Is God a Monster?

User avatar
Candlepower
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:26 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by Candlepower » Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:33 pm

robbyyoung wrote:
As for the “great commission”, this was specifically given for Israel’s last days, which was in the 1st century, encompassing the known Roman Empire. This is very clear to me when reading the NT writers letters and understanding.
Homer wrote: Your belief that the great commission was limited to the lands of the Greco/Roman empire would seem to be falsified by the Apostle Thomas, unless he misunderstood Jesus first hand commandment. There is evidence from many sources that Thomas evangelized in India and planted churches there long before 70 AD.
Good point, Homer.

Robby, it strikes me that the Full Preterist theory sees God as limited in time and space -- not global, but territorial, like the pagan gods. And like Augustine/Calvin/Sproul, Full Preterism presents a diminished and terribly unloving God (contrasted with Scripture's description of Him). Calvinism presents Him as incompetent to handle the complexities of human free will, and Full Preterism makes Him incapable of seeing beyond the first century or the Seven Seas. Contrary to what Jesus taught about Himself, as loving all and dying for their sin, both systems have Him loving only a few, and declaring, "to hell with the rest!"

I'm guessing your contention that the great Commission is null and void as of AD 70 conflicts with the testimony of your own Christian experience. I bet somewhere along the line of your life you heard or read the Gospel message, learned the importance of obeying Jesus, and became a follower ("Go and make disciples of all the nations...teach them to observe all things I have commanded you..."). I assume you were baptized ("baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit..."). So contrary to your contention that The Great Commission expired long ago, you apparently are a product of it. So am I, and so are all Christians since it was declared by Jesus. The Great Commission is very much alive, and will be until Jesus returns and re-creates heaven and earth.

Robby, I don't mean to offend you (instead to encourage you to re-think your position), but I must say that when I hear the Full Preterist arguments, I get the same kind of creepy feeling as when I hear Flat-Earthers and Hebrew-Rooters struggle to convince folks that their absurdity makes sense. Those schools of misinformation, as well as Full Preterism's, conflict severely with reality and Scripture.

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by robbyyoung » Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:25 pm

Candlepower wrote:Robby, it strikes me that the Full Preterist theory sees God as limited in time and space -- not global, but territorial, like the pagan gods.
Hi Candlepower,

Thanks for the reply. However, I believe what Jesus prophesied and what the NT Writers said was assuredly fulfilled in their day, Israel's last days. Therefore, it is not I who qualifies the time, place, and manner of Matthew 24:14 & Mark 16:15; I believe this was the understanding of the original audience. Jesus Himself specifically said it was "territorial" and Paul confirmed it; if you don't agree, then prove that the authors' testimony, in question, did not have this understanding. Nevertheless, if you and others want to believe that Israel's last days apply to you, in 2017--as if the premier relevance WAS NOT directly charged to our 1st Century brothers--that's perfectly fine, but I don't believe it's supported via Paul's testimony, teaching, and understanding. From what I've read, the post 70 A.D. gospel message has nothing to do with repeating Israel's last days events. These subsequent events made us heirs to the kingdom of God and any extended commission, to spread the gospel, is a by-product of the fulfillment of Matt 24 & Mark 16 . Thanks be to God!
Candlepower wrote:And like Augustine/Calvin/Sproul, Full Preterism presents a diminished and terribly unloving God (contrasted with Scripture's description of Him). Calvinism presents Him as incompetent to handle the complexities of human free will, and Full Preterism makes Him incapable of seeing beyond the first century or the Seven Seas. Contrary to what Jesus taught about Himself, as loving all and dying for their sin, both systems have Him loving only a few, and declaring, "to hell with the rest!"
With all do respect, these are borderline straw man arguments. I think it would be more beneficial to state a specific textual disagreement you may have, like the one I just addressed, to challenge the veracity of my conclusions. Our emotions and rational thinking should be in-line with the authors' understanding. Our discussions should not be about how to shoehorn what we want the text to say, but rather, what does it say and why.
Candlepower wrote:I'm guessing your contention that the great Commission is null and void as of AD 70 conflicts with the testimony of your own Christian experience. I bet somewhere along the line of your life you heard or read the Gospel message, learned the importance of obeying Jesus, and became a follower ("Go and make disciples of all the nations...teach them to observe all things I have commanded you..."). I assume you were baptized ("baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit..."). So contrary to your contention that The Great Commission expired long ago, you apparently are a product of it. So am I, and so are all Christians since it was declared by Jesus. The Great Commission is very much alive, and will be until Jesus returns and re-creates heaven and earth.
Candlepower, you assume too much. We are not reliving 1st Century events but rather the kingdom of God eternal principles. It reminds me of the saying, "The bible WAS NOT written to US but FOR us." When I read these ancient letters and testimonies of our 1st Century brothers and clearly see their expectations, hope, and faith of what Jesus and the Apostles said was coming upon them, I can only have a greater and renewed respect for the gospel message and fulfilled promises given to the original audience. We are God's representatives on earth, so why would I believe that the gospel message is over? I simply believe certain events and promises within the back story of the message were completed/fulfilled.
Candlepower wrote:Robby, I don't mean to offend you (instead to encourage you to re-think your position), but I must say that when I hear the Full Preterist arguments, I get the same kind of creepy feeling as when I hear Flat-Earthers and Hebrew-Rooters struggle to convince folks that their absurdity makes sense. Those schools of misinformation, as well as Full Preterism's, conflict severely with reality and Scripture.
I believe Christians, post 70.A.D., are commissioned to spread the gospel absent prophesies that do not apply to them. The kingdom of God is both alive and well in both the spiritual and physical realm. However, I personally believe that the spiritual realm is far more active. This discussion should be about Paul's understanding of Jesus' words. Therefore, if I'm absurd in my thinking, then so was Paul, especially when he taught and told the 1st Century believers that the oikoumenē Jesus prophesied about, in Matt and Mark, was indeed fulfilled in his day. So, please elaborate on why you can't accept his testimony/understanding?

