Interplanner
Well-known member
"Catastrophic geological structures around the world completely overwhelm any concept of uniformitarianism." So what do skeptics do? They fuss and howl about being unable to find Noah's ark.
This reminds me of what D'ists do about the DofJ. You have not only a massive event in antiquity, more horrifiying and larger than the next of its kind--Pompeii. You also have an entire structural change of theology going on in the ending of the old covenant and start of the new. As though that change was a mere one of many dealing of cards in a night of games. As though God would go back and forth several times on this old and new shift.
So what do D'ists do? They fuss and how about finding 2 towers in the temple and believe they can dismiss not only Josephus but the event.
I wonder why they don't deal with the one thing (the only comment) that the priest-captain said about the cause of the event. It is that there was a prediction about an awful leader of rebellious men who would ruin the country; that's Daniel 8-9. It's no wonder those passages would be on a person's mind who went through it.
So while the rejection of this form of proof of the Bible has these people making a nuisance of themselves as they take Payne's side, what they are really ticked about is that their way of 'proving' the Bible is totally invested in 2P2P. 'There has to be a restoration of Israel or you are doubting God.'
Yet this has been dealt with. In Romans. what about the failure of Israel says Paul in 3:3? He says God actually is proven true in all this with the wrath that he is bringing--the DofJ on Israel and other things on the nations.
Moreover, Israel is supposed to be in Messiah's mission (decidedly NOT the other way around as among the zealots!!) That's what the middle of Rom 10 to the end of 11 is about. If Israel would be in that mission, it would leverage the blessing to the nations. it is not about restoration, because to introduce that idea after all that was said about the mission in 10-11 is to make poppycock out of the structure of the Bible.
Finally, on 'proving' God, there is the finale in rom 16. The incoming of the nations is is not a verbal command by God to the leaders of the early church to perform; it is a 'divine/kingly order' which God has brought about, more or less, on His own. It is a fact of history. Like when he spoke at creation, and what he spoke was then reality. There was no stopping it, and it has taken place. BUT IF YOU DON'T REALIZE THIS IS WHERE THE DESTINY OF ISRAEL WAS GOING THE WHOLE TIME, THEN YOU WILL DOUBT GOD IS DOING ANYTHING UNTIL THERE IS A 'LAND KINGDOM'!!!
If you know Hebrews and 2 Cor 3-5 etc, you know how dysfunctional it would be to go back to a restored old covenant, even more so, to go back only to come forward to the Gospel again. So you have people seriously thinking that there are animal sacrifices in a millenium TO KEEP 2P2P intact rather than the truth "in Christ."
This reminds me of what D'ists do about the DofJ. You have not only a massive event in antiquity, more horrifiying and larger than the next of its kind--Pompeii. You also have an entire structural change of theology going on in the ending of the old covenant and start of the new. As though that change was a mere one of many dealing of cards in a night of games. As though God would go back and forth several times on this old and new shift.
So what do D'ists do? They fuss and how about finding 2 towers in the temple and believe they can dismiss not only Josephus but the event.
I wonder why they don't deal with the one thing (the only comment) that the priest-captain said about the cause of the event. It is that there was a prediction about an awful leader of rebellious men who would ruin the country; that's Daniel 8-9. It's no wonder those passages would be on a person's mind who went through it.
So while the rejection of this form of proof of the Bible has these people making a nuisance of themselves as they take Payne's side, what they are really ticked about is that their way of 'proving' the Bible is totally invested in 2P2P. 'There has to be a restoration of Israel or you are doubting God.'
Yet this has been dealt with. In Romans. what about the failure of Israel says Paul in 3:3? He says God actually is proven true in all this with the wrath that he is bringing--the DofJ on Israel and other things on the nations.
Moreover, Israel is supposed to be in Messiah's mission (decidedly NOT the other way around as among the zealots!!) That's what the middle of Rom 10 to the end of 11 is about. If Israel would be in that mission, it would leverage the blessing to the nations. it is not about restoration, because to introduce that idea after all that was said about the mission in 10-11 is to make poppycock out of the structure of the Bible.
Finally, on 'proving' God, there is the finale in rom 16. The incoming of the nations is is not a verbal command by God to the leaders of the early church to perform; it is a 'divine/kingly order' which God has brought about, more or less, on His own. It is a fact of history. Like when he spoke at creation, and what he spoke was then reality. There was no stopping it, and it has taken place. BUT IF YOU DON'T REALIZE THIS IS WHERE THE DESTINY OF ISRAEL WAS GOING THE WHOLE TIME, THEN YOU WILL DOUBT GOD IS DOING ANYTHING UNTIL THERE IS A 'LAND KINGDOM'!!!
If you know Hebrews and 2 Cor 3-5 etc, you know how dysfunctional it would be to go back to a restored old covenant, even more so, to go back only to come forward to the Gospel again. So you have people seriously thinking that there are animal sacrifices in a millenium TO KEEP 2P2P intact rather than the truth "in Christ."
