Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Vengeance of the Martyrs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by whag View Post

    From the two most well-known martyrs in the NT:

    Acts 7:59
    And they stoned Stephen as he was calling on God and saying, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”

    Luke 23:46
    Jesus called out with a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.”


    Where are you going with this line of questioning, counselor? I'm very curious what else you think they could be.
    I'm all for cross correlation of the texts, provided that there is a clear connection. The word used in Revelation 6:9 is "souls," but you have drawn a logical connection at least. I'm not sure that anything exists to explain why Jesus and Stephen stipulated "spirit." Eternal life/salvation is extended to the soul, with little attention being paid to the role of a person's spirit, though a distinction between the two is drawn in Hebrews 4:12. The text of Revelation 6:9 doesn't necessarily point to a group of disembodied souls, nor does it show that they are embodied, though disembodied seems the more likely, admittedly.


    No doubt, but the exchange between the martyrs and God is a simple question followed by an answer--not obviously symbolic (expect for maybe the robes, which could be both real and symbolic or just symbols). If you believe all the elements are symbolic, you'll have to explain the author's intent. Do you believe the exchange takes place or stands for something else?
    I believe the exchange takes place, and along the lines that Diogenes introduces, I believe the request for vengeance should be interpreted along the lines of (righteous) retribution: given that vengeance tends to carry (rightly or wrongly) connotations of an unmoderated response.
    As for the robes, I agree. White robes feature in Revelation 7:13-14, and there is a possible connection with the appropriate attire mentioned in Matthew 22:11-13.
    Last edited by tabibito; 09-08-2023, 01:11 AM.
    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
    .
    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
    Scripture before Tradition:
    but that won't prevent others from
    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
    of the right to call yourself Christian.

    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by tabibito View Post
      I'm all for cross correlation of the texts, provided that there is a clear connection. The word used in Revelation 6:9 is "souls," but you have drawn a logical connection at least. I'm not sure that anything exists to explain why Jesus and Stephen stipulated "spirit."
      LOL. Honestly, if you were dying, would you be thinking that deliberately?

      Originally posted by tabibito View Post
      Eternal life/salvation is extended to the soul, with little attention being paid to the role of a person's spirit, though a distinction between the two is drawn in Hebrews 4:12. The text of Revelation 6:9 doesn't necessarily point to a group of disembodied souls, nor does it show that they are embodied, though disembodied seems the more likely, admittedly.
      You’re getting dangerously close to How many theologians does it take to screw in a lightbulb? territory. The distinction isn’t at all significant relative to the point: obviously dead and presumably eternally living martyrs reminding God that justice and vengeance are due.

      Originally posted by tabibito View Post
      I believe the exchange takes place, and along the lines that Diogenes introduces, I believe the request for vengeance should be interpreted along the lines of (righteous) retribution: given that vengeance tends to carry (rightly or wrongly) connotations of an unmoderated response.
      To clarify, you believe that a metaphorical wax seal is broken that cues their literal unison verbalization of the question, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” Don’t forget: martyred Paul, “chief of all sinners,” would be among this group. This sounds uncharacteristic of a man who wouldn’t likely have forgotten he once was due the same wrath. It sounds uncharacteristic of Jesus to assure them popcorn would soon be served.

      I reiterate, like all apocalypses, it sounds like an embittered and impatient man wrote this. In all your restudying, has anything leapt out at you that’d distinguish Revelation as manifestly inspired compared to non-manifestly inspired pseudonymous apocalypses?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by whag View Post
        LOL. Honestly, if you were dying, would you be thinking that deliberately?
        It is amazing what people might think about when they are close to death, and I say that from repeated personal experiences. Not that I'm claiming to speak for others who have been in the same position.



        You’re getting dangerously close to How many theologians does it take to screw in a lightbulb? territory. The distinction isn’t at all significant relative to the point: obviously dead and presumably eternally living martyrs reminding God that justice and vengeance are due.
        But you are the one who read souls as spirits, and assumed disembodied (or so I interpreted your comments).

