New Agers get ready for the end on Dec. 21

Harold Camping has repented of his dating of doomsday, but Christian types are not the only ones who fall for end times predictions.  The Mayan calendar runs out on December 21, 2012.  So quite a few people think that will be the end of time.  (I’m not sure why they think the ancient Mayans would know that information.)  In France, people are already gathering at a mysterious mountain where they believe they will be saved when time runs out:

A mountain looming over a French commune with a population of just 200 is being touted as a modern Noah’s Ark when doomsday arrives – supposedly less than nine months from now.

A rapidly increasing stream of New Age believers – or esoterics, as locals call them – have descended in their camper van-loads on the usually picturesque and tranquil Pyrenean village of Bugarach. They believe that when apocalypse strikes on 21 December this year, the aliens waiting in their spacecraft inside Pic de Bugarach will save all the humans near by and beam them off to the next age.

As the cataclysmic date – which, according to eschatological beliefs and predicted astrological alignments, concludes a 5,125-year cycle in the Mesoamerican Long Count calendar – nears, the goings-on around the peak have become more bizarre and ritualistic.

For decades, there has been a belief that Pic de Bugarach, which, at 1,230 metres, is the highest in the Corbières mountain range, possesses an eery power. Often called the “upside-down mountain” – geologists think that it exploded after its formation and the top landed the wrong way up – it is thought to have inspired Jules Verne’s Journey to the Centre of the Earth and Steven Spielberg’s Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Since the 1960s, it has attracted New Agers, who insist that it emits special magnetic waves.

Further, rumours persist that the country’s late president François Mitterrand was transported by helicopter on to the peak, while the Nazis, and, later, Israel’s Mossad, performed mysterious digs there. Now the nearby village is awash with New Agers, who have boosted the local economy, though their naked group climbs up to the peak have raised concerns as well as eyebrows. Among other oddities, some hikers have been spotted scaling the mountain carrying a ball with a golden ring, strung together by a single thread. . . .

Upwards of 100,000 people are thought to be planning a trip to the mountain, 30 miles west of Perpignan, in time for 21 December, and opportunistic entrepreneurs are shamelessly cashing in on the phenomenon. While American travel agents have been offering special, one-way deals to witness the end of the world, a neighbouring village, Saint-Paul de Fenouillet, has produced a wine to celebrate the occasion.

via Hippies head for Noah’s Ark: Queue here for rescue aboard alien spaceship – Europe – World – The Independent.

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • Michael B.

    Believing that you are living in the end times has always been a key component of Christianity. Look how many copies books like The Late Great Planet Earth in 1970 or 88 Reasons Why The Rapture Will Be in 1988.

    Question: How many people on here think we are NOT living in the end times? That is, by the year 2200, there will have been no supernatural events that have occured such as the Rapture, Jesus returning, etc.

  • Michael B.

    Believing that you are living in the end times has always been a key component of Christianity. Look how many copies books like The Late Great Planet Earth in 1970 or 88 Reasons Why The Rapture Will Be in 1988.

    Question: How many people on here think we are NOT living in the end times? That is, by the year 2200, there will have been no supernatural events that have occured such as the Rapture, Jesus returning, etc.

  • #4 Kitty

    @Michael B
    You forgot the “Left Behind” series. And put me on the list as one who does not think we are living in the “biblical” end times. However, there are other “end times” to consider like nuclear holocausts, global warming, religious fundamentalism, and a Rick Santorum presidency.

  • #4 Kitty

    @Michael B
    You forgot the “Left Behind” series. And put me on the list as one who does not think we are living in the “biblical” end times. However, there are other “end times” to consider like nuclear holocausts, global warming, religious fundamentalism, and a Rick Santorum presidency.

  • Kirk

    End of the world taco party at my house on Dec 20.

  • Kirk

    End of the world taco party at my house on Dec 20.

  • Tom Hering

    These folks have been deceived. There are no alien saviors inside that mountain. But there is something else inside it. Something waiting. Something hungry. Something GIGANTIC.

    The town is called Bugarach.

    Bug.

    Arach.

    Chomp, chomp, chomp – slurp – chomp, chomp, chomp.

  • Tom Hering

    These folks have been deceived. There are no alien saviors inside that mountain. But there is something else inside it. Something waiting. Something hungry. Something GIGANTIC.

    The town is called Bugarach.

    Bug.

    Arach.

    Chomp, chomp, chomp – slurp – chomp, chomp, chomp.

  • Mary

    We who await the second coming of Christ are all living in the end times. Is that tomorrow? Is Armageddon on the horizon? The Bible tells us that things will get much worse before He comes to claim His Bride the Church. I don’t need a Mayan calendar to prepare me for the end times. Jesus has washed me in my Baptism, I’m ready.

  • Mary

    We who await the second coming of Christ are all living in the end times. Is that tomorrow? Is Armageddon on the horizon? The Bible tells us that things will get much worse before He comes to claim His Bride the Church. I don’t need a Mayan calendar to prepare me for the end times. Jesus has washed me in my Baptism, I’m ready.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Didn’t it just come out that the Mayan calendar actually ends at 2035 and not 2012?

    BTW, for the record, it always strikes me as odd when Christians get worked up about eschatology. We of all people should be the most JOYFUL about the return of Jesus Christ, knowing that while He comes to judge, he also comes for the final consummation of the salvation of His elect-meaning we who believe.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Didn’t it just come out that the Mayan calendar actually ends at 2035 and not 2012?

    BTW, for the record, it always strikes me as odd when Christians get worked up about eschatology. We of all people should be the most JOYFUL about the return of Jesus Christ, knowing that while He comes to judge, he also comes for the final consummation of the salvation of His elect-meaning we who believe.

  • Mary

    @Kirk #3

    Is that homemade tacos? I could be persuaded!

  • Mary

    @Kirk #3

    Is that homemade tacos? I could be persuaded!

  • George

    The Mayans did not calculate leap years, something we do, which means our calendar is much “behind” theirs. If their calendar cycle is 5125 years (I think thats when it is) and leap years happen every 4 years, then we are about 1,303 days behind them, which means their “December 21st” happened 1,026 days ago.

    My math might be slightly off, but I’m pretty sure the idea is correct.

    Anyway, no longer live in fear my friends!

  • George

    The Mayans did not calculate leap years, something we do, which means our calendar is much “behind” theirs. If their calendar cycle is 5125 years (I think thats when it is) and leap years happen every 4 years, then we are about 1,303 days behind them, which means their “December 21st” happened 1,026 days ago.

