Freethought & Rationalism Archive

07-01-2004, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Could you specify the passage?

I can't remember if the standard apologetic comes from Corinthians or another letter but I thought there is at least one passage where Paul appears to be hedging his bets.

51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
- 1 Cor 15:51-52

I'd like to see the passage you're referring to if you can find it.

judge · 07-01-2004, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doubtingthomas

He told people that they would not all die, but that some of them would be changed. Now he may not have believed that he would personally live to see the second coming; he did, however, tell the corinthians that not all of them would die before christ's return. He seems pretty certain in saying this to them, and I can't find anything in the text that suggests that he wasn't sure.

I don't think he tells people they will not die. He does tell people they will be changed BUT he also says that ...But someone may ask, "How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?" How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies.

Here check out the passage in context.

Paul tells them they must die first. What you are espousing is the modern fundamentalist wacko interpretation a la "left behind"

07-01-2004, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

I don't think he tells people they will not die. He does tell people they will be changed BUT he also says that ...But someone may ask, "How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?" How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies.

Here check out the passage in context.

Paul tells them they must die first. What you are espousing is the modern fundamentalist wacko interpretation a la "left behind"

Death is often used as a metaphor for change or for the end of something. The type of change here could be similar to death, but it will occur to people still alive. I think this statement of Paul's will clear up any of the misconceptions you have about the end times.

"15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." 1 Thess 4:15-17

This quote is practically the same as the one we have been debating, except here Paul makes the distinction clearer between the dead and the living.

Gregg · 07-01-2004, 04:47 PM

[Magus55mode]No, I don't see any problem. It's just copyist errors, if anything. Try again, silly atheist.[/Magus55mode]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kelsos

One of my favourite contradictions refer to the ancestry of Jesus. In an effort to show, as the prophecy would have it, the Messiah must be a descendant of David, both Matthew and Luke name the ancestors of Joseph, husband of Mary, yet they can't even agree who the father of Joseph was.

A favorite apologists' claim is that one genealogy is for Joseph, the other for Mary. But both clearly end at Joseph. As Greek writers, both Luke and Matthew would ignore Mary because Greeks ignored the female bloodline.

There's more to this: both Matthew and Luke, Greeks, show their ignorance of Jewish tradition: according to the Jewish tradition it is through the mother that one becomes born a Jew, not the father.

The real kick, though, is, that both attempt to show the lineage for Jesus by listing the forefathers of Joseph, and forget that Joseph was not the father of Jesus: Mary was impregnated by the Holy Ghost.

What a mess! Haha!

It never ceases to amuse me to watch the hopeless attempts of the apologists to make sense out of that.

judge · 07-01-2004, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doubtingthomas

Death is often used as a metaphor for change or for the end of something. The type of change here could be similar to death, but it will occur to people still alive. I think this statement of Paul's will clear up any of the misconceptions you have about the end times.

"15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." 1 Thess 4:15-17

This quote is practically the same as the one we have been debating, except here Paul makes the distinction clearer between the dead and the living.

Perhpas you are reading this too literally?
George Lamsa, who grew up in Northern Iraq speaking Aramaic as his first language later migrated to the US and wrote a book,Idioms of the bible explained in which he tells us that to be caught up with clouds means to happen quickly.

Reading this too literally has caused modern fundamantalists to see something here that an aramaic speaker would not see. The view that people who are alive are suddenly transformed and 'zoom up inot the air"

is a fundamentalist error.

There is no reason to beleive this happens to living people.."then we who are alive..."
"Then" can quite easily also refer to when people die, not that living people suddenly vanish...like in "left Behind"

07-01-2004, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Perhpas you are reading this too literally?
George Lamsa, who grew up in Northern Iraq speaking Aramaic as his first language later migrated to the US and wrote a book,Idioms of the bible explained in which he tells us that to be caught up with clouds means to happen quickly.

Reading this too literally has caused modern fundamantalists to see something here that an aramaic speaker would not see. The view that people who are alive are suddenly transformed and 'zoom up inot the air"

is a fundamentalist error.

There is no reason to beleive this happens to living people.."then we who are alive..."
"Then" can quite easily also refer to when people die, not that living people suddenly vanish...like in "left Behind"

Your view of this verse is that

1. Everyone who dies prior to 70 ad will "sleep" until christs return at 70 ad
2. Paul taught that those who died afterwords would immedeatley see heaven.

So how could these people who "are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord" be part of the coming of the lord after it had already happened.

My interpretation is that

1. Paul taught that some people who currently alive would not die but be changed at the time of Christ's coming
2. That this coming will be a singular event encompassing the resurrection of the dead and the changing of those who remain alive.

I've yet to see any problem with my interpretation which is, in my opinion, truer to the original text since mine does not rely on inserting words into Paul's mouth.

Toto · 07-01-2004, 07:30 PM

Idioms of the bible explained on Amazon USA (The above links are to Amazon UK)

07-01-2004, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Reading this too literally has caused modern fundamantalists to see something here that an aramaic speaker would not see. The view that people who are alive are suddenly transformed and 'zoom up inot the air"

is a fundamentalist error.

Just for the record I consider myself an agnostic at this point.

I don't think that most futurists believe that they will be in the air, only that they will be taken up swiftly to be with Jesus in Heaven.

Amaleq13 · 07-01-2004, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doubtingthomas

51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
- 1 Cor 15:51-52

I'd like to see the passage you're referring to if you can find it.

I agree that Paul's reference to the secret that "we shall not all sleep" when/by the time of The End certainly suggests he expected it within that generation.

I think one passage used to argue Paul's "hedging" is 1 Thess 5:1-2 where an appeal is made to the reference to the sudden and unexpected nature of event.

"But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night." (KJV)

Not the strongest rebuttal, I know, but it provides a tiny, slippery handhold for the faithful.

Kilgore Trout · 07-01-2004, 08:10 PM

Here's a good contradiction.

Leviticus Chapter 11....Big list of clean and UNCLEAN animals. The unclean animals may not be eaten.

Mark 7:14-19...Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. Nothing outside a man can make him 'unclean' by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him 'unclean.' "
After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. "Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")

So let's get this straight. Jesus is god, and god gave the Hebrews the Torah laws, yet jesus has no clue on the laws of unclean foods. This shows that he is a false prophet that is trying to get them to rebel against the laws the lord gave them to follow.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-01-2004, 07:30 PM	#167
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Idioms of the bible explained on Amazon USA (The above links are to Amazon UK)

07-01-2004, 08:10 PM	#170
Kilgore Trout Regular Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tralfamadore Posts: 246	Here's a good contradiction. Leviticus Chapter 11....Big list of clean and UNCLEAN animals. The unclean animals may not be eaten. Mark 7:14-19...Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. Nothing outside a man can make him 'unclean' by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him 'unclean.' " After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. "Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.") So let's get this straight. Jesus is god, and god gave the Hebrews the Torah laws, yet jesus has no clue on the laws of unclean foods. This shows that he is a false prophet that is trying to get them to rebel against the laws the lord gave them to follow.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.