        To clarify, you believe that a metaphorical wax seal is broken that cues their literal unison verbalization of the question, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” Don’t forget: martyred Paul, “chief of all sinners,” would be among this group. This sounds uncharacteristic of a man who wouldn’t likely have forgotten he once was due the same wrath. It sounds uncharacteristic of Jesus to assure them popcorn would soon be served.

        I reiterate, like all apocalypses, it sounds like an embittered and impatient man wrote this. In all your restudying, has anything leapt out at you that’d distinguish Revelation as manifestly inspired compared to non-manifestly inspired pseudonymous apocalypses?
        It there were any points that leapt out as inspired, it still would not show that the book as a whole was inspired, but chapter 12 provides a key to reading Revelation as being couched in poetical allusion or similar.
        (Not all the following points enjoy majority consensus). Chapter 12 recounts past events beginning with Mary's pregnancy, and traces through Christ's birth, the flight to Egypt (just short of 3.5 years (possibly)), Satan's response, the war in heaven during Christ's mission, and the continuing attempts to bring Mary down. It concludes with Satan's activity against believers which continues in the writer's present and into the future.
        Revelation 12 is easily comprehensible when it is read in hindsight. Had it been written earlier, the most extraordinarily alert of readers might have been able to comprehend the chapter if they had seen Jesus' family flee to Egypt and begin their return to the territory of Judah, only to change course and retreat to the Galilee region.
        Much of Revelation will be comprehensible only after the time of the two witnesses mentioned in chapter 11, with a few alert readers perhaps identifying their advent part way into their mission.
        Last edited by tabibito; 09-08-2023, 02:16 PM.
        1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
        .
        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
        Scripture before Tradition:
        but that won't prevent others from
        taking it upon themselves to deprive you
        of the right to call yourself Christian.

        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by whag View Post

          It makes no sense for martyrs to remind God about repayment since Jesus circumvented their justice (how quickly that's forgotten).

          They literally ask the question in unison when the literal wax is broken?

          It's not a rhetorical question since Jesus answers them: "Then they were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been."

          A rhetorical question being answered does not prevent a question from being rhetorical device. The question could be liturgical in nature. The question could be to edify the reader and serve as a reminder that the will of the individual is subordinate to with the will of God. If you wish with contend that the question is a genuine question, you would need to justify that. The martyrs would already be in Heaven and would have little need to have their blood avenged nor would they have any fret their blood would not be avenged. There's no compelling reason for the martyrs to be concerned with whether or not there would be any repercussions to their deaths for those who had them killed. I see no reason for it to be the kind of question you're trying to make it.



          You believe the millennial reign is literal?
          I have no issue with a literal millennial reign.
          P1) If , then I win.

          P2)

          C) I win.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
            A rhetorical question being answered does not prevent a question from being rhetorical device. The question could be liturgical in nature.
            Yea, you already said that, and I responded. It’s not a prayer but a genuine exchange between two entities reported by a witness. They’re finally in God’s company, so a prayer wouldn’t even make sense.

            Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
            The question could be to edify the reader and serve as a reminder that the will of the individual is subordinate to with the will of God. If you wish with contend that the question is a genuine question, you would need to justify that.
            It’s up to you to back up your claim it’s a liturgy rather than a genuine question. There’s no evidence for the former or you would have provided it. There’s also no support for your claim that the exchange takes place solely for the benefit of the reader. It’s a future event that John witnesses with no indication it’s a performance to remind Christians their will is subordinate to God’s. What believer would argue human will overrode divine will, anyway? That borders on the blasphemous.

            Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
            The martyrs would already be in Heaven and would have little need to have their blood avenged nor would they have any fret their blood would not be avenged.
            That’s what I’ve been saying. You’re merely repeating what I said and excusing it by calling it a liturgical performance for the reader (sans any commentary support, I might add).

            Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
            There's no compelling reason for the martyrs to be concerned with whether or not there would be any repercussions to their deaths for those who had them killed.
            Exactly. John’s got it twisted because he’s likely bitter about his own persecution and Jesus’ delayed return. He’s projecting his emotions onto the martyrs, forgetting in his old age that formerly persecuting Paul joins in the chorus. Apocalyptists aren’t known for thinking things through.

            Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
            I see no reason for it to be the kind of question you're trying to make it.
            You don’t see it because I’ve clearly explained the problem with it, forcing you to propose—with zero support— that it’s actually a prayer said solely for the benefit of the reader.

            Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
            I have no issue with a literal millennial reign.
            So we have at least a thousand years to go before ol’ Beelzebub is vanquished?

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by whag View Post

              Yea, you already said that, and I responded.
              We have yet to explore rhetorical questions as a rhetorical device.

              It’s not a prayer but a genuine exchange between two entities reported by a witness.
              You would need to support it's a "genuine exchange" in that the question is itself a genuine question.


              They’re finally in God’s company, so a prayer wouldn’t even make sense.
              In the presence of God would be the best place to make a supplicative prayer ie a petition.


              It’s up to you to back up your claim it’s a liturgy rather than a genuine question.
              You would need to support it being a genuine prayer.


              There’s no evidence for the former or you would have provided it.
              A communal response is similar to liturgical practices. If you're not familiar with that kind of ritual, that's something different.


              There’s also no support for your claim that the exchange takes place solely for the benefit of the reader. It’s a future event that John witnesses with no indication it’s a performance to remind Christians their will is subordinate to God’s.
              I said "could be" which is not the a definitive claim of the sole reason for the recording or the question.


              What believer would argue human will overrode divine will, anyway? That borders on the blasphemous.
              I take it you're not familiar with the Lord's Prayer. Part of Christianity is kind of ego death. Assuming it is a genuine question on the part of the martyrs, the reply is a reproach that the martyrs should have their will to be subordinate to the God's will in allowing the fullness of the number of martyrs to come to pass.


              That’s what I’ve been saying. You’re merely repeating what I said and excusing it by calling it a liturgical performance for the reader (sans any commentary support, I might add).
              I've given commentary. Given the fact the martyrs are in Heaven, they would know the final eschatological results. There's no reason to believe it is a genuine questions. You have the seal lifted, a communal response, and a reply. It has similarities to how a liturgy functions.


              You don’t see it because I’ve clearly explained the problem with it, forcing you to propose—with zero support— that it’s actually a prayer said solely for the benefit of the reader.
              Assuming it is a genuine question, it's no different than a murder victim's family asking for justice and the max penalty. There's no difference yet you call one vengeance. The response to the martyrs is that the number of martyrs is not complete at that instance and they need patience.



              So we have at least a thousand years to go before ol’ Beelzebub is vanquished?
              Iirc, the Millennial Kingdom is post-Trib.
              P1) If , then I win.

              P2)

              C) I win.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

                We have yet to explore rhetorical questions as a rhetorical device.
                I wonder why:

                Revelation 6:10 Commentaries: and they cried out with a loud voice, saying, "How long, O Lord, holy and true, will You refrain from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?" (biblehub.com)

                Do a search for "rhetorical."

                Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
                You would need to support it's a "genuine exchange" in that the question is itself a genuine question.
                You need to demonstrate otherwise. You haven't because most commentaries acknowledge it as a genuine question. A liturgical prayer does not help you, since prayers can include genuine questions with expectation of an answer.

                Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
                In the presence of God would be the best place to make a supplicative prayer ie a petition.
                pe·ti·tion
                [pəˈtiSHən]
                VERB
                1. make or present a formal request to (an authority) with respect to a particular cause:
                Synonyms: request, ask, entreat, implore, beseech

                I concede many commentators call it a prayer, but prayer doesn't preclude genuine asks. Moreover, it's not a prayer in the common sense since prayers aren't real time exchanges, while this is clearly described as a genuine interaction.

                Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
                You would need to support it being a genuine prayer.
                You did so but without demonstrating the prayer served as a rhetorical device. There is no support for that.

                Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
                I take it you're not familiar with the Lord's Prayer. Part of Christianity is kind of ego death. Assuming it is a genuine question on the part of the martyrs, the reply is a reproach that the martyrs should have their will to be subordinate to the God's will in allowing the fullness of the number of martyrs to come to pass.
                The reply is anything but a reproach. Jesus acknowledges the impatience of the martyrs by saying rest a little while longer and giving them white robes to calm their angst for having not yet been avenged.

                Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
                I've given commentary. Given the fact the martyrs are in Heaven, they would know the final eschatological results. There's no reason to believe it is a genuine questions. You have the seal lifted, a communal response, and a reply. It has similarities to how a liturgy functions.
                Given the fact the martyrs are in Heaven, they would know Jesus favored the virtue of forgiveness over the animalistic urge for vengeance. Given the fact the martyrs are in Heaven, they would know that Jesus said, "Father forgive them for they know not what they do." This just an old and embittered John projecting his impatience for vengeance onto the martyrs.

                Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
                Assuming it is a genuine question, it's no different than a murder victim's family asking for justice and the max penalty
                Except for these are martyrs, not average people. Strangely, John forgets himself and describes them as average people with fleshly desires.

                Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
                There's no difference yet you call one vengeance.
                Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
                The response to the martyrs is that the number of martyrs is not complete at that instance and they need patience.
                Exactly. Their petition denotes impatience, so Jesus tells them to wait a little while longer.

                Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
                Iirc, the Millennial Kingdom is post-Trib.
                If you remember correctly? LOL

                Satan is released to have more fun after the millennial reign, so, yes, he has at least 1,000 more years before he's vanquished according to the Bible.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                  It is amazing what people might think about when they are close to death, and I say that from repeated personal experiences. Not that I'm claiming to speak for others who have been in the same position.
                  No doubt. Typically, however, they don't stipulate--especially with regard to straining-at-a-gnat issues like spirit vs. soul. That's something theologians and lawyers do rather than dying people experiencing extreme emotion.

                  Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                  But you are the one who read souls as spirits, and assumed disembodied (or so I interpreted your comments).
                  I'd really like to know what you were getting at with that quibble. Obviously, the martyrs were dead and pre-glorification-disembodied, so what in the sam hell were you talking about if soul, spirit, and ghost all mean immaterial human beings?

                  Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                  It there were any points that leapt out as inspired, it still would not show that the book as a whole was inspired, but chapter 12 provides a key to reading Revelation as being couched in poetical allusion or similar.
                  (Not all the following points enjoy majority consensus). Chapter 12 recounts past events beginning with Mary's pregnancy, and traces through Christ's birth, the flight to Egypt (just short of 3.5 years (possibly)), Satan's response, the war in heaven during Christ's mission, and the continuing attempts to bring Mary down. It concludes with Satan's activity against believers which continues in the writer's present and into the future.
                  Revelation 12 is easily comprehensible when it is read in hindsight. Had it been written earlier, the most extraordinarily alert of readers might have been able to comprehend the chapter if they had seen Jesus' family flee to Egypt and begin their return to the territory of Judah, only to change course and retreat to the Galilee region.
                  Much of Revelation will be comprehensible only after the time of the two witnesses mentioned in chapter 11, with a few alert readers perhaps identifying their advent part way into their mission.
                  Dr. Raymond Stantz: This is hot, Ray. - Symmetrical book-stacking. Just like the Philadelphia mass turbulence of 1947.

                  Dr. Peter Venkman: You're right. No human being would stack books like this.


                  Re: the bolded, the theme of spiritual warfare is anthropomorphic to the extreme. It appears in so many myths and religious traditions because it's a reflection of us and why we fight. It strikes my curiosity what you think a war of spirits in Heaven looks like (e.g., what do you imagine are the instruments of that war?).

                  Why do you believe John is telling something true here any more than the authors of 1-3 Enoch?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by whag View Post

                    No doubt. Typically, however, they don't stipulate--especially with regard to straining-at-a-gnat issues like spirit vs. soul. That's something theologians and lawyers do rather than dying people experiencing extreme emotion.