Blessings.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by Homer » Tue Dec 26, 2017 1:30 am

Hi Robby,

Earlier you wrote:
As for the “great commission”, this was specifically given for Israel’s last days, which was in the 1st century, encompassing the known Roman Empire. This is very clear to me when reading the NT writers letters and understanding.
I have been looking into this claim of yours and I think you are very much mistaken. I looked at each statement Jesus made in giving His command to the Apostles, as recorded by Matthew , Mark, and Luke. Here they are, in order with my comments:

Matthew 28:19 New American Standard Bible
19. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations
(Strong's #1484; ethnos, gentiles, nations other than Israel), baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

Mark 16:15 New American Standard Bible
15. And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all
(Strong's #537: hapas an intensified form of "all") creation [Strong's #2889; kosmos the inhabited earth, people everywhere (by metonymy)].

Luke 24:47 New American Standard Bible
47. and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations
(ethne, see above on Matthew) beginning from Jerusalem.

Acts 1:8 New American Standard Bible
8. but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest
(Strong's #2078; eschatos, last, utmost, extreme) part of the earth" (Strong's #1093, ge, the inhabited earth)

Take note that the word oikumene appears nowhere in any version of our Lord's commandment to his Apostles/disciples. He was not ignorant of the extent of the inhabited world. Preterists claim they take things literally. If their position on the commission is the same as your they have made a significant error.

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by robbyyoung » Tue Dec 26, 2017 12:27 pm

Homer wrote:Hi Robby,

Earlier you wrote:
As for the “great commission”, this was specifically given for Israel’s last days, which was in the 1st century, encompassing the known Roman Empire. This is very clear to me when reading the NT writers letters and understanding.
I have been looking into this claim of yours and I think you are very much mistaken. I looked at each statement Jesus made in giving His command to the Apostles, as recorded by Matthew , Mark, and Luke. Here they are, in order with my comments:

Matthew 28:19 New American Standard Bible
19. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations
(Strong's #1484; ethnos, gentiles, nations other than Israel), baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

Mark 16:15 New American Standard Bible
15. And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all
(Strong's #537: hapas an intensified form of "all") creation [Strong's #2889; kosmos the inhabited earth, people everywhere (by metonymy)].

Luke 24:47 New American Standard Bible
47. and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations
(ethne, see above on Matthew) beginning from Jerusalem.

