Sunday, May 9, 2010

Debunking Christianity: How Can We Decide Who Is Wrong?

I've recently commented on a post  by John W. Loftus on his blog. One of the readers of Loftus blog seems to have disagreed with me very much. He responded to my comments by making distinct comments to the points I raised. I've decided to respond in kind. My responses are in red.

Marcus McElhaney, You said, So nothing can be known to exist if it can't be weighed, counted or measured? Is that what you are postulating? Is that what you mean? Personally, I certainly hope that's what John means. What's more, I'll bet that that is how you live your life, too: you demand evidence for everything in your life. Your profile says you're becoming a minister. Does COGIC demand evidence that you are proficient at passing collection plates to pay for miracles?  How dare they demand such proof!  

No. They don't. He obviously knows nothing about Christianity in general or the Church of God in Christ in particular. You cannot pay for miracles

Are they suggesting that the Holy Spirit in you must be verified?
No COGIC does not demand verification. Jesus does. 
34"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.  - John 13:34-35
If we don't love one another that proves we are not one of  His people. If God did not care for us to know how to verify if we are truly His or not then why is so much information is given in the Bible so that we know what the metrics are?
 19The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
 22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other. Galatians 5: 19-26
And there is more. But because I think the reader can read I'll just leave it at these two examples. The point is that God can and does not have a problem with us considering the evidence of our faith...as a matter of fact He told us what to look for.

Compare your profile to that of Harvey Burnett who became a Christian and a COGIC preacherman all at once, no training.  Wow, you don't know anything about the Church of God in Christ. No one becomes a District Superintendant without training. The means Elder Burnett is not just a Pastor! IT means that he is assistant to his bishop and is over several churches.

Marcus you require evidence, verification, and proof as much as anyone else. The primary difference between you and those who take their cues from the real world is your exceedingly poor standard for what constitutes evidence. Whereas you accept things like tradition, revelation and authority as evidence, more reasonable people reject those things as routes to truth since throughout humanity there exist thousands of incompatible traditions, thousands of irreconcilable revelations, and millions of authority figures convinced that none but them know the truth.  

A lot of presuppositions and no evidence. I do not accept tradition, my revelation, or any authority that is not compatible with the Bible. I agree that there thousand of irreconcilable and incompatible worldviews. They can't all be right, but there is one that I have researched that does stand up to objective evidence and not human opinion: the Bible - the Word of the living God..

You say some version of Christian Bible constitutes evidence, though it clearly does not. In other Christianities they say some other version of a Bible is evidence

I know you are referring to the gnostic texts and other early extra-biblical writings. None of them fit the following metric. 
16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17
If anyone disagrees, I really would like to see an explanation of how these texts outside the Bible do fit this criteria. And if  he refers to the textual variants, I'd like him to point out a single variant text that conflicts with historic and orthodox Christian doctrine. .

Then, there is the Koran and numerous other holy books declaring themselves to also be the "truth." Your profile also says that you make a living in the science-based field of software engineering. Your income would not exist if it were not for something far more reliable than tradition, revelation, or authority. Are you also a science-denying YEC? Do you discount or reject the science of radioisotopic dating? Were the YEC's mistaken who claim to have recently found Noah's Ark and also to have determined a 4800 year age of the wood via radiocarbon dating? Are you also correct if you deny it? Then, you contradict your fellow religionists. It's not reliable.
May 7, 2010 2:34 PM

I've written on my blog why I accept the Bible over the Qur'an.  Let me briefly just point out that most credible historian agree that Jesus was crucified. The Bible says that Jesus was crucified.  The Qur'an says that Jesus was not crucified. History conflicts with the Qur'an therefore I've got to throw it out.   I'm not a young earth creationists. Not all Christians are Young Earth Creationists. You can be a Christian believe either way - Old Earth or Young Earth. I personally don't find enough Biblical or Scientific evidence to endorse Old Earth Creationism. Even if you think Genesis is speaking of seven 24 hour days of creation that doesn't make the universe 6000 years old. Not all Christians agree with any of your evidence of what a Christian must believe to be a Christian.  That's like saying all Atheists are cannibals because Jeffrey Dahmer was an atheist.  Don't be ignorant and stupid.





Blogger Russ said...