                    I'd really like to know what you were getting at with that quibble. Obviously, the martyrs were dead and pre-glorification-disembodied, so what in the sam hell were you talking about if soul, spirit, and ghost all mean immaterial human beings?
                    "Soul" does not automatically mean disembodied.
                    Revelation terms them the souls of martyrs, and context shows that they had been killed. Adding "disembodied," for all that it is likely to be an accurate assessment, might change the meaning of the text.
                    As to why I insist on a strict adherence to what is written: too many false precepts circulate because someone has taken the trouble to add an opinion to what is written. As an example, a story popular in some Charismatic circles is that Acts 2:8 shows that, during Pentecost, members of the gathered crowd of onlookers were miraculously granted the ability to hear in their own languages what the disciples were saying: Acts 2:4, 6, 11 notwithstanding.
                    Strict adherence does not lead to a dozen and more different interpretations of the one text, and it does reliably identify ambiguous texts (those have no more than two or three possible interpretations.)

                    Re: the bolded, the theme of spiritual warfare is anthropomorphic to the extreme. It appears in so many myths and religious traditions because it's a reflection of us and why we fight. It strikes my curiosity what you think a war of spirits in Heaven looks like (e.g., what do you imagine are the instruments of that war?).
                    What weaponry? I doubt that it has a physical component. However, Jesus did claim to have seen Satan fall like lightning from heaven during his mission, so some sort of catastrophic (from Satan's point of view) upset is indicated.

                    Why do you believe John is telling something true here any more than the authors of 1-3 Enoch?
                    The author(s) of Enoch claim that Enoch wrote that long after he had departed the Earth. Whether or not Enoch died is left open in the Old Testament record - though his death is a likely assessment. Nonetheless, some Christian and Jewish sects regard the books as canonical. Whether they regarded Enoch as canonical or not, certain of Christ's disciples regarded the works as authoritative, at least where some of its content is concerned. For mine, too much runs counter to what is known of cosmology to accept it as scripture. IMO it should still be considered worthy of inclusion in Christian studies and valuable, if only because it is cited in a way that indicates Christ's disciples considered it authoritative. I place it as at least on par with the writings of the Early Church Fathers.
                    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                    .
                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                    Scripture before Tradition:
                    but that won't prevent others from
                    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                    of the right to call yourself Christian.

                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by whag View Post
                      In Revelation, John reports seeing the martyrs in Heaven loudly asking Jesus when their deaths will be avenged. Jesus responds that the remainder of living Christians need to be killed before their bloodlust is satisfied. That’s a long time (thousands of years) relative to how long they’ve already been there (a few years at most?). The temporal reference is strange, since they’re already impatient, and Jesus is saying “soon.” (Even through the figurative lens, it’s a puzzling scene. I think John intended for his audience to visualize his report as he saw it—literally.)

                      Revelation 6:9–11
                      9 When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne. 10 They cried out with a loud voice, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” 11 Then they were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been.

                      That passage always seemed odd to me. They are in Heaven with Jesus, albeit not yet glorified and in spirit form, but their main concern is karma for their killers? “Avenge our blood” clearly is a reference to their anger over being killed for the faith. Martyrs aren’t typically known for having these feelings but consider it an honor to die in the manner they chose. Jesus even implores God to forgive those who killed him.

                      Nothing in particular about Revelation has the signature of an inspired vision that’s any different than the other esoteric apocalypses. This in particular just sounds like something an old bitter man would write. If not, what obvious signature of inspiration am I missing here?

                      I request that H_A and JimL please not participate here. Thank you.
                      This is probably helpful:
                      Revelation 20:4-6.
                      Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands; they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

                      These thrones set up—plural, notice again it’s plural—and that these who have been—these martyrs!—those who have been beheaded, they come to life and they reign with Christ. They are given this authority to judge. They are participating now in the Ascension, because the Ascension is not just a matter of going up; it’s a matter of this path. This is where we started, with the big footprints: the path to the throne, the path to the enthronement, the victory at the end of all the works being done. And now these saints have participated in that; they have been doing the works of God. They have walked the same path with Christ, and they are now seated on thrones beside his, and they reign with Christ. And this is, as St. John says here, the first resurrection, this experience of these saints.

