me" (Gal 1:11-12) which is constructed largely from OT typology. He does cite another incident,
> but says that he can't talk about it (2Cor.12:4).
.
 "It is necessary to go on boasting. Though it is not profitable, I will go on to visions and revelations from the Lord. I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago (whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows) was caught up to the third heaven. And I know that this man (whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows) was caught up into paradise and heard things too sacred to be put into words, things that a person is not permitted to speak. On behalf of such an individual I will boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, except about my weaknesses."  -- 2Corinthians 12:1-5 / NETbible
.
 Now this is a *very* interesting passage for those believers curious about the details regarding the circumstances around Paul's conversion. Bear in mind that the time Paul is referring to is about the time of the expulsion of the Greek-speaking Jewish-believers from Jerusalem. If we therefore assume that Paul came to Jerusalem from Damascus to investigate these new heretics, it becomes more likely that Paul found a man among the heretics who impressed him as being a genuine mystic unlike anything he had seen before. What he saw we don't know, because Paul himself didn't know (as he plainly admits, twice). But what we do know is that being witness to such a powerful mystical experience profoundly affected Paul. And it is no great leap to suggest that, after that, his sympathies turned in favor of the radicals. In any case, there is no basis in the text for DonW's proposal that this is the third incident of Paul citing "direct revelation of material".
.
> Re: Canonicity. No quotes, the historical research I did was through secondary sources. It does not
> appear that councils kept minutes of meetings but simply hammered out doctrinal statements. Some
> attendees comment in correspondence or other writings about the content of debate. The nearest
> decent library is 75 miles away, and I don't spend a whole lot of time there researching things that
> are tangential.
.
 That's too bad; because I believe that suitable snippets from the source documents make almost any point very *much* better than all third-hand descriptions.
.
> The Gospel is a different genre from the epistles. It is also filtered through the eyes and ears of Mark.
.
 Why only Mark? ... Then you don't believe that the first gospel was a collaboration between Mark and Peter? You think that tradition can be so easily discarded? Why so? Is it because such a collaboration would obviously undermine your contention that a Greek-writing Peter (which is a pure invention of no historical value) authored both 1 & 2 Peter?
.
> It should not surprise anyone that Peter's personal writing style should turn out to be markedly different.
.
 Markedly different from Mark's, you mean? ... Yeah. Not just once, but twice even!
.
> I don't suppose that Peter was static.
.
  hmmm ... ?
.
> His position required him to expand his reading and vocabulary,
.
His position? You mean his position as the foremost? Since Peter was most likely illiterate up to and during the Lord's public ministry, it is difficult to see how he could "expand his reading and vocabulary". Nor do I see how he could be seized by some pressing need to become literate in Greek. There is no real evidence suggesting that Peter could or did write (and write as an expert in Greek yet) letters to churches, and plenty of evidence showing that the books that bear his name were written decades after his death by other people.
.
> and so his general epistle
.
 1Peter?
.
> does not reflect the unlettered follower of Jesus seen in the first decade of Christianity.
.
 Are you here admitting that the author of 1Peter bears little resemblance to the Peter of Mk? ... That is an astonishing admission; considering that you (presumably) wish other Believers to take your understanding of the history of these documents seriously (and mayhap even adopt them as their own).
.
> 2 Peter and Jude
.
  Ah, I see that you have noticed that these two epistles are 'joined at the hip' as it were. I wonder if you also see the significance of the obvious literary dependence that characterizes the relationship between these two youngest NT books. How would you explain this relationship? Would you say that the author of 2Peter used Jude as his primary source document? Why or why not? And if so, why would Simon-Peter do something like that (presumably sometime in the 60s)?
.
> belong to a genre that mimics a certain oratory style, drawing heavily from well-known examples
> from the OT described in one sentence vignettes. They beg to be read aloud with pauses for
> audience response (not that I have an audience).
.
