The Bible Is an Outdated Relic
- Thread starter expiated
- Start date
Meet your new messiah
https://forward.com/news/507424/messiah-is-here-signs-new-york-chabad-schneerson/
https://forward.com/news/507424/messiah-is-here-signs-new-york-chabad-schneerson/
if your grandfather is a chief rabbi, you make waves… funniest video clip in the pandemic.
https://nypost.com/2020/11/21/secret-plans-helped-synagogue-pull-off-massive-maskless-wedding/
https://nypost.com/2020/11/21/secret-plans-helped-synagogue-pull-off-massive-maskless-wedding/
An example of how the Bible's outdated guidelines are anything but that...
Creation Order Rings Out Loud: Even the Most Determined Secular Society Cannot Escape God's Design for Marriage and Family
The Nicholas Kristof piece...
Kristof begins with these words: "American liberals have led the campaign to reduce child poverty since Franklin Roosevelt, and it's a proud legacy, but we have long had a blind spot." He continues, "We're often reluctant to acknowledge one of the significant drivers of child poverty, the widespread breakdown of family, for fear that to do so would be patronizing or racist. It's an issue largely for working class Whites, Blacks and Hispanics, albeit most prevalent among African-Americans." He continues, "But just as you can't have a serious conversation about poverty without discussing race, you also can't engage unless you consider single parent households."
...is more than urgent for our discussion. I think you may hear things about it in the larger conversation in the culture this week, but I want to come back and say we as Christians don't start with sociology. The sociology is informative, it's illustrative, it's not authoritative. Authoritative for Christians is the Bible. Authoritative for Christians is the revelation of God. And this is where we understand that both in the Bible and in nature, that is to say even in lived human experience, what our Creator has made very clear is that His intention was that children, both boys and girls, be raised by two-parent families. And by the way, this doesn't just mean two parents, as if the magic number two is all there is to it. This is a mother and a father, a husband and a wife.
Now, Nicholas Kristof says, "The data don't indicate so much that it has to be gender related." Well, I think we, as Christians, just need to say upfront, "Oh yes, we know it does." And here's where we just have to step back a moment and say, "This kind of data is really illustrative of the fact that the rebellion against the Creator and the rebellion against creation order is such that there's a revulsion on the parts of many in this society to saying there are any thou-shalts or thou-shalt-nots when it comes to, say, marriage, family, sexuality, gender, children, raising children, et cetera."
And we as Christians understand that any rebellion of that sort is going to end in abject disaster. The sociological data that are so devastating and the lives that are so diminished in terms of their promise, in terms of economic, of jobs, of educational advancement, we understand that's all just downstream, and frankly, Christians have to say inevitable once you reject God's plan. Now, the Christian gospel doesn't end with the affirmation and clear revelation of the consequences of rejecting God's plan, but it does--and this is really important for Christians, I'm going to be writing about this because I'm hearing nonsense from Christians on this score--we need to come back and say, "The New Testament doesn't say, 'Oh, all that Old Testament concern with marriage and the family, well, that's all over now in the new covenant of Christ.'" That's not true. Just read the letters of the Apostle Paul.
And even as the church is concerned with helping those and ministering to those and validating those who are not in those kinds of homes, the fact is that the New Testament church holds up the same revealed--affirmed in creation order--plan of God for the family. And quite frankly, even in our congregations, we see the difference. We understand why it matters, and we as Christians want to help all children and all parents in all contexts, certainly within the church, but also even in the community, to do better, to flourish, to have greater opportunity. But we also understand that a rebellion against God's order and, for that matter, even just a fracture because sometimes people are in this predicament, never intending to be in this predicament. They don't even bear responsibility directly for being in this predicament. But I think of all people, they're the last people to say, "This isn't a predicament."
Again, we'll be talking about this. There's going to be a lot of data coming in, and quite frankly, I'll tell you in advance, we've got to look for the cultural backlash against this book, this column, this argument, because that's going to be really, really interesting.
It's also interesting that just a couple of days later, the New York Times, the same newspaper, ran a piece by Jessica Gross entitled, There's Still Overwhelming Cultural Pressure to Get Married and Have Kids. Now, what makes that interesting is that if you just take the headline, that would mean that the presumption is maybe we could or should get past the time when there's overwhelming cultural pressure to get married and have kids.