                      They are priests, as it says, of God and of Christ, reigning with him. What does it mean that they’re priests? Well, priests basically have two jobs: they offer sacrifices and they intercede for others. And we see them, especially there in Revelation, interceding before the throne of God. So this is the telos of mankind’s possibility, that he join Christ in his ascension and that he reign with him, next to him, that he participates in those same works, having participated in those works along the way, having walked the path, with the big footprints, the path of God himself.

                      Fr. Stephen: Right, and St. John here… I mean, it’s beyond doubt. He’s using the same language Daniel used about the thrones being set. And right after the passage you read is where the dragon is judged, just like the beast is judged in Daniel. So St. John is describing the same scene that the Prophet Daniel is. So this isn’t Daniel talking about one thing and St. John talking about something else in the future; this is part and parcel of the ascension and the enthronement, and this is part and parcel of he’s drawing on what Daniel was talking about when he was talking about how the vision was interpreted to him, that when the kingdom is entrusted to Christ, when he receives the dominion, that dominion is also received by the people of the saints of the Most High, and they reign and rule with him for this period of time in the midst of his enemies, and the live to serve as priests and intercede, and they rule with him until the time comes for the end.
                      ....
                      So when Daniel had his vision, and that vision was recorded and given to God’s people, and when the gospels and the Acts of the Apostles were written and described Christ’s Ascension, and when St. John received his vision and wrote the book of Revelation, and they wrote about this reality we’ve been talking about tonight, they did it to people who were suffering. Not people who were suffering from insecurities, not people who were suffering from sort of low-grade inconveniences and minor problems, but people who were suffering, people who were enslaved, people who had family members being killed, sometimes in front of them, sometimes tortured to death, for trying to be faithful to God.

                      And in all of these cases, what this vision proclaims very powerfully is that, regardless of who claims to be lord, whether it’s Nebuchadnezzar, whether it’s Cyrus or Darius, whether it’s Antiochus Epiphanes, whether it’s Caesar—whoever claims to be lord—isn’t. Whoever claims to be lord is a pretender and a fake, just like the gods they worship, because the one who is truly Lord is our Lord Jesus Christ. He is the one who has all dominion and authority on earth.

                      The only thing the fake lords can do it kill and destroy. They’re sort of like Jannes and Jambres, the magicians in Egypt, who come to—this sometimes gives people problems, because they’re like: “Well, how could they replicate what Moses did?” Think about what they replicated. Through Moses, all of the drinkable water in Egypt is turned into blood except for a very little bit, and the magicians show up and turn that last little bit into blood and make it undrinkable. Thanks. And then, you know, Egypt is infested with frogs and vermin, and they’re like, “Hey, we can make more frogs and vermin!” So, yeah, they can destroy; they can kill—they can’t create; they can’t do what God does.

                      So in their anger and to try to prove that they’re really lord, they will come and they will inflict suffering. They will come and kill the people of God. They will come and attack them, at the behest of the gods that they worship. But what we see in the saints and the martyrs, is that they had had this same vision, like St. Stephen had this vision, the vision we see described, of Christ enthroned—they would literally in some cases mock the people who were torturing them to death. They would make jokes as they were being fried on a rack, that they were done on the one side and needed to be flipped over, like St. Lawrence. They would ignore the sufferings; they were unimportant, because the truth is that no one can harm the righteous man. The person who loves Christ and belongs to Christ, the worst they could do to you is kill you, and when that happens you go to rule and reign with him, including ruling and reigning over and eventually judging that person who murdered you. That’s the promise that we have in this vision.

