|
Post by disciple4life on Nov 13, 2019 14:22:22 GMT -6
venge, You don't have a hermeneutic standard that shows how you know when to throw out passages from the OT, that you don't agree with. - You can't give a reason why despite the fact that Christ told his disciples to watch, and Paul told the Christians to watch /be ready, and that those who are watching will not be surprised - Others have given scripture that supports the position that we are to watch for signs in the skies - you haven't given a single counter verse that even remotely tells us not to, but you state that some on this site are practicing astrology. - and you also can't or won't give us an answer as to how to know when passages are symbolic even when they are history - not a parable, or not poetry, or not apocalyptic. - This is an example of why I said that it's important for Christians to follow principles of sound Hermeneutics - without common ground rules for interpreting passages, and cross-referencing and comparing the Whole counsel of Scripture - Old and New Testament, anyone can make scripture mean anything they want. The same standard for proving the trinity, and the rapture has been used by myself and multiple others, and yet you take the opinion of early church fathers, and commentaries, and give them regard, but for no apparent reason, disregard passages from Genesis. I've given examples of the disciples and Gentile NT believers following the moon for Feasts and Sabbaths, which Paul kept, and I've also given the example of the Magi, who used astronomy - not astrology to look for and find the future event of Christ's birth. You also mentioned that something "fanciful" is not to be taken literally. Every miracle of Christ and Paul and the Apostles in the entire Bible is all fanciful, and by this standard, we can't take any of them as literal. Cheers, Disciple4life
|
|
|
Post by mike on Nov 13, 2019 16:35:46 GMT -6
Good debate guys. Please take a deep prayerful breath before proceeding EDIT - disciple4life said: I think it's good to explore all aspects that may fit the above. If something is clearly historic, I think it is prudent to see what the spiritual application is/could be and could that principle apply in a poetic psalm (for example). However that does mean we change the meaning of the message
|
|
|
Post by venge on Nov 14, 2019 8:21:58 GMT -6
venge , You don't have a hermeneutic standard that shows how you know when to throw out passages from the OT, that you don't agree with. - You can't give a reason why despite the fact that Christ told his disciples to watch, and Paul told the Christians to watch /be ready, and that those who are watching will not be surprised - Others have given scripture that supports the position that we are to watch for signs in the skies - you haven't given a single counter verse that even remotely tells us not to, but you state that some on this site are practicing astrology. - and you also can't or won't give us an answer as to how to know when passages are symbolic even when they are history - not a parable, or not poetry, or not apocalyptic. - This is an example of why I said that it's important for Christians to follow principles of sound Hermeneutics - without common ground rules for interpreting passages, and cross-referencing and comparing the Whole counsel of Scripture - Old and New Testament, anyone can make scripture mean anything they want. The same standard for proving the trinity, and the rapture has been used by myself and multiple others, and yet you take the opinion of early church fathers, and commentaries, and give them regard, but for no apparent reason, disregard passages from Genesis. I've given examples of the disciples and Gentile NT believers following the moon for Feasts and Sabbaths, which Paul kept, and I've also given the example of the Magi, who used astronomy - not astrology to look for and find the future event of Christ's birth. You also mentioned that something "fanciful" is not to be taken literally. Every miracle of Christ and Paul and the Apostles in the entire Bible is all fanciful, and by this standard, we can't take any of them as literal. Cheers, Disciple4life Disciple4life said: That is very judgmental since I don't post everything in the forums. For one, hermeneutics is given to everyone by the Holy Spirit. What the Holy Spirit shows me is different that it shows you. Each in his/her own time. There are not any passages in the OT that I don't agree with. Its the interpretation of others that I don't agree with. So, with those I disagree with, I would like to know why they believe it and by asking questions, I am trying to understand their viewpoint if it can be explained scripturally, and if the Holy Spirit allows me to see it to or not to. I am looking for texts that show the early church openly advocated for astrology, as some call it here. I am curious to see if the early church followed it, by how much, what particular signs, did they encounter any issues etc...That is why I am looking at the NT and beyond it. I am not sure why that is a problem? Silentknights last post was helpful. I am looking into those and more as I log them in my notes. It has been viewed as astrology by others outside this site, which you are free to google, and I am trying to be cautious and actually attempt to see the difference of why some say its astronomy and not astrology because a friend on the site, she knows who she is, believes it and as any faithful Christian is to, prove scripture. I don't need to give counter verses because I am not here to disapprove anything by the comments I left. I was asking questions wasn't I? Disciple4life, am I being interrogated? I have asked you at least on 2 occasions that if you don't like what I write, please do not respond. That makes it easier for you and I. Why be contentious and cause strife? I have a difference of opinion on things commonly held on this site, whereas if you went to another site - you may be the one that is the minority! Would you rather push me away so it can be the same group all saying Yea, Yea! And not Nay Nay? Do not think you have all things right. It is better to make yourself a fool than to be proud and think you are 100% right. Before you came back, I had provided many reasons. But for some, they fall on deaf ears. It is the Holy Spirit, not hermeneutics that teaches. John 14:26, Nehemiah 9:20, Proverbs 1:23, 2 Timothy 3:16 Its important for Christians to follow principles of sound doctrine.
