Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Atheism of the gaps

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Professor Jerry Coyne has recently written a post titled, Atheism of the gaps, in which he urges skeptics to “make believers read about unbelief” before listening to their arguments, and “make atheism-of-the-gaps arguments.”

In the first section of his post, Professor Coyne throws down the gauntlet:

If people can fault us for not reading Aquinas, Augustine, Origen, Tertullian and (ugh) Alvin Plantinga and David Bentley Hart, well, then, we can do the same to them. If they haven’t read extensively in the honorable intellectual tradition of nonbelief, then they have no credibility as believers. Frankly, Salon should publish a piece that says this.

And what does he suggest that believers read?

Tell believers that we won’t pay any attention to their superstitions, or their criticisms of atheists, until they’ve read The Very Best of Atheist Thought. These works must include the books of the Four Horsemen (one would think the faithful would already have read these, but their misunderstandings about The God Delusion lead me to believe otherwise), the complete works of Robert G. Ingersoll, selected readings from Mencken and Bertrand Russell, Christopher Hitchens’s The Portable Atheist, selected writings of Hume, Walter Kaufmann’s The Faith of a Heretic and Critique of Religion and Philosophy, and Herman Philipse’s God in the Age of Science: A Critique of Religious Reason (I highly recommend the last book, which is fairly new).

What Coyne fails to mention is that there are many believers who have already read and critiqued the authors he cites. Here are some good links:

David Hume, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion
Hume, cosmological arguments, and the fallacy of composition by Dr. Edward Feser, Assistant Professor of philosophy at Pasadena City College (and a former atheist).
Hume, science, and religion by Dr. Edward Feser.
A World of Pure Imagination by Dr. Edward Feser.
Critique of the Cosmological Argument: Hume by Professor Robert Koons, Professor of Philosophy University of Texas at Austin.
David Hume and the Argument from Design by Professor Steven Dutch, Natural and Applied Sciences, University of Wisconsin.

Robert Ingersoll, Some Mistakes of Moses
The Bible Defended: A Review of Thomas Paine’s “Age of Reason” and R.G. Ingersoll’s “Mistakes of Moses,” “Lecture on skulls,” etc.: with ample quotations from both infidel and Christian writers: Being an answer and rebuke to infidel questions and atheistic assertions by Reuel S. Webber. Boston: H.L. Hastings, 1888.
Inger’s Whinge. A collection of two dozen replies to Robert Ingersoll, dating from the nineteenth century.

Bertrand Russell, Why I am not a Christian
Why I am not an Atheist by David Robertson, minister of St Peter’s Free Church in Dundee, Scotland.
Why I am not an atheist (Ravi Zacharias at Princeton) (45-minute video).
Why I’m not Bertrand Russell by Steve Hays at Real Clear theology.
A Critical Response to Bertrand Russell’s Why I Am Not a Christian by Warren Rachele.
Analysis: Why I Am NOT A Christian, by Bertrand Russell by ex-atheist “Stan” at Atheism Analyzed.

H. L. Mencken
H. L. Mencken: Is this your hero, New Atheists? by Vincent Torley.

Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
Review Article: The God Delusion or the Dawkins Delusion? by Rev. Stephen Clark (an Anglican priest who lives in Adelaide, South Australia). In Foundations, Spring 2007.
Review: The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins by Dr. James Hannam, author of God’’s Philosophers: How the Medieval World Laid the Foundations of Modern Science.
Lunging, Flailing, Mispunching by Terry Eagleton. In London Review of Books, Vol. 28 No. 20, 19 October 2006, pages 32-34.
Dawkins et al bring us into disrepute by Michael Ruse, professor of philosophy and zoology at Florida State University. In The Guardian, 2 November 2009.
Professor Antony Flew reviews The God Delusion at bethinking.org.

Sam Harris, The End of Faith
A Long Response to Sam Harris’ The End of Faith by Dr. Neil Shenvi.
A Response to The End of Faith – Frequently Asked Questions by Dr. Neil Shenvi.
Trading Faith for Spirituality: The Mystifications of Sam Harris by Meera Nanda, a biologist and philosopher of science and author of Prophets Facing Backwards, who has written many articles for Butterflies and Wheels.

Christopher Hitchens, God is not Great
Christopher Hitchens: My Response to god is not Great by Rev. Dr. Mark D. Roberts.
A Brief Response to Christopher Hitchens’ God is not great by Dr. Neil Shenvi.
Hitchens vs. Hitchens by Peter Hitchens.

Walter Kauffman, The Faith of a Heretic
The Faith of a Heretic. Interview with Harper’s Magazine, February 1959.
Excerpt from The Faith of a Heretic. From Walter Kaufmann, The Faith of a Heretic (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1961), pp. 149-52, 168-69, 170-72, 177-78, 180-81. (I couldn’t find any online responses to Kauffman’s book. If anyone knows of one, please feel free to contact me. Actually, Kauffman’s writings constitute a valuable counterfoil to Hitchens’ and Dawkins’ vitriolic criticisms of Judaism and the God of the Old Testament.)

