Bible talk

[Moff Jerjerrod]

I am long past any chance of "making it through" the evangelical gated doorway. I'm a pantheist, btw. My question was pretty simple one. If god knew on day 1 of creation that it would be at least 6000 years before the end times, and in those years he would wipe out out humanity at least once and billions of souls would be condemned to hell, why would he keep going?

One possible answer to consider, and there are a few more, is God loves us all and is not willing that any should perish, but to come to redemption through Christ Jesus?

 

[Angst]

I am long past any chance of "making it through" the evangelical gated doorway. I'm a pantheist, btw. My question was pretty simple one. If god knew on day 1 of creation that it would be at least 6000 years before the end times, and in those years he would wipe out out humanity at least once and billions of souls would be condemned to hell, why would he keep going?

not in the bible:

former me believed that god's nature is outside of time, as this is the nature of deterministic creation and end. if everything comes to pass according to your omnipotence, that everything is a fishbowl where the linearity and actual causality of time is events happening. making reason of the motivations of it never made sense to me. but it's like. if you write up a program to run and do something for 24 hours, the time passing after isn't really you waiting, you already made the code. that's what i'm getting at.

it's actually something that's quite cool when it comes to the nature of prophecy (which, yes, i don't believe is a thing but it's fun to talk about regardless, it's just compelling). prophecy is knowledge that intersects between the fatalistic (immanent, unquestionable nature of things as they are) and the deterministic (that free will is an illusion and causality is preordained). it breaks linear time, muddies past and present.

 

[Birdjaguar]

One possible answer to consider, and there are a few more, is God loves us all and is not willing that any should perish, but to come to redemption through Christ Jesus?

How many perished in the Flood?
How many perished between the flood and Jesus' rising?
Are they saved?
How many non Christians and non saved have died since 33 CE?
How many more will there be before the Second Coming?
There are 8 billion humans alive today; how may will chose Jesus?

Of course, I can quote scripture that says everyone will be saved regardless of their belief, but there is plenty of scripture to support almost anything one wants to believe.

not in the bible:

What is not in the Bible?

 

[Edmund Ironside]

As Mark 9:1 appears to have been the verse which started this whole thread, I feel like I should have a go at answering it.

Full disclosure, this is my intepretation, I have a degree in theology, but I am not a theologian, so I may well be wrong.
But looking at Mark 9:1 and the preceding verse, then it could be referring to the Pentecost and the coming of the Holy Spirit. I have bolded then important part.

38 If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.”
1 And he said to them, “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.”

For those wanting a deeper dive from someone much more knowledgeable then me, Mike Winger has an entire series on the book of Mark, and an entire episode devoted to Mark 9:1-13. Again full disclosure I have not watched the series yet, but this discussion has inspired me to work my way through it.

Anyone looking to read more of the bible I would highly recommend getting a study bible to help you.

Matt Whitman has a nice video going over some of the options:

I have an Archaeology Study Bible in ESV, which I would recommend for anyone who is big into their histoy like me.
Here Mike Winger's review of it:

God Bless you all.

 

[Angst]

What is not in the Bible?

my former position on god that i outlined ^^

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

How many perished in the Flood?
How many perished between the flood and Jesus' rising?
Are they saved?
How many non Christians and non saved have died since 33 CE?
How many more will there be before the Second Coming?
There are 8 billion humans alive today; how may will chose Jesus?

Of course, I can quote scripture that says everyone will be saved regardless of their belief, but there is plenty of scripture to support almost anything one wants to believe.


What is not in the Bible?

Today I came across this article that neatly summarizes the whole story according to the bible. It's a bit lengthy but read what you can and see what you think.

The Bible in a Nutshell :: By Rick Segoine

For those who might not have ever read the entire Bible from cover to cover, this article is a synopsis that follows the progression of main biblical

www.raptureready.com

 

[Hygro]

I find it hard to trust summaries when I went about 30 pages deep reading it quite literally and found it pointing to a very different canon than espoused by religions that claim it. Compatible yes, dare I say even more so, but hard to trust the synopsis of anyone motivated to summarize it to me.

 

[Angst]

Today I came across this article that neatly summarizes the whole story according to the bible. It's a bit lengthy but read what you can and see what you think.