                      So if we really understand what the Ascension is about, this should give us a lot more confidence in the way that we live our life. This is where St. Paul got his confidence, despite the shipwrecks and the beatings and the persecution and the hatred and the mocking he took. He knew that for him to live was Christ and to die was gain, and so he didn’t have to be afraid of anything or anyone. Anything anyone did to him would ultimately work for his benefit, for his blessings and his glory, and blessings and glory that are eternal, over against sufferings that are temporary, even if they go on for our whole lives here on this earth.

                      So that, to me, I think, is sort of a take-away. If we really have this vision before us, then all of a sudden we don’t have to worry about who’s president. We don’t have to worry about whether certain bills pass Congress. We don’t really have to worry about anything any more, because we serve and more importantly are loved by the God who rules over all of it.

                      In these apocalypses, time is not easy to judge; in the amillennial position (historically the dominant view in the church), the "thousand years" is now, and the scene in Rev. 6 is actually looking back in time.

                      (Apropos of nothing, the thread title keeps reminding me of a song by the noted theologian Alice Cooper):



                      Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                      Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                      sigpic
                      I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                        So if we really understand what the Ascension is about, this should give us a lot more confidence in the way that we live our life. This is where St. Paul got his confidence, despite the shipwrecks and the beatings and the persecution and the hatred and the mocking he took. He knew that for him to live was Christ and to die was gain, and so he didn’t have to be afraid of anything or anyone. Anything anyone did to him would ultimately work for his benefit, for his blessings and his glory, and blessings and glory that are eternal, over against sufferings that are temporary, even if they go on for our whole lives here on this earth.
                        Yes, it seems Paul would be among this group asking when their blood will be avenged, which is at odds with a man who considered his death a blessing.

                        Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                        So that, to me, I think, is sort of a take-away. If we really have this vision before us, then all of a sudden we don’t have to worry about who’s president. We don’t have to worry about whether certain bills pass Congress. We don’t really have to worry about anything any more, because we serve and more importantly are loved by the God who rules over all of it.
                        Political and legislative concern in the Christian community is no less intense than in the non-Christian community.

                        In these apocalypses, time is not easy to judge; in the amillennial position (historically the dominant view in the church), the "thousand years" is now, and the scene in Rev. 6 is actually looking back in time.
                        The uncharacteristic portrayal of martyrs impatient for avengement is more significant than when this takes place. Either way, they're waiting at least a thousand years.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                          "Soul" does not automatically mean disembodied.
                          Revelation terms them the souls of martyrs, and context shows that they had been killed. Adding "disembodied," for all that it is likely to be an accurate assessment, might change the meaning of the text.
                          As to why I insist on a strict adherence to what is written: too many false precepts circulate because someone has taken the trouble to add an opinion to what is written. As an example, a story popular in some Charismatic circles is that Acts 2:8 shows that, during Pentecost, members of the gathered crowd of onlookers were miraculously granted the ability to hear in their own languages what the disciples were saying: Acts 2:4, 6, 11 notwithstanding.
                          Strict adherence does not lead to a dozen and more different interpretations of the one text, and it does reliably identify ambiguous texts (those have no more than two or three possible interpretations.)
                          There was no danger of that here. Obviously, we weren't talking about corporeal beings. The concept of a pre-Heaven Heaven is ridiculous enough. Let's not pile silliness onto absurdity.

                          Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                          What weaponry? I doubt that it has a physical component. However, Jesus did claim to have seen Satan fall like lightning from heaven during his mission, so some sort of catastrophic (from Satan's point of view) upset is indicated.
                          I didn't saying anything about physical but asked what the war consisted of. How do spirits fight with each other and what exactly are they fighting about in Heaven while the passion play unfolds?

                          Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                          The author(s) of Enoch claim that Enoch wrote that long after he had departed the Earth. Whether or not Enoch died is left open in the Old Testament record - though his death is a likely assessment.
                          ?

                          Genesis 5:24
                          Enoch walked faithfully with God; then he was no more, because God took him away.

                          Hebrews 11:15
                          By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death: “He could not be found, because God had taken him away.” For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God.