And once again, just looking at the Jessica Gross piece, it's pretty clear about the fact that there is still, what she describes as, overwhelming social pressure to get married and have children. She says, "A substantial majority of Americans, 75%, have been married by 40," by the way, just in human scale, that's very late, "and once they're in their 40s, over 75% of men and over 80% of women have had a biological child." She goes on to say, "There's this idea floating around that if only the broader culture pushed marriage and family harder, we wouldn't have so many single parents. And I always wonder, when exactly did the broader culture stop pushing marriage and babies?"
Well, that's where I've got an answer for you, Jessica Gross. The answer is that in the academic elites and the ideological elites, they've been fighting against the natural family and against marriage and against having children as the expectation for decades. But here's the problem, creation order still is so loud as revelation that there's really no way to get past this. I want to go back to the pattern. The reason I'm talking about these two things today is because I think the same pattern is there, where you had Brad Wilcox talking about talk left, walk right, or, as I describe, liberal theories, conservative lives.
The fact is that you have two couples, and let's just say they're rich and advantaged. Let's just say one of them got tenure at Harvard and the other ones working in Palo Alto. And the four couples have four jobs. They have two children, they get married, young man and a young woman. You know what all four of those earlier parents want to be? Now, I'll just say this out of a deep personal testimony, they want to be grandparents. And even though they may live by the liberal theory that that's a bourgeois, old-fashioned, patriarchal, oppressive expectation, the fact is that I think that young liberal couple is still going to drop some older liberal hints about the fact that a grandchild or grandchildren would be very welcome.
And, by the way, I don't think that's selfishness. It could be. It could be demonstrated in selfish ways. I think that's creation order. I think that's a desire God has put within us. I think it is something that explains why, in spite of all the liberal theories, when a young mom and a dad get on a plane and you got one kid who's in a papoose and a couple others coming on by hand, what do people think when they see that family? They might not want to sit next to a crying baby, but the fact is most people just can't help smiling when they see those little children and they see that family coming on the plane. There's just a picture there. And even if, ideologically, they say, "I don't want to advantage or privilege that picture," the fact is that in their hearts, they see something that's inherently good they just can't deny.
That, too, by the Christian worldview is a revelation of the glory of God. It is the things that you cannot not know, the realities you cannot ultimately defeat even in your own heart. And I just have to confess to you, I'm speaking here not only as a theologian and as a churchman and as a Christian, I'm speaking also as a son and a grandson and a father and a grandfather. And I just want to tell you I'm pretty happy about that, pretty unspeakably happy about that, and I want to see even more people happy like that and know that joy.
And I simply want to say to this columnist in the New York Times, what she describes as an overwhelming cultural pressure to get married and have kids, that isn't just some hangover of a bourgeois Victorian culture. That's actually nature at work, or, more specifically, that's creation order at work. And you can resist it, but in the end, creation order wins.
Creation Order Rings Out Loud: Even the Most Determined Secular Society Cannot Escape God's Design for Marriage and Family
The Nicholas Kristof piece...
Kristof begins with these words: "American liberals have led the campaign to reduce child poverty since Franklin Roosevelt, and it's a proud legacy, but we have long had a blind spot." He continues, "We're often reluctant to acknowledge one of the significant drivers of child poverty, the widespread breakdown of family, for fear that to do so would be patronizing or racist. It's an issue largely for working class Whites, Blacks and Hispanics, albeit most prevalent among African-Americans." He continues, "But just as you can't have a serious conversation about poverty without discussing race, you also can't engage unless you consider single parent households."
...is more than urgent for our discussion. I think you may hear things about it in the larger conversation in the culture this week, but I want to come back and say we as Christians don't start with sociology. The sociology is informative, it's illustrative, it's not authoritative. Authoritative for Christians is the Bible. Authoritative for Christians is the revelation of God. And this is where we understand that both in the Bible and in nature, that is to say even in lived human experience, what our Creator has made very clear is that His intention was that children, both boys and girls, be raised by two-parent families. And by the way, this doesn't just mean two parents, as if the magic number two is all there is to it. This is a mother and a father, a husband and a wife.