The Bible in a Nutshell :: By Rick Segoine

For those who might not have ever read the entire Bible from cover to cover, this article is a synopsis that follows the progression of main biblical

www.raptureready.com

again, who is this,

so i tried digging;

the website seems again anonymously based

apparently there's raptureready.tv (directed through the site) where i could find two guys, the ceo https://media.eternityready.com/about/ and lmao that picture&formatting, and then amir tsarfati who's a raving cavalry chapel affliated end times preacher i think? (the cavalry chapel seems like a completely insane movement btw). the founder is bonkers and it's this kind of stuff that's dangerous about digging up random usa-based churches (and it's always incredibly disappointing to see as someone who supports religious practice)

 

[Gori the Grey]

again, who is this,

- Rick Segoine

From God to Eternity is a book of twenty first century contemporary proverbs, anecdotes and observations in the form of short sayings and sometimes questions about the most controversial topics that divide people in the modern world as of the year 2021. Written from the perspective of a biblical...

www.ricksegoine.net

 

[Samson]

God knew the ends before the beginnings. The answer to your question lies in logic. God created to suit His purposes and one of His purposes is to glorify Himself by presenting believers as glorified sons. Man was created in God's image. One of the attributes of God is love, and man is capable of loving God because has given him the freedom to so. Love cannot exist in the absence of free will. A tree is a splendid example of a creature that appears to glorify God. It remains rooted obediently where God placed it, limbs outstretched towards the sun as if in worship. But lacking free will, the tree cannot be said to love. Lacking free will, the tree cannot be said to sin.

How do you know that trees do not have free will but we do?

 

[Angst]

- Rick Segoine

From God to Eternity is a book of twenty first century contemporary proverbs, anecdotes and observations in the form of short sayings and sometimes questions about the most controversial topics that divide people in the modern world as of the year 2021. Written from the perspective of a biblical...

www.ricksegoine.net

i'm an idiot, it's at the bottom.

so who is this guy; i looked him up as much as i could, hard to dig, but - he's another apocalyptic.

https://www.raptureready.com/2023/07/18/the-rapture-is-imminent-by-rick-segoine/ , signed, from the same site, this year.

so. from the article i dug up.

like, i could just have gathered it from "RaptureReady.com", but i wanted to give it the benefit of the doubt.

so here's the issue. i looked over another of his articles, but religious imagery like this, speculations about the apocalypse & a want for destruction - while the subject of the beast's assault on humanity isn't explicit, i caution and become very careful with that source. again, there's a question of actual scholarship, but let's put that aside. expectations of rapture are usually connected with the silent implication of which actual sins that one wants to do away with, which is usually stuff like homosexuality, promiscuity, liberalism, etc. and by that i mean big L liberalism, y'know, democracy. that the site is connected to the cavalry chapel (whose founder was a real piece of work) means that i am simply not gonna take "RaptureReady" as a something that reads the bible scholarly; there's recognizing ultraconservative violence in the bible, which quite a few christian scholars (ie scholars that are christian) do, and then there's embracing that while claiming the apocalypse is around to soon cleanse us of vice. i simply can't tell if he's the latter. the language is particularly unspecific, which in these contexts usually means that it's careful dogwhistling. sorry for that assumption, but in his environment, he's well aware of the implications and would word it otherwise to avoid it.

like, for a concrete example to the contrary; i like apocalyptic imagery as much as the next guy; i wrote a book founded in it. but like, if you're gonna do it, it's probably a good idea to explain exactly what vices that cause the world to end. GYBE (the link) are very explicit in their apocalyptic imagery, and what is causing the end of the world. you can use this imagery without covering up what vices you want to cover.

i very much caution any biblical scholarship that aims to describe a soon apocalypse, because it's not particularly biblical as to why it was written as it was (they did expect the end of the world right around the corner); embracing dreams of rapture is usually people hopeful to be able to enforce some pretty gruesome politics. :l and it's not exclusionary to the us.

for @Edmund Ironside , i appreciate the input, but - i don't mean to assume - when i speak to theologians, there's usually a distinction between biblical intention and the religious application of biblical truths. if that makes sense. the bible as an editorial monster, and then how we apply it in life. if you are going to be a christian today, you may indeed want to re-interpret biblical writings to mean a particular festival, but you can still recognize why it's originally written if you want to know what it said. you can be a christian and understand that the bible is an incomplete and untruthful document, y'know; but it can still speak, poetically, about the world, even if it gets facts wrong.