My friend, again, you are judging. I do not disregard passages from the OT. Quite the contrary. But I am asking for scripture from the NT and the early church. Understand why, by the question I had raised. Were not Paul, Peter and others valuable to the gospel? So why wouldn't I give them regard? You do err. You do not understand what I am trying to accomplish. Instead, you are trying to attack a brother. I'm not your enemy. Yes, you had given them in a post. I am thank you for contributing in part of the discussion. But the examples you gave are not what I was looking for in regards to the specific question I raised. Do not feel that I casted you out because of it. I am looking for specifics and what you posted didn't answer the question. In regards to the magi, how do we know they used astronomy? Does it explicitly say that? Now you are arguing for the sake of arguing. Have I ever said all the miracles are not literal? Because you are putting words in my mouth and making wild accusations. Does not hermeneutics teach that scripture is literal UNLESS it demonstrates symbolic, figurative, or figures of speech and the text appears to be "out of the norm" for a literal interpretation? So if the text does appear to be fanciful, it is our responsibility to go back to the Greek, and look at the contexts. This follows that scripture should interpret scripture. Or as in Isaiah,
precept by precept, line by line, here a little there a little. If a man breathes fire out of his mouth, is it literal and natural to do so to inflict pain by fire out of your mouth? But, by hermeneutics, if other scripture demonstrates the fire is not literal but represents something...shouldn't scripture interpret scripture? And I say yes and then the literal is not literal in this case. Please keep this constructive and loving, if possible.
|
|
|
Post by mike on Nov 14, 2019 9:23:21 GMT -6
Disciple4life said: That is very judgmental since I don't post everything in the forums. For one, hermeneutics is given to everyone by the Holy Spirit. What the Holy Spirit shows me is different that it (He not it) shows you. Each in his/her own time. There are not any passages in the OT that I don't agree with. Its the interpretation of others that I don't agree with. So, with those I disagree with, I would like to know why they believe it and by asking questions, I am trying to understand their viewpoint if it can be explained scripturally, and if the Holy Spirit allows me to see it to or not to. <<Venge I have to be honest with you here and share how I view many of the posts in relation to this topic. First "hermeneutics" are sound biblical interpretation 'standards'. While there are some (including me) who dont always agree with the 'standards' there is a reason for methodology to interpretation. 2Pet 1:20 helps us with that so we understand these things are already established. Saying the Holy Spirit led me a certain way is a sure fire way to start cults, and heresies. The Holy Spirit leads us in truth and how to apply the Word to our lives every day. There are too many people claiming the Holy Spirit told me to do something that is not of God. This can be a whole other topic if need be, maybe it should be.
