A female, non-Christian reader was upset with an article addressing the biblical concept of wives submitting to their husbands. She classified it as a form of slavery, probably thinking that I would recoil and try to water down the submission factor. But instead I accepted the premise and even expanded upon it by saying, I have often thought how people in America are born into a slave system even today. I mean look at it, we can't simply find a plot of land and build a shelter and live our lives. Instead, most Americans must find work doing the bidding of another person. We are locked into paying rent, mortgages, utilities, not to mention taxes. What if I didn't want to be part of that rat race anymore? Where could I go to be truly "free"? If I went to the mountains, eventually some government official would find me and throw me off "public land" and perhaps fine me for squating.
With a title like the one of this article, perhaps you are expecting that I will berate everyone else for not being as "Christian" as I am -- since that is typically how such articles go. Next, such an article would outline how far modern Christianity has fallen and how we need to get back to some idealized practice or interpretation of Christianity. Indeed, many such articles are merely covers for the author to put forth some private interpretation of the Bible and claim it is the "real one".
Rather, I am NOT here to urge anyone to follow me in some fanciful "new" interpretation never expounded upon before by the theologians that have come before. Since my (and every Christian's) presupposition MUST be that God sustains basic understanding of His plan and truth, otherwise all who appeal to the "Bible alone" aren't being quite honest with themselves. The Bible didn't just drop from the sky, nor was it found on golden plates in a cave (Mormonism), nor was it "recited" to some cross-roads Arab trader in the 7th century (Islam). The Bible was given to Christians, using God's sustaining hand to bring it about, otherwise who is to say what we call the "Bible" is God's Word?
So, with the presupposition that God sustains the basic understanding of His plan and truth, we must ask WHAT IS A REAL CHRISTIAN?
This question seems easy enough to answer. Perhaps a person would say a vice is clearly "sinful" whereas a bad habit is something you ought not do but you do it without thinking. Or further, that a vice is something you willfully do with full knowledge of its negative (and possibly sinful) ramifications, whereas a bad habit is something you do without realizing it, that also is negative and possibly sinful.
Could it be that a vice is controlling and addicting; something you cannot simply stop such as smoking or drugs? Maybe a vice is always negative whereas a habit can be positive or negative?
I've asked one of my daughter's friends this question but purposely requested they do not answer me until more time passes. Please ask yourself the same question...especially next time you or someone else names some action and says, "This is my only vice". What is meant by that?
SUMMARY: A theoretical paper for an automobile design based on the coiled mainspring used in wristwatches and some novelty toys. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainspring )
The possibility of creating and powering an automobile by the principles of clockworks is met by some immediate objections.
So, I was curious what would happen if I simply searched the word Christian in google. The hits returned, the wikipedia entry on Christian and secondly a wikipedia entry on a Christian wrestler oddly enough.
The top advertisement was for meeting Christian singles.
Further, there was a link to religioustolerance.org which obviously is going to be liberal, especially since as I clicked the link called, Brief summary of Christianity The main founders of the "Jesus movements" -- a.k.a. primitive Christianity it first displayed Roman Catholicism and Mormonism. Really?
The point is, imagine you're a non-Christian who wants to find out about Christianity and the first thing you come across is the wikipedia entry or this religioustolerance definition.
The ninth episode of the REAL Antithesis Hour. Roderick Edwards and RiversOfEden discuss the topic; END OF SIN along with how full preterists should view marriage if they think the Resurrection is past. We also briefly discuss some current topics within the full/hyperpreterist movement. This will be the final episode in the series as it relates to full/hyperpreterism. I want to thank Rivers for having the courage and integrity to join me in these podcasts. I also want to thank the many listeners and those who wrote in. Lastly, I still greatly encourage people to contact hyperpreterist leader, Don Preston and urge him to have a one-on-one public discussion with RiversOfEden -- the most consistent "full preterist".
TEXTS
Rev 22:14-15
Mt 22:23-32
Listen to this podcast:
See how REAL antithesis works. To download to your mp3 device or computer -- right click HERE and SAVEAS.
Download via ITUNES.
Or listen using the player below.
