|
|
Post by wandashort on Jan 10, 2011 9:47:48 GMT -5
Hopefully those of you waiting for the BCS book to arrive have received them. Here is the thread to discuss the first four chapters of BCS.
Thanks again Allyn for providing us this section and thank you JL for being willing to walk through this study with us!
Here we go!
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 10, 2011 14:40:15 GMT -5
Still don't have my book yet. This is why I buy books from Amazon; I usually have them in hand within two days of ordering.
I can read the introduction online, but if the discussion progresses too far before I get the book and get caught up, I'll probably just sit this one out. It would have been enough of an effort just to keep on top of current discussion, but if I have to play catch-up, well, I've got a lot on my plate.
I'm assuming (hoping) the chapters are short, that we are going to try covering four at a time?
|
|
|
|
Post by wandashort on Jan 10, 2011 17:29:19 GMT -5
Still don't have my book yet. No problem Bev! We will wait. I just wanted to get that first thread up there. I actually am going back to reread from the beginning because a lot has changed in the past year as far as my own understanding so I want to look with fresh eyes. I'm assuming (hoping) the chapters are short, that we are going to try covering four at a time? The book is broken into three parts - the first part is an overview of preterism and is four chapters long (47 pages all told). The chapters are not super long but once we get into part two we may go chapter by chapter OR if Jeff would like to suggest an order so that relevant or related chapters can be read and discussed in the same thread that might be the best way. Regardless, we are not in any hurry (at least I havent seen a timeframe deadline) so I vote we go slow and steady. Let us know when you have received the book and read thru the first 4 chapters! Blessings, w |
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jan 10, 2011 17:32:55 GMT -5
I thought I could get to it days ago but I finally started re-reading the book. I am a slow thoughtful reader so it takes me a long time to read a book. I get too side-tracked in looking things up.
|
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Jan 10, 2011 20:49:35 GMT -5
Wanda Woman, The book is broken into three parts - the first part is an overview of preterism and is four chapters long (47 pages all told). The chapters are not super long but once we get into part two we may go chapter by chapter OR if Jeff would like to suggest an order so that relevant or related chapters can be read and discussed in the same thread that might be the best way. 1-4 develops preterism. (1 is online at our website) 5-6 recent history. (both can be read on our website) 7-9 flood. (Might make a good set to be discussed together.) 10 Babel 11-12 the Fall and the Curse. 13-18 Creation 19 epistemology 20 more issues in preterism 21 the future These might be reasonable way to break up the text. But the chapters are there for a reason. |
|
|
|
Post by wandashort on Jan 11, 2011 6:10:39 GMT -5
Excellent plan Jeff! Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 11, 2011 12:56:50 GMT -5
I thought I could get to it days ago but I finally started re-reading the book. I am a slow thoughtful reader so it takes me a long time to read a book. I get too side-tracked in looking things up. Same here, Allyn.  |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 11, 2011 12:59:16 GMT -5
I'm going to go read the introduction and chapter 1 right now, before I get hopelessly sidetracked into something else today, as so easily happens!
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 11, 2011 14:03:01 GMT -5
A tip for Jeff (and all book authors), if you and Tim ever publish an updated edition of this book, I strongly recommend you include complete book-chapter-verse citations each and every time you quote scripture. Reading many quotations referenced only by verse numbers (e.g., vv. 37-39) is inconvenient at best, and probably frustrating to your readers as they have to scroll up or page back to remind themselves from what book and chapter the verses are being pulled.
|
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Jan 11, 2011 20:32:51 GMT -5
A tip for Jeff (and all book authors), if you and Tim ever publish an updated edition of this book, I strongly recommend you include complete book-chapter-verse citations each and every time you quote scripture. Reading many quotations referenced only by verse numbers (e.g., vv. 37-39) is inconvenient at best, and probably frustrating to your readers as they have to scroll up or page back to remind themselves from what book and chapter the verses are being pulled. Bev, I believe we only do that in Chapter 1, and we only do that because we quote a large portion of Mat. 23-25, interspersed with comments. Our editor thought it was better that way. It's on my list of things to consider. For those who do not have the book, that chapter is posted at beyondcreationscience.com/index.php?pr=Read_Chapter_1. I would like some others to comment on whether they agree with Bev or our editor. A PM is fine. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jan 11, 2011 20:36:56 GMT -5
When reading the book through once already last year I think I was satisfied with the use of references.