You said, Assuming it is I have a two simple lines of questions to ask: How can you prove that your family loves you? Answer: evidence, lots and lots of evidence. In societies like the US where daughters are not bought and sold as chattel, the love of a man or woman must be earned through demonstratable behaviors, some evolutionarily engrained and some societally defined. You provide your love interest with evidence, lots of evidence, and your love interest reciprocates with lots of evidence for you. If the evidence is absent you soon lose interest. Then, too, this evidence exchange is not limited to female-male relationships. Also, parents teach their children to behave in ways consistent with how we feel about them. We see how these things play out at church potlucks, weddings, funerals. How do your children know you do not like someone? Evidence. How do you teach your children to suck up to Grandma? You teach them to provide evidence, tangible behaviors accepted in our society to reflect one's feelings. Also, Marcus, we are so susceptible to accepting behaviors as evidence that we are easily duped with them. This is especially the case when we take the behavior of uttering a litany of unreliable words as evidence. Ted Haggard. Jimmy Swaggart. Jim Baker. Jerry Falwell. George Reker. You? Words are weak evidence by themselves and they are even weaker when, as is the case with all all religions, they are spoken without a reliable standard against which their veracity can be assessed.  

The Bible is a reliable standard when weighing the veracity of anyone speaking on the issues the Bible discusses. Just like there is evidence for loving spouses, parents and children, there is evidence that the Bible is true. MY point was simply that the proof of love cannot be objectively obtained by the scientific method.  All truth cannot be substantiated by naturalism.That is not saying that it's not useful and should be ignored but if you base your entire understand of this reality on it, you will miss a lot!

The Bible is a focal point of Christianity but it is not evidence for much of anything. Some people wrote down the prevailing myths, legends, fables, dreams, and superstitions, then peppered it with a big dollop of wishful thinking. Christians do not agree with each other about it, and, as has been pointed out, there exists no way to resolve the disagreements.  
  
A lot presuppositions. Where is your proof that the Bible is not true and just myth, legends, dreams, superstitions and wishful thinking? Where is the beef?

  How much does their love weigh? How long is it? How wide is it? Dumb. Just dumb. These are not the metrics of love, but the metrics are there. We see how love whithers away when Christians by the millions violate their marriage vows, abandon their children, abuse their children and spouses.

So longevity in a marriage is a proof of love? I disagree. But if it helps my parents have been married 52 years. They credit God for their longevity and love. Atheists are no better at being good spouses or parents than Christians without God.  My point is that you cannot scientifically prove love in a laboratory as Loftus claimed was necessary to know emphatically something is true. He did not qualify the comments but seemed to apply it to everything,. Do you really want to apply such drivel to everything that exists? I don't.

You said, Better question is if there is no transcendence of this life and no one has any ultimate value (as many consistent atheists believe) than what does it matter? Ultimate value is a stupid notion. People do not act as if anyone has "Ultimate Value." Assuming no inbreeding, you have or had eight great grandparents. Can you name all of those people who were of Ultimate Value? How about further back to their sixteen parents? Can you name them? Similarly, your great grand children will have little or not interest in who you were. Imagining Ultimate Value does not make it so. We are all generation-centric. When your children are small they look to you for everything. A few short years later that is no longer the case. A few more years and you become a holiday ornament. Tack on too many more and your Ultimate Value ends up in a nursing home being cared for by strangers.  

Such a bleak outlook. What kind of family are you from? Of course I care about all my foreparents - even if I can't know who all of them are. I owe them. I'm only six generations removed from slavery. All I have and I ever will have to be passed  to my children came through them. I'm here...America is here...because of their sacrifices. I'm not the only one into genealogy and understanding past ancestors. Your arguments are completely unable to be applied to all people.  

How do you prove you matter period? How do we weigh, count, or otherwise measure your worth or anyone else's for that matter? Sure would like to hear answers for these. Of course silence would also be an answer.