    My math might be slightly off, but I’m pretty sure the idea is correct.

    Anyway, no longer live in fear my friends!

  • Tom Hering

    There is comfort in the fact that archeologists haven’t yet discovered a sheet of “apocalypse” reminder stickers for the Mayan calendar.

  • Tom Hering

    There is comfort in the fact that archeologists haven’t yet discovered a sheet of “apocalypse” reminder stickers for the Mayan calendar.

  • Dr. Luther in the 21st Century

    To clarify, people who believe in the Left Behind theology do not believe we are living in the end-times. They are waiting for the end-times to begin.

    Amillenialists, on the other hand, believe we are living in the end-times and are bidding our time marrying, working, and having children while we wait for Jesus to get back and make all things new.

  • Dr. Luther in the 21st Century

    To clarify, people who believe in the Left Behind theology do not believe we are living in the end-times. They are waiting for the end-times to begin.

    Amillenialists, on the other hand, believe we are living in the end-times and are bidding our time marrying, working, and having children while we wait for Jesus to get back and make all things new.

  • Kirk

    @Mary,

    I make a darn good carnitas and pickle my own onions. I don’t know how to make tortillas, though.

  • Kirk

    @Mary,

    I make a darn good carnitas and pickle my own onions. I don’t know how to make tortillas, though.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    I think I can believe that we are in the Biblical End times without thinking the world will end by 2,200. Peter declared the last days to have begun in the second chapter of Acts. We’re in them and since we have been in them for some 2000 years, I’m not going to predict the end of the world anytime soon. It could happen tomorrow, I believe that whole heartedly, and live as one knowing it could be tomorrow, or later on this afternoon, with joyful expectation. I also believe it entirely possible that the world goes on for a few more millenia. But I’ll come to your party Kirk, if there are Margaritas to go with the carnitas. I want to celebrate the return of Christ!

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    I think I can believe that we are in the Biblical End times without thinking the world will end by 2,200. Peter declared the last days to have begun in the second chapter of Acts. We’re in them and since we have been in them for some 2000 years, I’m not going to predict the end of the world anytime soon. It could happen tomorrow, I believe that whole heartedly, and live as one knowing it could be tomorrow, or later on this afternoon, with joyful expectation. I also believe it entirely possible that the world goes on for a few more millenia. But I’ll come to your party Kirk, if there are Margaritas to go with the carnitas. I want to celebrate the return of Christ!

  • –helen

    Not knowing where you live (for the taco party) I guess I’ll have to settle for Torchy’s, which is not “homemade” but pretty good. :)

    Has it occurred to anyone that the Mayan calendar may be “running out” because the Spaniards killed off all the people who might have extended it? (My calendar “runs out” Dec. 31; I get a new one.)

  • –helen

    Not knowing where you live (for the taco party) I guess I’ll have to settle for Torchy’s, which is not “homemade” but pretty good. :)

    Has it occurred to anyone that the Mayan calendar may be “running out” because the Spaniards killed off all the people who might have extended it? (My calendar “runs out” Dec. 31; I get a new one.)

  • Dr. Luther in the 21st Century

    I only ask that the party aka last day be after I see the Hobbit. Please, pretty please ;)

  • Dr. Luther in the 21st Century

    I only ask that the party aka last day be after I see the Hobbit. Please, pretty please ;)

  • http://www.matthewcochran.net/blog Matt Cochran

    I love the one-way ticket deals. Something tells me there’s even more money to be made in selling tickets for the trip home.

    Of course Christians always think we’re living in the end times. We are supposed to act as though Christ were coming back any minute now because He could be coming back any minute now. Where we go off the rails is when we think acting this way involves hiding in a bunker and making bad geopolitical predictions. Our Lord gave us no such commands. We would be wise to focus instead on tasks He’s actually given us and be found so doing when our Master returns.

  • http://www.matthewcochran.net/blog Matt Cochran

    I love the one-way ticket deals. Something tells me there’s even more money to be made in selling tickets for the trip home.

    Of course Christians always think we’re living in the end times. We are supposed to act as though Christ were coming back any minute now because He could be coming back any minute now. Where we go off the rails is when we think acting this way involves hiding in a bunker and making bad geopolitical predictions. Our Lord gave us no such commands. We would be wise to focus instead on tasks He’s actually given us and be found so doing when our Master returns.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Michael asked (@1):

    How many people on here think we are NOT living in the end times?

    I’ll answer your question (I believe we are), but will you answer my question (your comments here often seem more aimed at provoking rather than engaging)? This question goes for Kitty (@2), too:

    What do you think the “end times” are? Your comment suggests that your understanding of the concept (e.g. mass-market Evangelicalism) is not one that I actually assent to.

    That is, by the year 2200, there will have been no supernatural events that have occured such as the Rapture, Jesus returning, etc.

    In asserting that I believe we’re living in the end times, I am in no ways putting a date (or even a date range) on things. The end could be in a few minutes, or it could occur in the year 3000 … or even the year 1000000.

    Kitty said:

    However, there are other “end times” to consider like nuclear holocausts, global warming, religious fundamentalism, and a Rick Santorum presidency.

    It’s funny to me that those who so often deride the apocalyptic fervor of Evangelicals are so equally given to the same fervor. They just have different things they’re running around screaming about. I guess most people enjoy living in fear?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Michael asked (@1):

    How many people on here think we are NOT living in the end times?

    I’ll answer your question (I believe we are), but will you answer my question (your comments here often seem more aimed at provoking rather than engaging)? This question goes for Kitty (@2), too:

    What do you think the “end times” are? Your comment suggests that your understanding of the concept (e.g. mass-market Evangelicalism) is not one that I actually assent to.

    That is, by the year 2200, there will have been no supernatural events that have occured such as the Rapture, Jesus returning, etc.

    In asserting that I believe we’re living in the end times, I am in no ways putting a date (or even a date range) on things. The end could be in a few minutes, or it could occur in the year 3000 … or even the year 1000000.

    Kitty said:

    However, there are other “end times” to consider like nuclear holocausts, global warming, religious fundamentalism, and a Rick Santorum presidency.

    It’s funny to me that those who so often deride the apocalyptic fervor of Evangelicals are so equally given to the same fervor. They just have different things they’re running around screaming about. I guess most people enjoy living in fear?

  • DNeuendorf

    “…opportunistic entrepreneurs are shamelessly cashing in on the phenomenon…”
    Truly, it is an ill wind that blows no one good. I wonder if I can sell some t-shirts.