Herman Philipse, God in the Age of Science: A Critique of Religious Reason
On Philipse’s Attempt to Write Off All Deductive Cosmological Arguments by Dr. Emmanuel Rutten, Philosophy Department, University of Amsterdam. In Philo Vol. 16, No. 1, Spring-Summer 2013.
God in the Age of Science?: A Critique of Religious Reason. Review by Andrew Pinsent, University of Oxford.

Atheism of the gaps arguments

Next, Professor Coyne urges skeptics to make “atheism of the gaps” arguments:

Religionists often float God-of-the-gaps arguments, saying that God must lie in the interstices of our scientific understanding. Well, we can play that game, too. There are huge gaps in believers’ understanding of God, and in those lacunae, I claim, lies strong evidence for No God. Here are some of those religious gaps:

  • Why would the Abrahamic God, all-loving and all-powerful, allow natural evils to torment and kill people? Why can’t he keep kids from getting cancer? How did the Holocaust fit into God’s scheme?
  • Why, if God wants us to know and accept him so much, does he hide himself from humanity?
  • Why would an omnibenevolent God consign sinners to an eternity of horrible torment for crimes that don’t warrant that? (In fact, no crimes do!). The official Catholic doctrine, for instance, is that unconfessed homosexual acts doom you to an eternity of immolation in molten sulfur. And would the Christian God really let someone burn forever because they were Jews, or didn’t get baptized?
  • Why is God in the Old Testament such a jerk, toying with people for his amusement, ordering genocides in which women and children are killed en masse, and allowing she-bears to kill a pack of kids just for making fun of a prophet’s baldness? How does that comport with the God worshipped today?
  • Why didn’t Jesus return during his followers’ lifetime, as he promised?

…[T]heism doesn’t even begin to provide credible answers to the goddy puzzles above, and, unlike science, has never made a bit of progress in attacking them. So, I claim, we can find good evidence for atheism in the gaps of religious understanding. And that tactic trumps religious God-of-the-gaps arguments, because the gaps in science grow smaller as we learn more (neuroscience is one example), while the gaps in theism are always the same size.

Professor Coyne displays his historical ignorance in the last paragraph: the ancient Greeks knew nothing of fine-tuning, or of evidence for the universe having had a beginning, and they also believed in spontaneous generation.

For those who are interested, the following links should help answer most of Professor Coyne’s questions.

Why des God allow natural evils to keep killing people?
Does a Good God Exist? – A Debate with Christopher Hitchens by Professor William Dembski. Professor Dembski’s remarks on the problem of evil hit the nail on the head.
Tsunami and Theodicy by David Bentley Hart.
Is the Existence of God Compatible with Gratuitous Evil? by Daniel and Frances Howard-Snyder.
On Rowe’s Argument from Particular Horrors by Daniel Howard-Snyder.
Must Good Come From Every Evil? by Bruce Little.

Where was God in the Holocaust?
Where was God in the Holocaust? by Rabbi Evan Moffic.
Belief After the Holocaust by Nissan Dovid Dubov.

Why doesn’t God reveal Himself more clearly?
Why doesn’t God just make Himself obvious to us?
Why doesn’t God just show Himself? by Scott Youngren.
Why isn’t the God of the Bible showing Himself to me? by Glenn Miller.

The alleged cruelty of God in the Old Testament
Why morality cannot be 100% natural: A Response to Professor Coyne by Vincent Torley. (Discusses Old Testament morality and addresses charges that the Old Testament sanctions genocide and injustice.)

S. Michael Houdmann also makes some pertinent observations in What does the Bible say about child sacrifice?:

Molech worship was practiced by the Ammonites and Canaanites, who revered Molech as a protecting father figure. Images of Molech were made of bronze, and their outstretched arms were heated red-hot. Living children were then placed into the idol’s hands and died there or were rolled into a fire pit below…

God prohibited Israel from child sacrifice in general and Molech worship in particular. Leviticus 20:2-5 states, “Say to the Israelites: ‘Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him. I myself will set my face against him and will cut him off from his people; for by sacrificing his children to Molek, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. If the members of the community close their eyes when that man sacrifices one of his children to Molek and if they fail to put him to death, I myself will set my face against him and his family and will cut them off from their people together with all who follow him in prostituting themselves to Molek.’” Many other Old Testament passages affirm God’s zero-tolerance for child sacrifice.

Question…wasn’t Elisha very cruel when he sent those bears against those little kids who were teasing him about being bald? by Glenn Miller. It turns out that they weren’t little kids, but a gang of young men who were threatening worshipers of God.

Hell
Hell by Professor Peter Kreeft.
Pope John Paul II on Hell. Sermon from a General Audience (Wednesday, 28 July, 1999).
The Biblical View of Hell by Glenn Miller. (Scroll down to the section on “the traditional view”. This article is well worth reading, as it will change the way you think about hell.)
Hell: a difficult doctrine we dare not ignore by Dr. Christopher Townsend.