Again, evidence, Marcus. Be honest with yourself. You demand it for all things, but what you accept as evidence is horribly flawed.
May 7, 2010 2:34 PM

I wonder if people like Russ really examine what they think or do they just shoot from the hip. I'm a Christian because I do believe the evidence points to the Bible being true. Nothing else makes sense. If these are Russ' best arguments I'm completely unimpressed. I demanded evidence for the Bible and God gave it to me. If you were honest with yourself you would admit the problem isn't with lack of evidence but in you.I know because the failure is in me also and it took the power of God to change me. He can do the same for you.
As for anyone who want to read some good evidences for Christianity being true, you can refer to series of articles from Apologetics 315 which Brian Auten has compiled essays written by several Christians from all walks of life who give their best arguments in a short essay for why Christianity is the only way. 
Apologetics 315 - Essay Series


Debunking Christianity: How Can We Decide Who Is Wrong?
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

26 comments:

  1. Marcus,

    Good Job! Russ is an idiot who thinks he has an understanding of Christianity and continues to offer the most false information that I've ever seen and makes the biggest non-sequiturs in history.

    You ask him to prove that his family loves him and he then says there's lots of "evidence" as proof and then neither offers evidence nor points to or offers anything of any value...how DUMB can one be?

    He believes in empiricism like his daddy john, even goes so far as to say that we live a completely material existence.

    Yet he has no empirical evidence for logic, mind, even mathematics...all of these things are immaterial, exist without extension in space, are factual in nature and cannot be empirically proven, but yet according to him, "we live in a completely material world"...IDIOT!

    Cats like that need only to open their mouth for anyone to see how hate and rage and hate filled they are. They hate a GOd that they say doesn't exist and further hate Christians for living godly and promoting character. They act as if the failures of Christians define Christianity and there's nothing further from the truth...They hail the witch hunts that killed 18 people as defining of Christian belief, and try to explain away all the multiple millions killed and oppressed as a result of atheist concepts and political agenda throughout history. They won't even claim people who were complete materialists and murders following atheistic principles down through history...they'll point to none of that. Radicals like him are totally absurd and unreasonable.

    Another thing about people like this, have no clue as to what Holy Ghost power is. They have never experienced any power in their lives. Only lived to make excuses for their sins. In fact Russ says that he has no sin...In other words he's a borderline psychopath, that feels that all of his actions are ultimately justified by material or genetic means. That would also mean that he thinks everything he does or says is correct (at least for him) It's sad that many of their churches were so dry, lifeless and empty they they got nothing from them. They only had a form of head-knowledge but no real power. Most of them come from that sort of background.
    That's the sad part, and I believe that knowing that gives us additional insight into why Jesus said "I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." (Mt. 7:23) They never knew the power of God in the beauty of holiness. Just went to some school (some of them) got a rubber stamp from some man, some type of degree and thought that they knew all that there was to know about God. Never ONCE experienced his power, neither understood the character, nature and personality of God.

    Anyway, continue the good work you're doing. Spending time in spiritual cesspools like that has its rewards and only serves to enhance arguments and develop spiritual knowledge. In 3 years they have offered NO ARGUMENTS that have ever caused me to even question my faith...Fact is, they have none! Thank God!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Elder Burnett, thanks for taking the time to post this comment and reading my blog. I enjoy your comments regularly and I think you blog is awesome. Thank you. I'll be praying for you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks brother preachea!

    You're too are doing an excellent job!

    Have you joined COGIC Scholars yet? I'm submitting my info to them in a minute.

    Talk to ya later. Blessed!

    ReplyDelete
  4. WOW, aren't Marcus and Harvey proud of eachother!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Shane,

    I know I'm proud of my God. Now you anti-Christ advocates have NOTHING to be proud of...you are at least a person of reason so I don't think you represent the bad scholarship that resides at debunking.

    So if you're an unbeliever, be that to the fullest, because as a believer I will be one to the greatest extent.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Marcus.

    Ok, the first scripture is Mark 8:38-Mark9:1

    Which reads- "If anyone is ashamed of Me and my message, then the Son of Man will be ashamed of Him when He returns in the glory of His father with the holy angels".
    9:1- Jesus went on to say, "Surely I tell you, some standing here right now will not die before they see the Kingdom of God arrive in great power".

    Many belive this scripture is shows that Jesus (if He said this) was mistaken and obviously not who He said He was since His second coming hasn't happened yet let alone in the lifetime of some of His disciples.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Harvey, I have much to be proud of, just because I dont feel convinced of the same thing you do does not make me feel bad or wrong!
    Be whatever you want.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The second scripture which affirms the first starts at Matthew 24:3 Jesus goes on to tell all His disciples about all the things which will happen in the last days.
    Finally at verse 34 Jesus says to the disciples "I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass from the scene until all these things take place".

