Posted on 05/23/2011 9:09:12 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
There are various clinical definitions of insanity.
The "repeating an action but expecting a different result" vernacular definition is a nonstarter: people routinely repeat actions that are initially futile (like drilling for oil) and are not actually considered insane.
People routinely talk their way out of supposed dilemmas: "no man knows the day or the hour" isn't the same as "no man will ever know the day or the hour" they will argue.
Many congregations and groups are built on similar hairsplitting.
>>Maybe He already has returned, but it’s just not at all the way people believed it would be?<<
The problem with Camping’s prediction is that it was diametrically opposed to what scripture says. Scripture clearly teaches that we can know the approximate time, but nobody will know the exact day.
Your comment is diametrically opposed to what scripture says as well. It warns us not to believe anyone who says he has “secretly” come and can be found somewhere. It says that when He comes, everyone will know it. Everyone.
Think of the movie “Independence Day”, only much more so.
“t individuals like Camping are a constant result of this advice. “
I don’t think advising people to read the Bible produces the constant result of people obsessing with numerology. I think that is Camping’s particular problem.
Also a narcissism, a believe that he alone can interpret the thing, which I also don’t think is a constant result of telling people to read their Bible.
>>how did this become such a media hype?<<
\
Just wait ‘till the last couple of months of 2012. You ain’t seen nothin’ yet! ;)
And we’ll have a election and its results in the news at the same time.
And the economy will certainly be in MUCH worse shape than it is today.
The last half of 2012 is gonna be one interesting time in history.
>>...but you will find no place in scripture that instructs us that He wants us to be happy.<<
Beat me to it. Thanks for calling it out.
Again, I agree with you. Keep it up.
I will add only one point. You said: “I feel great sorrow over those that believe they are saved but have no evidence of their faith.”
The real tragedy is that others have no evidence of their faith. That is to say, a Christian needs no good works to secure his or her salvation. It is all accomplished in Christ. Nor does a Christian need further evidence of saving faith than the testimony of God Himself, i.e., the Gospel. However, the world badly needs the good works that must of necessity proceed from saving faith. Or, to put it another way, our neighbors need the love of God that flows from one who first was loved by God. Thus God would have us love our neighbor as He has loved us.
Blessings to you this day.
Camping doesn’t read the Bible, he reads INTO the Bible. He has a world view and he looks to the Bible for confirmation of it. It’s a bad way to read anything because you’re not getting anything out of it.
Harold Camping isn’t the issue. He’s just another kook on the street. It’s the fact that this became a media event that’s the issue. Why do I even know who this nobody is? Why did the press build this up when it wasn’t a story in the first place.
>>It appears Camping could not see the forest for the trees...<<
Or could not see the REAL forest for the imaginary trees.
He reminds me of the folks that used to look for “backwards masked” “evil” lyrics in rock and roll songs, ignoring the fact that what they were looking for was often in plain site in the actual lyrics of the songs.
He’s in charge of a radio network that has 66 stations, he’s not exactly and has the ability to make a pretty big media event all by himself. Then people start liquidating their life saving to spread his message even farther and you have a legitimate media event to cover.
Were you afraid you were about to be raptured and had to press the submit button before it happened?
“These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full.” Jn 15:11
Everyone old enough to read the whole text comes to it with a worldview - and they read it in a way that makes the most sense for them.
There has never been an unbiased reader of the Bible.
There’s a difference between reading the Bible with a worldview and reading the Bible to CONFIRM your worldview.
Think of it like a menu, you can read a restaurant menu to see what they have, now you’ll naturally pay more attention to the foods you like than the ones you don’t (your worldview) but you’re reading the menu. Or you can read a restaurant menu to see if they have western BBQ burgers, it’s still your worldview but now instead of reading the whole thing you’re skipping large sections that wouldn’t have the burger, no reason to check out the appetizers, salads or fish section when all you care about is the western BBQ burger, you might even miss the fact that you’re in a Mexican restaurant.
Camping is in the later category. He’s all about Judgment Day, that’s all he’s reading the Bible for, he wants to figure out the end of the world. He’s convinced the clues are in there somewhere, this isn’t the first time he’s predicted it, and if he lives long enough it won’t be the last. And he quite thoroughly ignores the parts that don’t relate to the end, especially the parts that say he can’t predict the end.
It’s not about biased vs unbiased, it’s about reading to read and reading to confirm.
You should read the Bible.
>>“These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full.” Jn 15:11<<
Precisely. People often times consider joy and happiness to be synonymous. They are not. Happiness is very fleeting. Joy is not. At least the joy to which the bible refers is not.
They believe all Bible prophecy has been fulfilled.
My best friend (he is also my ex-pastor) once said something interesting. He said that most people, after they “become Christian”, read the bible to learn of Jesus, Christianity and this whole thing they have joined. They then spend the rest of their life reading the bible and various books on it to confirm the conclusions about Christianity they reached after those first two years of study.
It is the reason it can be very difficult to convince someone they firmly believe about the bible is false. They didn’t read much about the particular sub-topic in those first two years and got a general impression. Then everything they read about it later is with the assumption that the general impression is true. It ends up being reinforced ten or 100 fold even though the bible may easily refute it.
The “ever virgin” Mary thing is an excellent example. For me it was the “burn in hell for all eternity” thing. I finally looked at the subject in detail (via scripture reading and comparisons) with an open mind and let the chips fall where they may. I now believe the unbelievers, after the first resurrection, are destroyed much as I believe animals are at their first, and only death.
I did not always believe this, but I had never really studied it and basically just believed what people told me and read “everlasting”, “unquenchable”, and other such words with that paradigm. But when I actually studied it, a different picture emerged.
Same thing happened with the “pre-trib/post-trib” thing.
You’re conclusion is one that I also agree with
I have read a fairly large part of it. I’ll read more while you’re contacting Mr. Camping.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.