Good Reading

[jabcat]

I found this website  
http://hubpages.com/hub/Scriptures-Inspired-for-the-L-Ray-Smith-Followers      
where this young lady (Carrie Bradshaw)   takes quite a hard line against UR and in this particular thread, L.Ray Smith in particular.  She was unrelenting, repeating pretty standard ET/mainstream doctrine.  A couple of responders' posts got my attention though, and I wanted to share them.

PART ONE

This fellow was challenging her stance(s) on ET and some of her literalist interpretations, and made this (I thought) quite interesting post of observations about Revelation;

Literal Lake of Fire? Literal or symbolic of something else . Well lets look at Revelation as a whole.


Rev 1: Does Jesus literally walk around with a medieval broadsword hanging out of His mouth? No, the sword is symbolic of His word.


Rev 2: Does Jesus spend His time walking about between seven literal lampstands? No, the lampstands are symbolic of the seven churches.


Rev 3: Does Jesus hold seven literal stars in His hand? No, stars are billions of times larger than the Earth. The stars are symbolic of the angels of the seven churches.


Rev 4: Is the sea before the throne literally made of glass? No, glass at room temperature is a solid, and sea is made of water.


Rev 5: Do lambs literally have seven horns and seven eyes? No they have two of each. The seven eyes are symbolic of the seven spirits of God.


Rev 6: Are the four horsemen riding four literal horses? No, horses can only travel at 30mph so couldn't possibly visit the whole Earth, and horses aren't available in red.


Rev 7: Can four angels stand at four literal corners of the Earth? No, the Earth is spherical and in order to have four corners, it would have to be flat with four distinct sides.


Rev 8: Can eagles literally talk? No.


Rev 9: Is it possible that somewhere upon the Earth there is a literal bottomless pit? No, the Earth is finite in diameter, so a bottomless pit is impossible unless it constitutes a hole that passes all the way through.


Rev 10: Does thunder literally speak intelligent words? No, thunder is the sound waves generated when a high voltage electrical current turns a column of air to plasma which forces a rapid expansion of the surrounding air.


Rev 11: Do olive trees have literal mouths from which they can breathe literal fire? No.


Rev 12: Can a woman literally be clothed with the sun, stand on the literal moon, and wear twelve literal stars on her head? No, she would be incinerated.


Rev 13: Are we really going to see a literal beast with seven heads, ten horns and ten crowns walk up the local beach? No, such a thing would be no match against a helicopter gunship.


Rev 14: Is Babylon literally going to fall again? No, Babylon was completely desolate by 141BC by the time the Parthian Empire took over the region.


Rev 15: Literal sea of glass again?


Rev 16: Can a literal bowl of some reactive substance be literally poured out upon the sun? No, it would have to be a bowl of several million miles in diameter containing something extremely potent to have a significant effect upon the sun.


Rev 17: Will a literal woman who drinks literal blood ride about on the back of a literal scarlet beast? No, this chapter already gives us the interpretation of the symbology of the woman and the beast.


Rev 18: Literal Babylon falling again? No.


Rev 19 & 20: Literal lake of fire?


If we accept the opening statement of Revelation that the book is symbolic; if we accept that the first 18 chapters describe things that are symbolic; how can we then say that out of the whole book of symbolic things, the lake of fire is literal? It makes no logical sense. The Lake of fire must also be symbolic of something else.


For the Lake of Fire to be a literal lake made of literal fire, then we would have to say that real seven headed dragon type beasts will be roaming about, and people will be tormented by giant locusts having scorpions tails, human heads, lions teeth and women's hair. If the Book of Revelation is literal, then perhaps we should take the Greek myths or Harry Potter Stories as real true life accounts as well. [Seriously], how can we believe that man will be overcome by literal mutant ninja locust-scorpion type things? Hand out the Uzi-9mms and everyone will be ok.

[jabcat]

Part II

Very cool.  This young fellow of 14 joined in with some quite good insights.  Unfortunately it appeared to have little to no effect on Ms. Bradshaw, but I thought it was alright  :bigGrin:.

The youngster said;


Hi Carrie,

I am new to Christianity although I've read alot of material on the different beliefs held by different denominations (weird that there are different beliefs stemming from one bible). I am only 14 so please be gentle!

You said this to Timpaul in one of your comments: 'We don't know if your grandparents are in heaven ~ but we do know that if they NEVER heard the gospel and didn't know better, the Word says they are without sin.'

Where in the bible was this said?