    Here it would seem Jesus is once again telling His disciples they would still be alive at the end of this age.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Fundy Alert!!!

    Confusion over "This generation":

    Psalms 24:6 ~"This [is] THE GENERATION of them that seek him, that seek thy face, O Jacob. Selah."

    So tell me, when are the people of the Lord encouraged to STOP seeking the face of God? If this is the "generation" when did it stop and when did it begin?

    I'll tell ya, it was forever that people, HIS people, were to seek his face. Look further,

    Psalms 102:18~ "This shall be written for the generation to come: and the people which shall be created shall praise the LORD."

    So it was only written for the generation of people from that time or was this joined by conjunction with the people who were yet to be created (born) could they be considered a part of a generation also??? Look further,

    Psalms 112:2 ~"His seed shall be mighty upon earth: the generation of the upright shall be blessed."

    So where is this "generation of the upright"? is that is a certain time , place and location or is there a greater message??? I'll bet a fundy is lost in the conversation about now...

    Fundy's don't see that "generation" relates much greater and more information than to a place, space or time on earth. Does the fundy, even the radical atheist one, ever stop to think or consider this??? Nooooo, they have too many bad arguments to perpetuate for that. no need to reason that there is a much greater context of scripture at hand?

    Look at how the NT uses generation:

    Acts 8:33~"In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth"

    Who shall declare his "generation"...isn't he eternal? At least that is how he is described? So generation means more than a day age or 40 years??? Wow!

    1 Peter 2:9 ~"But ye [are] a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:"

    repeating Exodus 19:6

    You mean, I'm a chosen 'generation' or part of a chosen generation? how could that be? It's past 40 to 50 years, in fact it's 2000 years ago...how could a generation be that long???

    Shane, your arguments are old hat and do NOTHING to bring clarity to the issue...they only render more confusion and display a fundy and literal approach to scriptures that everyone knew was apocalyptic in language and prophetic in vision.

    Further in judgement every man will see the Lord, either in peace or in judgement. Caiphas knew this and tore his robe when Jesus assumed Daniel 7:14 preeminence over him. They SAW the power of God at the crucifixion and couldn't identify it:

    Col. 2:14-15~ "14-Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; 15-[And] having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it."

    The power of God was OPENLY seen in the devils defeat....

    Your argument is unpersuasive Shane, at least to those of us who know what the text says...try again!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Harvey.

    Really....So Jesus went on and on telling His disciples what to look for in the end days, and instructing them what to do in those days....BUT....according to your christian save face method, Jesus wasn't actually refering to them in general, He actually this generation as a whole?....really.

    So what about the scripture in Mark, its a little more specific?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Harvey.

    Judging by your post, you are presuppossing those scriptures to mean what you think they mean.

    You are assuming Jesus is eternal so it must mean this....or...you assume the old testament scriptures are including gentiles so it must mean that!

    Your answers are nothing knew either.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Harvey.

    I just read your entire post here to Marcus?

    You know, let me tell you, you make more judgment calls then Russ made.
    You actually assume that we were all part of some dry church and just got a stamp on our hands and got some head knowledge?

    You know what, if that makes you feel better about how some people could actually leave the fold then thats your problem!

    The fact is that, for me, it was nothing like you say.
    I had a deep heart felt belief.
    I and some others used to do outreach and walk around with an eight foot croos on our shoulders handing out tracts to people who wanted to tear our heads off!
    Dont try and judge our experiences as believers or our commitment.

    You talk of holy ghost power, ya....I thought I experienced that for a peroid of my life. Hell....I even had some things happen to me that I cant explain to this day?

    But when I felt myself slipping away (nothing to do with wanting to sin) I called out and begged a God that wasn't there.
    And thats exactly why I eventually did fall away.

    The only thing that christianity did for me was drive my mind crazy with worrying about every little thing I did, worrying about my family who wanted nothing to do with the bible.

    Point being, after leaving the church I began to research into the secular stance and gained understanding that was brainwashed from me before.

    In any event, although life is a mystery to me, I feel more on track with reality now then I ever did believing that mind cloud!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Shane,

    First dealing with your scriptural illiteracy:

    Since we've ESTABLISHED that "generation" has nothing to do with a literal or figurative 40 to 50 year period of time we can go on to the scripture that you "think" is the most powerful regarding your assertion:

    KJV: Mark 9:1~ "1-And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power."