 

[Core Imposter]

Ironside, I watched that video. Seems solid.

 

[Core Imposter]

How do you know that trees do not have free will but we do?

Bing says:

The question of whether trees have free will is a philosophical one that has been debated for centuries. However, from a scientific perspective, trees do not have free will.

I am going with the science.

 

[Angst]

?

science hasn't really defined "free will"

like trees aren't sapient or even sentient (at least so alien that our sentience doesn't translate to theirs), but that doesn't actually equate to notions about free will at all; it's more a concept within philosophy, and from a biological perspective, it's still heavily debated

what kind of bing method are you using? because if you use the new ai-esque feature, this is pretty much a showcase of why you shouldn't do that...

 

[Samson]

Bing says:

The question of whether trees have free will is a philosophical one that has been debated for centuries. However, from a scientific perspective, trees do not have free will.

I am going with the science.

If micro$oft is saying science has said that then it is their AI lying to you. you should not believe everything you read online. Also that is only half the answer.

 

[Core Imposter]

?

science hasn't really defined "free will"

like trees aren't sapient or even sentient (at least so alien that our sentience doesn't translate to theirs), but that doesn't actually equate to notions about free will at all; it's more a concept within philosophy, and from a biological perspective, it's still heavily debated

what kind of bing method are you using? because if you use the new ai-esque feature, this is pretty much a showcase of why you shouldn't do that...

Seriously? Ok, I wasn't being serious. I thought would be funny to quote Bing. The AI did also note the philosophical debate. I left that out

 

[Valka D'Ur]

One possible answer to consider, and there are a few more, is God loves us all and is not willing that any should perish, but to come to redemption through Christ Jesus?

How does that square with all the people he ordered killed in the Old Testament? You can't come to redemption through someone who doesn't exist (yet).

A tree is a splendid example of a creature that appears to glorify God. It remains rooted obediently where God placed it, limbs outstretched towards the sun as if in worship. But lacking free will, the tree cannot be said to love. Lacking free will, the tree cannot be said to sin.

Trees stretch toward the Sun because they want light for photosynthesis. If trees were to worship any deity also worshiped by humans, it would either be Apollo or Ra or any of dozens of others.

How do you conclude that trees can't love?

I read a Merlin story a few months ago in which an apple tree fell in love with Sir Gwaine (he's very fond of apples). The tree got jealous when Gwaine ate an apple from another tree, and consequently decided it would no longer provide any fruit. It only relented when Gwaine most sincerely apologized and promised to never eat any other apples than those produced by this specific tree.

Bing says:

The question of whether trees have free will is a philosophical one that has been debated for centuries. However, from a scientific perspective, trees do not have free will.

I am going with the science.

And what source does Bing use to arrive at this conclusion?

 

[Angst]

Seriously? Ok, I wasn't being serious. I thought would be funny to quote Bing. The AI did also note the philosophical debate. I left that out

ah ok

 

[FriendlyFire]

As Mark 9:1 appears to have been the verse which started this whole thread, I feel like I should have a go at answering it.
God Bless you all.

I give him 4 minutes of my time and its just the usual Christian apologist before my brain gave up
If you would like to surmise I would be happy to read. But no one one is going to bother watching several hours

Cant imagine where the First Christians got the idea that Jesus would return within there generation from, its a mystery

 

[FriendlyFire]

God knew the ends before the beginnings. The answer to your question lies in logic. God created to suit His purposes and one of His purposes is to glorify Himself by presenting believers as glorified sons. Man was created in God's image. One of the attributes of God is love, and man is capable of loving God because has given him the freedom to so. Love cannot exist in the absence of free will. A tree is a splendid example of a creature that appears to glorify God. It remains rooted obediently where God placed it, limbs outstretched towards the sun as if in worship. But lacking free will, the tree cannot be said to love. Lacking free will, the tree cannot be said to sin.

Free will except when God decided to "Harden your heart"
Not that even happened (Exodus), as it was mostly invent from thin air

E: Plus this entire glorify himself, go and enslave your neighbors and slaughter them except for the women virgins whom you can keep
Not exactly glorious