 It's good that you should notice the plain fact that these books were consciously written with the intent that they be read aloud to gatherings of Believers. This is because these epistles are essentially written witnesses of prophetic utterance as it was practiced in the second century Egyptian-Greek churches. In this respect it links directly with the book of James (which is also a collection prophetic sermons). All three books constitute a unique and distinct unit within the canon. The fact that all three books are closely bound together (ie. as spiritual brothers, and classic examples of 2C Christian-prophetic literature) is made plain simply by comparing the opening verse of each.
.
 "From Jacob, a slave of God and of Jesus Christ" -- Jm 1:1
.
 "From Judas, a slave of Jesus Christ and brother of Jacob" -- Jude 1:1
.
 "From Simeon-Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ" -- 2Peter 1:1
.
 Hmmmm ... Interesting that our last author should announce himself as a 'slave' (ie. a prophet of the Lord Jesus Christ) *before* he identifies himself as an apostle! Why is that, DonW? It's not at all what one would expect of the 'first pope' and the 'first among the apostles'. A most curious detail this is, and I would dearly love to hear someone - anyone - explain its meaning and significance; rather than simply ignore or explain it away (which appears to be the usual way the exegetes and commentators go; cf.4X: AB#37/1964).
.
 So not only must you explain to us the nature and meaning of the relationship between 2Peter and Jude, but you must *also* explain the nature and meaning of the relationship between 2Peter, Jude, *and* James. If you cannot do so, please have the decency to admit it to our Readers, so that they and I will not be left swinging in the breeze.
.
 btw: Do you know of any churches anywhere in North America that actually read the entire epistle of Jude out to the assembly? ... No? ... And since most Christians get the bulk of their bible-knowledge from their churches, it seems safe to conclude that (aside from a few believers, students, and scholars) Christians are not even exposed to the contents of this very short and readable (and pungent) universal epistle. Perhaps it's just not politically-correct enough. ... And since all this is indeed true, we may well understand that because the People of God are in no way exposed to Christian prophetic literature, they can hardly be expected to recognize it even when they do see it!

P.S.  'More On The Method Of Pure Reflection' dept. presents:
.
 "The procedure employed in an inquiry for gaining such insight was the method of pure reflection. Observation, inspection, tackling and probing, the sheer seeing of what we face, serve to introduce us to the realness of the phenomenon and sharpen our ability to formulate questions conducive to the discovery of what is unique about it. Indeed, it requires much effort to learn which questions should not be asked and which claims must not be entertained. What impairs our sight are habits of seeing as well as the mental concomitants of seeing. Our sight is suffused with knowing, instead of feeling painfully the lack of knowing what we see. The principle to be kept in mind is to know what we see rather than to see what we know." - From 'The Prophets' by A. J. Heschel, Vol.1, p.xi, 1962.

/ -- Original Message -- / From > textman / To > Frank Y Speight / Date > 14 Oct 1998 / Subject > Re: Thessalonians1 /
.
] Frank Y Speight wrote some interesting stuff on promises, oaths and such like things ... <snipped>
.
> textman say: Dear Frank, thx for sending me your fascinating article on promises. Did you not post it
> to one of the ngz? ... In my favorite ng (ie. soc.religion.quaker) there is a thread on oaths and vows
> and promises. I think this article of yours would be right at home therein. ... I do have one small
> question, however. What does all this have to do with my translation of the four Thessalonian
> letters? Frankly, I would be much more interested in your thoughts on them than on the matter of
> oaths. Indeed, I am fishing for responses because the first reaction I received was a good sound
> thrashing ... I mean flaming. And so I am just wondering if anyone likes my Thessalonian articles.
> I did put a lot of work into them, you know!

> Richard writes: Hello Textman. Thank you for your reply. My name is Richard and I use the computer of
> Frank Speight. As you know all True Prophets are very poor and therefore cannot afford a computer.
> (chuckle) 2Cor6:10: "We are poor, yet making many rich; having nothing yet possessing everything."