    NIV: "1-And he said to them, "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God come with power."

    In fact I can name 16 more translations that leave out the "right now". You quote the ONE translation that uses right now.

    You use:

    The New Living Translation;

    "1- Jesus went on to say, "Surely I tell you, some standing here right now will not die before they see the Kingdom of God arrive in great power".

    Now, that's ok, because you "think" that "right now" pins the context down and causes a problem...but in reality Caiphas later displays that he understood what Jesus meant when he asked him a similar if not the same question. The question is, what did all of them know that you don't? They knew the scriptures and what they meant. they knew what was prophetic and apocalyptic literature. They KNEW that Jesus applied these scriptural concepts to himself and was referring to this:

    Dan. 7:13-14 ~ "13-I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 14-And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed."

    What did John the Baptist say about this Kingdom prior to all this?

    Mark 1:14-15 ~ "14-Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, 15-And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel."

    What you see your hatred doesn't allow you to see...it's called a literary device. It's an inclusio. Mark 1's promise of the "Kingdom" and the walking fulfillment of it being at hand, is further enunciated in Mark 9 so that the disciples, who had seen the "kingdom of God" at the hand of Jesus through miracles that they couldn't explain away, would know what the scriptures meant and who Jesus was.

    see 2

    ReplyDelete
  14. Shane 2,

    The fundamentalist, such as you, assume that the "kingdom of God" was some future event at the end of the world or all time. I'll give you credit because the disciples thought the same. The secret here is that the CROSS was the POWER OF GOD!

    1 Corinthians 1:18~"For the preaching of the CROSS is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God."

    They SAW it Shane...Caiphas, the Sanhedrin, the Pharisees, the disciples, those standing there. Those standing here, EVERYONE saw the power of God...

    Caiphas understood what Jesus meant even further because he knew that Jesus was declaring his LORDSHIP, not existence as a man...but his being as GOD!

    Mt. 26:64-66 ~ "64-Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. 65-Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.66-What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death."

    There is nothing more clear Shane. the power of God was seen by ALL who stood there, who ridiculed Jesus, who heard and knew of his resurrection, who heard the gospel of the NT preachers willing to give their life for what they saw and knew.

    Everyone SAW this, except radicals such as yourself. This is not a trick, this is the gospel message, which is foolishness to you...but it's life and power to us!

    So where is your argument? I know it's in the DUST like it was from the beginning...

    ReplyDelete
  15. Shane,

    Now, allow me to address the rest of your sad tirade.

    You said:"You know, let me tell you, you make more judgment calls then Russ made."

    I don't think that's possible. Russ is filled with the most illogical and unsupportable mumbo-jumbo that I've ever read and I've been reading, debating and commenting at DC for 3 years or so...they've had MUCH better scholarship in the past and unlike Russ, people who knew how to not make COMPLETE idiots out of themselves...So judgement is not the issue...stupidity is.

    You said:"You actually assume that we were all part of some dry church and just got a stamp on our hands and got some head knowledge?"

    Were you ever filled with the Holy Ghost? Do you know what a spiritual gift is or was?...

    I don't know about you, but for people like Russ and others of his persuasion, they get a book (besides the bible) learn it, take a ministerial class, go to a ministerial school, learn the routine of their church and SKIP laboring in prayer, fasting, praise, waiting on God for personal deliverance, ministry and true relationship with Christ. They get certified by men and God NEVER knew them, because they NEVER emptied out to know him...they bring their intellect and tell God what they though he was rather than allowing HIM to tell them who he IS...That's what I mean...Loftus did it, many of the readers of DC did it and sad thing is they "think" that that's all there was and is to God...

    You said:"The fact is that, for me, it was nothing like you say.
    I had a deep heart felt belief.
    I and some others used to do outreach and walk around with an eight foot cross on our shoulders handing out tracts to people who wanted to tear our heads off!
    Dont try and judge our experiences as believers or our commitment."