Acts 1:8 New American Standard Bible
8. but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest
(Strong's #2078; eschatos, last, utmost, extreme) part of the earth" (Strong's #1093, ge, the inhabited earth)

Take note that the word oikumene appears nowhere in any version of our Lord's commandment to his Apostles/disciples. He was not ignorant of the extent of the inhabited world. Preterists claim they take things literally. If their position on the commission is the same as your they have made a significant error.
Hi Homer,

Thanks for the reply, and I hope you had a blessed Christmas. I truly appreciate your scrutiny concerning my claims, that, Paul’s understanding of Jesus’ words in Matt 24:14 & Mark 16:15 were fulfilled in Israel’s last days (1st century). Despite the exclusion of oikumene in the biblical references you provided, you are not practicing sound exegesis to refute my observations concerning Paul’s understanding. For example, in Matthew 24:14 when Jesus stated, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world (oikumene) as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come, he was talking to His disciples, giving them signs and clues to know when they were getting close to the end of the Old Covenant Age. Now, Jesus used the word oikumene, a very unambiguous descriptive term, used only 15 times in the NT, mainly to describe The Roman Empire. So, in order for you and I to quell any remaining ambiguity to determine if Jesus truly meant The Roman Empire, we would need a confirmation of someone else clearly establishing this and claiming fulfillment. This would qualify and put into context ambiguous terms such as: kosmos, hapas, ethne, ge, and eschatos in order to prevent eisegesis on our part.

Well guess what? We have that in The Apostle Paul, who said the following:

Rom 1:8
First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed in all the world

Therefore, Paul gives testimony that the entire world, in the first century, knew of the Roman Christians’ faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. This obviously invalidates any private interpretation of the entire globe and make us look for an alternate meaning behind Mark 16:15. But, Paul further said:

Col 1:5-6
because of the hope laid up for you in heaven. Of this you have heard before in the word of the truth, the gospel, which has come to you, as indeed in the whole world it is bearing fruit and increasing—as it also does among you, since the day you heard it and understood the grace of God in truth

And…

Col 1:23
if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister.

Therefore, this qualifies Matt 28:19, Mark 16:15, Luke 24:47, & Acts 1:8 as the oikumene or Roman Empire Jesus prophesied about. Not because I said it, but because Paul said it.

Homer, we are simply discussing Paul's understanding, one of the last inspired/authoritative authors of God’s Word. What we believe to be literal or not is irrelevant, unless we did the work necessary to ascertain the authors’ understanding. I do not believe I failed miserably in showing Paul’s understanding. Therefore, I see no reason to assume an understanding contrary to Paul’s. Furthermore, you have yet to prove Paul had a different understanding.

Finally, if this conversation is going to continue along this topic, I believe we should move it to another thread. We are straying from the original OP.

Blessings my friend, and have a Happy New Year!

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by Homer » Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:39 pm

Hi Robby,

You are missing my point. You have asserted that Jesus' commission to the Apostles/disciples was to go only to the Greco/Roman empire. You referred to historical accounts of Thomas going to India prior to the destruction of Jerusalem as a fable. The burden of proof is on you.

If Paul meant oikumene in the sense you claim for it why didn't he use it his statements you cited?
Note: Kittel, Arndt/Gingrich, and Strong all give the primary meaning of oikumene as the inhabited earth, the Roman lands as a secondary meaning. Oikumene was, as used by the Romans, a political term they took for their empire.
I truly appreciate your scrutiny concerning my claims, that, Paul’s understanding of Jesus’ words in Matt 24:14 & Mark 16:15 were fulfilled in Israel’s last days (1st century).
Paul may have been using hyperbole, as is often employed in scripture. Regardless, my point is about the meaning of Christ's commission, not about when Jerusalem would be destroyed.

I consider the various words used to describe the extent of the commission to be used as synonyms. You cite Colossians 1:23 as proof that Paul understood the commission to be restricted to the Roman empire. But Paul used the word kosmos; you say that he meant oikumene as the Romans understood it. Then why didn't he use oikumene, which you claim is a more precise word? Paul informs us in his own words his understanding of kosmos , which he makes much use of. See acts 17:24:

Acts 17:24 New American Standard Bible
24. The God who made the world
(kosmos) and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands;

