Crossing the Jordan into the Inner Meaning [New Church, Open]

Spirit and Life Bible Study ^ | Wed Nov 28, 2012 | Rev Dr Johnathon Rose

[DaveMSmith]

Everything in the Old Testament history leads up to the crossing of the Jordan, and yet the way the story is told in Joshua 3 and 4 has major inconsistencies and problems. Is there another way to read it?

Can the Bible be taken literally?

[boatbums]

I believe the heavens were bowed at the Lord's Advent. Jehovah God is the perfect Divine soul of Jesus. His body was from His mother, Mary, and was imperfect and the Lord spent His lifetime battling temptations thus subjugation of the hells. I see Jesus as Son of God or Son of Jehovah, not Son of Mary, which I believe takes away from His Divinity. When in the world, the Lord dealt with two states - the Son of Man state and the Son of God state, as indicated in Scripture. God is omnipotent, omniscience and omnipresent and is present everywhere - in heaven and earth always. After the glorification (temptation of the cross), the Lord became Divine Human thus allowing conjunction with all mankind.

Okay, but would you please answer my direct questions?

Do you believe that while Jesus was present on earth in bodily form, that God the Father was in heaven? Yes or No

Was God the Holy Spirit present both in heaven and on earth while Jesus was on earth and the Father was in heaven? Yes or No

[DaveMSmith]

Of course God was in heaven... omnipresent and everywhere in the universe of creation. I believe also Jesus could see the spiritual world while on earth. The kingdom of God is within.

The Holy Spirit is Divine Power and Activity which proceeds from the One God, in whom is the Lord God the Savior.

Sorry, but your questions don't lend themselves to yes or no answers - the spiritual world is not a place separate from the natural world. The natural clothes the spiritual.

[metmom]

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths people will go to to avoid answering simple, direct, pointed questions that need only a simple answer.

[Tennessee Nana]

I was born in 1948
________________________________________

So was I...

:)

[Tennessee Nana]

I see Jesus as Son of God or Son of Jehovah, not Son of Mary, which I believe takes away from His Divinity.
___________________________________________

and yet the Bible refers to Him as the son of Mary...

to say anything else is to deny the virgin birth...

and to deny that Mary was even pregnant...

I think youre silly...

and your statements are blasphemy...

[Elsie]

Youngsters!

Marvel not that I say unto you;

“Ye must be born again.”

[DaveMSmith]

Son of Mary appears just once, in Mark 6:3.... Son of God, 72 times in the New Testament

I profane nothing.

[daniel1212]

While we can derive spiritual meanings from literal events, that does not make such doctrine unless the Holy Spirit does so in Scripture, and any postulation by us of spiritual meaning of literal events must be in accordance with the principles and precepts of what Scripture states, as there is hardly any limits to what men can do in allegorizing, and must NOT replace the literal event,

I read today, “Neither did Naphtali drive out the inhabitants of Beth–shemesh, nor the inhabitants of Beth–anath; but he dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land: nevertheless the inhabitants of Beth–shemesh and of Beth–anath became tributaries unto them. “ (Judges 1:33)

And that God reproved them for so doing saying, , “And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land; ye shall throw down their altars: but ye have not obeyed my voice: why have ye done this? Wherefore I also said, I will not drive them out from before you; but they shall be as thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare unto you. “ (Judges 2:2-3)

Now i can derive spiritual application from this to mean that if we disobey, “put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof, “ (Romans 13:14) then we will have to live with chastising thorns we must regularly overcome, but which could have had deliverance from if we had not drawn back in faith.

However, this is an interpretation that, while it seems to have warrant, would not be an article of faith such as the Deity of Christ, and it cannot replace the text as a literal event.

Rome does this in its approved notes in its official American Bible by teaching that Genesis 2 (Adam and Eve and creation details) and Gn. 3 (the story of the Fall), Gn. 4:1-16 (Cain and Abel), Gn. 6-8 (Noah and the Flood), and Gn. 11:1-9 (Tower of Babel: the footnotes on which state, in part, “an imaginative origin of the diversity of the languages among the various peoples inhabiting the earth”) are “folktales,” using allegory to teach a religious lesson.

And that the such things as that the Bible’s attribution of Divine sanction to wars of conquest, “cannot be qualified as revelation from God.”

Likewise “cloud, angels (blasting trumpets), smoke, fire, earthquakes,lighting, thunder, war, calamities, lies and persecution are Biblical figures of speech.”

In addition, even the ages of the patriarchs after the flood are deemed to be “artificial and devoid of historical value.” (Genesis 11:10-26)

It additionally conveys such things as that Matthew placed Jesus in Egypt to convince his readers that Jesus was the real Israel, and may have only represented Jesus giving the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew, to show that Jesus was like Moses who received the law on Mount Sinai.

All of which impugns the overall literal nature the O.T. historical accounts, and as Scripture interprets Scripture, we see that the Holy Spirit refers to such stories as being literal historical events (Adam and Eve: Mt. 19:4; Abraham, Issac, Exodus and Moses: Acts 7; Rm. 4; Heb. 11; Jonah and the fish: Mt. 12:39-41; Balaam and the donkey: 2Pt. 2:15; Jude. 1:1; Rev. 2:14). Indeed “the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety” (2Cor. 11:3; Rev. 12:9), and if Jonah did not spend 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of the whale then neither did the Lord, while Israel’s history is always and inclusively treated as literal.