The Holy Spirit would not show me something contrary to what HE shows you. Perhaps you mean that we are at different places in our walk with the Lord and we are shown different things. You not agreeing doesnt make your view correct does it? In this topic in particular, if you notice everyone is saying virtually the same thing except you. Many have tried to express the view they hold with you only to be countered without a valid 'argument' in most cases. Statistically 98% of churches in America do not teach or talk about end times. Does that mean we are not in the end times? Does that mean the 2% are seeing things incorrectly and should teach as if we are not in the end times?I am looking for texts that show the early church openly advocated for astrology, as some call it here. Why do you feel the texts outside scripture are necessary? Why havent you received the verses given in previous posts? Also it is ASTRONOMY no one here calls it astrology, please stop provoking others by accusing of astrology. You consistently do this and I am beginning to believe it is a deliberate attempt to provoke. It has to stop. I am curious to see if the early church followed it, by how much, what particular signs, did they encounter any issues etc...That is why I am looking at the NT and beyond it. What has your research shown you? Why do I or others need to prove to you in the manner you desire to find answers? You havent provided a position on this topic other than "astrology'. We who hold the stars as symbolic have given you ample evidence from the Bible that there are signs in the heavens provided by God. If you feel those are inadequate, please do your own reseach outside the bible and let us know what you find if that is your intent. I am not sure why that is a problem? It is a problem because several people have given you several answers and none satisfy your curiousity. Silentknights (you mean stormyknight) last post was helpful. I am looking into those and more as I log them in my notes. It has been viewed as astrology by others outside this site, which you are free to google, and I am trying to be cautious and actually attempt to see the difference of why some say its astronomy and not astrology because a friend on the site, she knows who she is, believes it and as any faithful Christian is to, prove scripture. It seems to me that many have proven this out already, perhaps you should express to us why this isnt astromomy and that we who are in favor of viewing the stars are worshipping them. Educate us Venge! I don't need to give counter verses because I am not here to disapprove anything by the comments I left. Yes you are doing exactly that! I was asking questions wasn't I? Disciple4life, am I being interrogated? I have asked you at least on 2 occasions that if you don't like what I write, please do not respond. That makes it easier for you and I. Why be contentious and cause strife? I have a difference of opinion on things commonly held on this site, whereas if you went to another site - you may be the one that is the minority! (we are not on another site) Would you rather push me away so it can be the same group all saying Yea, Yea! And not Nay Nay? Do not think you have all things right. (please take your own advice here too. None of us have it all together) It is better to make yourself a fool than to be proud and think you are 100% right. Before you came back, I had provided many reasons. But for some, they fall on deaf ears. Again Venge you are being antagonistic. You have not 'proven' that anyone here observing signs in the heavens is practicing worship of the stars. This very comment of yours SCREAMS I'M RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG which as you know violates our rulesIt is the Holy Spirit, not hermeneutics that teaches. John 14:26, Nehemiah 9:20, Proverbs 1:23, 2 Timothy 3:16 Its important for Christians to follow principles of sound doctrine.
My friend, again, you are judging. I do not disregard passages from the OT. Quite the contrary. But I am asking for scripture from the NT and the early church. Understand why, by the question I had raised. Were not Paul, Peter and others valuable to the gospel? So why wouldn't I give them regard? You do err. You do not understand what I am trying to accomplish. Instead, you are trying to attack a brother. I'm not your enemy. Please clarify what it is you are trying to accomplish, I cant tellYes, you had given them in a post. I am thank you for contributing in part of the discussion. But the examples you gave are not what I was looking for in regards to the specific question I raised. Do not feel that I casted you out because of it. I am looking for specifics and what you posted didn't answer the question. In regards to the magi, how do we know they used astronomy? Does it explicitly say that? You are really splitting hairs venge. You need to do more research on the topic. If you had you would find that the magi are exactly thatNow you are arguing for the sake of arguing. Have I ever said all the miracles are not literal? Because you are putting words in my mouth and making wild accusations. Does not hermeneutics teach that scripture is literal UNLESS it demonstrates symbolic, figurative, or figures of speech and the text appears to be "out of the norm" for a literal interpretation? So if the text does appear to be fanciful, it is our responsibility to go back to the Greek, and look at the contexts. This follows that scripture should interpret scripture. Or as in Isaiah,
precept by precept, line by line, here a little there a little. If a man breathes fire out of his mouth, is it literal and natural to do so to inflict pain by fire out of your mouth? But, by hermeneutics, if other scripture demonstrates the fire is not literal but represents something...shouldn't scripture interpret scripture? And I say yes and then the literal is not literal in this case. Please keep this constructive and loving, if possible. Venge I would like you to answer me (what I think is) two simple questions. Why did God put the stars in the places they are? Why didnt God just create the earth with the Sun and Moon, why the need for billions of other lights in the sky? (Thats basically one question with several parts). Part 2 - What purpose do the stars serve the image bearers (mankind)? EDIT - I have another question for you as to try to understand you and where you are at better. Jesus instructed the disciples in Matt 10:14 to shake the dust off their feet when they were rejected. Do you literally shake the dust off your feet? Why or why not?