  • DNeuendorf

    “…opportunistic entrepreneurs are shamelessly cashing in on the phenomenon…”
    Truly, it is an ill wind that blows no one good. I wonder if I can sell some t-shirts.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    George (@8), I’ve seen your ideal floating around the Internet, but no, it doesn’t make sense.

    Kirk (@11), how in the world do you know how to make carnitas and pickle onions, yet can’t make tortillas? I mean, I can make tortillas, and I can’t do either of those other things — or, at least, I haven’t bothered trying yet. Okay, so I’ll bring a package of masa harina (flour) to the party. But you’ll have to provide the tortilla press and some sort of griddle. (Seriously, buy a package of masa harina and add some water, it’s that easy; you can press them by hand if you have to.)

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    George (@8), I’ve seen your ideal floating around the Internet, but no, it doesn’t make sense.

    Kirk (@11), how in the world do you know how to make carnitas and pickle onions, yet can’t make tortillas? I mean, I can make tortillas, and I can’t do either of those other things — or, at least, I haven’t bothered trying yet. Okay, so I’ll bring a package of masa harina (flour) to the party. But you’ll have to provide the tortilla press and some sort of griddle. (Seriously, buy a package of masa harina and add some water, it’s that easy; you can press them by hand if you have to.)

  • #4 Kitty

    @tODD

    What do you think the “end times” are? Your comment suggests that your understanding of the concept (e.g. mass-market Evangelicalism) is not one that I actually assent to.

    I believe that the “end times” referred to in Mark 13:14-20 regard the events surrounding the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. “But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not,…”
    I believe Mark was written during or after these events and wrote these eschatogical prose in order to grant to his readers meaning, hope, or even a call to action. So, yeah I’m saying I don’t believe Jesus actually said this.

    I guess most people enjoy living in fear?

    Not fear per se. I think people enjoy the thought of having their lives mean something. They also enjoy the community or solidarity with others who have drank from the same cup.

  • #4 Kitty

    @tODD

    What do you think the “end times” are? Your comment suggests that your understanding of the concept (e.g. mass-market Evangelicalism) is not one that I actually assent to.

    I believe that the “end times” referred to in Mark 13:14-20 regard the events surrounding the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. “But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not,…”
    I believe Mark was written during or after these events and wrote these eschatogical prose in order to grant to his readers meaning, hope, or even a call to action. So, yeah I’m saying I don’t believe Jesus actually said this.

    I guess most people enjoy living in fear?

    Not fear per se. I think people enjoy the thought of having their lives mean something. They also enjoy the community or solidarity with others who have drank from the same cup.

  • Kirk

    @18

    Well, that’s the problem: no tortilla press. I’ve never bothered to learn for that reason.

  • Kirk

    @18

    Well, that’s the problem: no tortilla press. I’ve never bothered to learn for that reason.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    Thinking that the end of the world will come when the Mayan calendar gets to the end of its ability to count days is like thinking that your car will be destroyed and disappear when the odometer rolls over from 999999. (However, I’m sure my car will have disappeared long before that happens)

  • http://www.facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    Thinking that the end of the world will come when the Mayan calendar gets to the end of its ability to count days is like thinking that your car will be destroyed and disappear when the odometer rolls over from 999999. (However, I’m sure my car will have disappeared long before that happens)

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Kitty (@19), you realize that’s not the only passage of Scripture that refers to the end times, don’t you?

    As Bror already noted (@12), Peter declared us to be in the “last days” as of Acts 2:17. 2 Timothy 3 concurs. As does Hebrews 1:2. And Hebrews 9:26. And 2 Peter 3. I could probably find more if I actually tried hard.

    So, yeah I’m saying I don’t believe Jesus actually said this.

    And what is your rubric for discerning such things?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Kitty (@19), you realize that’s not the only passage of Scripture that refers to the end times, don’t you?

    As Bror already noted (@12), Peter declared us to be in the “last days” as of Acts 2:17. 2 Timothy 3 concurs. As does Hebrews 1:2. And Hebrews 9:26. And 2 Peter 3. I could probably find more if I actually tried hard.

    So, yeah I’m saying I don’t believe Jesus actually said this.

    And what is your rubric for discerning such things?

  • Michael B.

    @Todd@16 asked “What do you think the “end times” are”

    That’s a great question. Let me clarify my original question a bit more. I’m basically asking who on here has an apocalyptic worldview. By that I mean the person believes:
    1) An Evil World — The world has become evil.
    2) Dualistic — everything is either completely good or evil, and all evil will be destroyed.
    3) Total destruction — The world and much of its people are evil, and thus the they will have to be destroyed. The end of the world is coming, literally, not figuratively or spiritually. After the current world is destroyed it will then be remade.
    4) Imminent — This is something that is happening soon. Not in 1000 years from now.

    This is/was the worldview of many Christians, and you’ll find it in many types of Christian literature, both past and present.

  • Michael B.

    @Todd@16 asked “What do you think the “end times” are”

    That’s a great question. Let me clarify my original question a bit more. I’m basically asking who on here has an apocalyptic worldview. By that I mean the person believes:
    1) An Evil World — The world has become evil.
    2) Dualistic — everything is either completely good or evil, and all evil will be destroyed.
    3) Total destruction — The world and much of its people are evil, and thus the they will have to be destroyed. The end of the world is coming, literally, not figuratively or spiritually. After the current world is destroyed it will then be remade.
    4) Imminent — This is something that is happening soon. Not in 1000 years from now.

    This is/was the worldview of many Christians, and you’ll find it in many types of Christian literature, both past and present.

  • #4 Kitty

    @tODD #22
    Q: “What’s your rubric?”

    It’s a departure from the other Jesus who calmed storms, instructed us to love our enemies, pray for those who persecute us, and who opened up the mysteries of the Kingdom of God with parables. Mark 13 is by contrast shrill and mean. It does not transform, inspire, or even convict.
    Also, there is reason to believe it was written during the same time as the destruction of the temple. How convenient. “Oh yeah, Jesus warned us this would happen…let me see, he said….” That’s not prophecy it’s ventriloquism.
    So, there you have it; this reader has to give it a thumbs down. Although it’s an exciting piece of eschatology it just doesn’t compare well to the other sayings of Jesus.

  • #4 Kitty

    @tODD #22
    Q: “What’s your rubric?”