In October 2008 I wrote to Whitefield Theological Seminary (WTS) and to its president and founder, Kenneth Talbot concerning its relationship with then hyperpreteristi leader Samuel M. Frost. Frost had long boasted that he in part arrived at his heretical position via the tools provided him by WTS and Frost had made a point of claiming he was accepted by Talbot as a Christian brother. This is confirmed by Talbot constantly calling Frost and other hyperpreterists, "brother" and validated by the FACT that Talbot was purportedly utilizing Frost to help develop the student Hebrew program for WTS. All of this while Frost was still hot and heavy into the heresy.
My inquiry to WTS and Talbot's surprisingly rather unChristian response (see full details), caused me to distance myself from the so-called "anti-hyperpreterist" community (and the feeling was mutual, as the anti-hyperprets saw in Talbot, a new champion despite his validation of heresy).
My contention then and now is unwavering; that a Christian or a Christian institution should NEVER appear to be validating known heresy. It doesn't matter if the institution is not the Church proper, it still wears the label of "Christian" and when a known heretic can use that institution's credibility to proffer him or herself as accepted within Christianity -- perhaps even as Christian -- then that Christian institution has done a great disservice to the Faith.
The Real Antithesis Hour will have presented 9 podcasts covering the definition and difference between Hyper (or Full) Preterism and historic Christian positions. I want to invite the many listeners to tune in June 16th Thursday for the final show in the series.
The final show will briefly cover the issue of the End of Sin and then wrap up with posing some specific questions to the full/hyperpreteristi guest-host, RiversOfEden about his consistent variation of hyperpreterism and how it impacts daily life.
As my family returned from church today, there were many questions. You see, the sermon was on homosexuality and how it is no worse a sin than any other sin. I mean, the Bible does say sin is sin right (Rom 3:23)? This confuses many people because then who are we to say anything about anyone's sins; specifically homosexuals if we are equally sinful? I mean, what about the Bible verse of removing the board out of your own eye before trying to help another person remove a speck (Mt 7:2-5)?
Okay, so you're a Christian and you have engaged or have been engaged in a discussion about religion in general or some more specific theological discussion. How many of us have spent lots amount of time in such a discussion just to find out the other participants were so relativistic minded or so full of themselves that the discussion ended up nowhere? Well, here are 10 signs that a religious or theological conversation is going nowhere. If the person does one of the following, your time is probably wasted.
10.They begin with "I think..." or "I believe..." 9. They mention Rob Bell or Brian McLaren favorably. 8. They keep talking about their personal experiences. 7. They don't use theology terms because they don't like labels. 6. They keep referring to historic Christianity as "churchianity". 5. They never refer to any specific verse in the Bible. 4. They quote a bunch of philosophers. 3. They have you call them "Doctor". 2. They talk over you everytime you speak. 1. They refer you to their website every 5 minutes.
I have often made the connection that hyperpreterism is no more "Christian" than is Mormonism. Mormons ALSO appeal to Scripture. It has never been an issue about who does and doesn't read the Bible. Of course Mormons and Hyperpreterists read the Bible. The issue is INTERPRETATION of the Bible. Hyperpreterists like to ignore the presupposition that God sustains basic truth and the basic understanding of that truth, and even more especially among the New Covenant which has Jesus coming and revealing and explaining what the Old Covenant saints only saw in type and shadow behind the veil of Moses. If God doesn't sustain basic understanding of truth among Christians, then at any point along can come a charlatan boasting to have better understood God more than any other men ever in Christianity. Isn't this in effect what hyperpreterism claims???
It irks me when supposed "experts" blather on and they are given a status that doesn't represent the typical. For instance, the entire Harold Camping issue or like an article I read today where a man named Ian Morgan Cron wrote on FoxNews.com, an article titled: Five Words That Could Save the Church (source). Save it from what? The author answers the question with this phrase: "Five words could prevent the public brawls between Christians who differ in their opinions on social and theological issues." Who says we Christians AREN'T supposed to "brawl" to some degree over doctrine? Actually, the Bible says just the opposite as the author of this piece concludes.
