|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Divot, if you read this, I apologize for being so abrupt in my response to you. I hope the verse I provided was helpful.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Quote:
I just ran into Harold Camping, he looked really depressed. I said, "Cheer up, it's not the end of the world!".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
This popped up in Greensboro, NC on Saturday.. web page
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
I consider myself an agnostic on the subject of god, as in I am unsure of the existence or form of a supreme being.
I consider myself an Atheist on the subject of religion, in that I am ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that there is no religion on the face of the earth that exists as such a supreme being would have created it.
I believe the Bible and other similar works to be the work of Man, not of God. I believe that Organized Religions have been directly responsible for more death, blood, and destruction than any other single cause other than the Bubonic Plague, in which organized religion played a significant part in making far worse.
What I see in organized religion is Man usurping for himself, not so much the power of God, but the mantle of his authority. Whenever someone says "God wants this or that", my response is "according to whom?"
When I refer to the book as "gibberish", I want to characterize that a bit as it is much like reading Shakespeare. The language is overly "flowery", for want of a better term, the motivations for actions seem unclear and overblown, it is difficult to follow. Some of it is fairly clear, much is self-contradictory. For instance, the bit you quoted about not getting into heaven without being more righteous than the scribes and the Pharisees, I did not recall that one, I thought it was just accepting Jesus as your Savior, as in "None will go to the Father except thru me."
SFAIK there is an exception for babies, but what about all the Buddhists, Mormons, etc who are perfectly wonderful people but are operating under a slightly different rulebook. They should be excluded just because Books-a-million didn;t have a branch in their neighborhood a thousand years ago?
Now, back to this slapping business. Both in the interview I heard and my recollection of the text, Jesus was specific in identifying the particular cheek being struck. The quote was more than just "turn the other cheek", but "If he strike you upon the right cheek, offer him thy left." I will accept both your superior knowledge of the text and your honesty in giving an answer. Is the specific cheek mentioned in the text?
I am not contending that the interpretation I am offering is absolute fact. I AM saying that, IF the specific cheeks are in fact mentioned, there may very well be either a completely different main idea, or at the least an additional layer of meaning. This derives from a set of social rules that were completely different at the time, and points to a possible interpretation that is very different from what is generally accepted.
You yourself have stated that it might be possible that this was indeed the meaning of the text. If, and yes that is a big IF, but IF one of the most well-known and oft-quoted passages in the book has been so completely misunderstood, an almost complete 180 turn-around, what else has been changed by the hand of Man to be totally different from the original idea?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,126
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,126 |
Quote:
This popped up in Greensboro, NC on Saturday..
[image]http://www.myfox8.com/news/wghp-story-nc-man-billboard-110523,0,300126.story[/image]
jc
Just fixing your link 
It's supposed to be hard! If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it great!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
Just an update. The guy and his followers are rationalizing this away something fierce ... Quote:
OAKLAND, California (AP) — California preacher Harold Camping said Monday his prophecy that the world would end was off by five months because Judgment Day actually will come on October 21.
Camping, who predicted that 200 million Christians would be taken to heaven Saturday before the Earth was destroyed, said he felt so terrible when his doomsday prediction did not come true that he left home and took refuge in a motel with his wife. His independent ministry, Family Radio International, spent millions — some of it from donations made by followers — on more than 5,000 billboards and 20 RVs plastered with the Judgment Day message.
But Camping said that he's now realized the apocalypse will come five months after May 21, the original date he predicted. He had earlier said Oct. 21 was when the globe would be consumed by a fireball.
It's not the first time the independent Christian radio host has been forced to explain when his prediction didn't come to pass. He also predicted the Apocalypse would come in 1994, but said it didn't happen then because of a mathematical error.
Rather than give his normal daily broadcast on Monday, Camping made a special statement before the press at the Oakland headquarters of the media empire that has broadcast his message. His show, "Open Forum," has for months headlined his doomsday message via the group's radio stations, TV channels, satellite broadcasts and website.
When the Rapture didn't arrive Saturday, crestfallen followers began turning their attention to more earthly concerns.
Jeff Hopkins had figured the gas money he spent driving back and forth from Long Island to New York City would be worth it, as long as people could see the ominous sign atop his car warning that the End of the World was nigh.
"I've been mocked and scoffed and cursed at and I've been through a lot with this lighted sign on top of my car," said Hopkins, 52, a former television producer who lives in Great River, New York. "I was doing what I've been instructed to do through the Bible, but now I've been stymied. It's like getting slapped in the face."
Apocalyptic thinking has always been part of American religious life and popular culture. Teachings about the end of the world vary dramatically — even within faith traditions — about how they will occur.
Still, the overwhelming majority of Christians reject the idea that the exact date or time of Jesus' return can be predicted.
Tim LaHaye, co-author of the best-selling "Left Behind" novels about the end times, recently called Camping's prediction "not only bizarre but 100 percent wrong!" He cited the bible verse Matthew 24:36, 'but about that day or hour no one knows" except God.
"While it may be in the near future, many signs of our times certainly indicate so, but anyone who thinks they 'know' the day and the hour is flat out wrong," LaHaye wrote on his Web site, leftbehind.com.
In 2009, the nonprofit Family Radio reported in IRS filings that it received $18.3 million in donations, and had assets of more than $104 million, including $34 million in stocks or other publicly traded securities.
AP link
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
SOME of the millions they spent came from donations??? SOME??? Are they doing anything else productive to generate revenue, or does every single cent they take in come from donations from followers? Or profits from investments made with those donations?