How can anyone be without sin? Romans 3:23 says 'For ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God'

You are saying that Timpaul's grandparents are without sin just because they have not heard the gospel?

What about murderers who have not heard the gospel too?

This is confusing. As far as I know, ALL are born sinners. None is righteous, no, not one.

Also, may I know your stand on evil? Did God create evil?

Thank you!
-----------------------------

"Answered" by Carrie Bradshaw

Bless your heart, Sha. I'm glad you stopped in. It is a fact that all are born into sin since Adam and Eve's fall. Jesus said in John 15:22, "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin." So, for those who believe in God, for His existence is known instinctively (Romans 1:20), but have never heard the gospel that Jesus Christ came to die for their sins, and thus never had the opportunity to accept or reject the gospel, they are "excused".
-----------------------------

Sha responding again;

Hi Carrie,

Thanks for your reply.

I was thinking, if people are excused because they have never heard of the gospel and God commanded His people to sow the seeds (minister and spread the gospel), isn't God indirectly sending millions to hell?

God would have to take the risk of losing more souls by spreading the word since men's free will would not confirm that they will accept the gospel. Would it not have been better for the gospel not to be spread and more saved?

I have also heard that few would be saved (broad is the way to destruction). Does that mean God has already lost (or is currently losing) the battle for souls with Satan?
----------------------

:sigh:   Unfortunately Carrie mixed up her scriptural "contexts" and replied

God will not save all, as is stated clearly in Luke 13:23-24: "And someone said to Him, 'Lord, are there just a few who are being saved?; And He said to them, 'Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able.'"

Anyway, good points by the young man.  :thumbsup:

I'll add to the discussion, "Jesus, Savior of the world" John 4:42.  God bless, James.

[Beloved Servant]

That's brilliant, I love it.

And, if it is a literal lake of fire, how long would a human body last before it was reduced to ash?

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: Liked both of them.  :thumbsup: The kid's was priceless. No wonder a child shall lead them. The child hasn't had time to be "programed' yet.  :winkgrin: :grin: Blessings....

[shawn]

It's probably this statement I like the most and one of the stronger supports for UR...

I have also heard that few would be saved (broad is the way to destruction). Does that mean God has already lost (or is currently losing) the battle for souls with Satan?

A point I brought up on another message board where I was continually flamed was...If satan is able to deceive most of God's creation and through that deception elicit God's wrath to the point that he burns much of his creation by flames for eternity...wouldn't that mean satan won?  The Holocaust would pale infinitely in comparison.  But, the Bible declares victory over death and sin.  How could that ever be seen as a victory?

The doctrine of ET doesn't make sense.  Even as a small child...an early believer I was able to pick up on it.  How can the vast majority of Christians accept this interpretation of scripture?

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: Because most of Christianity do not study the words of the Word, and take whatever they have heard the pastor, friends, family, ect., say. This board is not like that; we all study the original languages, comparing scripture with scripture, if we weren't doing it already before we came here, for sure we are now. Blessings....

[jabcat]

It's probably this statement I like the most and one of the stronger supports for UR...

I have also heard that few would be saved (broad is the way to destruction). Does that mean God has already lost (or is currently losing) the battle for souls with Satan?

A point I brought up on another message board where I was continually flamed was...If satan is able to deceive most of God's creation and through that deception elicit God's wrath to the point that he burns much of his creation by flames for eternity...wouldn't that mean satan won?  The Holocaust would pale infinitely in comparison.  But, the Bible declares victory over death and sin.  How could that ever be seen as a victory?

The doctrine of ET doesn't make sense.  Even as a small child...an early believer I was able to pick up on it.  How can the vast majority of Christians accept this interpretation of scripture?

:thumbsup:  I personally believe that's how most will be saved - through destruction.  I.e., Lake of Fire, God setting the conditions for all who have not done so in this life, to die to self - when every knee bows and every tongue confesses Jesus as Lord - IN the Holy Spirit.  A few are chosen (the ecclesia), the rest take the broad road to destruction.   :2c:

[shawn]

It's probably this statement I like the most and one of the stronger supports for UR...

I have also heard that few would be saved (broad is the way to destruction). Does that mean God has already lost (or is currently losing) the battle for souls with Satan?

A point I brought up on another message board where I was continually flamed was...If satan is able to deceive most of God's creation and through that deception elicit God's wrath to the point that he burns much of his creation by flames for eternity...wouldn't that mean satan won?  The Holocaust would pale infinitely in comparison.  But, the Bible declares victory over death and sin.  How could that ever be seen as a victory?