.
 textman say: Dear Richard, I tend to agree. My computer was a gift from a great lady. I could not afford one myself; having no money of that sort. Paul is right, of course. True Believers do not have the love of money that is necessary to be rich and successful in the World. We set our hopes on spiritual things, and in love have the means by which to properly appreciate all things. We hold the whole world in our hearts. This is what Paul means when he says that we 'possess everything'.
.
> I Love I Thess & 2 Thess but I never heard of 4 Thessalonians. Most of my Bible studies are on
> the End-Times and I quote and analyze 1Thess 4 & 5 and 2Thess 2 quite a bit. Send me an Email
> on what you have done. I am sending you my latest Bible study on the End-Times. Hope you find
> it interesting.
.
 Well, yes and no on that. Please see my commentary on your articles below. As to the essay that follows my four Thess articles, I'm just now in the process of uploading it to my website . . .
.
> I am sure we will be good friends in Heaven where we will have millions of friends including Jesus
> who will love us just the way we are. May our wonderful Friend Jesus be always at your side as
> you read God's Word daily (Acts 17:11) and then do what it says (Jm 1:22). Your eternal friend
> in Jesus,  Richard
.
  I'm none too sure about that "millions of friends" bit, but thx anyway.

The Name of the Anti-Christ
[Or: A COMMENTARY ON RICHARD'S END-TIMES ARTICLES]

> WILL 666 (NERO CAESAR?) AND HIS FALSE PROPHET (POPE JOHN PAUL?) RULE THE WORLD FROM
> ROME (?) DURING THE (1260-DAY?) GREAT TRIBULATION?
.
  textman say: I'm afraid not. Nero is long dead and buried. He will not be making any spectacular come-backs any time soon. Of that you can be sure. As for Pope John Paul being the False Prophet ... Are you referring to JPI or JPII? JPII is not the great 'false prophet' foretold in Revelation. [Nor is the apostle John the author of Revelation.] No, I'm afraid that JPII is just another Romish priest; no better or worse than most others. Indeed, I do not think him an evil man at all. He is, rather, a good man doing the best he can for a troubled church in a crazy mixed-up World. To call him the false prophet is to do him a great injustice.
.
> <snip> In 2Thess 2:3 the Beast of the End-Times is called a "*MAN* of sin or lawlessness" and therefore
> the name of the Beast which adds up to 666 is a *MAN'S* Name which is also confirmed in Rev 13:17b,18
> above. Therefore, the NAME of the Beast which adds up to 666 is a *MAN'S NAME* and could not be the
> name of a woman or a city, country, computer or Satan, etc. <snip>
.
 Actually, Richard, there is no mention of 'the Beast' (as such) in the Thessalonian letters. It's true that Silvanus refers to the 'man of sin', but it is not clear from the text whether he meant this to be taken literally as a certain specific male human being, or was using 'man' in the generic sense. Personally I opt for the latter. Observe how he describes this person: "the man of lawlessness, the son of destruction, the one setting himself against and exalting himself above all being called God or an object of veneration, so as for him in the temple of God to sit, presenting himself that he is God"(2Th.2:3-4). Thus if a woman comes along showing all these traits, shall we discount her simply because she is the 'wrong gender'? That would be a serious error, I think. Nor do I believe that the Beast must be 'a' human being as such. This is because no individual human being can commit the evil that only a large and powerful organization (such as the Woman-Church of Canada) can commit. Therefore, the Beast is not one person, but many; just as the Anti-Christ is not one person, but many. Oh it's true that some individuals are more so than others; and the Wicked One is more so than all others. Nevertheless, it is a mistake to suppose that the vile evil of the Beast & Anti-Christ can be contained in any one human body (male or female).
.
> Will the 6th Caesar (Julius, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius &
> the *6th* is Nero) who ordered the execution of Paul&Peter in *AD 66*;
.