    It’s a departure from the other Jesus who calmed storms, instructed us to love our enemies, pray for those who persecute us, and who opened up the mysteries of the Kingdom of God with parables. Mark 13 is by contrast shrill and mean. It does not transform, inspire, or even convict.
    Also, there is reason to believe it was written during the same time as the destruction of the temple. How convenient. “Oh yeah, Jesus warned us this would happen…let me see, he said….” That’s not prophecy it’s ventriloquism.
    So, there you have it; this reader has to give it a thumbs down. Although it’s an exciting piece of eschatology it just doesn’t compare well to the other sayings of Jesus.

  • #4 Kitty

    Kitty (@19), you realize that’s not the only passage of Scripture that refers to the end times, don’t you?

    Yes, it’s a fascinating metaphor. It’s fun to imagine what it must have meant to each of the different writers.

  • #4 Kitty

    Kitty (@19), you realize that’s not the only passage of Scripture that refers to the end times, don’t you?

    Yes, it’s a fascinating metaphor. It’s fun to imagine what it must have meant to each of the different writers.

  • Tom Hering

    “Mark 13 … does not transform, inspire, or even convict.”

    So what? I kind of appreciate the truth, even when there’s a lot of icky stuff in it.

  • Tom Hering

    “Mark 13 … does not transform, inspire, or even convict.”

    So what? I kind of appreciate the truth, even when there’s a lot of icky stuff in it.

  • #4 Kitty

    So what? I kind of appreciate the truth, even when there’s a lot of icky stuff in it.
    Yes, I do to.

  • #4 Kitty

    So what? I kind of appreciate the truth, even when there’s a lot of icky stuff in it.
    Yes, I do to.

  • TE Schroeder

    Kitty @24 stated “It’s a departure from the other Jesus who calmed storms, instructed us to love our enemies, pray for those who persecute us, and who opened up the mysteries of the Kingdom of God with parables. Mark 13 is by contrast shrill and mean.”

    I believe you are creating Jesus how you want him to be rather than letting Jesus be who he is. Is Jesus God? If so, then he is also like that shrill, meanie God who destroyed Korah, rained fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, sent the Flood, etc…. Or do you dismiss those as myths, too? And if so, why?

  • TE Schroeder

    Kitty @24 stated “It’s a departure from the other Jesus who calmed storms, instructed us to love our enemies, pray for those who persecute us, and who opened up the mysteries of the Kingdom of God with parables. Mark 13 is by contrast shrill and mean.”

    I believe you are creating Jesus how you want him to be rather than letting Jesus be who he is. Is Jesus God? If so, then he is also like that shrill, meanie God who destroyed Korah, rained fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, sent the Flood, etc…. Or do you dismiss those as myths, too? And if so, why?

  • #4 Kitty

    @TE Schroeder
    I read the Bible in the same manner that I’d read mythology or poetry. And I’m not at all dismissive of it. In fact, it suprises me how often these myths or images keeps drawing me back. I still maintain that the Jesus of Mark 13 is altogether different than elsewhere in Mark’s gospel. And perhaps, I was a bit dismissive of those verses. I actually think they’re exciting and well written. Unfortunately, they’re also undeveloped and quite raw. I wish he’d expanded on it a bit more.

  • #4 Kitty

    @TE Schroeder
    I read the Bible in the same manner that I’d read mythology or poetry. And I’m not at all dismissive of it. In fact, it suprises me how often these myths or images keeps drawing me back. I still maintain that the Jesus of Mark 13 is altogether different than elsewhere in Mark’s gospel. And perhaps, I was a bit dismissive of those verses. I actually think they’re exciting and well written. Unfortunately, they’re also undeveloped and quite raw. I wish he’d expanded on it a bit more.

  • TE Schroeder

    Does that mean you do not regard the Biblical accounts as history at all? And if some parts are to be regarded as history while others are regarded as myth or poetry, how do you determine which is which?

  • TE Schroeder

    Does that mean you do not regard the Biblical accounts as history at all? And if some parts are to be regarded as history while others are regarded as myth or poetry, how do you determine which is which?

  • #4 Kitty

    The Bible is similar to Shakespeare’s plays. Henry IV are part historical and part fiction. But I don’t read them for their historical narrative; there are much better resources. I read them for the same reason I keep coming back to the sayings of Jesus, the creation myths, the Song of Songs, etc. ~ they rock my socks.

  • #4 Kitty

    The Bible is similar to Shakespeare’s plays. Henry IV are part historical and part fiction. But I don’t read them for their historical narrative; there are much better resources. I read them for the same reason I keep coming back to the sayings of Jesus, the creation myths, the Song of Songs, etc. ~ they rock my socks.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Michael B (@23), your clarifications would force me — and, I suspect, most Lutherans — to answer “no” to your original question (@1).

    Answering “yes” would appear to be tantamount to Manichaeism, among other things. Your statement #2 very much runs counter to the Lutheran saying that describes us all: Simul justus et peccator. And, of course, anybody who has read Scripture knows better than to say when the last day is, even in broad terms (i.e. “Not in 1000 years from now”).

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Michael B (@23), your clarifications would force me — and, I suspect, most Lutherans — to answer “no” to your original question (@1).

    Answering “yes” would appear to be tantamount to Manichaeism, among other things. Your statement #2 very much runs counter to the Lutheran saying that describes us all: Simul justus et peccator. And, of course, anybody who has read Scripture knows better than to say when the last day is, even in broad terms (i.e. “Not in 1000 years from now”).

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Kitty (@24), that’s not much of a rubric. Is it me, or does it boil down to “Well, I personally think it sounds like two different people!”?

    Even my two-year-old son knows that, in spite of the fact that his Papa sometimes is upset with him and punishes him, while at other times he is silly and fun and likes to sing, he only has one Papa. And, when I look back on my childhood and see my father acting similarly to me, I realize it was not because I had two fathers, but that these were both facets of the same father — indeed, that they both stem from the same thing: my father’s love for me.

    Anyhow, you’re obviously in the minority here on this opinion. Not that majority opinion means much in theology, but it should at least make clear that many people do not find it difficult to believe that there is only one Jesus, as it were, in the Bible. This seems to be an issue you personally have, not one with the text as such.

    Also, there is reason to believe it was written during the same time as the destruction of the temple.

    First off, you’d get smacked with a “[weasel words]” if you tried to post that line on Wikipedia. What, pray tell, is that “reason to believe” (or, perhaps, not to believe)? I see nothing in the text itself that suggests that. Unless, of course, one simply asserts by fiat that predictive prophesy is impossible.

    Yes, it’s a fascinating metaphor. It’s fun to imagine what it must have meant to each of the different writers.