I wonder how many little old ladies are eating cat food for dinner because they sent their last dime to this organization. I know that my own grandmother had to be stopped from doing something similar, many years ago. Sending nearly her last dime to some evangelist, I mean.
This is the poster child for why I dislike organized religion, and see absolutely no need for their existence. There is no certain way to distinguish the truly sincere from the snake-oil salesman. There are even some snake-oil salesman who are also truly sincere.
This guy just got up on a stump and said "Look here, folks, I've got the Word of God, now here's what you need to do...". IMO, more Evil than Good comes from this.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Quote:
"...For instance, the bit you quoted about not getting into heaven without being more righteous than the scribes and the Pharisees, I did not recall that one, I thought it was just accepting Jesus as your Savior, as in "None will go to the Father except thru me..."
Jesus' quote that ones righteousness must exceed the righteousness of the scribes and pharisees is not teaching a different righteousness than that of faith. He said this because the scribes and Pharisees believed they were righteous due to their strict outward observance of the Law, but Jesus was saying that mere external obedience to the commands of God was not enough. It is possible to obey the Laws external commands, but break them in our hearts and minds. For example, I may have never murdered anyone, but if I hate someone I am guilty of breaking the Law. I may have never actually committed adultery, but if I ponder it in my heart or lust after another man's wife, I have broken the Law. I may never steal, but if I covet I have broken the Law, etc.
Jesus is telling them that they cant get by on merely keeping the external requirements of the Law, because God not only looks at our actions but He also looks at our hearts. We may appear outwardly good and righteous to everyone around us, but God knows the secrets of our hearts. Therefore, we need both forgiveness and inward change.
In another place, Jesus preached to the Pharisees and said...“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of extortion and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisee, first cleanse the inside of the cup and dish, that the outside of them may be clean also. ( Matthew 23:25-26)
Now Jesus wasnt talking about literal dishes and cups, He was saying that they worked so hard to make themselves righteous on the outside, but their hearts were still wicked. Now this does not only apply to them, but to us as well, for Jeremiah said, " ...the heart is deceitful above all things, desperately wicked, who can know it..." ( Jeremiah 17:9)
God promised to provide the needed internal change, ( which is received by faith), through a New Covenant in Jeremiah. The Law was the old covenenant, the Gospel is the New Covenant. That's why the sections of the Bible are called the Old and New Testament. ( the same Greek word is translated both testament and covenant in the New Testament). God describes the New Covenant in Jeremiah 33:31-34, I wil not post the whole passage here, you can look it up if you want, but the New Covenant includes the promises that God would change believers internally, He would be their God, they would know Him, and that He would forgive their sins. If you want to know why God had an Old Covenant and replaced it with the New Covenant, I can explain that to you in another post. I just wanted to give you a basic overview of what Jesus was saying. I am trying to keep this as brief as possible.
So the statement that our righteousness must exceed the righteousness of the scribes and phrarisees does not contradict the teaching of righteousness by faith in Christ, it reveals why we need to trust in Christ, ie our own righteousness is not enough The scribes and Pharisees were the most religious people around, but as I said earlier, religion is not nearly enough
Regarding my misquoting the cheek passage, pardon me, I was merely paraphrasing. Your point is well taken. But the fact that the sides of the face are mentioned does not disallow the interpretation that I offered. As far as your interpretation, I would say that if it is contrary to the way this passage has been interpreted for 2,000 years, then you would have to have more historical documentation then quoting some unknown guy on the radio.
In conclusion, when you look at all the passages I quoted and how they fit together in an unmistakable way, it is clear that the Bible has remarkable internal consistency. Those who say it contradicts itself simply do not understand its teachings.
Last edited by LA Brown fan; 05/24/11 02:09 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
This is the poster child for why I dislike organized religion, and see absolutely no need for their existence.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
Quote:
This is the poster child for why I dislike organized religion, and see absolutely no need for their existence. There is no certain way to distinguish the truly sincere from the snake-oil salesman. There are even some snake-oil salesman who are also truly sincere.
Sure. You see it in the modern "alternative medicine" movement where people are willing to listen and buy from these "gurus" while shunning "western" medicine because they "are driven by money." Even though the evidence is piled up against people who believe homeopathic remedies, acupuncture or reiki does anything, they still go on about their merry ways claiming they're the ones with the open minds and we're absolutely wrong. They're so invested both mind and body that it would literally rock the foundations of their lives to change their mind. When something occurs to throw a shadow on their belief, they try to rationalize it away in a way that still allows them to hold their belief even if the rationalization makes even less sense.
Take Camping's new prediction. According to him, Jesus is back, but only in spirit. He came back took pity on the rest of 6.7 billion humans and belayed the tribulation order. But, He'll still blow up the world in October, don't worry. And you know what? His (Camping) staunchest supporters are still with him. It's amazing what we can convince ourselves of sometimes.
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658 |
Quote:
Divot, if you read this, I apologize for being so abrupt in my response to you. I hope the verse I provided was helpful.
No offense taken as none was intended, and I hope this is helpful for you.
Deuteronomy 19:
18 The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against a fellow Israelite, 19 then do to the false witness as that witness intended to do to the other party. You must purge the evil from among you. 20 The rest of the people will hear of this and be afraid, and never again will such an evil thing be done among you. 21 Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.