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Nov 14, 2019 9:30:24 GMT -6
Venge, would you agree that astrology says that the stars somehow have control over our lives and events to come?
Would you agree that astronomy is the study of the stars, planets, etc?
The use of those stars to tell seasons or direction (as in how ship captains use of them) is not sinful?
Would you agree that there are constellations named in the Bible?
If God set those stars in place, and named the stars and constellations, is the study of them sinful?
If He says they are for signs and John sees a sign made of stars (and sun and moon) is that astrology? I don't see John assigning some sort of astrology to it. I don't see people here saying the sign has some sort of spiritual control over events or our lives. We see stars arranged by God in such a way that they can be described as John describes them.
|
|
|
Post by bondservant on Nov 14, 2019 12:17:27 GMT -6
I am looking for texts that show the early church openly advocated for astrology, as some call it here. Why do you feel the texts outside scripture are necessary? Why havent you received the verses given in previous posts? Also it is ASTRONOMY no one here calls it astrology, please stop provoking others by accusing of astrology. You consistently do this and I am beginning to believe it is a deliberate attempt to provoke. It has to stop. I am curious to see if the early church followed it, by how much, what particular signs, did they encounter any issues etc...That is why I am looking at the NT and beyond it. What has your research shown you? Why do I or others need to prove to you in the manner you desire to find answers? You havent provided a position on this topic other than "astrology'. We who hold the stars as symbolic have given you ample evidence from the Bible that there are signs in the heavens provided by God. If you feel those are inadequate, please do your own reseach outside the bible and let us know what you find if that is your intent. I am not sure why that is a problem? It is a problem because several people have given you several answers and none satisfy your curiousity. Silentknights (you mean stormyknight) last post was helpful. I am looking into those and more as I log them in my notes. It has been viewed as astrology by others outside this site, which you are free to google, and I am trying to be cautious and actually attempt to see the difference of why some say its astronomy and not astrology because a friend on the site, she knows who she is, believes it and as any faithful Christian is to, prove scripture. It seems to me that many have proven this out already, perhaps you should express to us why this isnt astromomy and that we who are in favor of viewing the stars are worshipping them. Educate us Venge! I don't need to give counter verses because I am not here to disapprove anything by the comments I left. Yes you are doing exactly that! I was asking questions wasn't I? Please keep this constructive and loving, if possible. If I had not read enough of Venge's post I would agree that this is provocative. I don't feel it is at that level just yet or I have learned to not be offended as I could see some people getting offended with the constant use of the word astrology. Let me be clear: Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by yardstick on Nov 16, 2019 3:11:13 GMT -6
To quote from the link you provided: "...and their supposed influence..." I do not believe any one here is suggesting that the stars, sun, moon, planets, observed and observable signs, are there to affect human beings lives ( as in 'control a destiny'), or the way events occur on earth. They are there as messages, time-markers and/or symbols.
|
|
|
Post by yardstick on Nov 16, 2019 3:37:51 GMT -6
venge - of course they were! They studied the scripture and Genesis clearly tells us in 1:14 14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: Mike, With all due respect, that verse does not answer my question. The question was: Were the disciples or the early church taught to look at the sun, moon, equinoxes etc where we find scripture of them telling us to do so? I’m looking for scripture that shows the early church instructed their followers to look at these things for reasons X, Y and Z. Where is that in the NT or early church writings? If they were taught to believers after Christ died and rose, I’d like to see what they said and what they thought. If they did not teach it, I will abstain because it’s better to abstain from food that may or may not be tainted so that there is no unclean thing that enters within. The Apostles recorded Jesus telling them to understand what certain events in the sun moon and stars were to mean, and that they were to be watching for those events. Because the Apostles recorded these things for posterity, and as a witness to what they had experienced, they are by extension passing the message on to those who follow after them. Nevertheless, I am certain you know that OT scripture passages would have been readily available to NT believers; well before the compilation of what we now call the Bible. These OT references would have been widely known and used; because the Bible, as we know it, did not exist. Also it is well known that the letters written by Paul and others were largely written to correct error which was periodically creeping into the church. I do not believe there is any corrective instruction provided by the Apostles on this topic. If this is the case, it puts the focus back on the Gospel reports of what Jesus said, as well as the relevant OT passages. It would be helpful if you could maybe show what passages in the NT Apostolic letters explicitly correct one or more of the churches from the improper use of astrology, to the proper use of astronomy. Else, we are left with the Gospels, and the OT passages as guidance.