Homosexuality
“What will I tell my gay friends?” by ex-atheist Jennifer Fulwiler.
A conversation with my gay friend by Jennifer Fulwiler.

Did Jesus wrongly predict His return?
Did Jesus Wrongly Predict a First Century Return in Matthew 24:34? by Marshall “Rusty” Entrekin. An unusually thorough discussion which proposes no less than four solutions compatible with orthodox faith.

If readers would like to suggest other helpful articles, then I would be glad to add them to the list.


Comments
Jerry Coyne-- just another idiotfelicity2112
March 20, 2015
March
03
Mar
20
20
2015
04:22 PM
4
04
22
PM
PST
1914 : Failed Watchtower Prophecy But then there are also people who claim that 1948 is fulfilled prophecy, or that 1967 is fulfilled prophecy, or that Jesus wlll return in (pick your year: 1987, 1988, 2000, 2007, ...) or that the world will end in 2060 (ala BA77 and his slavish believe in Newton's calculations). GROW UP CHRISTIANS!Mung
May 6, 2014
May
05
May
6
06
2014
08:16 PM
8
08
16
PM
PST
Do you have an answer which will satisfy the atheists? I guess the answer is no. But seriously Barb, the Jehovah's Witnesses is a cult. Flee for your life. Flee for your soul.Mung
May 6, 2014
May
05
May
6
06
2014
08:09 PM
8
08
09
PM
PST
Barb:
In Revelation, John is given visions showing Christ ascending the throne and judging mankind. This is in the future.
Mung:
How do you know it’s in our future?
Mung:
Is Christ’s ascending to the throne really in our future?
Barb:
No.
So Christ ascended to the throne in the past (not in our future). You said it was in the future. When did Christ ascend to the throne? 1914? Did the judgement not begin when Christ ascended to the throne? Is it still in our future? Did it begin in 1914? Why did Peter write, thousands of years ago:
because it is the time of the beginning of the judgment from the house of God, and if first from us, what the end of those disobedient to the good news of God?
And why did Luke record in Acts:
But when he dealt with the subjects of justice, self-control, and the judgement which was soon to come, Felix became alarmed...
Do you have an answer which will satisfy the atheists?Mung
April 30, 2014
April
04
Apr
30
30
2014
06:25 PM
6
06
25
PM
PST
Barb:
Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses say that God’s Kingdom was established in 1914?
Who cares? I didn't ask that question. Who here asked that question? (you need to FLEE that cult) 1914 : Failed Watchtower ProphecyMung
April 30, 2014
April
04
Apr
30
30
2014
06:06 PM
6
06
06
PM
PST
Barb:
The fact that you don’t understand Bible prophecy doesn’t prove the Bible wrong.
Where have I claimed that the Bible is wrong? That fact that you don't understand what I am saying doesn't prove me wrong! You don't have an effective response to the atheists. I do. Your response is to tell them the Bible doesn't say what it plainly says. My response is to agree with them about what the Bible plainly states, and tell them that the things it claims were about to come to pass did in fact comes to pass. The preterist response answers the atheists. Those things came to pass as and when Jesus and the apostles declared they would. They were not false prophets. The futurist response, your response, does not, and cannot, answer the atheists because it agrees with the atheist premise! I don't know how I can make it any more clear than that. Preterists deny the truth of their premise. Futurists grant them the truth of their premise. Why?Mung
April 30, 2014
April
04
Apr
30
30
2014
06:00 PM
6
06
00
PM
PST
bb, if I were to recommend one book, it would be this one: The Parousia: The New Testament Doctrine of Our Lord's Second Coming For all I know you can find it online for free.Mung
April 30, 2014
April
04
Apr
30
30
2014
05:46 PM
5
05
46
PM
PST
Hi bb, No offense taken. An internet search did turn up the following:
Discovered around 1930, near Fayum, Egypt together with two younger manuscripts of the Gospels, Acts and Revelation it is classified as Papyrus 46 ... ...new discoveries and reevaluation of evidence was applied to Papyrus 46. Scholar Young Kyu Kim in a thorough and highly technical paper concluded that Papyrus 46 should be dated to the later 1st century before the reign of Domitian. here
I certainly wouldn't hang my hat on that though. You're right, Revelation is full of symbolism and it's not always easy for us to tease out what the symbols mean. Presumably they meant more to those to whom it was written at the time. :) In Rev 11 If speaks of a temple, It speaks of the city where their Lord was crucified. I there any indication in the text whatsoever that they have already been destroyed by the roman armies? Also, keep an eye out for the parallels with the Gospels. Ho are they not describing the same events? Most preterists, along with amillenialists, deny that the thousand years is a literal 1000 year period. Most preterists are probably likewise not premillenialists, and thus again with amillenialists, deny a literal reign of Jesus from the earthly city of Jerusalem in some form of "benevolent dictatorship." Much of what you are looking for in the way of fulfillment apears to be based upon a literal interpretation, and preterists see much of that as imagery. So for example, if I were deny that Christ had returned because he never came back riding a white horse, with a sword coming out of his mouth and wearing clothes drenched in blood, wouldn't I be right? Is that a literal description of how he is going to return, or is that imagery?Mung
April 30, 2014
April
04
Apr
30
30
2014
12:01 PM
12
12