Thomas - The Tank Engine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
I don't know about organized religion, but Harold Camping is not a good example of conservative, evangelical Christianity. Evangelical Christians are aware that "no man knows the day or the hour of Christ's return...". People who try to predict when Jesus will return are contradicting the clear teachings of Jesus.
I'm sorry, but you cant lump all "God believers" with Harold Camping any more than you can lump all evolutionists with atheists or lump all atheists with Josef Stalin, or lump everyone who hates organized religion with Karl Marx. There are many pseudo-Christian movements. If you wonder why, read the following passage.
Matthew 13:24Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
25But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. 26But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. 27So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? 28He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
29But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. 30Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
and its interpretation...
Matthew 13:36Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. 37He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; 38The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; 39The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. 40As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. 41The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; 42And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
Quote:
I'm sorry, but you cant lump all "God believers" with Harold Camping
I wasn't. My response was about modern day snake oil salesmen and their ilk, something that Nelson was talking about. I referred to Camping and his followers because he represents the most current example of people who were demonstrably wrong yet still hold to their beliefs even though they have to twist words meanings and whatnot to do it.
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Thank you for the scripture. It does clearly say that one who was found guilty of false accusation would have to bear the punishment that would have been meted out on the falsely accused, but it also says this...
Leviticus 24:19- And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him; 20 Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again.
So both of our statements are true.
I know the idea of "eye for eye" is a tough pill to swallow, but it actually acted as a deterrent, and it was not teaching personal vengeance. Tt was a judicial punishment imposed by the governing leaders.
This brings me to another point. Some people erroneously think that if the Bible teaches something than it is applicable for all people and all ages. So they think that Christians believe in killing witches or adulterers or people that hold different beliefs. Of course, the moral and spiritual principles of the Bible always apply in every age, yet some of the legislative commands, like take the idol worshipper out and let them die by stoning, does not apply to 20th century America or even in First century Jerusalem, ( See John 8). It applied to Israel in the centuries before Christ. Why is this so? Because God was intent on preserving a nation. Evil is progressive and if it is allowed to grow unchecked it is like a cancer that will destroy an entire nation. God put these laws into place to preserve Israel, because Israel was the nation God chose to send His Son into the world. When Israel turned away from God, it caused terrible consequences. God placed these harsh punishments on individuals to mitigate His discipline of the nation, and to prevent them from falling into calamnity. Israel was a special nation, so needed special protection.
The nation of Israel needed to maintain her identity as a holy, ( separate), people in order for the Saviour to come for the whole world.
Last edited by LA Brown fan; 05/24/11 03:45 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
I'm sorry Draftdayz, my response wasnt directed at you but at Nelson, even though I responded to your post. From previous discussions I had with you, you don't seem to be someone who stereotypes people. Everything I said in that post was in response to what Nelson said about organized religion, none of it was directed at you or anything you said.
Last edited by LA Brown fan; 05/24/11 03:51 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,679
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,679 |
Quote:
Thank you, and I'm glad you are enjoying the discussion. I am grateful to Nelson for sharing his perspective.
By the way, I like the quote in your sig.
Thanks....that's mine and have told my wife to have it inscribed on my headstone.
.
I have tried to hold it true for the last 40 years.
She says I want to live forever. I say who wouldn't want me to live forever?? 
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Quote:
Still, the overwhelming majority of Christians reject the idea that the exact date or time of Jesus' return can be predicted.
Tim LaHaye, co-author of the best-selling "Left Behind" novels about the end times, recently called Camping's prediction "not only bizarre but 100 percent wrong!" He cited the bible verse Matthew 24:36, 'but about that day or hour no one knows" except God."While it may be in the near future, many signs of our times certainly indicate so, but anyone who thinks they 'know' the day and the hour is flat out wrong,"
Tim Lahaye in his quote is giving the orthodox Christiain view of the second coming. I really feel bad for Campings followers, because rather than realize that they are following a teacher that promulgates error and mistranslates and distorts the Bible, they will probably either continue to listen to him, or many will lose faith in God. The sad thing is that their trust has not been betrayed because God failed to keep His promise, but because someone went around saying things that God never said. If you are a believer, never base your faith in the words of your pastor or a preacher on TV or the radio, especially when they teach words contrary to God's Word. Read the Bible for yourself and see if what they say is Biblical or not. God's word has never failed, though the doctrines and teachings of men often do.
If Mr Camping was wise he would retract everything he said regarding the date of Christ's second coming, return the donation money he spent on billboards as much as he could and pay for them himself, and then get on his knees and ask God to forgive him after asking his followers for forgiveness. Don't get me wrong, I'm not judging Harold Camping, I am discerning the error of his message.
This is not what Christianity teaches.
Last edited by LA Brown fan; 05/24/11 09:31 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Quote:
Quote:
Thank you, and I'm glad you are enjoying the discussion. I am grateful to Nelson for sharing his perspective.
By the way, I like the quote in your sig.
Thanks....that's mine and have told my wife to have it inscribed on my headstone.
.
I have tried to hold it true for the last 40 years.
She says I want to live forever. I say who wouldn't want me to live forever??
Would you have to be able to speak and/or type for all of those years ....?
J/K .... although ... you might get more positive votes if ........... LOL
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950 |
j/k
The guys a nut case who doesnt have a clue.....and his followers have even bigger problems
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Very interesting choice for a passage to quote. There are quite a few that refer to false prophets and false religions, but this ain't one of them.
At least it does seem to have a clear message, or does it? More on that in a moment.