    Indeed. In a similar manner, I understand all of your comments here to be a retelling of what you had for dinner — no more, no less.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Kitty (@24), that’s not much of a rubric. Is it me, or does it boil down to “Well, I personally think it sounds like two different people!”?

    Even my two-year-old son knows that, in spite of the fact that his Papa sometimes is upset with him and punishes him, while at other times he is silly and fun and likes to sing, he only has one Papa. And, when I look back on my childhood and see my father acting similarly to me, I realize it was not because I had two fathers, but that these were both facets of the same father — indeed, that they both stem from the same thing: my father’s love for me.

    Anyhow, you’re obviously in the minority here on this opinion. Not that majority opinion means much in theology, but it should at least make clear that many people do not find it difficult to believe that there is only one Jesus, as it were, in the Bible. This seems to be an issue you personally have, not one with the text as such.

    Also, there is reason to believe it was written during the same time as the destruction of the temple.

    First off, you’d get smacked with a “[weasel words]” if you tried to post that line on Wikipedia. What, pray tell, is that “reason to believe” (or, perhaps, not to believe)? I see nothing in the text itself that suggests that. Unless, of course, one simply asserts by fiat that predictive prophesy is impossible.

    Yes, it’s a fascinating metaphor. It’s fun to imagine what it must have meant to each of the different writers.

    Indeed. In a similar manner, I understand all of your comments here to be a retelling of what you had for dinner — no more, no less.

  • #4 Kitty

    @tODD
    This seems to be an issue you personally have, not one with the text as such.
    I agree that this issue rarely (if at all) comes up within WELS or the LCMS. However, New Testament scholars discuss this sort of thing all of the time. And besides whatever is wrong with the assertion “Well, I personally think it sounds like two different people!”?

    What, pray tell, is that “reason to believe” (or, perhaps, not to believe)?

    PerWiki:The gospel was written in Greek shortly after the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70, possibly in Syria.

    Indeed. In a similar manner, I understand all of your comments here to be a retelling of what you had for dinner — no more, no less.

    And you take the Bible to be a magic book written by one of the gods.

  • #4 Kitty

    @tODD
    This seems to be an issue you personally have, not one with the text as such.
    I agree that this issue rarely (if at all) comes up within WELS or the LCMS. However, New Testament scholars discuss this sort of thing all of the time. And besides whatever is wrong with the assertion “Well, I personally think it sounds like two different people!”?

    What, pray tell, is that “reason to believe” (or, perhaps, not to believe)?

    PerWiki:The gospel was written in Greek shortly after the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70, possibly in Syria.

    Indeed. In a similar manner, I understand all of your comments here to be a retelling of what you had for dinner — no more, no less.

    And you take the Bible to be a magic book written by one of the gods.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Kitty said (@34):

    New Testament scholars discuss this sort of thing all of the time.

    Sure. You have to have something to occupy your time with once you’ve decided to not actually believe what it says (“We have to pay respect to this work, even though we, well, don’t”). Other people look for hidden messages a la the Bible Code. Tomato, tomahto.

    I just feel like Thomas Jefferson was a little more honest in his attempt to cherry-pick the bits he liked.

    Whatever is wrong with the assertion “Well, I personally think it sounds like two different people!”?

    Again, it’s not much of a rubric, is it? I asked you for an authoritative rule, and you gave me a highly subjective judgment call.

    Per Wiki: “The gospel was written in Greek shortly after the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70, possibly in Syria.”

    That’s not an actual “reason to believe”, that’s just proof that some other writer also has reason to believe. Again, what is the actual reason to believe that Mark was not written before the destruction of the Temple?

    Is it possible that scholars who do not believe in Jesus’ ability to predict future events assert a post-70AD date for Mark precisely because they do not believe in Jesus’ ability to predict future events, and thus Mark must have been written after the destruction of the Temple? But then, the only reason to believe that Mark was contemporaneous with the Temple’s destruction is … that one doesn’t believe the Bible to be true.

    And you take the Bible to be a magic book written by one of the gods.

    What’s that? Pizza? Again?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Kitty said (@34):

    New Testament scholars discuss this sort of thing all of the time.

    Sure. You have to have something to occupy your time with once you’ve decided to not actually believe what it says (“We have to pay respect to this work, even though we, well, don’t”). Other people look for hidden messages a la the Bible Code. Tomato, tomahto.

    I just feel like Thomas Jefferson was a little more honest in his attempt to cherry-pick the bits he liked.

    Whatever is wrong with the assertion “Well, I personally think it sounds like two different people!”?

    Again, it’s not much of a rubric, is it? I asked you for an authoritative rule, and you gave me a highly subjective judgment call.

    Per Wiki: “The gospel was written in Greek shortly after the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70, possibly in Syria.”

    That’s not an actual “reason to believe”, that’s just proof that some other writer also has reason to believe. Again, what is the actual reason to believe that Mark was not written before the destruction of the Temple?

    Is it possible that scholars who do not believe in Jesus’ ability to predict future events assert a post-70AD date for Mark precisely because they do not believe in Jesus’ ability to predict future events, and thus Mark must have been written after the destruction of the Temple? But then, the only reason to believe that Mark was contemporaneous with the Temple’s destruction is … that one doesn’t believe the Bible to be true.

    And you take the Bible to be a magic book written by one of the gods.

    What’s that? Pizza? Again?

  • #4 Kitty

    I asked you for an authoritative rule, and you gave me a highly subjective judgment call.

    I refer to authorities (New Testament scholars) in a separate matter and your response is…(“We have to pay respect to this work, even though we, well, don’t” and you then compare them to numerologists. You’re difficult to please.

    Again, what is the actual reason to believe that Mark was not written before the destruction of the Temple?

    Wiki references Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). p. 24-27.

    But, warning: this work is the result of the sort of people who must finds something to occupy their time once they’ve decided not to believe what the Bible says. And so I don’t blame you for sniffing at it.

    But then, the only reason to believe that Mark was contemporaneous with the Temple’s destruction is … that one doesn’t believe the Bible to be true.

    I’m not touching this one. I mean tODD!?

    What’s that? Pizza? Again?

    Ok, now you’ve gone too far!

  • #4 Kitty

    I asked you for an authoritative rule, and you gave me a highly subjective judgment call.

    I refer to authorities (New Testament scholars) in a separate matter and your response is…(“We have to pay respect to this work, even though we, well, don’t” and you then compare them to numerologists. You’re difficult to please.

    Again, what is the actual reason to believe that Mark was not written before the destruction of the Temple?