01
PM
PST
Mung, I realized that one might take offense to a "tone" in the comment above. Please take no offense as you're one of the commenters here I enjoy reading most. The above are challenges to preterist eschatology that I've heard, and that have come to my mind, without hearing or reading your side articulated yet. I'm new to this debate and am ready to learn.bb
April 30, 2014
April
04
Apr
30
30
2014
09:02 AM
9
09
02
AM
PST
Mung, If Christ returned in A.D. 70, what happened to the millenial reign of Christ? I've heard some say we're living in it. But where is Christ and why has it lasted more than 1000 years? From what I read in prophecy, things should look a lot different than what we've seen over church history which is very anti-climactic by comparison: i.e. Christ himself on earth ruling as benevolent dictator, Mt. Zion the tallest in the world, Dead Sea full of fresh water, a massive temple in Jerusalem, nations heading to Jerusalem every year to celebrate the feast of tabernacles or face judgement. There are also a number of end times prophecies that I haven't seen any evidence for happening yet. I.E. marriage and certain foods banned (2 Tim 4...The Roman emperor banned marriage for young men during Valentine's time but the saint died in 269), no one being able to buy or sell without the mark of the beast, an evil, global dictator (while Rome was expansive, it wasn't global), Israel attacked by many nations and rescued by Christ himself at His return. I'm just wondering how preterists deal with these. Please feel free to reply with link or list of links.bb
April 29, 2014
April
04
Apr
29
29
2014
09:56 AM
9
09
56
AM
PST
Mung, Fair enough. I'm not familiar with the arguments for the date of the writing of Revelation. I was just told by sources that I trust that it was circa 90. This will be fun to explore. I just came across this bit from When Was Revelation Written?:
Revelation 17:10 tells us when the book was written. “There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time” (Revelation 17:10). This verse is referring to seven kings, who are emperors of Rome. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has yet to come. This means that five have died. The sixth is currently reigning. The seventh is not yet ruling.
I find the verse so vague that I can't see how anyone can pin it down and say "Yup. That's it." But I guess the interpretation of Roman emperors is as fair as any. Do you know of any Revelation manuscripts dated prior to A.D. 90?bb
April 29, 2014
April
04
Apr
29
29
2014
08:26 AM
8
08
26
AM
PST
Here is the detailed explanation referred to in my post above. Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses say that God’s Kingdom was established in 1914? Two lines of evidence point to that year: (1) Bible chronology and (2) the events since 1914 in fulfillment of prophecy. Here we will consider the chronology. Read Daniel 4:1-17. (Daniel 4:20-37)show that this prophecy had a fulfillment upon Nebuchadnezzar. But it also has a larger fulfillment. How do we know that? Daniel 4:3, 17 show that the dream that God gave to King Nebuchadnezzar deals with the Kingdom of God and God’s promise to give it “to the one whom he wants to . . . even the lowliest one of mankind.” The entire Bible shows that Jehovah’s purpose is for his own Son, Jesus Christ, to rule as His representative over mankind. (Ps. 2:1-8; Dan. 7:13, 14; 1 Cor. 15:23-25; Rev. 11:15; 12:10) The Bible’s description of Jesus shows that he was indeed “the lowliest one of mankind.” (Phil. 2:7, 8; Matt. 11:28-30) The prophetic dream, then, points to the time when Jehovah would give rulership over mankind to his own Son. What was to happen in the meantime? Rulership over mankind, as represented by the tree and its rootstock, would have “the heart of a beast.” (Dan. 4:16) The history of mankind would be dominated by governments that displayed the characteristics of wild beasts. In modern times, the bear is commonly used to represent Russia; the eagle, the United States; the lion, Britain; the dragon, China. The Bible also uses wild beasts as symbols of world governments and of the entire global system of human rulership under the influence of Satan. (Dan. 7:2-8, 17, 23; 8:20-22; Rev. 13:1, 2) As Jesus showed in his prophecy pointing to the conclusion of the system of things, Jerusalem would be “trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations” were fulfilled. (Luke 21:24) “Jerusalem” represented the Kingdom of God because its kings were said to sit on “the throne of the kingship of Jehovah.” (1 Chron. 28:4, 5; Matt. 5:34, 35) So, the Gentile governments, represented by wild beasts, would ‘trample’ on the right of God’s Kingdom to direct human affairs and would themselves hold sway under Satan’s control.—Compare Luke 4:5, 6. For how long would such governments be permitted to exercise this control before Jehovah gave the Kingdom to Jesus Christ? Daniel 4:16 says “seven times” (“seven years,” AT and Mo, also JB footnote on Daniel 4:13). The Bible shows that in calculating prophetic time, a day is counted as a year. (Ezek. 4:6; Num. 14:34) How many “days,” then, are involved? Revelation 11:2, 3 clearly states that 42 months (3 1/2 years) in that prophecy are counted as 1,260 days. Seven years would be twice that, or 2,520 days. Applying the “day for a year” rule would result in 2,520 years. When did the counting of the “seven times” begin? After Zedekiah, the last king in the typical Kingdom of God, was removed from the throne in Jerusalem by the Babylonians. (Ezek. 21:25-27) Finally, by early October of 607 B.C.E. the last vestige of Jewish sovereignty was gone. By that time the Jewish governor, Gedaliah, who had been left in charge by the Babylonians, had been assassinated, and the remaining Jews had fled to Egypt. (Jeremiah, chapters 40-43) Reliable Bible chronology indicates that this took place 70 years before 537 B.C.E., the year in which the Jews returned from captivity; that is, it took place by early October of 607 B.C.E. (Jer. 29:10; Dan. 9:2) How, then, is the time calculated down to 1914? Counting 2,520 years from early October of 607 B.C.E. brings us to early October of 1914 C.E., as shown on the chart. CALCULATING THE “SEVEN TIMES” “Seven times” = 7 X 360 = 2,520 years A Biblical “time,” or year = 12 X 30 days = 360. (Rev. 