|
|
|
Post by yardstick on Nov 17, 2019 2:13:57 GMT -6
disciple4life , mike , venge , Natalie , bondservant , I'd like to add something (for clarification) that I have mentioned before with respect to astrology: it involves the belief of a causative effect by the stars. I am confident that no one on this site is suggesting such a causative effect. There are plenty of us who are inferring a spiritual or literal meaning - and quite frankly, we have not been correct in our surmising in many cases. Equally so; however, is the fact that we have become more conservative in our hypothesizing of just what could conjunctions, or other astronomical events signify. It is this growth in understanding that appears to be heavily discounted in much of our discussion. Too, there has been heavy discounting of our trend towards a more conservative stance in regard to entertaining new hypotheses about geopolitical and celestial events. In short, in many cases, we are slow to form a conclusive belief; and/or we have taken a more 'wait and see' attitude, lest we come under ridicule or disparagement for taking a foolish position. A position which in the past, has indeed proven to be foolish.
|
|
|
Post by disciple4life on Nov 23, 2019 7:20:18 GMT -6
Good distinction yardstick- the part about astrology having to do with the belief that the stars and planets cause or control our destiny. We have record in the new Testament- after Christ rose of Christians watching the skies for future events.
But this should not be conflated with fortune telling/ which is a key difference. Jews used a lunar calendar, [ and still do]but in the first century they didn't have adjustments so that a feast wouldn't fall on a certain day. These were added centuries later. They had to *know [ read be taught] the phases of the moon because most of the holidays are either on a full moon or several days count from the full moon except Rosh hashanah-
*** This is very very significant for two reasons. - 1. Rosh Hashanah is the only one that occurs on the new moon - It determined all the sabbaths[ weekly shabbat and 7 other high shabbat for the coming year -2 It is the feast that no one knows the day or hour and a instantly recognized Hebrew idiom. You have to be watching for it, but it doesnt happen any moment or at any random time. ** its a two day window, but every child knows the season. [Like "knocked it out of the park". It is inseparably linked to the culture and has no meaning in other languages.]
There had to be two witnesses in Jerusalem who were questioned independently by the sanhedrin. If it were raining or cloudy the new moon could not be seen. Thus is why the feast lasts two days. No one knows the day or hour. But when the witnesses were confirmed- then they blast 99 short and long blasts on the Shofar- and then there- is "the last trump" the 100th blast.
Were they taught to look at the skies and help them for future events?? Absolutely
Did the Magi who came to worship the son see the star in the East which helped them find the messiah and thus understand future events. Absolutely.
Is this astrology? No. How can we know? Because God would not have astrology linked with the birth of Christ nor would we have the example of Paul and all the first Christians keeping the feasts. - couldn't know Passover or Pentecost without watching the moon.
Disciple4Life
|
|
|
Post by sog on Dec 13, 2019 9:17:40 GMT -6
Thought I'd throw this here since it's about the sun. Headline: Deep solar minimum on the verge of an historic milestone wattsupwiththat.com/2019/12/12/deep-solar-minimum-on-the-verge-of-an-historic-milestone/From link - The sun is currently in the midst of a deep solar minimum and it is about to reach an historic milestone. So far this year the sun has been blank (i.e., no visible sunspots) for 266 days and, barring any major surprises, it’ll reach 269 days early next week which will be the quietest year in terms of sunspots since 1913 when the sun was spotless for 311 days. In fact, the current stretch of consecutive spotless days has reached 29 and for the year the sun has been blank 77% of the time. The current record-holder in the satellite era for spotless days in a given year is 2008 when the sun was blank for 268 days making the 2008-2009 solar minimum the deepest since 1913. Solar minimum is a normal part of the 11-year sunspot cycle, but the last one and the current one have been far deeper than most. One of the consequences of a solar minimum is a reduction of solar storms and another is the intensification of cosmic rays. The just ended solar cycle 24 turned out to be one of the weakest in more than a century – continuing a weakening trend that began in the 1980’s – and, if the latest forecasts are correct, the next solar cycle will be the weakest in more than 200 years.
|
|