Now, Nicholas Kristof says, "The data don't indicate so much that it has to be gender related." Well, I think we, as Christians, just need to say upfront, "Oh yes, we know it does." And here's where we just have to step back a moment and say, "This kind of data is really illustrative of the fact that the rebellion against the Creator and the rebellion against creation order is such that there's a revulsion on the parts of many in this society to saying there are any thou-shalts or thou-shalt-nots when it comes to, say, marriage, family, sexuality, gender, children, raising children, et cetera."
And we as Christians understand that any rebellion of that sort is going to end in abject disaster. The sociological data that are so devastating and the lives that are so diminished in terms of their promise, in terms of economic, of jobs, of educational advancement, we understand that's all just downstream, and frankly, Christians have to say inevitable once you reject God's plan. Now, the Christian gospel doesn't end with the affirmation and clear revelation of the consequences of rejecting God's plan, but it does--and this is really important for Christians, I'm going to be writing about this because I'm hearing nonsense from Christians on this score--we need to come back and say, "The New Testament doesn't say, 'Oh, all that Old Testament concern with marriage and the family, well, that's all over now in the new covenant of Christ.'" That's not true. Just read the letters of the Apostle Paul.
And even as the church is concerned with helping those and ministering to those and validating those who are not in those kinds of homes, the fact is that the New Testament church holds up the same revealed--affirmed in creation order--plan of God for the family. And quite frankly, even in our congregations, we see the difference. We understand why it matters, and we as Christians want to help all children and all parents in all contexts, certainly within the church, but also even in the community, to do better, to flourish, to have greater opportunity. But we also understand that a rebellion against God's order and, for that matter, even just a fracture because sometimes people are in this predicament, never intending to be in this predicament. They don't even bear responsibility directly for being in this predicament. But I think of all people, they're the last people to say, "This isn't a predicament."
Again, we'll be talking about this. There's going to be a lot of data coming in, and quite frankly, I'll tell you in advance, we've got to look for the cultural backlash against this book, this column, this argument, because that's going to be really, really interesting.
It's also interesting that just a couple of days later, the New York Times, the same newspaper, ran a piece by Jessica Gross entitled, There's Still Overwhelming Cultural Pressure to Get Married and Have Kids. Now, what makes that interesting is that if you just take the headline, that would mean that the presumption is maybe we could or should get past the time when there's overwhelming cultural pressure to get married and have kids.
And once again, just looking at the Jessica Gross piece, it's pretty clear about the fact that there is still, what she describes as, overwhelming social pressure to get married and have children. She says, "A substantial majority of Americans, 75%, have been married by 40," by the way, just in human scale, that's very late, "and once they're in their 40s, over 75% of men and over 80% of women have had a biological child." She goes on to say, "There's this idea floating around that if only the broader culture pushed marriage and family harder, we wouldn't have so many single parents. And I always wonder, when exactly did the broader culture stop pushing marriage and babies?"
Well, that's where I've got an answer for you, Jessica Gross. The answer is that in the academic elites and the ideological elites, they've been fighting against the natural family and against marriage and against having children as the expectation for decades. But here's the problem, creation order still is so loud as revelation that there's really no way to get past this. I want to go back to the pattern. The reason I'm talking about these two things today is because I think the same pattern is there, where you had Brad Wilcox talking about talk left, walk right, or, as I describe, liberal theories, conservative lives.
The fact is that you have two couples, and let's just say they're rich and advantaged. Let's just say one of them got tenure at Harvard and the other ones working in Palo Alto. And the four couples have four jobs. They have two children, they get married, young man and a young woman. You know what all four of those earlier parents want to be? Now, I'll just say this out of a deep personal testimony, they want to be grandparents. And even though they may live by the liberal theory that that's a bourgeois, old-fashioned, patriarchal, oppressive expectation, the fact is that I think that young liberal couple is still going to drop some older liberal hints about the fact that a grandchild or grandchildren would be very welcome.