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14) In the fulfillment of the “seven times” each day equals one year. (Ezek. 4:6; Num. 14:34) Early October, 607 B.C.E., to December 31, 607 B.C.E.= 1/4 year January 1, 606 B.C.E., to December 31, 1 B.C.E. = 606 years January 1, 1 C.E., to December 31, 1913 = 1,913 years January 1, 1914, to early October, 1914 = 3/4 year Total: 2,520 years What happened at that time? Jehovah entrusted rulership over mankind to his own Son, Jesus Christ, glorified in the heavens.—Dan. 7:13, 14. Then why is there still so much wickedness on earth? After Christ was enthroned, Satan and his demons were hurled out of heaven and down to the earth. (Rev. 12:12) Christ as King did not immediately proceed to destroy all who refused to acknowledge Jehovah’s sovereignty and himself as the Messiah. Instead, as he had foretold, a global preaching work was to be done. (Matt. 24:14) As King he would direct a dividing of peoples of all nations, those proving to be righteous being granted the prospect of everlasting life, and the wicked being consigned to everlasting cutting-off in death. (Matt. 25:31-46) In the meantime, the very difficult conditions foretold for “the last days” would prevail. Those events have been clearly in evidence since 1914. Before the last members of the generation that was alive in 1914 will have passed off the scene, all the things foretold will occur, including the “great tribulation” in which the present wicked world will end.—Matt. 24:21, 22, 34. When will the end of this wicked world come? Jesus answered: “Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.” However, he also stated: “Truly I say to you that this generation [that was alive when “the sign” of “the last days” began its fulfillment] will by no means pass away until all these things occur.”—Matt. 24:36, 34. Also, after telling of events that would follow the establishment of the Kingdom in the hands of Jesus Christ in 1914, Revelation 12:12 adds: “Be glad, you heavens and you who reside in them! Woe for the earth and for the sea, because the Devil has come down to you, having great anger, knowing he has a short period of time.”Barb
April 29, 2014
April
04
Apr
29
29
2014
05:20 AM
5
05
20
AM
PST
Mung continues,
But atheists can read. And most Christians are not biblical scholars. The OP raises the question about how to respond to the atheist challenge to the prophetic words of Christ and the apostles. How do you answer their challenge?
By what I posted. Yes, atheists can read. But not many of them read the Bible, and fewer still have ever sat down and actually studied it.
You seem to be arguing that when Christ and the apostles spoke of the soon return of Christ that they didn’t really mean soon, or that soon did not mean soon. Based upon what? That’s what any atheist is going to want to know.
The disciples believed that Jesus’s kingdom was going to overthrow Roman rule and allow the Jews to live freely again. This didn’t happen. What is it based upon? What’s written in the Bible.
I have an answer. Do you?
Yes, and I posted it above.
Why doesn’t my answer meet the atheist critique? How does your answer meet the atheist critique?
Your answer isn’t an answer. You state that you can’t figure out why the books of Daniel and Revelation both speak of Jesus’s coming. This isn’t something that can be answered with one or two sentences. This is a prophecy that requires some time to understand, and that requires both reading and studying the Bible.
I was quoting your post @ 41! You tell me. How do you know it’s in our future?
I was quoting you in post #41. I know it’s in the future because many of the signs of Jesus’s presence as king haven’t come to pass yet (peace on Earth, for example).
Matthew 16:27 says the judgment is about to occur.
Yes, and Jesus was concerned about his disciples since he knew that his betrayal and death were near. He promises some of them a sign from heaven. ‘Truly I say to you, there are some of those standing here that will not taste death at all until first they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” (Matthew 16:28) Obviously, Jesus did not mean that the disciples would live until the establishment of the Kingdom, which occurred centuries later. (There’s a detailed explanation for this in the books of Daniel and Revelation). This is what I posted earlier: Jesus showed them his glory in kingdom power by means of the transfiguration.
Matthew 3:10 says the axe is already laid to the root. Even now the ax of God’s judgment is poised, ready to sever the roots of the trees. Yes, every tree that does not produce good fruit will be chopped down and thrown into the fire. (NLT)