The doctrine of ET doesn't make sense.  Even as a small child...an early believer I was able to pick up on it.  How can the vast majority of Christians accept this interpretation of scripture?

:thumbsup:  I personally believe that's how most will be saved - through destruction.  I.e., Lake of Fire, God setting the conditions for all who have not done so in this life, to die to self - when every knee bows and every tongue confesses Jesus as Lord - IN the Holy Spirit.  A few are chosen (the ecclesia), the rest take the broad road to destruction.   :2c:

I do think that is entirely possible.  While I tend to side more with the ED guys...I totally understand the UR stance and believe there is support for it.  UR makes more sense to my finite mind than ET and seems to line up more with God who loves agape.

[WhiteWings]

Rev 6: Are the four horsemen riding four literal horses? No, horses can only travel at 30mph so couldn't possibly visit the whole Earth, and horses aren't available in red.

It's (possibly) about the Roman Republic/Empire

Seal 1: The White Horse (31 B.C. - 193 A.D.) - Roman emperors and conquering generals rode white horses in their victory parades. The rider is given a crown.

Seal 2: The Red Horse: War (193-284 A.D.) - The time of relative peace and prosperity in Rome was broken in 193 A.D. by civil war and bloodshed. During this 89-year period, Rome was plunged into one civil war after another.

Seal 3: The Black Horse: Famine (250-300 A.D.) - This speaks primarily of famine caused by war.

Seal 4: The Pale Horse: Death (250-265 AD) - Death is the inevitable result of famine. Gibbon estimates that close to half of the population of the Roman Empire died of starvation in just a 15-year period!

[Miriam]

:cloud9: Because most of Christianity do not study the words of the Word, and take whatever they have heard the pastor, friends, family, ect., say. This board is not like that; we all study the original languages, comparing scripture with scripture, if we weren't doing it already before we came here, for sure we are now. Blessings....

Quite so. I feel a bit ashamed of the 30 years I simply accepted the things I was told without looking into them more deeply myself. I'm trying to redress that now, trusting God to redeem the time.

[WhiteWings]

To be honest on ET boards I also see people seriously discussing verses.
What's special about this forum is that also very unconventional topics are discussed. And when conventional topics are discussed quite often people are not scared to discuss unconventional possible meanings. Here people try to look outside the box.
On many ET boards people just discuss the same church doctrine over and over.
Many very unconventional discussions are dead ends. But to find gems one must always look in places were nobody looked before.

The fear to be wrong and consider something that may turn out wrong/blasphemy severly limits progress.
People that didn't make mistakes since birth didn't learn much.
Those that progressed a lot and claim they made no mistakes should check out a few verses about lies  :winkgrin:

Exploring is the power of this forum.

  :director: imho

[jabcat]

Rev 6: Are the four horsemen riding four literal horses? No, horses can only travel at 30mph so couldn't possibly visit the whole Earth, and horses aren't available in red.

It's (possibly) about the Roman Republic/Empire

Seal 1: The White Horse (31 B.C. - 193 A.D.) - Roman emperors and conquering generals rode white horses in their victory parades. The rider is given a crown.

Seal 2: The Red Horse: War (193-284 A.D.) - The time of relative peace and prosperity in Rome was broken in 193 A.D. by civil war and bloodshed. During this 89-year period, Rome was plunged into one civil war after another.

Seal 3: The Black Horse: Famine (250-300 A.D.) - This speaks primarily of famine caused by war.

Seal 4: The Pale Horse: Death (250-265 AD) - Death is the inevitable result of famine. Gibbon estimates that close to half of the population of the Roman Empire died of starvation in just a 15-year period!

Maybe so.  Whether or no, good thoughts to consider.   

[legoman]

It's probably this statement I like the most and one of the stronger supports for UR...

I have also heard that few would be saved (broad is the way to destruction). Does that mean God has already lost (or is currently losing) the battle for souls with Satan?

A point I brought up on another message board where I was continually flamed was...If satan is able to deceive most of God's creation and through that deception elicit God's wrath to the point that he burns much of his creation by flames for eternity...wouldn't that mean satan won?  The Holocaust would pale infinitely in comparison.  But, the Bible declares victory over death and sin.  How could that ever be seen as a victory?

The doctrine of ET doesn't make sense.  Even as a small child...an early believer I was able to pick up on it.  How can the vast majority of Christians accept this interpretation of scripture?