What God made, according to Paul, was the world and all things in the world. Obviously God's creation was not limited to the Roman empire. So why would he employ kosmos in a different sense in the two places? The same word used by Mark in describing the commission.
Despite the exclusion of in oikumene in the biblical references you provided, you are not practicing sound exegesis to refute my observations concerning Paul’s understanding. For example, in Matthew 24:14 when Jesus stated, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world (oikumene) as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come”, he was talking to His disciples, giving them signs and clues to know when they were getting close to the end of the Old Covenant Age. Now, Jesus used the word oikumene, a very unambiguous descriptive term, used only 15 times in the NT, mainly to describe The Roman Empire. So, in order for you and I to quell any remaining ambiguity to determine if Jesus truly meant The Roman Empire, we would need a confirmation of someone else clearly establishing this and claiming fulfillment. This would qualify and put into context ambiguous terms such as: kosmos, hapas, ethne, ge, and eschatos in order to prevent eisegesis on our part.
Oikumene is just as ambiguous as the other words.
Well guess what? We have that in The Apostle Paul, who said the following:

Rom 1:8
First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed in all the world
Kosmos

Therefore, Paul gives testimony that the entire world, in the first century, knew of the Roman Christians’ faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. This obviously invalidates any private interpretation of the entire globe and make us look for an alternate meaning behind Mark 16:15. But, Paul further said:
Col 1:5-6
because of the hope laid up for you in heaven. Of this you have heard before in the word of the truth, the gospel, which has come to you, as indeed in the whole world
(kosmos) it is bearing fruit and increasing—as it also does among you, since the day you heard it and understood the grace of God in truth
And…
Col 1:23
if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation
(ktisis) under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister.

How is it you limit all creation under heaven to the Roman empire? And, again, Paul used oikumne in none of your citations. You erroneously claim it to the more precise word. Why then does he not use it?

Homer, we are simply discussing Paul's understanding. Therefore, this qualifies Matt 28:19, Mark 16:15, Luke 24:47, & Acts 1:8 as the oikumene or Roman Empire Jesus prophesied about. Not because I said it, but because Paul said it.

Except Paul never said it. You are reading that into the text.

Furthermore, you have yet to prove Paul had a different understanding.


See above.

Finally, if this conversation is going to continue along this topic, I believe we should move it to another thread. We are straying from the original OP.


Seems to fit in this thread if the Christ'scommission was limited to the Greco/Roman world.

May you be blessed in the coming year!

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by steve » Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:09 pm

To my mind, there is a clear reference to the evangelization of the whole (global) world after AD70 in the parable of the King's Son's wedding (Matthew 22:1-14). The progression of thought is unambiguous:

Verses 1-6 describe the Gospel being preached to the Jews, and their rejection of the King's invitation;

Verse 7 describes the wrath of the King, and His destroying of those people (the Jews) and of their city (Jerusalem);

Verses 8-10 describe the sending (and going) of the King's servants—after the destruction of Jerusalem—into all the world to bring in the Gentiles.

Verses 11-13 describe a later judgment of those who accepted the broader invitation. This is clearly a later judgment than that of verse 7, which described AD70, and must not be confused with it.

Thus, Jesus clearly predicted a period during which the Jews were primarily invited to salvation, followed by the judgment of AD70—all this is followed by another period of evangelism worldwide, ending with yet another judgment (the final judgment, in my opinion).

Despite my openness to various viewpoints, other than my own, I cannot even imagine a sound exegesis of this parable that would allow AD70 to be equated with the final judgment, or which would exclude a global outreach of the Gospel following AD70.

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by robbyyoung » Wed Dec 27, 2017 1:34 pm

Homer wrote:Hi Robby,

You are missing my point. You have asserted that Jesus' commission to the Apostles/disciples was to go only to the Greco/Roman empire. You referred to historical accounts of Thomas going to India prior to the destruction of Jerusalem as a fable. The burden of proof is on you.
Hi Homer,

As far as the thread being on topic, I will continue this discussion until determined otherwise. But I digress to your comment that the burden of proof is on me. This discussion isn’t about Thomas? It’s about Paul’s understanding concerning 1st century evangelism and how he claims fulfillment of Jesus’ words as delivered to His disciples. Furthermore, you are the one who interjected the Thomas myth into the conversation in order to water-down Paul’s clear and authoritative understanding; which is not steeped in myth or wishful thinking—we have his testimony for all to see.