The ax of God’s judgment here is referring to his judging those claiming to be followers of Christ (“Every tree”). This does not refer to his judging the entire world as king of God’s Kingdom. For a parallel account, see Luke 13:6-9 and Matthew 7:19.
Is Christ’s ascending to the throne really in our future?
No. Christ’s judging humanity is in the future, but my understanding of the NT shows that the kingdom came to power in heaven in 1914. Again, this requires a pretty detailed explanation. This belief is also not shared by many other Christians. We know that Jesus indicated that there would be signs of his presence as king (see Matthew chapter 24). We see those signs being fulfilled today.
Why does the entire New Testament say otherwise?
It doesn’t. The fact that you don’t understand Bible prophecy doesn’t prove the Bible wrong.Barb
April 29, 2014
April
04
Apr
29
29
2014
05:17 AM
5
05
17
AM
PST
Barb:
In Revelation, John is given visions showing Christ ascending the throne and judging mankind. This is in the future. Which scripture are you referring to? Is it in chapter 19?
I was quoting your post @ 41! You tell me. How do you know it's in our future? Matthew 16:27 says the judgment is about to occur. Matthew 3:10 says the axe is already laid to the root.
Even now the ax of God's judgment is poised, ready to sever the roots of the trees. Yes, every tree that does not produce good fruit will be chopped down and thrown into the fire. (NLT)
Is Christ's ascending to the throne really in our future? Why does the entire New Testament say otherwise?Mung
April 28, 2014
April
04
Apr
28
28
2014
09:16 PM
9
09
16
PM
PST
Barb:
Atheists can claim whatever they want. They’re not exactly known for being biblical scholars...Very little will convince an atheist.
But atheists can read. And most Christians are not biblical scholars. The OP raises the question about how to respond to the atheist challenge to the prophetic words of Christ and the apostles. How do you answer their challenge? You seem to be arguing that when Christ and the apostles spoke of the soon return of Christ that they didn't really mean soon, or that soon did not mean soon. Based upon what? That's what any atheist is going to want to know. I have an answer. Do you? Why doesn't my answer meet the atheist critique? How does your answer meet the atheist critique?Mung
April 28, 2014
April
04
Apr
28
28
2014
09:02 PM
9
09
02
PM
PST
bb @ 44:
Mung, I’m probably too late, as usual for me at this site, but hope you see this comment. Doesn’t the preterist view hold all prophecy regarding Christ’s return to be fulfilled by A.D. 70? If so, what do preterists do with the fact that Revelation was written in A.D. 90?
Hello bb, not too late! Preterists deny that it is a fact that Revelation was written in AD 90.
One of the oddest facts about the New Testament is that what on any showing would appear to be the single most datable and climactic event of the period - the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, and with it the collapse of institutional Judaism based on the temple - is never once mentioned as a past fact.
Redating the New Testament
My confident conviction is that a solid case for a Neronic date for Revelation can be set forth from the available evidences, both internal and external. In fact, I would lean toward a date after the outbreak of the Neronic persecution in late A.D.64 and before the declaration of the Jewish war in early A.D.67. A date in either A.D.65 or early A.D.66 would seem most suitable.
When Jerusalem FellMung
April 28, 2014
April
04
Apr
28
28
2014
08:42 PM
8
08
42
PM
PST
Mung @ 42: Whether I believe it or not is irrelevant. We’re talking about atheists here, and about how to respond to their claims that Jesus and the apostles were mistaken. Atheists can claim whatever they want. They're not exactly known for being biblical scholars. Your response is that the apostles were mistaken and that what Jesus said can be re-interpreted so as to ignore the obvious meaning. That’s not going to convince an atheist! Very little will convince an atheist. The scripture you referenced has parallel accounts in other gospels which correspond to the transfiguration. That, to me, seems the best explanation. Remember, not every word in the Bible is to be taken literally. In Revelation, John is given visions showing Christ ascending the throne and judging mankind. This is in the future. Which scripture are you referring to? Is it in chapter 19? How do you know it’s in the future? Does this vision correspond to the same vision Daniel was give? There are some parellels, yes. To Daniel: But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. To John: Then he told me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near. Concerning this text, commentator Thomas Scott, in the first half of the 19th century, observed: “The angel, by way of conclusion, intimated to Daniel, that this prophecy would remain obscure, and as ‘a sealed book,’ of which little would be understood, ‘till the time of the end’ . . . The fact has evidenced this to be the case: immense difficulties have always been acknowledged in many of Daniel’s prophecies, and they have been ‘as words shut up’ even from believers in general. . . . In these latter ages many have bestowed great pains, in searching into history, to illustrate those parts of these prophecies which are already accomplished; and by comparing them with other scriptures, to form some judgment of what yet remains to be fulfilled: and thus much light has been thrown on them. As they shall gradually be more and more accomplished, they will be better understood: and future generations will be far more