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 11, 2011 21:59:36 GMT -5
A tip for Jeff (and all book authors), if you and Tim ever publish an updated edition of this book, I strongly recommend you include complete book-chapter-verse citations each and every time you quote scripture. Reading many quotations referenced only by verse numbers (e.g., vv. 37-39) is inconvenient at best, and probably frustrating to your readers as they have to scroll up or page back to remind themselves from what book and chapter the verses are being pulled. Bev, I believe we only do that in Chapter 1, and we only do that because we quote a large portion of Mat. 23-25, interspersed with comments. Our editor thought it was better that way. It's on my list of things to consider. For those who do not have the book, that chapter is posted at beyondcreationscience.com/index.php?pr=Read_Chapter_1. I would like some others to comment on whether they agree with Bev or our editor. A PM is fine. Thanks. If it's only in the first chapter, it may be bearable. I read the first chapter online and found myself scrolling up a few times because I couldn't remember what gospel the verses were coming from. And because it was online, it was all on the same "page." But in print, it might entail having to page back a few pages to find the full reference. It's my preference as a reader, and I've also done some editing. I try to keep the experience of the reader in mind when I edit. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 12, 2011 22:46:11 GMT -5
Okay, I have the book now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jan 13, 2011 8:38:00 GMT -5
Okay, I have the book now. Great! I look everyday to see when things will get started. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 13, 2011 10:09:23 GMT -5
Okay, I have the book now. Great! I look everyday to see when things will get started. I've read only the first two chapters so far. My first impressions are good, the book seems to be very well-written. I know this isn't the kind of feedback wanted for our study of it, but I thought Jeff might like to hear it. |
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Jan 13, 2011 10:50:39 GMT -5
Great! I look everyday to see when things will get started. I've read only the first two chapters so far. My first impressions are good, the book seems to be very well-written. I know this isn't the kind of feedback wanted for our study of it, but I thought Jeff might like to hear it. Thanks, Please send me a list of any typos or errors you find. We would also appreciate comments on which arguments worked and did not work and why. We hope to someday do a fourth edition. |
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Jan 13, 2011 11:51:15 GMT -5
Thanks, Please send me a list of any typos or errors you find. We would also appreciate comments on which arguments worked and did not work and why. We hope to someday do a fourth edition. Uhhhh, she is busy right now...  |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 14, 2011 0:19:56 GMT -5
Thanks, Please send me a list of any typos or errors you find. We would also appreciate comments on which arguments worked and did not work and why. We hope to someday do a fourth edition. Uhhhh, she is busy right now... I'm sure Jeff meant that for everybody, as they read through the book during this study. Not to worry, Ted! Besides, I already have another book in the queue to edit after I finish yours. And I can only do one at a time! (And that takes long enough, as you are painfully aware.) But even when reading casually, I mentally pick out typos and grammatical errors. If I notice any, Jeff, I'll let you know. But I doubt I'll do any citation checking or suggested rewrites of problem areas.  |
|
|
|
Post by wandashort on Jan 14, 2011 8:18:54 GMT -5
Not to worry, Ted! Besides, I already have another book in the queue to edit after I finish yours. Maybe that can be our second book study! :-} |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 14, 2011 14:21:52 GMT -5
Not to worry, Ted! Besides, I already have another book in the queue to edit after I finish yours. Maybe that can be our second book study! :-} Hmm. Could be interesting. I think many here would come at it with a closed mind, so it wouldn't be much of a study, but more of a mass attack. The title is Against Once Saved Always Saved. |
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Jan 14, 2011 14:32:03 GMT -5
Maybe that can be our second book study! :-} Hmm. Could be interesting. I think many here would come at it with a closed mind, so it wouldn't be much of a study, but more of a mass attack. The title is Against Once Saved Always Saved.Nahhhhhhhh, the nice, charming, wonderful Christians here would never do such a thing  |
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jan 14, 2011 19:46:04 GMT -5
Hi Jeff,
I have been slowly working through the chapters once again and I have a question from early on in the book. I think its in chapter 2 or 3 where you take the words of Jesus, saying "as in the days of Noah" and you throw in a little clue as to what you will be addressing later in the book concerning the flood. My question is do you believe Jesus was trying to show that the events about to unfold will be a local event as you say the flood was a local event? I believe it was a regional event for sure but even if it was just localized do you believe that is the message he was trying to achieve by comparing those days with the days of Noah?