Homer wrote:If Paul meant oikumene in the sense you claim for it why didn't he use it his statements you cited?
Note: Kittel, Arndt/Gingrich, and Strong all give the primary meaning of oikumene as the inhabited earth, the Roman lands as a secondary meaning. Oikumene was, as used by the Romans, a political term they took for their empire ...

Paul may have been using hyperbole, as is often employed in scripture. Regardless, my point is about the meaning of Christ's commission, not about when Jerusalem would be destroyed ...

I consider the various words used to describe the extent of the commission to be used as synonyms. You cite Colossians 1:23 as proof that Paul understood the commission to be restricted to the Roman empire. But Paul used the word kosmos; you say that he meant oikumene as the Romans understood it. Then why didn't he use oikumene, which you claim is a more precise word? Paul informs us in his own words his understanding of kosmos , which he makes much use of. See acts 17:24: ...
Oikumene is just as ambiguous as the other words ...

How is it you limit all creation under heaven to the Roman empire? And, again, Paul used oikumne in none of your citations. You erroneously claim it to the more precise word. Why then does he not use it? ...

Except Paul never said it. You are reading that into the text.
I must confess, I deliberately withheld the text that will refute the crux of you argument, however, even without the text, that I will soon show you, I believe my previous case was exegetically sound. I am extremely confident in my understanding, especially because of your counter arguments: (1) Paul may have been using hyperbole—So then you do agree with me that Paul said exactly what you are trying to refute! Yes, you know exactly what he said, but now your crutch is to charge Paul with hyperbole, really? Then, why aren’t you charging Jesus with using hyperbole, after all, wasn’t He telling His disciples what they would encounter, as proofs to know when the “end was near”? Nevertheless, what proof do you have that Paul was exaggerating his claims? (2) Oikumene was, as used by the Romans, a political term they took for their empire—Homer, this only strengthens my case on the accuracy of the prophecy being fulfilled. Who do you think Jesus, Paul, and the Apostles audience was? Their preaching was obviously focused on the oikumene, just like Jesus told them to do. (3) But Paul used the word kosmos … Then why didn't he use oikumene—Of course these words can be interchangeable, however, the context is what defines the author's understanding. Did you miss “which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven”? Therefore, if I reject your hyperbole theory, kosmos will have the same connotation as Paul’s use of it in Rom 1:8 “First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed in all the world (kosmos). Would you charge Paul with hyperbole here also? And finally, (4) Oikumene is just as ambiguous as the other words—Not when contextualize with the authors understanding. Which brings me to the text that I will share with you now, you said to me, “Except Paul never said it. You are reading that into the text”, really? Observe:

Romans 10:17-18 “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world (oikumene).”

Again, I see no reason to question Paul’s understanding or equate it to hyperbole in order to suit my comfort zone. I’m in agreement with Paul’s teachings, preaching, and expectations concerning his 1st century ministry which led to Israel’s last days.

Blessings.

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by robbyyoung » Wed Dec 27, 2017 6:46 pm

steve wrote:To my mind, there is a clear reference to the evangelization of the whole (global) world after AD70 in the parable of the King's Son's wedding (Matthew 22:1-14). The progression of thought is unambiguous:

Verses 1-6 describe the Gospel being preached to the Jews, and their rejection of the King's invitation;

Verse 7 describes the wrath of the King, and His destroying of those people (the Jews) and of their city (Jerusalem);

Verses 8-10 describe the sending (and going) of the King's servants—after the destruction of Jerusalem—into all the world to bring in the Gentiles.

Verses 11-13 describe a later judgment of those who accepted the broader invitation. This is clearly a later judgment than that of verse 7, which described AD70, and must not be confused with it.

Thus, Jesus clearly predicted a period during which the Jews were primarily invited to salvation, followed by the judgment of AD70—all this is followed by another period of evangelism worldwide, ending with yet another judgment (the final judgment, in my opinion).

Despite my openness to various viewpoints, other than my own, I cannot even imagine a sound exegesis of this parable that would allow AD70 to be equated with the final judgment, or which would exclude a global outreach of the Gospel following AD70.
Hi Steve,

Thanks for participating in the discussion and sharing these instrumental verses. I am pointing out that Jesus’ statement, to His disciples, in Matthew 24:14 is directly relating to Israel’s judgement; hence, “then the end will come”. What end? I contend ‘The End’ in which they inquired about when Jesus prophesied that the Temple was going to be destroyed. I believe vs. 14 conflates with all of the discourse signs Jesus said His disciples, absent being killed, would experience.