And, by the way, I don't think that's selfishness. It could be. It could be demonstrated in selfish ways. I think that's creation order. I think that's a desire God has put within us. I think it is something that explains why, in spite of all the liberal theories, when a young mom and a dad get on a plane and you got one kid who's in a papoose and a couple others coming on by hand, what do people think when they see that family? They might not want to sit next to a crying baby, but the fact is most people just can't help smiling when they see those little children and they see that family coming on the plane. There's just a picture there. And even if, ideologically, they say, "I don't want to advantage or privilege that picture," the fact is that in their hearts, they see something that's inherently good they just can't deny.
That, too, by the Christian worldview is a revelation of the glory of God. It is the things that you cannot not know, the realities you cannot ultimately defeat even in your own heart. And I just have to confess to you, I'm speaking here not only as a theologian and as a churchman and as a Christian, I'm speaking also as a son and a grandson and a father and a grandfather. And I just want to tell you I'm pretty happy about that, pretty unspeakably happy about that, and I want to see even more people happy like that and know that joy.
And I simply want to say to this columnist in the New York Times, what she describes as an overwhelming cultural pressure to get married and have kids, that isn't just some hangover of a bourgeois Victorian culture. That's actually nature at work, or, more specifically, that's creation order at work. And you can resist it, but in the end, creation order wins.
simplified.com
In what way(s) is the shroud of Turin's 14th century carbon dating flawed?
One of the main issues with the 14th-century carbon dating is the possibility of contamination. The shroud has been handled and exposed to various environments throughout its history, including restoration attempts and public displays. These circumstances could have introduced newer carbon materials into the fabric, leading to a skewed dating result.
Another point of concern is the possibility of the shroud being repaired or altered over the years. It is well-documented that the shroud has undergone restoration and repairs, which could have affected the carbon dating outcome. Any additional material used in renovating the shroud might have altered the carbon content, again resulting in an inaccurate dating.
Furthermore, some experts argue that the fire that occurred in 1532, which caused significant damage to the shroud, might have affected the carbon levels present in the fabric. The high heat from the fire could have modified the carbon composition, making the shroud appear younger in the radiocarbon dating analysis.
Lastly, there are debates surrounding the actual origin and purpose of the Shroud of Turin. Some researchers believe that it is not an actual burial cloth of Jesus Christ but instead a medieval forgery or a symbolic representation created during the 14th century. If this alternative theory were accurate, it would naturally explain the 14th-century dating outcome.
In conclusion, the 14th-century carbon dating of the Shroud of Turin is considered flawed due to factors such as contamination, restoration activities, the 1532 fire, and the ongoing debates about the shroud's origin. These issues cast doubt on the accuracy and reliability of the dating results.
In what way(s) is the shroud of Turin's 14th century carbon dating flawed?
One of the main issues with the 14th-century carbon dating is the possibility of contamination. The shroud has been handled and exposed to various environments throughout its history, including restoration attempts and public displays. These circumstances could have introduced newer carbon materials into the fabric, leading to a skewed dating result.
Another point of concern is the possibility of the shroud being repaired or altered over the years. It is well-documented that the shroud has undergone restoration and repairs, which could have affected the carbon dating outcome. Any additional material used in renovating the shroud might have altered the carbon content, again resulting in an inaccurate dating.
Furthermore, some experts argue that the fire that occurred in 1532, which caused significant damage to the shroud, might have affected the carbon levels present in the fabric. The high heat from the fire could have modified the carbon composition, making the shroud appear younger in the radiocarbon dating analysis.
Lastly, there are debates surrounding the actual origin and purpose of the Shroud of Turin. Some researchers believe that it is not an actual burial cloth of Jesus Christ but instead a medieval forgery or a symbolic representation created during the 14th century. If this alternative theory were accurate, it would naturally explain the 14th-century dating outcome.
In conclusion, the 14th-century carbon dating of the Shroud of Turin is considered flawed due to factors such as contamination, restoration activities, the 1532 fire, and the ongoing debates about the shroud's origin. These issues cast doubt on the accuracy and reliability of the dating results.
Ergo, Attention all non-believers! This proves scientifically that it must be from ~33AD and is proof of an actual Jesus because...fire!
gotquestions.org
In John 14, Jesus says, "Very truly I tell you . . . I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it" (verses 12–14). This promise seems to give us the right to ask for anything and everything we want, and Jesus is obligated to give it to us—but is that really what the Lord is saying here?