    See that's what I mean...you gave God what YOU THOUGHT he wanted...in 30 years he's NEVER told me to put a 8 foot wooden cross on my back and do anything...I bear a cross that can't be seen. In fact he bears that cross along with me...This is what I mean...I don't doubt your sincerity, But I doubt and judge (biblically) your application...I probably would think differently of Christianity also if I had to do that just to reach souls...I reach without a bible at times...Why? Because it's IN me not on me...there's a difference and I'm sorry your leadership didn't help you distinguish that difference.

    You said:"You talk of holy ghost power, ya....I thought I experienced that for a peroid of my life. Hell....I even had some things happen to me that I cant explain to this day?"

    What are "some things"???

    You said:"But when I felt myself slipping away (nothing to do with wanting to sin) I called out and begged a God that wasn't there. And thats exactly why I eventually did fall away."

    What is that? Had nothing to do with sin, but "God wasn't there"??? You'll have to explain that one too.

    You said:"The only thing that christianity did for me was drive my mind crazy with worrying about every little thing I did, worrying about my family who wanted nothing to do with the bible."

    Once again, you speak in parables...Christianity drove you crazy??? because you 'worried about every little thing"??? It looks like you drove yourself crazy with worry...

    I would suppose that either you were the only one attending church in your family or that you felt on the outside of your family relationships...ie: you didn't know how to minister to your family or be a witness to them and with them...

    ReplyDelete
  16. Shane,

    How one is taught or introduced to Christian living and lifestyle is important and there is a lot of Christian leadership malpractice and error. It's seems like, if nothing else, you were a victim of bad and obtuse leadership...

    I'm sorry for your experience, but spouting off anti-Christ dogma doesn't make it any better. only agreement with the truth will. This is not a matter of "brainwashing" it's a matter of coming to live in the Light of Christ.

    Like I said, you're one of the more reasonable commentors at DC and I've seen that. Thanks for sharing your experiences.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Shane, I have responded to the interpretation of the scriptures you raised at http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2010/05/commenting-on-this-generation-mark.html

    I think it's sad that you left Christianity because you didn't think God was there for you when you felt you needed him. But I've got to ask if that was it or was it that God didn't respond to your situation the way you thought he should. Ask any Christian. I'm sure Elder Burnett would agree with me. Everyone knows what it's like when you feel like God has left you twisting in the wind and hanging from a thin strand or rope. Or at least it feels that way. I know from experience. And then when I felt like the rope was going to break God always caught me, protected me, strengthened me. And then I had to go back to twisting in the wind until God was ready to take me down. God has a reason for everything God does or allows to happen to us and for us.

    I also agree with Elder Burnett, Shane, you are one of the more reasonable atheists I talk to also.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Harvey.

    Before I check out Marcus answer, I have to say that it really does not matter whether the translation says "right now", or just says "some standing here".
    Eitherway it gets the same point across "those who were there at that specific moment"?

    I dont see how you can argue that?

    Also, you keep just qouting Mark 9:1, ans saying that Jesus was not even refering to His second coming, but other events that would be considered "the power of God".

    This is incorrect....You of all people who seem to be educated in biblical matters should know that the first translations of the bible had no chapters or verses.
    It was because the greek/hebrew manuscripts were one long story all mashed together.
    It was not till some time later that chapters and verses wee added.

    So, it is easy to see that Mark 9:1 is a continuation from Mark Mark 8:38

    It seems paifully obvious to me Jesus was in fact talking of His return when you put these verses together.

    Besides, if He was not refering to the second coming, then in what other event did Jesus come in the glory of God with the holy angels????

    ReplyDelete
  19. Shane,

    My contention is that Jesus phraseology was in line with Jewish apocalyptic literature and that these were idiomatic phrases and expressions that indicated not only his office and messiah, but also his deity as God.

    This was common in Jewish literature especially Daniel and Isaiah which he was referencing and referenced most often.

    As stated the Jewish leaders clearly understood him saying that he was blaspheming and the disciples didn't think it could be because there was only ONE God and that God wasn't a man to their understanding.

    When he says "some of you standing here will see" and references this with "angles" he is declaring his power over heaven and the heavenly host. Who has that power? ONLY God!

    So his statements are best defined when you look at the source from whence those statements come. He didn't speak in a vacuum. He spoke in and out of what the Jews could relate to even IF it wasn't revealed to them until later.