surprised and instructed by them, than we are.” (Scott’s Explanatory Notes, 1832) The lack of understanding concerning Daniel’s prophecies in the early part of the 19th century indicated that this foretold “time of the end” was yet future, since those “having insight,” God’s true servants, were to understand the prophecy in “the time of the end.” You're referring here to an angel’s declaration to Daniel, which began back at Daniel 10:20, and which now concludes with these heartwarming words: “And as for you, O Daniel, make secret the words and seal up the book, until the time of the end. Many will rove about, and the true knowledge will become abundant.” (Daniel 12:4) Much of what Daniel was inspired to write was indeed made secret and sealed up to human understanding. Why, Daniel himself later wrote: “Now as for me, I heard, but I could not understand.” (Daniel 12:8) In this sense Daniel’s book remained sealed for centuries. What about today? We are privileged to live in “the time of the end” foretold in the book of Daniel. As prophesied, many faithful ones have ‘roved about’ in the pages of God’s Word. The result? With God's blessing, true knowledge has become abundant. Daniel 11:31) This abundance of knowledge, then, is yet another identifying mark of “the holy ones of the Supreme One.” The expression “time of the end” does not mean an ‘end of time’ but denotes a period of time that culminates in the end or destruction, not of all things, but of the things mentioned in the prophecy. That time itself will not end is made clear in the Scriptures. For example, the psalmist said concerning the earth: “It will not be made to totter to time indefinite, or forever.” (Ps 104:5) Since the earth will continue to exist, it necessarily follows that time, as an earthly “dimension” or measurement, will not cease. While it is true that Revelation 10:6 may be rendered “there should be time no longer,” the context indicates that this means no further grant of time; thus, a specific or allotted period of time terminates. (KJ) Other translations, therefore, read: “There should be no more delay.” (AT, RS) “There will be no delay any longer.” (NW) Commenting on this text, A. T. Robertson observes: “This does not mean that chronos (time) . . . will cease to exist, but only that there will be no more delay in the fulfillment of the seventh trumpet (verse 7), in answer to the question, ‘How long?’ (6:10).”—Word Pictures in the New Testament, 1933, Vol. VI, p. 372.Barb
April 28, 2014
April
04
Apr
28
28
2014
07:18 PM
7
07
18
PM
PST
Mung, I'm probably too late, as usual for me at this site, but hope you see this comment. Doesn't the preterist view hold all prophecy regarding Christ's return to be fulfilled by A.D. 70? If so, what do preterists do with the fact that Revelation was written in A.D. 90?bb
April 28, 2014
April
04
Apr
28
28
2014
06:55 PM
6
06
55
PM
PST
Matthew 16:27 in the Greek: http://biblehub.com/text/matthew/16-27.htm http://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/16-27.htmMung
April 26, 2014
April
04
Apr
26
26
2014
07:07 PM
7
07
07
PM
PST
Barb:
You don’t have to believe it, but it is a valid explanation for the scripture quoted above.
Whether I believe it or not is irrelevant. We're talking about atheists here, and about how to respond to their claims that Jesus and the apostles were mistaken. Your response is that the apostles were mistaken and that what Jesus said can be re-interpreted so as to ignore the obvious meaning. That's not going to convince an atheist!
In Revelation, John is given visions showing Christ ascending the throne and judging mankind. This is in the future.
How do you know it's in the future? Does this vision correspond to the same vision Daniel was give? To Daniel:
But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end.
To John:
Then he told me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near.
Mung
April 26, 2014
April
04
Apr
26
26
2014
06:50 PM
6
06
50
PM
PST
Mung writes,
The claim that the account of the transfiguration was a fulfillment of that prophecy is just ludicrous.
You don’t have to believe it, but it is a valid explanation for the scripture quoted above.
How many of the disciples had died in those six days? Is this really what Jesus said? “Truly I say to you, there are one or two of those who are standing here who will taste death without seeing the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” No, more than six days is clearly in sight here. And really, how many were on the mount with Him?
There were three disciples with him during the transfiguration.
And he came with his angels and judged, six days later? “For the Son of man is about to come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will render to each according to his doings.” Now where else do the New Testament authors speak of Him coming with angels and judging every man? Do they claim it had already happened, at the transfiguration?
No. The disciples were given a glimpse of Christ’s kingly glory. In Revelation, John is given visions showing Christ ascending the throne and judging mankind. This is in the future.
Why then, a few chapters later, are they asking him WHEN it would happen????
Why did the disciples not get the point when Jesus told them not to seek first place? He reminded them, repeatedly, to be as children and yet they continually argued over which one of them was greatest. They’re human. They’re imperfect. They didn’t always get the point the first time it was explained to them. Most of them believed that Christ’s kingdom would be a literal kingdom that would overthrow Roman rule. They did not understand that his kingdom would be heavenly.Barb