So is what you are saying is that this Mr. Camping, who has read the same book as you, probably followed all the rules too, but after carefully studying it, and I'm sure praying about it, believes he has read definite statements that indicate particular truths. Any of this sound familiar? Now, because this fellow says he has some "truths" that differ from your "truths", he is a Son of the Devil and should burn in fire forever? Is that what you are saying? Because I read NOTHING in that passage about false prophets or false messages, just wiping out evil.
What is that line about "Judge Not"? I know I've read it, just want to make sure that you have.
That is about the level of intolerence I have come to expect from most God-fearing Christians.
As for the parable, I have another interpretation. Some will say he is using the harvesting of the field to illustrate the end of the world. I would see it exactly the opposite.
I assume that "tares" is "weeds" or something similar, interesting this is similar to a Latin word related to balancing a scale. Now, folks, these days if you fail to weed your garden you might be short of flowers for your centerpiece, or not have enough fresh tomatoes for your chili and have to buy canned. 2,000 years ago, if you failed to weed your fields your neighbors would find the emaciated bodies of you and your family, huddled together in your 2-room mud-brick hovel, after you had all starved to death during the winter. Rather than the "end of the world" , sometime in the far future, being similar to weeding your field, I think it said that failing to weed your field WOULD BE the end of YOUR world, in just the next few months. To THOSE people, at THAT time, this would be the more important concept.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Quote:
So is what you are saying is that this Mr. Camping, who has read the same book as you, probably followed all the rules too...
Wrong! Mr Camping uses an extreme allegorical method to interpret the scriptures, whereas I interpret the Bible literally, unless the context indicates clearly that it should be interpreted otherwise. If you think Mr. Camping is interpreting the Bible and only the Bible, please show me a passage that indicates that 5 means perfection, 10 means redemption, and whatever the other number was means going to heaven. If you think this is in the Bible, Just go to http://www.biblestudytools.com click on Strongs concordance, then you can type in the word five or ten or seventeen ( I think that was the third number), and it will give you every occurrance of those numbers in the Bible. Then, get back to mell me where you can find any basis for his numerical system.
Quote:
What is that line about "Judge Not"? I know I've read it, just want to make sure that you have.
I am not judging Mr Camping, I am discerning the error in his message.
Quote:
Now, because this fellow says he has some "truths" that differ from your "truths",
His truths didnt end up being true, did they?
Quote:
he is a Son of the Devil and should burn in fire forever? Is that what you are saying?
I never in any way, shape, or form indicated that Harold Camping was going to Hell. If you would bother to read the parable, you would see that the farmer, ( sower) was asked by his servants if they should remove the tares. He said do not remove the tares because you may root up the wheat with them, let both grow together till the harvest. I cannot say that anyone is going to Hell, because first of all I do not know their hearts. Some appear to be tares at times but are in fact wheat, some appear to be wheat but are actually tares. If you study the background, I believe in the early stages of growth, wheat and tares look similar, but when they are fully grown you can better tell the difference. So it is not always possible to tell who are the wheat and who are the tares, that is Gods job. Nevertheless, the tares exist, as well as the wheat.
When this age ends God will separate the wheat from the tares when He judges the world.
With this in mind my quoting of the parable of the sower was not intended to call Mr. Camping a tare. Only God knows who are His. I quoted the parable of the sower in reference to pseudo Christians, the ones who give Christianity such a bad name that you hate organized religion.
Quote:
Because I read NOTHING in that passage about false prophets or false messages, just wiping out evil.
So giving false prophets and false prophecies arent evil?!! Now I'm not saying it is "deliberate" evil. People often do evil things when they think that they are doing good. That does not justify them though.
Quote:
As for the parable, I have another interpretation. Some will say he is using the harvesting of the field to illustrate the end of the world.
Yes, some would say that, including Jesus, because He interpreted the parable for us, remember? Read the below passage again, I guess you didnt read it the first time.
Matthew 13:37He, ( Jesus) answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; 38The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; 39The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world;
Quote:
What is that line about "Judge Not"? I know I've read it, just want to make sure that you have.
Have you read this passage?
1 John 4:1- Dear friends, do not believe everyone who claims to speak by the Spirit. You must test them to see if the spirit they have comes from God. For there are many false prophets in the world.
Just because we are not judges, ( which I agree with you on), doesnt mean that we can't have discernment.
Now I am not saying Mr Camping is a false prophet, but he has declared a prophecy or prediction if you prefer that was false. That is why I said he should retract, make restitution, and ask God and his followers for forgiveness. Not because he is not saved, ( I do not know that, only God does), but because he is in error.
I am not condemning Mr Camping, I am refuting his message. My quote about the parable of the sower was in context to my statement about pseudo Christians, the ones you say make old ladies eat cat food and such. I don't know if Mr Camping is one of those, ( a Pseudo Christian), but you were the one who pointed the accusing finger at him first. If I may quote you...
Quote:
This is the poster child for why I dislike organized religion, and see absolutely no need for their existence.
Last edited by LA Brown fan; 05/25/11 04:24 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Your John 4.1 quote would seem to apply to this situation, and is directly related.
However, your original quote is related ONLY if you choose to believe, and you certainly did, IMO, Imply, that Mr Camping is evil and is going to hell. If it relates to Pseudo-christians in any way, whatsoever, the ONLY "context" I can discern is if pseudo-christians are evil and are going to hell. You did state that his message was evil
If it was not your intention to imply that Mr Camping was evil and should suffer in fire for eternity, then you need to be a HELL of a lot more careful how you quote scripture.