 Actually, it is highly unlikely that this legendary event has any basis in historical reality. The simple truth is that we just don't know how Peter and Paul died. But the probability that Nero killed them both at the same time is vanishingly small. Be advised that although the Faith is encrusted with pious legends and fantasies, it is firmly based on historical realities; on things that actually happened to real concrete actual human beings. ... Blessed be the Christian that can tell the difference between these two confusing and similar things!
.
> be the Beast who will come up from the Abyss (Or Hell-See Rev 11:7 & 17:8) exactly 42
> months (See Rev 13:5b) before the Last Day when Jesus comes again?  <snip>
.
 Highly unlikely.
.
> Christian writings in the early 2nd Century AD show that many Christians at that time believed
> that Nero Caesar (Who adds up to 666 in Hebrew) would return as the Anti-Christ of the End-Times.
> Rev 13:18 "This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight (Even in AD 96), let him (Even in AD 96)
> calculate the beast, for it is a man's number. His (Nero Caesar's) number is 666."
.
 Nero is no threat to the Faith. Ignorant and foolish interpretation of the Scriptures, however, IS!
.
> And so the above Scripture absolutely guarantees that anyone with spiritual wisdom and insight
> could figure out who the Anti-Christ of the End-Times would be even when Revelation was first
> given to the churches in AD 96, and that the the number of his name adds up to 666.  <snip>
.
 But prophecy is NOT about fortune-telling! It IS about spiritual discernment and speaking the Truth. Do you want to figure out who the Anti-Christ is? Yes? Then don't bother your head about letters that double as numbers, and counting things up to the magical and mystical "666". The Anti-Christ is among us, to be sure, but no calculator will point the way to Her. Seek rather those qualities and characteristics that are the essential features of the Wicked One. For the Anti-Christ is unique and undeniable. She appears to the People of God as a prophet and a saint; indeed, as a new manifestation of Christ. She is mentor to the priests, and the Savior of all "oppressed and abused" women. Beauty and Charm are the clothes she wears; and Music is her voice. Wisdom & Compassion are her doctrines; and mutual-love the essence of her faith. Thus, on the outside she is an angel from Heaven clothed in white and radiant light. To the Woman-Church she is the very re-incarnation of Christ. But beneath the surface it is another story altogether. In her heart abides wickedness and cruelty. Lies and deception are the roads she treads. Lust and sensuality are her only 'spiritual realities'. Hatred for men is her guiding light; and apathy the greatest of all her virtues. ... Yes, I have seen the Wicked One! I have looked into her mutual-love filled eyes, and seen the spiritual death and corruption that lives in her hardened heart. Arrogance and vanity swell her mind; and her heart is cold as ice, hard as diamond, and black as coal. She is Death incarnate. Truly she is her Father's daughter. Faithless Daughter of the corrupt and debased Woman-Church. Satanic Daughter of the Father of Lies! This is the only Anti-Christ this perverse nation will ever see. And it is the spiritual and moral blindness of Christians that refuse to acknowledge the Truth that will allow her to utterly destroy the faith, the Church, and the people of God. Yes, the Anti-Christ is a real concrete individual woman. But She is certainly NOT alone. And that is why the true name of the Anti-Christ is LEGION ... For there are MANY like unto Her!
.
> In the first *66* years (AD 30 to AD 96) of the Christian New Covenant by far the most evil "man of sin"
> or man against Christ (Which means *ANTI-CHRIST*) was the *6th* Caesar who killed thousands of
> Christians and ordered the death of God's greatest 2 witnesses according to the Book of Acts (Or Paul
> & Peter) in *AD 66*. On the *66th* Anniversary of the first Lord's Day (?April 7th? AD 96) the *66th*
> and last book of God's Word was given to the churches; which tells of the evil acts of *666* during the
> 1260 days before the 2nd Coming of Jesus on the Last Day. God will also allow *666* or Nero Caesar
> to kill God's greatest 2 witnesses during the 1260-day Great Tribulation (Moses & Elijah) just 3 1/2 days
> before the 7th angel sounds the 7th & Last Trumpet and "It is time to judge the dead and reward all of
> God's servants." (See Rev 11:7-15,18) <snip>
.