April 25, 2014
April
04
Apr
25
25
2014
05:00 AM
5
05
00
AM
PST
Smidlee:
I know one for sure who did saw Jesus coming in his kingdom since he wrote what he saw in the book of Revelations.
According to some interpreters at least three people saw him, because he came in the glory of his father with the angels and rendered judgment upon all just six days after he uttered that prophecy. Which makes john's book recount past deeds, nto a prophecy of the future. Or do you believe in multiple comings in glory with the angels to render judgment? Heck, I've heard of some people who believe the Bible teaches SEVEN different resurrections. Hard to get that from anything Jesus said, but hey...Mung
April 24, 2014
April
04
Apr
24
24
2014
07:40 PM
7
07
40
PM
PST
Barb:
Jesus was not a liar.
I'm not the one needs convincing Barb. It's the atheists who take the very clear statements of Jesus and the apostles and claim they were wrong. Even some Christians claim they were mistaken. I don't have that problem. I don't have to explain why "this generation" doesn't have it's obvious meaning, nor do I have to explain why Jesus' numerous claims that He would return soon, within the lifetime of those present, didn't actually take place. I don't have to explain why all the expectations throughout all of the New Testament were misguided, and they are numerous It's Christians throughout history who have been wrong, not Jesus and not the apostles. Let them be true. Let everyone else be a liar. Else what is the basis for our faith?
You also suggest that these words weren’t fulfilled because all of Jesus’ disciples who were present when he said those words died before the establishment of God’s Kingdom in the heavens. The Interpreter’s Bible even says of this verse: “The prediction was not fulfilled, and later Christians found it necessary to explain that it was metaphorical.”
On the contrary, It is my claim that they were fulfilled, without resorting to all the hermeneutical gymnastics. The claim that the account of the transfiguration was a fulfillment of that prophecy is just ludicrous. How many of the disciples had died in those six days? Is this really what Jesus said? “Truly I say to you, there are one or two of those who are standing here who will taste death without seeing the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” No, more than six days is clearly in sight here. And really, how many were on the mount with Him? And he came with his angels and judged, six days later? "For the Son of man is about to come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will render to each according to his doings." Now where else do the New Testament authors speak of Him coming with angels and judging every man? Do they claim it had already happened, at the transfiguration? Why then, a few chapters later, are they asking him WHEN it would happen????Mung
April 24, 2014
April
04
Apr
24
24
2014
07:36 PM
7
07
36
PM
PST
Kevnick @ 36: that's fine, we can agree to disagree. Thanks for the conversation.Barb
April 24, 2014
April
04
Apr
24
24
2014
06:28 PM
6
06
28
PM
PST
Fantastic post with an amazing wealth of information!! :)Chalciss
April 24, 2014
April
04
Apr
24
24
2014
05:04 PM
5
05
04
PM
PST
Barb, Unfortunately, I don't agree with you on this issue,l which I have predicted. I will get back to you if I find any reasonable points to this discussion. Thanks for your time. /Kevnickkevnick
April 24, 2014
April
04
Apr
24
24
2014
04:19 PM
4
04
19
PM
PST
Kevnick asks,
If God prevented the holocaust, knowing that Satan and wicked people were behind it, wouldn’t that have made God himself an accomplice to Satan and his rule or a liar? Correct me if I’m wrong please.
No. See my response above. Humans are gifted with free will. Some use it responsibly, others not so much. God allowing something to happen does not make him an accomplice, especially not when he has a nicely written instruction book that states plainly, "don't do that." God promises to rid the earth of wicked people in the future (see Proverbs 2:21,22). How he chooses to do that remains to be seen. In the meantime, he has allowed people to choose life or death, to paraphrase, Deuteronomy, and choose whether to serve him or not.Barb
April 24, 2014
April
04
Apr
24
24
2014
04:05 PM
4
04
05
PM
PST
Barb, It is true that God may have prevented some of the evils that are happening or could have happened. We don't know, but He could have done it so that His plan actually would work out. I, however, meant great evils in the history of mankind like the holocaust. If God prevented the holocaust, knowing that Satan and wicked people were behind it, wouldn't that have made God himself an accomplice to Satan and his rule or a liar? Correct me if I'm wrong please.kevnick
April 24, 2014
April
04
Apr
24
24
2014
02:26 PM
2
02
26
PM
PST
You have to see this! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r83ROf8coSU#t=471&aid=P-8fxdbj0OsAndre
April 23, 2014
April
04
Apr
23
23
2014
09:14 PM
9
09
14
PM
PST
"did see.." ^ Revelation 3:10 " Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation , (rapture) which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. (the Great Tribulation which starts in chapter 4- the church isn't mention any longer) 11- Behold, I come quickly: ... This is all the church is given, no warning, no signs , no prophecy unlike the nation Israel.Smidlee
April 23, 2014
April
04
Apr
23
23
2014
05:31 PM
5
05
31
PM
PST
1 2 3

Leave a Reply