    Wiki references Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). p. 24-27.

    But, warning: this work is the result of the sort of people who must finds something to occupy their time once they’ve decided not to believe what the Bible says. And so I don’t blame you for sniffing at it.

    But then, the only reason to believe that Mark was contemporaneous with the Temple’s destruction is … that one doesn’t believe the Bible to be true.

    I’m not touching this one. I mean tODD!?

    What’s that? Pizza? Again?

    Ok, now you’ve gone too far!

  • #4 Kitty

    Again, what is the actual reason to believe that Mark was not written before the destruction of the Temple?

    Good question. I’d like to take a look at them.

  • #4 Kitty

    Again, what is the actual reason to believe that Mark was not written before the destruction of the Temple?

    Good question. I’d like to take a look at them.

  • Michael B.

    “And if some parts are to be regarded as history while others are regarded as myth or poetry, how do you determine which is which?”

    Being a bald guy, my absolute favorite story in the Bible tells the story of Elijah, a wise man, yet one cursed with male pattern baldness. One day he was minding his own business, making the long walk to Bethel, when he is confronted by a roving band of children who tease him with names like “bald head.” But Elijah was having none of this, he turns round and curses them in the name of the Lord, and instantly two female bears emerge from a nearby wood and maul all 42 children to death. 2 Kings 2

  • Michael B.

    “And if some parts are to be regarded as history while others are regarded as myth or poetry, how do you determine which is which?”

    Being a bald guy, my absolute favorite story in the Bible tells the story of Elijah, a wise man, yet one cursed with male pattern baldness. One day he was minding his own business, making the long walk to Bethel, when he is confronted by a roving band of children who tease him with names like “bald head.” But Elijah was having none of this, he turns round and curses them in the name of the Lord, and instantly two female bears emerge from a nearby wood and maul all 42 children to death. 2 Kings 2

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Kitty (@36) said:

    Wiki references Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). p. 24-27.

    Yes, I know. And thanks for linking directly to the particular page I wanted to refer to, anyhow. I mean, did you read it? It says:

    Mark was composed around 70,[18] as the Jewish-Roman War (66-74 CE) is clearly reflected in the Gospel, for example in sections which relate to the time of the author and his first readers. There is a dispute as to whether the destruction of the temple announced in Mark 13.2 has already taken place [19] or is still expected. [20]

    The last two footnotes merely point us further down the rabbit hole, suggesting we read Theissen’s Gospels (ah, referring to your own works to back up a claim) for the “already taken place” side.

    That said, my favorite footnote was #18, which says, succinctly, “Extremely early datings are not considered here.”

    Well golly, I can see why you find this reference so definitive! It flatly refuses to consider some early dates for writing, and then tells us there’s “dispute” as to whether the material was written before or after the events predicted.

    Oh, but let’s go look up the reference to Theissen’s Gospels in Context, anyhow, hmm? Let’s see:

    This temple prophecy, in my opinion, presupposes the destruction of the temple, because it has been adapted to correspond to events that have already happened.

    Right. Once again I’ll suggest that the main reason to believe the Mark 13 prophecy occurred after the events it describes is that one simply doesn’t believe in predictive prophecy.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Kitty (@36) said:

    Wiki references Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). p. 24-27.

    Yes, I know. And thanks for linking directly to the particular page I wanted to refer to, anyhow. I mean, did you read it? It says:

    Mark was composed around 70,[18] as the Jewish-Roman War (66-74 CE) is clearly reflected in the Gospel, for example in sections which relate to the time of the author and his first readers. There is a dispute as to whether the destruction of the temple announced in Mark 13.2 has already taken place [19] or is still expected. [20]

    The last two footnotes merely point us further down the rabbit hole, suggesting we read Theissen’s Gospels (ah, referring to your own works to back up a claim) for the “already taken place” side.

    That said, my favorite footnote was #18, which says, succinctly, “Extremely early datings are not considered here.”

    Well golly, I can see why you find this reference so definitive! It flatly refuses to consider some early dates for writing, and then tells us there’s “dispute” as to whether the material was written before or after the events predicted.

    Oh, but let’s go look up the reference to Theissen’s Gospels in Context, anyhow, hmm? Let’s see:

    This temple prophecy, in my opinion, presupposes the destruction of the temple, because it has been adapted to correspond to events that have already happened.

    Right. Once again I’ll suggest that the main reason to believe the Mark 13 prophecy occurred after the events it describes is that one simply doesn’t believe in predictive prophecy.

  • TE Schroeder

    Kitty,

    I had asked what makes you determine what is to be understood and history and what is not. I could have guessed your answers. Basically, it comes down to, “I’LL be the judge of God’s word, thank you.” Then you pepper this with others who agree.

    Makes me wonder if Jesus really rose from the dead, or if that is myth too. And if it is myth, death wins. Who decides?

    “But I don’t want death to be the victor.”

    Oh, okay, then Jesus’ resurrection really happened. Well, kind of, figuratively. Or not. Gee, such hard decisions. Which is it?

    Michael B.: As for the Elisha account, it happened right after the Lord had anointed him as prophet. The children immediately begin to mock him. So, the Lord made it clear that he (or his prophet) is not to be trifled with in rather vivid, graphic terms. If it is not a historical account (and there is nothing in the text which suggests it should be considered otherwise), what is the point you come up with?

  • TE Schroeder

    Kitty,

    I had asked what makes you determine what is to be understood and history and what is not. I could have guessed your answers. Basically, it comes down to, “I’LL be the judge of God’s word, thank you.” Then you pepper this with others who agree.

    Makes me wonder if Jesus really rose from the dead, or if that is myth too. And if it is myth, death wins. Who decides?

    “But I don’t want death to be the victor.”

    Oh, okay, then Jesus’ resurrection really happened. Well, kind of, figuratively. Or not. Gee, such hard decisions. Which is it?

    Michael B.: As for the Elisha account, it happened right after the Lord had anointed him as prophet. The children immediately begin to mock him. So, the Lord made it clear that he (or his prophet) is not to be trifled with in rather vivid, graphic terms. If it is not a historical account (and there is nothing in the text which suggests it should be considered otherwise), what is the point you come up with?

  • Michael B.

    @TE Schroeder@40

    Here’s your problem. A fundamentalist pastor once said that Sunday morning is the biggest hour of idolatry in America, because people make up a definition of God and then worship it.