 I pity all those poor fools who buy into this bullshit ...
.
> I Thess 5:2-4: "The Day of the Lord (Mentioned in I Thess 4:16,17 & in 2 Thess 2:1-3) will come like a
> thief in the night (To unbelievers). While people are saying "Peace and safety" (See Rev 11:10 & Matt
> 24:50,51) destruction will come on them suddenly." (See 2 Thess 1:7-10 & 2 Pet 3:10,13).... But you,
> brothers, are not in darkness so that this Day (Of the Lord) should surprise you like a thief." (See Rev
> 3:3; Rev 16:15 & 2 Thess 2:1-3) God's Word is very clear that the "Day of the Lord" is just one 24-hour
> day and is also the Day of the Second Coming of Jesus and our Resurrection Day.   <snip>
.
 That is what the selected texts suggest. But even Paulos and Silvanus could not agree as to the precise shape and nature of the events leading up to "the Wrath to Come" (1Thes. 1:10). I suspect that it was their squabbling over these fantastic matters that led to their break-up. That's the only thing that comes from directing your energies towards foolish things (such as predicting and describing the End-Times).
.
> NOTE:  There are many statues of the *exact likeness* of Nero Ceasar including a 151 foot statue in the
> "Golden House" in Rome. The Statue of Liberty (without pedastel) is also exactly 151 feet high...hmm. At
> the beginning of the Tribulation the False Prophet of 666, (Rev13:14:) "Will order the people of the earth
> to set up a statue in honor of the Beast who was wounded (Fatally-Rev 13:3) by the sword and yet lived!"
> (again) This statue of the Beast will be the "exact likeness" of Nero Caesar and could possibly be seen on
> World-Wide TV so that people of all nations will be able to worship this statue as per Rev 13:15b. <snip>
.
 Here we see the full idiocy of End-Times fever (or should that be 'fervor'?). Are all the nations of the World going to worship a statue, as if they never saw one before? Wut? Is this statue going to come to life on television? I think you've been watching too many 'B movies' pal. Get a life already ...
.
> * WILL THE CITY ON 7 HILLS OR *ROME* BE THE END-TIME BABYLON? * Most Bible scholars believe that
> the book of First Peter was written shortly after the beginning of the Neronian & Roman persecution of
> Christians in AD 64 because of I Peter 4:12,13 & 5:8,9. We know that Peter and his wife were living in
> Rome at this time.  <snippage>
.
 No, we don't know that. We do know that 1Peter was NOT written by Peter, and was NOT written as early as 64CE. We also know that Peter lived in Antioch and was quite content there. We also know that round about 68CE he and Mark were inspired to write the first and greatest gospel (which much latter came to be called 'The Gospel According to Mark'). Therefore it is extremely unlikely that a second century document (1Peter) was written before Mk. Do not be deceived by foolish scholars into thinking otherwise!
.
> ANSWER: About 98% of all Christians in AD 96 lived in the vast Roman Empire which was ruled from Rome
> (The evil city on 7 hills) by a Roman Emporer named Domitian Ceasar who made a decree in the last year
> of his life (Or Sept AD 95 to Sept AD 96) that every inhabitant in the Roman Empire must worship statues
> of former Roman Ceasars (Including Nero Ceasar) or be killed or put in prison. God knew that most
> Christians would be ruled by Roman Emporers from Rome during the next few hundred years; and that
> the book of Revelation would be an integral part of their statement of faith.
.
 In fact, John's Reveation was not universally accepted by the early churches. Indeed, many were quite sure that Rev was not sacred scripture. Thus it very nearly didn't make it into the canon at all. It snuck in under the wire only at the last minute; and this is why it's the last book in the Bible!
.