The entire fourteenth chapter of John serves as Jesus' valedictory address to His disciples. The soon-coming crucifixion would leave His followers scared and confused, so Jesus provided them with comfort and assurance regarding a number of things, including how they would carry on His work. Part of this comfort was the promise that Jesus would hear and answer their prayers. Jesus tells them that anything they ask "in my name" would be granted to them.
Jesus is not promising to be a personal vending machine; rather, He is encouraging confidence and faithfulness in prayer. When Jesus says to pray "in my name," He means that we can pray in His authority. He has provided the access we need to heaven. When our requests, made in the name of His Son, further God's purposes and kingdom, God will act on our behalf, and in the end the Father will be "glorified in the Son" (John 14:13). A good example of such a prayer is Christ's in the garden where He prayed, "Not my will, but yours be done" (Luke 22:42).
In the old American West, before the days of credit cards, a shopkeeper would maintain a ledger book recording the activities of each customer’s account and the amount owed. The business owner knew his customers well and the work in which they were involved. A customer would at times send others to the shop for him to make purchases and bring back materials needed for his home or business. Those sent in the customer’s stead (e.g., his children) would be able to receive the goods "in the name of" the account owner. But, if they tried to purchase things not in line with what the shopkeeper knew the customer needed or wanted, the purchase would be denied.
Coming to God in Jesus' name is similar to those old financial transactions. Jesus holds the account, and we are welcome to come to the Father in Jesus' name to receive what we need. The Father willingly grants our requests because of Jesus' standing. Of course, if we are asking for things that we don't need or that are contrary to the character or will of Christ, then we cannot expect to receive those things (see James 4:3).
When He said He would give "whatever you ask in my name," Jesus was not delivering a magical formula for getting whatever we want. He was giving us a guiding principle to align one's desires with God's. When we pray "in Jesus' name," we pray according to the will of God; we pray for what will honor and glorify Jesus. God will provide the means necessary to accomplish His objectives, and He equips us as His servants. Ultimately, God receives all the glory and praise for what is done.
In John 14, Jesus says, "Very truly I tell you . . . I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it" (verses 12–14). This promise seems to give us the right to ask for anything and everything we want, and Jesus is obligated to give it to us—but is that really what the Lord is saying here?
The entire fourteenth chapter of John serves as Jesus' valedictory address to His disciples. The soon-coming crucifixion would leave His followers scared and confused, so Jesus provided them with comfort and assurance regarding a number of things, including how they would carry on His work. Part of this comfort was the promise that Jesus would hear and answer their prayers. Jesus tells them that anything they ask "in my name" would be granted to them.
Jesus is not promising to be a personal vending machine; rather, He is encouraging confidence and faithfulness in prayer. When Jesus says to pray "in my name," He means that we can pray in His authority. He has provided the access we need to heaven. When our requests, made in the name of His Son, further God's purposes and kingdom, God will act on our behalf, and in the end the Father will be "glorified in the Son" (John 14:13). A good example of such a prayer is Christ's in the garden where He prayed, "Not my will, but yours be done" (Luke 22:42).
In the old American West, before the days of credit cards, a shopkeeper would maintain a ledger book recording the activities of each customer’s account and the amount owed. The business owner knew his customers well and the work in which they were involved. A customer would at times send others to the shop for him to make purchases and bring back materials needed for his home or business. Those sent in the customer’s stead (e.g., his children) would be able to receive the goods "in the name of" the account owner. But, if they tried to purchase things not in line with what the shopkeeper knew the customer needed or wanted, the purchase would be denied.
Coming to God in Jesus' name is similar to those old financial transactions. Jesus holds the account, and we are welcome to come to the Father in Jesus' name to receive what we need. The Father willingly grants our requests because of Jesus' standing. Of course, if we are asking for things that we don't need or that are contrary to the character or will of Christ, then we cannot expect to receive those things (see James 4:3).
When He said He would give "whatever you ask in my name," Jesus was not delivering a magical formula for getting whatever we want. He was giving us a guiding principle to align one's desires with God's. When we pray "in Jesus' name," we pray according to the will of God; we pray for what will honor and glorify Jesus. God will provide the means necessary to accomplish His objectives, and He equips us as His servants. Ultimately, God receives all the glory and praise for what is done.