    So when you say talking of his return, that's what the debate of preterism is all about...but correctly speaking Jesus was talking about the revealed power of God in the earth which he embodied and that occurred in his life, death, burial and resurrection.

    I never said that it wasn't referencing his second coming but it was much more comprehensive than that and was not only limited to that.

    Now I'm not alone in any of my sentiments. Robert Bowman and Ed. Komoszewski put together and excellent work called "Putting Jesus In His Place" and they go through all of this revealing the multitude of NT references to the deity of Jesus and how and why the Jews of his day interpreted his sayings and actions and how the NT from gospels through epistles are filled with declaratives of his deity.

    When dealing with this whole subject they say this, "So when Jesus alluded to Dan 7:13 and Psalm 110:1 in his response to Caiphas's question, he was making a staggering claim. Jesus was claiming to be a heavenly, divine figure who would be seated at god's right hand, exercising divine rule forever over people everywhere. This claim to divine authority creates a great deal of irony in Jesus hearing before the Sanheddrin. As Son of Man who sits at God's right hand Jesus exercises the authority of God. So while the religious leaders thought they sat in judgement over Jesus (And were seeking his death!), Jesus asserted they were actually the ones on trial." [Pg. 247]

    What Jesus referred to in Mk. 9:1 cannot be separated from Mk. 8:38 or Mt. 26:64-66.

    The chapter and verse issue has nothing to do with it other than the fact that there were literary devices used throughout the narratives called inclusios and without knowing that you can't fully grasp the meaning and intent of certain passages and combinations of passages.

    Nonetheless, the scriptures you reference do not support that Jesus either made a mistake, lied or failed in his ability to do what he said. he did it. 1-On the Cross, 2-through resurrection, 3- through future reconciliation and promise of judgement and this was fulfilled in the lifetimes of those that stood there looking on and to us today.

    I hope that makes it a little more clear.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Harvey.

    I dont know....?
    I dont think I can buy that as an answer. When I read Mark chapter 8, and I see Jesus is telling His disciples about something that will take place at His return, and then He continues to say "some standing here will nit die befor they see the son of man coming in the glory of His father with the holy angels", to me, this is very evident to see what Jesus was refering to!

    In your response I see that you (like most other christians) had to go to great lengths to show it was something else!
    You had to revert to other scriptures, and go into long explainations....etc....

    Where I simply took the scripture for what it said....you know the old saying...."the simplist answers are more often the correct ones"....

    ReplyDelete
  21. You will have to excuse my spelling mistakes, my children keep yelling at me for stuff....lol...havn'e even got to Marcus link yet.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Shane, Jesus is not talking about his second coming in Mark 8. He referred to it in Mark 8:38 but it's not the point Jesus is making. Mark 9:1 is about the point he is making. Read the whole context of the end of Mark 8.

    34Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 35For whoever wants to save his life[c] will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it. 36What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul? 37Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul? 38If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels."

    Jesus is talking about living this thing - this life as one of his followers.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Shane,

    The only reason I reference the others is because the content wasn't new to those listening on and the Jews who were familiar to apocalyptic literature.

    He didn't say one thing to his disciples and a completely different thing to others. The message is consistent.

    Mt. 24 is a good expample of the disciples thinking that there were asking one question only to find that they were asking multiple questions.

    So parsimony is not always teh best option especially when dealing with this type of literary genre.

    BTW: You look over my spelling errors and I'll look over yours.-LOL

    ReplyDelete
  24. Marcus.

    Im not refering to the point Jesus was making, Im am refering to his comment in verse 38.

    He says He will also be ashamed of them when He returns in His fathers Glory with the Holy angels.

    Verse 38 is as you say, refering to His return....correct...?

    Then in Mark 9:1, it says, "Jesus went on to say, Truly I tell you, some standing here will not die before they see the Kingdom of God arrive in great power".

    To me this was in conjunction to Mark 8:38.

    It makes no sense if Jesus was refering to any of the verses prior to verse 38?
    All he was doing from verse 34-37 was telling them the price of disciplship?

    ReplyDelete
  25. of course it make sense. Jesus spends several verses talking about the cost of being a disciple and then a single phrase of promise of the second coming. Why, Shane, would you think that Jesus would spend so much time talking about the cost of following him and verse 9:1 is ignoring the context but 8:38 is also in the contest of the cost of being a disciple.

    ReplyDelete