> During this time period Roman Emporers and the city of Rome were considered to be sacred and Divine
> by most Roman citizens. And so if the Christian Statement of Faith or Bible stated that a former Roman
> Emporer named Nero Ceasar was and will be the most evil man of sin; and that he would rule the world
> from Rome; which is called in Rev 17:5b "THE MOTHER OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH" it would
> then be extremely popular and even mandatory for EVERY Roman Emporer after AD96 to search out and
> kill every Christian in the Roman Empire. And so this is the most likely reason that God did not use the
> names of Nero Ceasar and Rome in the book of Revelation even though they will be 2 of the most
> important and evil factors during the Great Tribulation.
.
  My poor dear Readers! Will you place your trust in someone who willfully and consistently spells 'Emperor' as 'Emporer'? Surely that is not a risk consistent with Christian wisdom?
.
> <more snippage> WILL THE REIGN OF 666 AND THE GREAT TRIBULATION LAST EXACTLY 1260 DAYS?
> <snipped the entire remainder of this horrendous portion of the article!>
.
 This is a question without any value or merit whatsoever!
.
> * SPECULATION AS TO THE IDENTITY OF THE FALSE PROPHET OF 666? *
.
 More useless speculating to no good purpose with no good result.
.
> <snip> IICor 11:14,15: "Satan himself masquerades as an ANGEL of light. It is not surprising,
> then, if his servants masquerade as SERVANTS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS."  <more snippage>
.
 There you go. Now you can't say that I disagree with everything in these horrid articles . . .
Oh, right. That's a passage from Paul. Ummm, never mind.
.
> There has been much speculation as to the identity of the False Prophet of 666. In Rev 13:11 we learn
> that the False Prophet will have 2 horns like a "Lamb". The word "Lamb" is used 29 times in Revelation.
> 28 times it refers to our Great Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and one time in Rev 13:11 the word "Lamb"
> is used to describe the "False Prophet" or False Christ (See Matt 24:24a). This leads many Bible scholars
> to believe that the False Prophet might be a great religious leader since he is described as a "Lamb" in
> Rev 13:11. The "False Prophet" is also called the "Beast of the EARTH" in Rev 13:11 which leads us to
> conclude that the "False Prophet" will be alive on "earth"; while the Anti-Christ will come up out of the
> Abyss by way of the sea. <snip>
.
  This is interesting. The Wicked One who lives now as a woman does bear a strong resemblance to a 'lamb'; if charm, meekness and gentleness are lamb-like qualities. Moreover, she is most certainly the False Christ, and she also behaves as a prophet (being a teacher, preacher, and mentor, etc). Moreover, she also has two horns (on her chest)! ... Say now; maybe there's something to all this crap after all? ... Nah
.
> <Rest of article snipped because textman gets a headache when exposed to so much unadulterated BS!>
.
 textman say: I can't believe I read the whole thing! 
.
 And I have only one thing to say to any saints who are determined enough to have reached this point in this posting: Please don't bother your heads about stuff like this. This is NOT what prophecy is about! Trust me; for I know whereof I speak. Using apocalyptic language to highlight the truth is one thing. Making predictions about the End-Times, and calling the Pope the False Prophet (from the evidence of Scripture yet) is something else again. Moreover, it ought to be apparent to every biblically literate Christian that the author of these articles has no real knowledge of the Scriptures. Paul did not write 14 books, but only half are actually from his hand. In the same way, 2Peter is a second century document, and the author of Revelation is not the same man who wrote the fourth gospel and the Johannine epistles. No competent bible scholar will dispute these facts. Therefore, if it is true Christian prophecy you seek, look no further than textman, because he is the only one who is willing and able to give you the straight poop.  ...  And may the Schwartz be with you!

  "And then many will fall away, and betray one another, and hate one another. And many false prophets will arise to lead many astray. And because wickedness is multiplied, the love of most people will grow cold. But they who endure to the end will be saved."  --  [Matthew 24:10-13 / Prophet Version]

textman
*