    Consider the 2 propositions:
    Proposition#1) “God loves all the children of the world”
    Proposition#2) “There are children that God hates”

    Virtually every Christian, from very liberal to fundamentalist, would agree with proposition#1 and disagree with proposition#2. Yet according to author of Second Kings, there are clearly some children that God doesn’t love. (If God loved the children, he certainly has a strange way of showing it.) The overwhelming majority of Christians are worshiping a different God than the one portrayed in Second Kings.

  • Michael B.

    @TE Schroeder@40

    Here’s your problem. A fundamentalist pastor once said that Sunday morning is the biggest hour of idolatry in America, because people make up a definition of God and then worship it.

    Consider the 2 propositions:
    Proposition#1) “God loves all the children of the world”
    Proposition#2) “There are children that God hates”

    Virtually every Christian, from very liberal to fundamentalist, would agree with proposition#1 and disagree with proposition#2. Yet according to author of Second Kings, there are clearly some children that God doesn’t love. (If God loved the children, he certainly has a strange way of showing it.) The overwhelming majority of Christians are worshiping a different God than the one portrayed in Second Kings.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Michael (@41), you said:

    According to author of Second Kings, there are clearly some children that God doesn’t love.

    Sorry, but what passage are you thinking of? I searched on a number of terms, and I still don’t know of any passage that appears to make the point you’re attempting.

    Not that it matters. It’s not terribly hard to find scriptural basis for your first proposition (oh, I don’t know, John 3:16, maybe?).

    I suppose, then, that the real issue here is that you find different parts of the Bible to be irreconcilable? That you simply can’t understand how they can describe the same God?

    Because Christians understand that God hates sin — truly hates it — and yet also understand that God loves the world. Indeed, they get that God loves them while yet hating their sin. These would-be paradoxes are all resolved at the Cross.

    So if you find these paradoxes irreconcilable, I’d suggest that, fundamentally, your problem is that you don’t get the Cross.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Michael (@41), you said:

    According to author of Second Kings, there are clearly some children that God doesn’t love.

    Sorry, but what passage are you thinking of? I searched on a number of terms, and I still don’t know of any passage that appears to make the point you’re attempting.

    Not that it matters. It’s not terribly hard to find scriptural basis for your first proposition (oh, I don’t know, John 3:16, maybe?).

    I suppose, then, that the real issue here is that you find different parts of the Bible to be irreconcilable? That you simply can’t understand how they can describe the same God?

    Because Christians understand that God hates sin — truly hates it — and yet also understand that God loves the world. Indeed, they get that God loves them while yet hating their sin. These would-be paradoxes are all resolved at the Cross.

    So if you find these paradoxes irreconcilable, I’d suggest that, fundamentally, your problem is that you don’t get the Cross.

  • TE Schroeder

    To follow up with your (Michael B @41) propositions.

    Proposition #1) “God loves all the children of the world”
    TRUE! John 3:16; 1 John 2:2, and a pethora of others.

    Proposition #2) “There are children that God hates”
    TRUE! And not just some children, but all!
    Psalm 5:4-5 states, “You are not a God who takes pleasure in evil; with you the wicked cannot dwell. The arrogant cannot stand in your presence; you hate all who do wrong.” God does not send sins to hell, but sinners.

    But then God sent One who knew no sin to be sin for us so that, in him, we might become the righteousness of God. And not just for some, but for all; for God so loved the world.

    So, does God love the sinner or hate the sinner?
    Yep.

  • TE Schroeder

    To follow up with your (Michael B @41) propositions.

    Proposition #1) “God loves all the children of the world”
    TRUE! John 3:16; 1 John 2:2, and a pethora of others.

    Proposition #2) “There are children that God hates”
    TRUE! And not just some children, but all!
    Psalm 5:4-5 states, “You are not a God who takes pleasure in evil; with you the wicked cannot dwell. The arrogant cannot stand in your presence; you hate all who do wrong.” God does not send sins to hell, but sinners.

    But then God sent One who knew no sin to be sin for us so that, in him, we might become the righteousness of God. And not just for some, but for all; for God so loved the world.

    So, does God love the sinner or hate the sinner?
    Yep.

  • TE Schroeder

    And (Michael B @41) to follow up on your original statement:

    You wrote: “Here’s your problem. A fundamentalist pastor once said that Sunday morning is the biggest hour of idolatry in America, because people make up a definition of God and then worship it.” Actually (and sadly), I agree with him.

    Paragraphs 2-4 in my post @39 were supposed to come off as a sacrastic, hypothetical exchange for someone who is picking and choosing what parts of Scripture are true and which are myth. I am not tech-savvy enough to know how to make that plain when posting. Trust me, it sounded really good in my head.

    I don’t question the resurrection. Nor do I make it my job to assess which verses of the Bible are mythical. If the Lord presents something as a historical event, I take him at his word.

    But if someone is going to select portions of God’s word to be myth (and how do you decide where to stop?), the resurrection is most liekly one of those parts. And if that is myth, the Bible is useless. May as well stick to Aesop.

  • TE Schroeder

    And (Michael B @41) to follow up on your original statement:

    You wrote: “Here’s your problem. A fundamentalist pastor once said that Sunday morning is the biggest hour of idolatry in America, because people make up a definition of God and then worship it.” Actually (and sadly), I agree with him.

    Paragraphs 2-4 in my post @39 were supposed to come off as a sacrastic, hypothetical exchange for someone who is picking and choosing what parts of Scripture are true and which are myth. I am not tech-savvy enough to know how to make that plain when posting. Trust me, it sounded really good in my head.

    I don’t question the resurrection. Nor do I make it my job to assess which verses of the Bible are mythical. If the Lord presents something as a historical event, I take him at his word.

    But if someone is going to select portions of God’s word to be myth (and how do you decide where to stop?), the resurrection is most liekly one of those parts. And if that is myth, the Bible is useless. May as well stick to Aesop.

  • Michael B.

    @TE Schroeder@44

    “But if someone is going to select portions of God’s word to be myth (and how do you decide where to stop?), ”

    You have a good point. And yet at one point in the history of the church, this is exactly what happened. Certain books were chosen to be included in the Bible, and others were not included.

  • Michael B.

    @TE Schroeder@44

    “But if someone is going to select portions of God’s word to be myth (and how do you decide where to stop?), ”

    You have a good point. And yet at one point in the history of the church, this is exactly what happened. Certain books were chosen to be included in the Bible, and others were not included.

  • TE Schroeder

    Michael B @ 45 wrote, “Certain books were chosen to be included in the Bible, and others were not included.”