Yes good point Shawn.

Another thing that always made no sense to me is we are told how God gave us this wonderful gift of free will, and because of that He has restrained Himself from influencing or "forcing" us to do anything, so therefore He can't save anyone unless we come to Him out of our own free will. 

But apparently Satan is allowed to run around and deceive and influence and trick us as much as He wants?  And if we stumble because of Satan's deception, wouldn't this be an excuse we could use before God?

[WhiteWings]

Maybe so.  Whether or no, good thoughts to consider.

That was just a fraction of this 30 part article.

[Lefein]

I think that for the language of Revelation there is a substance of both the literal, and the symbolic in each theme.

New Jerusalem might not be literally a cube (I prefer diamond...) shaped city of gold.  But I don't think that means that New Jerusalem is a mere symbolic gesture of "the church" or some vapid thing as that.  New Jerusalem is probably a very tangible aspect of the new creation --- and if it is not a literal golden polygon made of precious jewels, at the very least there will be a literal dwelling place that expresses such vast and magnificent beauty, and it won't be "in our heads as a happy state of mind".

My example is more or less to show that...I think there is a really deep thing that we can't quite understand under a lense of taking Revelation as perfectly literal with no greater or higher substance - that is materialistic, and therefore poor.  Yet we cannot take symbolism to mean "mere moral, or intellectual representation of an abstract intangible concept" - that is likewise poor.

Definitely interesting and compelling on the first post, I haven't read the rest yet.  But I wanted to express that whether symbolic or literal, it is probably something transcendent beyond both, and something more tangible and beautiful than Revelation can present.  God is Spirit, and so his prophecies are spiritual as well as having affect in the material.  A spiritual thing is more tangible than the material expression, Life and Truth and Love are not "ghosts" or hypothesis. :thumbsup:

[WhiteWings]

I think that for the language of Revelation there is a substance of both the literal, and the symbolic in each theme.

New Jerusalem might not be literally a cube (I prefer diamond...) shaped city of gold.

Only the street was of gold. (?)

Street = river
Gold = water
I have to admit real gold fits perfectly with reall jasper, sapphire, etc
But as you, imo very correctly, noted a lot is symbolic; so I wouldn't be suprised if there isn't a single precious stone i n the whole city.
Perhaps the stones are symbolic for something else.

But I don't think that means that New Jerusalem is a mere symbolic gesture of "the church" or some vapid thing as that.  New Jerusalem is probably a very tangible aspect of the new creation --- and if it is not a literal golden polygon made of precious jewels, at the very least there will be a literal dwelling place that expresses such vast and magnificent beauty, and it won't be "in our heads as a happy state of mind".

I think very few people know what Revelation really means.
Based on the little experience I have I would say few things mean what you read. The whole Bible has little riddles and symbols in it. So what would you expect from a book that openly claimes it's ever more mysterious.
^EBRRev 1
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, to point out unto his servants the things which must needs come to pass with speed,––and he shewed them by signs, sending through his messenger, unto his servant John;

My example is more or less to show that...I think there is a really deep thing that we can't quite understand under a lense of taking Revelation as perfectly literal with no greater or higher substance - that is materialistic, and therefore poor.  Yet we cannot take symbolism to mean "mere moral, or intellectual representation of an abstract intangible concept" - that is likewise poor.

In the link I gave you see things are called as a Temple priest would call them. I think one of the keys to understand Revelation is to know exactly what rituals the priests had and what names they gave to things and rituals. I would be suprised if a Rabbi has better understanding of Revelation than many Christian scholars....
:2c:

[Molly]

I would be suprised if a Rabbi has better understanding of Revelation than many Christian scholars....

Maybe, but only the messianic ones.  The rest do not read the Old Testament.

Otherwise, they-would-recognize-Jesus-as-their-Messiah.

[Lefein]

I'd say there are precious stones and metals, and things we haven't even thought of out of the sheer creativity God has in making architecture.  But I'm just beginning to think that maybe our concept of the new creation from Revelation (New Jerusalem included) is very pale to the reality.  That is to say - Revelation is symbolic, but only so much as the Reality it presents is far, far, far greater in scope and grandeur (including the tangible) than can be presented in literal detail.

What is a huge descending cube/prism city of precious-ingredients full of heavenly glory may not be a descending cube/prism city of precious-ingredients --- but perhaps a whole universe-sized expression of such beauty, and much much more besides.