The eigth episode of the REAL Antithesis Hour. Roderick Edwards and RiversOfEden were slated to discuss the topic; END OF SIN, but got side-tracked with good questions from the mailbag. Yes, that's right we went a bit down a rabbit trail on this one - YET, we still didn't end up talking about sports or the weather or how either of us are on some Emergent "journey". I think the listeners will still find this episode very interesting.
Next week, we'll discuss the End of Sin.
Listen to this podcast:
See how REAL antithesis works. To download to your mp3 device or computer -- right click HERE and SAVEAS.
Download via ITUNES.
Or listen using the player below.
For the longest time, it was just a few of us fighting against hyperpreterismi from the INSIDE. Sure, Dee Dee Warren of PreteristBlog.com had been fighting the heresy and she should be commended for the great work she has done, but she wasn't ever really within the movement. But what is strange is a new crop opposing hyperpreterism has come to the fore. Lots of ex-hyerpreterists such as Jason Bradfield (who left before his mentor Sam Frost by the way), Sam Frost and some others. This new crop, perhaps at the instance of PaulT (PreteristBlog's new mouthpiece) is called the "new guard". PaulT likes to call me the "old guard". That's okay I guess since the Bible says "Stand in the ways and see, And ask for the old paths, where the good way is, And walk in it; Then you will find rest for your souls." - Jer 6:16a.
Besides the "new guards" AREN'T saying anything different than the "old guards" have been saying all along. For example, I said:
Okay by now many of you have heard the world is going to end today or that there will be a "rapture" (a taking away of all the Christians) to heaven. As a devout Christian, whom I hope many of you know as a consistent example of a Christian, I want to ASSURE YOU that there will be no rapture or end of the world today.
The man who has been going around claiming there will be a rapture is Harold Capmping, an 89 year guy who predicted the same thing in 1994...and yet here we are. What was his explanation why the 1994 rapture didn't happen?
"[It] didn't come true because of a mathematical error...I'm not embarrassed about it. It was just the fact that it was premature...[but this time] there is...no possibility that it will not happen." - source
The seventh episode of the REAL Antithesis Hour. Roderick Edwards and RiversOfEden discuss the Judgment and how if according to Full Preterismi/Hyperpreterism it happened in AD70, how is anyone still to be judged? Further, it would seem all hyperpreterists should be universalists if they were consistent -- unless of course they would accept RiversOfEden view that indeed "all was fulfilled" in AD70 - for real.
TEXTS
Heb 9:27
Luke 16:19-31
Rev 20:14-15
Rev 22:15
Next week, we'll discuss the End of Sin.
Listen to this podcast:
See how REAL antithesis works. To download to your mp3 device or computer -- right click HERE and SAVEAS.
Download via ITUNES.
Or listen using the player below.
The YouTube video, "Reformation Polka" has generated a lot of comments, especially about the contention that Martin Luther and the other Reformers more opposed Papalism rather than the Church in general.
A few questions came that I'd like to address in a full article.
The sixth episode of the REAL Antithesis Hour. Roderick Edwards and RiversOfEden discuss the timing of the resurrection of the believers...or rather more about the notion of how and when people are "born again".
In this podcast we get a little more combative yet no one calls anyone "stupid" or "nutcase" nor threatens to sue anyone.
TEXTS
Dan 9:24
John 3:1-8
John 11:23-26
1 Pet 1:22-23
Mt 24:31
Next week, we'll discuss the Judgment and how if it supposedly happened in AD70, why aren't ALL Hyperpreterists, universalists?
Listen to this podcast:
See how REAL antithesis works. To download to your mp3 device or computer -- right click HERE and SAVEAS.
Download via ITUNES.
Or listen using the player below.
A local television station announced a report on the lack of women in state politics. I immediately thought, here we go again. Let me be the person to say this plainly. Why are so many people worried about the color of someone's skin or their gender? I mean, let's face it, Barack Obama was mainly elected simply because people wanted to be part of the "historic moment" of the first black president (even though he is really only "half-black"). They didn't really care about what he believes or his qualifications for the job. It seems the same with this "women in State politics" issue. It seems some people simply want ANY woman to be elected. I want to see PEOPLE elected -- who cares about their color or gender. I want to see people who have American principles, such as free-market mentality, capitalism, and self-reliance, not socialists who tell us they want to "redistribute [other people's] wealth".