More here: http://peacebyjesus.tripod.com/ancients_on_scripture.html#Remarks

Of course, Borg takes this to a whole new level, in which only half the Bible is truly Scripture, and literal meanings are replaced at will with his subjective spiritual meanings. And which akin to Mary Baker Eddy(http://peacebyjesus.tripod.com/bible_versus_s.c.c.s.html).

The fall of Adam is said by Borg to be the apostasy of the church, and the Final Judgment is made to be an event that has already happened in 1757, while his new church is the New Jerusalem of Rv. 22, and such texts as Mk. 16:16 are imagined to mean that “unless a man is regenerated by the truths of faith (i.e. Swedenborg’s “truths”), and lives a life according to them, he cannot be saved.”

While Borg emphasizes love, it is not a Biblical love for the Truth but a love of Borg’s mind and one that will lead one to Hell as “another Jesus, whom we have not preached,” another spirit,” “another gospel,” by false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.” “ (2 Corinthians 11:4,13)

[daniel1212]

Is this designed to tempt us to leave the frozen chosen in the NE???

[Cronos]

I don't get that sense when I read from the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical books. There is no light of God that I feel when reading them, no spiritual connection.

Really? Not from Maccabbees? I see God working there, protecting the Jews against overwhelming odds

To your points of:

i The Apostles of Jesus Christ gave their approval of these books as they were composed and circulated throughout the different local churches -- not for the book of Apocalypse

2. Most all of these local churches, with very few exceptions, received these letters - again, not for the book of Apocalypse

3. Lastly, because they speak to the heart of every believer as if the Holy Spirit was right there leading and guiding us through them. -- that is subjective -- and the same can be said of the "Shepherd of Hermes"

sorry, but without the councils in which The Holy Spirit worked through the attendees, there is no reason for keeping the book of Apocalypse in and the Shepherd of Hermes out.

[daniel1212]

The kids you used to say “Don’t trust anyone over 30” have to keep moving it up i suppose. I was born in 52, but my second and most important birthday was in 1977 or early 78. And i still am too much an immature teen in that realm.

[Cronos]

let me explain this to you:

the thing is that there are not 20,000 different sets of core beliefs -- many retain the same beliefs but have different locations, or disagree on some organizational matter

I'd say the number is about 20,000 roughly of Christianity that all claim the same Bible?

Now if you bothered to read, you would see that Colofornian was arguing that the 20,000 odd groups do not imply 20,000 varying beliefs

Understood so far, or you want me to go slower?

And, I agreed that the 20,000 odd groups do not imply 20,000 different sets of core beliefs, adding that baptists -- there are about 50 odd baptist groups around the country, but I would guess there are no more than 3 or 4 different theological groups.

Now anyone of the meanest intelligence would realize that this means that the 20,000 various groups may have about a dozen or two dozen different sets of core beliefs -- as for instance in the very small group of pentecostals the difference in core beliefs between AoG and Benny Hinn and Oneness Pentecostals

Understood or would you like it explained more s l o w l y?

[Cronos]

Why did the council at Trent then decide it needed to make ANOTHER "infallible" pronouncement on the canon

For the simple reason that just as you are doubting various books of the Bible, in the 1500s the various reformations (first, second, third etc) led to wholescale doubts of the entire canon by various groups including unitarians, etc.

But that was for Protestants -- for varying groups, Christian and non-Christian such as yours, Seventh Day Adventists, Mormons, etc. that's now your prerogative to toss out as many books as you want to

[Cronos]

And which agreement was once of the core teachings that set the evangelical movement apart from liberals, and which is what i defend.

Come on... do all members of this movement hold to the tenets expressed in the Nicene creed?

Some, even on this forum will refuse to say anything about it

[Cronos]

And which agreement was once of the core teachings that set the evangelical movement apart from liberals, and which is what i defend.

oh and on checking some numbers, note that one can't say that Oneness Pentecostals are a small numbe r-- they are 10% of all pentecostals

And they emphatically do not believe in the Trinity

This is a major, fundamental dogmatic difference between orthodoxy and the Oneness P's -- now if an evangelical holds to a Trinitarian view, then the Oneness Pentecostal doctrine differs from theirs at a very fundamental level

[daniel1212]

Pertinent: http://peacebyjesus.tripod.com/disagrementsssandse.html

[metmom]

For all your condescension, it’s nice to see you finally get with the program.

We’ve been telling Catholics for years now that there are not 30,000 different denominations of Protestantism, but I guess until they see it themselves, there’s just no talking to them.

[presently no screen name]

Understood or would you like it explained more s l o w l y?

Do it the catholic way - brainwash. Soap, lather, rinse, repeat - do it until you have them repeating back to you. Hey, write it on the board 1000 times, if necessary. Assign it for homework, then test them on it. Finally, you have a class full of parrots....We are one holy catholic and apostolic church. Success! Surely, you know how 'it' works.

Then some parrots flew away and found Truth and became eagles! And renewed their mind with THE WORD OF GOD! Praise God!

[presently no screen name]

Who on this forum has NOT humbled themselves to believe....

GOD’S Holy Spirit Inspired Word of God is The FINAL AUTHORITY.

[presently no screen name]

I can't help but wonder, if these Councils were all supposed to have "settled" the question of the Old Testament canon, then why was there a need for all the rest after the first one at the Synod of Rome?

ONLY TRUTH has been settled from the beginning of time - TRUTH never changes - Always was and Always will be. There is ONLY ONE Truth.

Counterfeit is always adding, forever changing. Deception begets deception.