I said he read the same book you did, you stated "WRONG", because, evidently, he did not read it the same Way that you did. By "rules" that he followed I was not referring to rules for reading (I am currently unaware that there are any) but rules as set forth in the book such as "do unto others". If there is a rule that states that you must read and believe in the same way that LAB does, because that's the only correct way, I have not yet come across one..
Still don't know what a "tare" is, SFAIK most weeds are easily discernible from wheat in the very early stages of growth. Moreover, to tell a Bronze Age farmer not to weed their fields, when doing so was literally a matter of life and death, would have been dismissed by most. If the parable suggests to wait and let God sort them out, just like waiting to weed the field, the logical conclusion would seem to be that if we wait, we starve and die. So we should get out our pitchforks and torches and hunt down whoever we think the evil ones are.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Your John 4.1 quote would seem to apply to this situation, and is directly related.
However, your original quote is related ONLY if you choose to believe, and you certainly did, IMO, Imply, that Mr Camping is evil and is going to hell. If it relates to Pseudo-christians in any way, whatsoever, the ONLY "context" I can discern is if pseudo-christians are evil and are going to hell. You did state that his message was evil
If it was not your intention to imply that Mr Camping was evil and should suffer in fire for eternity, then you need to be a HELL of a lot more careful how you quote scripture.
I said he read the same book you did, you stated "WRONG", because, evidently, he did not read it the same Way that you did. By "rules" that he followed I was not referring to rules for reading (I am currently unaware that there are any) but rules as set forth in the book such as "do unto others". If there is a rule that states that you must read and believe in the same way that LAB does, because that's the only correct way, I have not yet come across one..
Still don't know what a "tare" is, SFAIK most weeds are easily discernible from wheat in the very early stages of growth. Moreover, to tell a Bronze Age farmer not to weed their fields, when doing so was literally a matter of life and death, would have been dismissed by most. If the parable suggests to wait and let God sort them out, just like waiting to weed the field, the logical conclusion would seem to be that if we wait, we starve and die. So we should get out our pitchforks and torches and hunt down whoever we think the evil ones are. Because that is CLEARLY what God is telling us to do. See, you have to read these things in context.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Show me where I said Harold Camping was evil and should or will burn in hell? My point with quoting the parable of the sower was that it is no mystery why there are false teachings and false practices in the church. Nowhere did I apply it to Harold Camping. I applied it to false teachers in general. Here are some interesting quotes by Martin Luther on this passage. I will add the views of some other great Bible teachers later as time permits. http://homepage.mac.com/shanerosenthal/reformationink/mltares.htmRegarding the tares: Sowed tares - By "tares" is probably meant a degenerate kind of wheat, or the darnel-grass growing in Palestine. In its growth and form it has a strong resemblance to genuine wheat; but it either produces no grain, or that of a very inferior and hurtful kind. Probably it comes near to what we mean by "chess." It was extremely difficult to separate it from the genuine wheat, on account of its similarity while growing. ( Barnes) 13:25 But while men slept - They ought to have watched: the Lord of the field sleepeth not. His enemy came and sowed darnel - This is very like wheat, and commonly grows among wheat rather than among other grain: but tares or vetches are of the pulse kind, and bear no resemblance to wheat. ( Wesley) http://bible.cc/matthew/13-25.htm
Last edited by LA Brown fan; 05/25/11 09:55 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Quote:
However, your original quote is related ONLY if you choose to believe, and you certainly did, IMO, Imply, that Mr Camping is evil and is going to hell. If it relates to Pseudo-christians in any way, whatsoever, the ONLY "context" I can discern is if pseudo-christians are evil and are going to hell. You did state that his message was evil
Pseudo Christians are in danger of going to hell. Neither you nor I nor anyone else can say who is going to Hell, because God is drawing men and women to repentance, and their fate is not sealed until they die or until Jesus returns, whichever comes first. By the way, I did not mean to imply that Camping was a Pseudo Christian, just that pseudo Christianity is responsible for a lot of the errors in theology. Yet not all. Some errors are due to the fact that no-one but God is infallible. I used the parable of the sower to explain why there is error and false teaching in the church, not to indite Mr Camping of chicanery. For all I know he probably believes what he teaches, and I think he does. Yet that does not mean that he is right, and sincerity does not make him a christian any more than fallibility makes someone a non-Christian. Only God knows his heart.
You seem to imply that because there are Christians that make absurd predictions and claims that all Christians are crackpots. That assumption was what I was addressing when I quoted the parable of the sower, not the claims of Harold Camping. You took what I said out of context.
Quote:
If it was not your intention to imply that Mr Camping was evil and should suffer in fire for eternity, then you need to be a HELL of a lot more careful how you quote scripture.
I never said he was evil or that he should suffer fire for eternity. Where do you read that. The true Biblical view is that everyone, ( except those still in the age of innocence), deserve to go to hell. I deserve to go to hell, you deserve to go to hell, the apostle Paul deserved to go to hell, etc etc. That's why Jesus came to die on the cross, to save us from what we deserved. This is called grace.If I were to say that he should go to Hell I would be condemning myself, because I too deserve to go to Hell. This is what Jesus meant when He said Judge not lest you be judged.
I
Quote:
said he read the same book you did, you stated "WRONG", because, evidently, he did not read it the same Way that you did. By "rules" that he followed I was not referring to rules for reading (I am currently unaware that there are any)
Many people are currently unaware that there are rules for interpreting the Bible. That's why there are so many bad theologies out there. The rules for translating the Bible are called "hermeneutics".