                          Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                          Nonetheless, some Christian and Jewish sects regard the books as canonical. Whether they regarded Enoch as canonical or not, certain of Christ's disciples regarded the works as authoritative, at least where some of its content is concerned. For mine, too much runs counter to what is known of cosmology to accept it as scripture. IMO it should still be considered worthy of inclusion in Christian studies and valuable, if only because it is cited in a way that indicates Christ's disciples considered it authoritative. I place it as at least on par with the writings of the Early Church Fathers.
                          What specifically?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by whag View Post

                            There was no danger of that here. Obviously, we weren't talking about corporeal beings. The concept of a pre-Heaven Heaven is ridiculous enough. Let's not pile silliness onto absurdity.
                            Given that this is a vision of times yet future, it is entirely possible that the souls had been clothed with imperishable flesh in accordance with the expectation arising from the description of the future state of the revived-to-life faithful.



                            I didn't saying anything about physical but asked what the war consisted of. How do spirits fight with each other and what exactly are they fighting about in Heaven while the passion play unfolds?
                            No description of the war is provided. It is only said that no place in heaven was subsequently provided for Satan.



                            ?

                            Genesis 5:24
                            Enoch walked faithfully with God; then he was no more, because God took him away.

                            Hebrews 11:15
                            By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death: “He could not be found, because God had taken him away.” For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God.
                            "Was no more" without a qualifier would usually indicate death. "Was no more (to be seen/found)" and a variety of other expressions would indicate that he might not have died. The author of Hebrews does not provide a citation, so why he stated that Enoch had not died is an open question. However, if he had not died, neither had he been granted access to heaven. Paradise maybe, but not heaven.

                            What specifically?
                            The sun making entry through different doors depending on the season would be one. (shown in a vision, so it can perhaps be argued.)
                            The lunar cycle falling an average four days short of the solar cycle each year is more of a problem.
                            The book as a whole can't be accepted as God-inspired, but that doesn't rule out the inclusion of inspired passages.
                            Last edited by tabibito; 09-17-2023, 10:53 PM.
                            1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                            .
                            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                            Scripture before Tradition:
                            but that won't prevent others from
                            taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                            of the right to call yourself Christian.

                            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by whag View Post

                              Yes, it seems Paul would be among this group asking when their blood will be avenged, which is at odds with a man who considered his death a blessing.
                              Just because Paul considered death to be gain for himself in no way means that the perpetrator is innocent of wrongdoing. "Woe to the world because of offenses! For offenses must come, but woe to that man by whom the offense comes!" (Mat. 18:7) Jesus is of course talking about his own death there, but it is equally applicable to the death of martyrs.
                              Political and legislative concern in the Christian community is no less intense than in the non-Christian community.
                              The Christian who made the statement is not an evangelical.
                              The uncharacteristic portrayal of martyrs impatient for avengement is more significant than when this takes place. Either way, they're waiting at least a thousand years.
                              How is it uncharacteristic? Keep in mind that every portrayal in the Bible is not positive.
                              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                              sigpic
                              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                                Just because Paul considered death to be gain for himself in no way means that the perpetrator is innocent of wrongdoing.
                                Just because Jesus said “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do,” does not mean that the perpetrators were innocent of wrongdoing.

                                Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                                The Christian who made the statement is not an evangelical.
                                I never said he was an evangelical.

                                Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                                How is it uncharacteristic? Keep in mind that every portrayal in the Bible is not positive.
                                Paul, Stephen, and Perpetua don’t seem like the types who would creepily ask Jesus in unison when their blood will be avenged. I can’t say it any other way than that.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by shunyadragon, 02-15-2024, 12:52 PM
                                74 responses
                                309 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 02-06-2024, 01:46 PM
                                60 responses
                                319 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 02-04-2024, 06:06 AM
                                144 responses
                                721 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 02-03-2024, 09:07 AM
                                62 responses
                                317 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post eider
                                by eider
                                 
                                Started by whag, 01-26-2024, 01:08 PM
                                53 responses
                                311 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X