Last year, I had to battle the problem of Canadian Thistle invading my gardens. I relentlessly sprayed every sign of this pest until it was virtually eradicated from my yard. But this year, a new menace has emerged; Wild Yarrow.
As with everything, I see a theological or philosophical connection.
Something piqued my curiosity after helping my high-school aged daughter with an essay. The essay was about the human propensity to oppress others and why. My daughter's task was to pull from 3 former reports to determine the answer. The 3 former reports were on the book Of Mice and Men, the events of the Holocaust, and the rule of Saddam Hussein. What is the commonality within these 3 that might explain the human propensity for oppression?
In all 3 cases, the oppressors had a sense of inferiority and the feeling of threat.
United States of America president Barack Obama announced on May 1, 2011 that America had successfully located and killed Islamic terrorist Osama Bin Laden, dumping his corpse in to the ocean so that his burial place would not become a memorial for other would-be terrorists.
During the announcement, Obama like a typical politician made it sound like the world stood in unity with America and he made sure to emphasize that America is not at war with Islam and never will be. While I understand the diplomatic strategy of saying such a thing, it seems to miss the historic FACT that Islam has been at war with the West, and even specifically America since America's founding. (See Barbary Pirates and: http://thekingdomcome.com/christianity_vs_islam )
The fifth episode of the REAL Antithesis Hour. Roderick Edwards and RiversOfEden discuss what the Christians in the New Testament expected the nature of believers resurrection to be; physical or only spiritual (or "covenantal"). The typical Full or Hyperpreteristi concept of the believers resurrection is that it was "spiritual", or "covenantal", or merely the resurrection of Israel into the New Covenant.
TEXTS
Mt 22:23-30
Lk 20:34-36
Acts 17:17-20, 32
Acts 23:6-8, 24:14-15
1 Cor 15:35-49
Next week, we'll discuss the timing of the believers resurrection.
Listen to this podcast:
See how REAL antithesis works. To download to your mp3 device or computer -- right click HERE and SAVEAS.
Download via ITUNES.
Or listen using the player below.
So, I used to be a die-hard FireFox user, having long abandoned Internet Explorer. But FireFox eats up a lot of CPU and Physical Memory (RAM) usage -- yep, a bunch of geek-speak. This was drastically slowing down my computer. Most people say, "We'll just buy more RAM". I say, I shouldn't have to. I tried out Google Chrome, but it was even worse than FireFox in that it didn't like it when you had other browsers open. Well, I resumed using FireFox for a while but it was consuming 500,000 to 900,000K and would consistently rise to those levels after the initial 40,000K at launch. That is outrageous. I even removed most of the add-ons, but it is still a memory hog.
A SOLUTION?
Surely there had to be someone out there making a better browser. Enter; LUNASCAPE.
In America, on Easter or Resurrection Sunday as it is often called, families dress up in their finest clothes and invite members of the family or friends they rarely speak to any other time of the year to attend church. They may get up early or go to the second service, to hear sermons on the resurrection. Afterwards, they often go to a restaurant or there is a pitch-in meal at someone's home. The meal is typically ham/pork perhaps in reference to Christianity's symbolism of being freed from the Jewish dietary law, which was really about God's calling non-Jews "clean", in giving them the ability to be part of the New Covenant (see Acts 10:9-15). Sometimes, depending how religious the family is there are Easter-egg hunts, plastic-grass filled baskets with chocolate bunnies and jelly-beans.
Does anyone know the origin or history of this holiday in America? Because America was originally very "Puritan" and Calvinisti, neither Easter nor Christmas was observed before the Civil War. From all appearance, Easter with its bunnies seems to have been brought to America by Germans.
Recent Comments
8 weeks 4 days ago
9 weeks 4 days ago
9 weeks 4 days ago
9 weeks 6 days ago
10 weeks 2 days ago
10 weeks 2 days ago
10 weeks 3 days ago
11 weeks 1 day ago
11 weeks 2 days ago
11 weeks 2 days ago