Quote:
If there is a rule that states that you must read and believe in the same way that LAB does, because that's the only correct way, I have not yet come across one..:
The rule is not to interpret the Bible the way LAB does, it is the rules of hermeneutics. I did not invent "hermeneutics", but It is flattering that you think I did.
Quote:
Still don't know what a "tare" is, SFAIK most weeds are easily discernible from wheat in the very early stages of growth
I am not an expert, but I read somewhere that what I described fits the Lolium temulentum. Like I said, I am not an expert, so if I am wrong, I'm sure someone will correct me.
Quote:
Moreover, to tell a Bronze Age farmer not to weed their fields, when doing so was literally a matter of life and death, would have been dismissed by most.
The sower said to let both grow together, then at the harvest the wheat and the tares could be separated; This implies that the wheat would not be lost.
.
Quote:
If the parable suggests to wait and let God sort them out, just like waiting to weed the field,
That is exactly what it is saying.
Quote:
the logical conclusion would seem to be that if we wait, we starve and die.
Says who?
Quote:
So we should get out our pitchforks and torches and hunt down whoever we think the evil ones are. Because that is CLEARLY what God is telling us to do. See, you have to read these things in context.
You are the only one that I am aware of that has interpreted this passage that way in the 2,000 years it has been studied. Can you name a reputable scholar who interprets the parable this way? You cant just make the Bible mean something because you say so.
For example, you said earlier that the harvest was not referring to the end of the world, when Jesus, ( the one who told this parable), said it did. I guess Jesus should have asked Nelson what He meant before He told His parables. : 
By the way, do you know the "rules" for interpreting the meaning of "parables". Here are two important guidelines that you are obviously and blatantly ignoring.
1. "Take note that not every detail in a parable has special significance. Show discernment in knowing which parts of the parable are crucial to the point of the parable and those parts which function as window dressing. For example, in the Parable of the Good Samaritan the priest, the Levite, and the Samaritan all have special significance, but the road, the innkeeper, and the two denarii function as supporting details for the main point."
2. Look for the main point of a parable. Most parables are driving home one overarching truth or principle although there may be exceptions at times.
There are other rules for interpreting parables. Here is the link.
http://www.theologicalstudies.org/page/page/4381589.htm
With regards
Last edited by LA Brown fan; 05/26/11 02:23 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,428
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,428 |
Why are you arguing with an atheist or what ever he calls himself. Your quoting of Scripture means nothing to him. He doesn't believe or understand it and never will. You will not change his mind anymore than he will change yours
The Views Expressed By Me Are Not Necessarily The Views That You Will Agree With, I'm In My Own Little World But They Know Me Here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
I fully understand that he does not believe the Bible, but I have no problem in answering him, because in all these posts I have discussed the word of God and spoken about Jesus and that's all I want to do. My replies are just as much, actually moreso, for others who may end up reading these posts than for Nelson. I know that there are those who have their minds made up as atheists and others who are strong in their faith in God, but there are others who fall somewhere in between. I am mainly answering for them, should they happen to read this thread. But you are correct, because the whole discussion degenerated into vain arguments. Nevertheless, we did talk about the Bible, and salvation, and the second coming, and the truth, and the teachings of Jesus, etc. So in that sense, I do not regret it.
I do recognize that Nelson has merely been argumentative and just throwing random arguments out there, ( at least that's the way it appeared), but I don't mind putting scriptures on here. Nelson just gave me an opportunity to share what I believe, even though I did play into some of his arguments at times, which may have been counterproductive. Nevertheless, if I limp I will run with a limp
But I think you are right. I have probably said enough.
Last edited by LA Brown fan; 05/26/11 02:44 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Here are a couple excerpts from the Martin Luther sermon I posted a link for last night, along with a few comments from me. I had never read this sermon before I posted the link, yet I am basically saying the same things that he said hundreds of years ago. Quote:
"...this parable treats not of false Christians, who are so only outwardly in their lives, but of those who are unchristian in their doctrine..."
LAB Note- Doctrine means teaching.
Quote:
"...And the sum of all is that we should not marvel nor be terrified if there spring up among us many different false teachings and false faiths. Satan is constantly among the children of God. (Job 1:6)..."
(LABNote): This means that many false teachings are inspired by satan, not that the false teachers are satan. Satan will even seduce and deceive people who are true Christians, if they let him.
Quote:
"... this Gospel teaches how we should conduct ourselves toward these heretics and false teachers. We are not to uproot nor destroy them... for in this matter he who errs today may find the truth tomorrow..."
LAB note- In other words, just because someone is teaching falsely in the present, does not mean they are a tare, for they may later realize their error. The fact that they realize their error would then indicate that they are of the wheat. Those who willfully remain in error are the tares. Only God knows if they are wheat or tares in the final verdict. We are unable to know the condition or eternal destiny of others.
Quote:
"...Therefore this passage should in all reason terrify the grand inquisitors and murderers of the people, where they are not brazened faced, even if they have to deal with true heretics. But at present they burn the true saints and are themselves heretics. What is that but uprooting the wheat, and pretending to exterminate the tares, like insane people?"
LAB note- No Christians shouldnt get their pitchforks and torches out like you say. God is the only judge. The Christian is to refute false teaching, not condemn the false teacher.
This will be my last post on this topic unless someone posts a sincere question that needs to be answered..