    Yes, based on Apostolic origin or lack thereof, not because of lack of space, lack of originality, etc…. Interestingly enough, though some of the 27 NT canonical books were questioned for various reasons (late authorship and therefore slow to be circulated being one of the big reasons), those found inclusion which were known to be apostolic. Other writings (Epistle of Clement, the Didache, and a handful of others) were finally dismissed because they were not of apostolic origin. Others were scoffed at and condemned, though not surpressed, because they DID contain myths and were spurious (Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Judas, et al.). So it was not a matter of deciding who wrote the best stuff; it was about who was entrusted with the recording the very words and works of Jesus. Jesus commissioned the apostles for that. The early Church recognized that and devoted themselves to it (Acts 2:42), as the Church still does today.

  • TE Schroeder

    Michael B @ 45 wrote, “Certain books were chosen to be included in the Bible, and others were not included.”

    Yes, based on Apostolic origin or lack thereof, not because of lack of space, lack of originality, etc…. Interestingly enough, though some of the 27 NT canonical books were questioned for various reasons (late authorship and therefore slow to be circulated being one of the big reasons), those found inclusion which were known to be apostolic. Other writings (Epistle of Clement, the Didache, and a handful of others) were finally dismissed because they were not of apostolic origin. Others were scoffed at and condemned, though not surpressed, because they DID contain myths and were spurious (Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Judas, et al.). So it was not a matter of deciding who wrote the best stuff; it was about who was entrusted with the recording the very words and works of Jesus. Jesus commissioned the apostles for that. The early Church recognized that and devoted themselves to it (Acts 2:42), as the Church still does today.

  • Michael B.

    @TE Schroeder

    But that raises the question: How did they know if a book was of Apostolic origin?

  • Michael B.

    @TE Schroeder

    But that raises the question: How did they know if a book was of Apostolic origin?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Michael B asked (@47),

    How did they know if a book was of Apostolic origin?

    It’s not like the Church appeared out of nowhere overnight. It was first composed of people who were disciples of Jesus — as in, they literally followed him around. Several of those disciples were Apostles. These disciples went on to share what Jesus taught them with others, and the Church grew.

    Given that, it’s not exactly difficult to conceive of ways in which the Church would discern apostolic origin. These were either people who had known the original Apostles, or knew people who knew them. They could tell if a teaching sounded new (and therefore erroneous), or if it was in keeping with the truth that had been passed on to them. And that’s just for the works claiming to be apostolic in origin.

    You should probably also read up on the antilegomena. Unlike our Evangelical brothers, Lutherans don’t (in theory, at least), believe in a “flat Bible”.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Michael B asked (@47),

    How did they know if a book was of Apostolic origin?

    It’s not like the Church appeared out of nowhere overnight. It was first composed of people who were disciples of Jesus — as in, they literally followed him around. Several of those disciples were Apostles. These disciples went on to share what Jesus taught them with others, and the Church grew.

    Given that, it’s not exactly difficult to conceive of ways in which the Church would discern apostolic origin. These were either people who had known the original Apostles, or knew people who knew them. They could tell if a teaching sounded new (and therefore erroneous), or if it was in keeping with the truth that had been passed on to them. And that’s just for the works claiming to be apostolic in origin.

    You should probably also read up on the antilegomena. Unlike our Evangelical brothers, Lutherans don’t (in theory, at least), believe in a “flat Bible”.

  • TE Schroeder

    Acts 2:42 says, “They (the early Church in Jerusalem) devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.”

    For a little while at least, the Christians who were meeting Jerusalem listened to the apostles’ teaching from the apostles themselves. Now THAT would have been cool!

  • TE Schroeder

    Acts 2:42 says, “They (the early Church in Jerusalem) devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.”

    For a little while at least, the Christians who were meeting Jerusalem listened to the apostles’ teaching from the apostles themselves. Now THAT would have been cool!

  • Pingback: Trackback

  • Pingback: Trackback

  • Pingback: {mylan minocycline and pregnancy|minocycline sandoz puisten|minocycline can taken food|minocycline on cycle|minocycline obesity|minocycline and pseudotumor cerebri|gen minocycline antibiotic}

  • Pingback: {does augmentin treat syphilis|my baby take augmentin|amoxicillin and k clavulanate side effects|augmentin handling|can augmentin mixed alcohol|augmentin xr dose for sinusitis|augmentin cystoplasty}

  • Pingback: {amoxicillin clavulanate potassium dog|amoxicillin clavulanate potassium and alcohol|augmentin tablet dosage|can you take expired augmentin|amoxicillin clavulanate potassium liquid|dose for augmentin in children|augmentin for bodybuilding}

  • Pingback: {fluoxetine and lansoprazole|fluoxetine hydrochloride side effects in dogs|can you take adderall fluoxetine|fluoxetine 40mg r149|fluoxetine nerve regeneration|difference between cymbalta fluoxetine|fluoxetine salbutamol}

  • Pingback: {buying celebrex mexico|celebrex nonsteroidal anti inflammatory drugs nsaids|is celebrex used to treat gout|celebrex ervaring|celebrex paranoia|celebrex ocean commercial|celebrex depakote}

  • Pingback: {is clarithromycin a penicillin|biaxin xl dosage for sinus infection|clarithromycin and inr|biaxin indications dosage|biaxin tamoxifen|meclizine biaxin|clarithromycin lipitor interactions}

  • Pingback: {zyprexa rifaximin|asacol xifaxan|metronidazole rifaximin|amoxicillin xifaxan|flagyl rifaximin|rifaximin metronidazole|prevacid rifaximin}

  • Pingback: {duloxetine u.s.p|cymbalta duloxetine mechanism of action|duloxetine cymbalta dual inhibitor|duloxetine hydrochloride+monograph|duloxetine cystitis|dose pharmacokinetics of duloxetine hydrochloride|duloxetine alkaline phosphatase}

  • Pingback: {benazepril neuropathy|benazepril irregular heartbeat|generic name of benazepril|use of amlodipine and benazepril|benazepril birth control|lotensin ndc|benazepril left ventricular hypertrophy}

  • Pingback: {carvedilol bisoprolol heart failure|bisoprolol or atenolol|zebeta efficacy|zebeta diuretic|synthroid zebeta|zebeta side dosage|zebeta heart}

  • Pingback: {when will celebrex patent expire|celebrex brand names|what is celebrex 100 mg|celebrex low iron|where to buy celebrex uk|celecoxib classification|aspirin allergy and celebrex}

  • Pingback: snk.to/DOgj


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X