Nevertheless, I never said that the gospel will cease to be spread, after all, it’s eternal. But, Matthew 24:14 is not dealing with post 70 A.D. events, but a sign to 1st century believers on the pending destruction of Old Covenant Israel and Jerusalem.

Where you see a future final judgement (in mass I suppose), I see individual judgement, as people die and find themselves answering to God. This “final judgement” has been taking place in people’s lives for over 2000 years, and will continue as long as humans walk the earth.

So, although I believe Matt 24:14 was fulfilled, I don’t believe the gospel message has ended, as Matt 22 affirms. However, we do differ on how judgement is passed on “the individual” found without a wedding garment. But I’m willing to listen and glean from other opinions that resemble the thought processes of the NT Authors.

Blessings.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by Homer » Wed Dec 27, 2017 11:55 pm

Hi Robby,

You wrote:
I must confess, I deliberately withheld the text that will refute the crux of you argument, however, even without the text, that I will soon show you, I believe my previous case was exegetically sound.
Romans 10:17-18 “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world (oikumene).
Sorry Robby, but I find your "Holy Grail" proof-text to be lacking. Perhaps you never noticed that Paul exactly quoted Psalm 19:4, as in the LXX:

Psa 19:4 - εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν (Strong's #1093)ἐξῆλθεν ὁ φθόγγος αὐτῶν καὶ εἰς τὰ πέρατα τῆς οἰκουμένης τὰ ῥήματα αὐτῶτῷv

When this Psalm was translated into Greek (the LXX) and oikoumene was used for "world" there was no Roman empire. But perhaps Paul used it in another sense.

Psalm 19:1-4 informs us that the natural revelation extends to the entire world (oikumene):

Psalm 19:1-4 New American Standard Bible
1.
The heavens are telling of the glory of God;
And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands.
2.
Day to day pours forth speech,
And night to night reveals knowledge.
3.
There is no speech, nor are there words;
Their voice is not heard.
4.
Their line has gone out through all the earth,
And their utterances to the end of the world.
In them He has placed a tent for the sun,

There is no question here that the LXX used oikumene for the entire world.

And further consider Paul's Use of the quote from the LXX:

for their voice has gone out to all the earth,(gen)
and their words to the ends of the world (oikumene).


Cottrell comments: "They are an example of Hebrew poetry's tendency to say the same thing twice in different words." So gen and oikumene are synonyms in this Passage.

But back to the Point of the passage. Paul's concern in the context of Romans 10 is that wherever the Jews have gone the gospel has been preached, thus the Jews are without excuse; they can not claim ignorance.

Again I must say that I, being a partial Preterist, have no doubt that Jesus prophetically foretold of the destruction of the temple in 70AD. What I dispute is your claim that Jesus did not command His Apostles/disciples, from then until now, to preach the gospel throughout the entire world. And just because Paul may have said that the gospel had been preached throughout the Roman empire says nothing about whether Thomas, or any others, had gone beyond the Roman empire. Can you provide a scripture of Jesus' words where they were limited in how far they should go, and no farther?

God bless, Homer

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by steve » Thu Dec 28, 2017 9:03 am

Where you see a future final judgement (in mass I suppose), I see individual judgement, as people die and find themselves answering to God. This “final judgement” has been taking place in people’s lives for over 2000 years, and will continue as long as humans walk the earth.
While the case is given of one individual, it is not describing the judgment of that individual at the point of death, but at the end of the Gospel enterprise. Jesus specifically places this judgment after the Gospel had reached its entire target audience, and "the wedding hall was full of guests" (v.10). That is, when the invitation had obtained its full result and the wedding was full of respondents.

Notice that the king here does not deal only with one guest. "The king came in to see the guests." It was in the context of examining all the guests (as in the last judgment, at the general resurrection) that the king happened upon the individual who had failed to dress properly. There may have been others, but that is not the point. The guests who had responded all had to face the king's scrutiny. The case of one man is given as, possibly, the sample of a category.

In any case, the parable does not place the final judgment at AD70, nor at the death of the individual, but at the end of the Gospel Era.

Post Reply

Return to “Calvinism, Arminianism & Open Theism”