Last edited by LA Brown fan; 05/26/11 09:55 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
I would guess you haven't dealt much with farming?
When you grow Food in a field, ANYTHING, ANYTHING AT ALL which grows in that field that is NOT food, means that you will produce LESS food than if all the non-food items growing there were removed. By allowing "tares" to grow to maturity along with the wheat, much wheat has been lost before the harvest even begins.
The concept that either that field produces enough to eat through the winter or the family starves to death would have been crystal-clear 2,000 years ago. No grocery stores or Salvation Army to help you out, no relief helicopters, You grew it so You could eat it or You died. The loss of any significant amount of harvest was not just a minor inconvenience. People often would make a decision which child would live, and which would not be fed because there was not enough for all.
Let me try another example. If I were to tell you a story, and part of that story was "don't change the oil in your car", because somebody else would do it for you, and related that to a different story where somebody else would do something else for you, would you not say to yourself "I HAVE to change the oil in my car, there is nobody else to do it for me, perhaps I should do this other thing for myself, as well"?
i understand that you cannot make the Bible say anything you want it to. So tell me again, exactly what species and genus of plant is a "tare" and where did this information come from? If you make a "tare" a non-wheat plant that looks a lot like wheat, this somewhat weakens my position but if it is an easily distinguishable weed then it does not. I'll grant that the plant you describe actually exists but what basis is there for deciding what a "tare" is?
These "rules" you have for reading the Bible, these "rules" which, in effect, tell you what it says because they tell you how to interpret it, where exactly did these come from? Are they a work of God, or a work of man?
What you said in points 1 and 2 was essentially pick and choose what you want to emphasize. I am doing just exactly that. Is there ANYONE who can tell me that I am not choosing the correct items? You also missed my meaning somewhat, I meant to say that rather that the altered harvest being a metaphor for the end of the world, I see the end of the world as being the metaphor for the altered harvest.
Further, this "altered harvest" with the sons of the devil coming to full growth seemed to Cause the end of the world. While this may or may not be a bad thing, the altered harvest of wheat certainly was. It was also known at the time that this was bad, and easily correctable by weeding. Unless, of course, these weeds were those "special" weeds that looked just like wheat. I would take from that passage that just as Man should weed his fields, he should also "weed out" the sons of the Devil from among the population.
What you have is a bunch of men decide what a passage means, and then they decide how to explain it. Pretty much the exact same method used to determine that the sun went around the earth. Same group of dudes decided that anyone with ACTUAL PROOF that they were wrong should be put to death.
You have heard of the Dark Ages? They were dark largely because organized religion put out the lights. Not YOUR religion, of course. It was those other guys.
If you answered my direct question on whether or not Jesus mentioned the specific cheek, I missed it. What do these "rules" say about that, for what reason would he be specific, and not just say "if a person strikes you"? Why pick out one of the few areas of the body where a blow was not just a physical attack, but almost definitely a demeaning of the person's worth and value? Why offer a specific alternative that did not carry any status messages? Is this just accidental, or is there additional meaning in this passage? Who is it that decides the answer to this question?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Can you tell me what good ol' Marty was saying other than "IMO, what this Book says does not mean what you think it means."
Also, after he said that, were there any pitchforks and torches involved?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I have enjoyed reading much of this religious discussion lately.. I'm reminded of the Christian Church during the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917. During the revolution, as the barbaric and oppressive Bolsheviks were seizing power and beginning their decades long reign of death and destruction on the people and the economy of Russia. A reign which would ultimately force people of all faiths underground to practice their religion in secret lest they be discovered and forced to pay a pretty steep penalty, up to and including death..... the Christian Church within Russia was also embroiled in a very heated argument that occupied much of their time and their energy. It seems that, within the church, they couldn't agree on the size and quantity of candles to have on the alter during service. A few things I've learned over the years and it applies to faith as well as to politics.. you aren't ever going to win somebody over to your way of thinking by dissecting the details... Discussing the genus and species of a "tare" could be an interesting intellectual debate within the Christian faith but I would suspect nobody has ever come to faith or left faith based on that discussion. See, for evil to overcome the people in faith requires much the same tactics as overcoming the people in politics.. get them arguing over stupid details that don't really matter while you rob them blind of everything they own....  So... taxes are too high, our government wastes too much money and intrudes into our lives, the forces of good and wickedness are swirling around us and we need to love the Lord our God with all out heart and soul and love our neighbors as ourselves... regardless of what species a "tare" is..
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
you aren't ever going to win somebody over to your way of thinking by dissecting the details
I was a a Satanist up until a yesterday and reading about the Tare species.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
"Marty" used the laws of exegesis to interpret the passage, instead of using eisegesis.
ex·e·ge·sis- a critical explanation or interpretation of a text or portion of a text, especially of the Bible.
Eisegesis- eis·e·ge·sis–noun, plural -ses  [-seez] Show IPA.
an interpretation, especially of Scripture, that expresses the interpreter's own ideas, bias, or the like, rather than the meaning of the text.
.
And your the one who mentioned pitchforks, I was responding to you "eisegeses" of the text.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Did you read the law of interpreting parables that said " Look for the main point of a parable. Most parables are driving home one overarching truth or principle although there may be exceptions at times."
Jesus is not talking about farming, He is talking about the kingdom of God. The wheat and the tares are not literal wheat and tares, they refer to people within the visible kingdom.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Quote:
you aren't ever going to win somebody over to your way of thinking by dissecting the details
I was a a Satanist up until a yesterday and reading about the Tare species.
Welcome to the faith brother. 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Good post, and I agree the discussion of the genus of the tare will not convert anyone. That was just a side point to the main discussion. Some of the points of the main discussion are: 1. That the only defense against false teaching is a careful reading of the Bible, like the Berean Christians. 2. That false prophecy in no way reflects on whether the Bible is reliable or not, because false prophecy is always contrary to sound Biblical teaching. The Bible even predicted beforehand that many would come and pervert the scriptures. The apostles obviously thought this was important for people to know. They spoke on the subject as much as anything else. 3.That the vast majority of objections by agnostics and atheists against the truth of the Bible are due to a misinterpretation of what the Bible says. 3. That misinterpretations of the Bible are often due to the failure of people to follow the laws of exegesis and hermeneutics. 4. That the Bible has remarkable internal consistency, despite the claims of nonbelievers that it contradicts itself. 5. That the Old and New Testaments do not contradict, but compliment each other. Basically there is an all out attack on the Bible, not only on this message board, but in society at large. Should Christians be silent while the Bible is slandered and maligned by lies. Were the apostles and church fathers silent? Also, while my arguments will not change anyones mind, ( I wholeheartedly agree with you there), I did post numerous scriptures, and scriptures are able to not only change minds but also hearts. Human wisdom has no power, but the Word of God is alive and powerful, sharper than any two edged sword. So if you please, ignore everything I said and just read the scriptures. They are able to make people wise. I hope someone reads the scriptures even if only to try to prove them wrong, because if they read it, a seed may be planted. Of course, the parable of the sower shows that not every seed will bear fruit, but that's God's concern not mine. There have been atheists and agnostics that were converted to Christianity because they read the Bible trying to prove it wrong. This is a miracle only God can perform. Remember, if we sow sparingly, we will reap sparingly, and God also said that His Word would not return to Him empty, but it would accomplish what He desires and achieve its purpose. ( Isaiah 55:11). Now when I say God's Word, I do not mean the explanations that I made in attempting to interpret it, but the scriptures themselves, of which I have posted numerous. Here are some links to help people who may want to investigate the teachings of the Bible. They all provide free resources. The greatest resource is the Bible itself http://www.crosswalk.com/ Bibles and study tools. http://www.studylight.org/isb/ Interlinear Bible with Hebrew and Greek text, and dictionary. http://www.blueletterbible.org/ Numerous study tools like concordances, dictionary, Hebrew and Greek text, etc. The greatest help in understanding the Bible is the Holy Spirit Himself. BTW- thank you for this statement. I agree wholeheartedly Quote:
So... taxes are too high, our government wastes too much money and intrudes into our lives, the forces of good and wickedness are swirling around us and we need to love the Lord our God with all out heart and soul and love our neighbors as ourselves... regardless of what species a "tare" is..
Last edited by LA Brown fan; 05/26/11 01:10 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
So it is your Opinion that Marty's Opinion was not Opinion at all, but a logical response to the incorrect Opinion of the prevailing Church authorities? Did any of those authorities think they were wrong, at the time?
Was not Martin Luther chased with pitchforks and torches, more than once? Was this for any other reason than that he disagreed with Church Authority? That the almost universal prevailing Opinion differed from his Opinion?
It is your Opinion that to correctly evaluate a parable you must first form a correct Opinion.
The parable talked about farming. It talked about the end of the world. You obviously have the Opinion that the end of the world is the most important part. You probably don't have a field to tend, and certainly would not be dead in 6 months if you failed to do so. The folks who first heard this story, for the most part, did have a field. The end of the world might be in 6 months, or 6,000 years. Winter and starvation had a much more definite timeline.
These people knew what happened to others whose fields did not produce, for whatever reason. They BURIED THE BODIES almost every year. Fairy stories about the end of the world were far less important than an immediate, pressing need that they dealt with on a regular basis.
Like the candles on the altar, as mentioned, most of this has no real purpose. However, MY goal is that when somebody says "God says THIS is the correct number of candles", there will be somebody available to say "well, maybe, maybe not." Possibly even someone who says "You know what, i don't see a darn thing in this book about candles, I'm the guy buying, making, lighting, cleaning, and putting them out, I'll make the decision, now GTFO of my way. Go to your house, buy your own candles, and fire up as many as you wish."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Here's a little research for you.
There is no consensus what exactly a "tare" is. The most likely candidate is Darnell weed, which does resemble wheat, IN THE EARLY STAGES OF LIFE.
There are other related plants and no one knows for sure which was meant, if indeed any specific plant were indicated.
Well before Harvest time, the difference is easily detectable. Darnell weed is sometimes called "false wheat" and is apparently edible, though not nearly as productive as real wheat.
The plant may have recreational drug uses. It is in the Sativa family, related to marijuana. It and it's relatives are sometimes called "vetches".
Deliberately sowing Darnell into wheat fields was not an unknown act.
Darnell was most definitely considered to be something which reduced the yield of a wheat field. It was considered important to remove it from the wheat field well before harvest time.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Wow, I have to give you serious props for the time and energy and research you are putting in to make your points about a biblical story regarding wheat and tare...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 934 |
Yes, Luther was chased by the Catholic Church for disagreeing. Just because someone does something in the name of God doesnt mean God endorses it. Luther was a threat to the power of the Church, and he also was making them lose a lot of money because he taught against the practice of selling indulgences.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum End of the world This Saturday
|
|