|
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Jan 14, 2011 20:09:29 GMT -5
Hi Jeff, I have been slowly working through the chapters once again and I have a question from early on in the book. I think its in chapter 2 or 3 where you take the words of Jesus, saying "as in the days of Noah" and you throw in a little clue as to what you will be addressing later in the book concerning the flood. My question is do you believe Jesus was trying to show that the events about to unfold will be a local event as you say the flood was a local event? I believe it was a regional event for sure but even if it was just localized do you believe that is the message he was trying to achieve by comparing those days with the days of Noah? Allyn, That's likely in Chapter 1, page 29 Jesus is saying it would be a similar type event, but that the destruction of Jerusalem would be greater. The flood ended the "world" of that time, but it did not end the "heaven and earth." From John 1:9-11, we see that, at least by John's usage, "world," kosmos, means a specific generation of covenant people. In contrast, "heaven and earth," ge, refers to the covenant itself and all generations of people who are in it. Peter seems to be using "world" and "earth" in the same way in 2 Peter 3. In a covenantal sense, the destruction of Jerusalem was certainly greater. In a physical sense, Jesus' use of the words "world" and "earth" also restrict both events to physical regions. We demonstrate this in Chapter 8. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 14, 2011 21:50:19 GMT -5
I don't see any relation between the scope (affected area) of the flood and Jesus' using it as an illustration.
Jesus had just finished telling his disciples what signs to look for and that they should flee to the mountains when they see the abomination of desolation.
They should heed the signs because the exact day and hour is not known.
I think the fleeing to the mountains is equivalent to Noah entering the ark (Matthew 24:38).
Though Noah and his family entered the ark, the people still did not understand, they continued about their business (Matthew 24:38-39).
When the Christians flee to the mountains, the residents of Jerusalem will pay no nevermind and continue their business until disaster will suddenly strike.
So it's about watching for the signs and heeding the signs without delay because they wouldn't know how much time they have from the time of the signs to the destruction of the city.
|
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Jan 14, 2011 22:01:39 GMT -5
I don't see any relation between the scope (affected area) of the flood and Jesus' using it as an illustration. Jesus had just finished telling his disciples what signs to look for and that they should flee to the mountains when they see the abomination of desolation. They should heed the signs because the exact day and hour is not known. I think the fleeing to the mountains is equivalent to Noah entering the ark (Matthew 24:38). Though Noah and his family entered the ark, the people still did not understand, they continued about their business (Matthew 24:38-39). When the Christians flee to the mountains, the residents of Jerusalem will pay no nevermind and continue their business until disaster will suddenly strike. So it's about watching for the signs and heeding the signs without delay because they wouldn't know how much time they have from the time of the signs to the destruction of the city. Bev, Have you considered vs. 21 in your analysis of vs 38-39? |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 14, 2011 22:04:05 GMT -5
My question is regarding signs and wonders on pages 65 and 66.
One of the hallmarks of preterism is the proper interpretation of apocalyptic language; that it does not describe literal events. That things like the sun, moon, and stars represent things other than the actual bodies in the sky.
Yet on these pages, the historical testimony of Josephus seems to substantiate a literal interpretation of those things. An actual comet streaking across the sky, the appearance of a real star over the city, and the appearance of troops of soldiers among the clouds.
So should apocalyptic language be interpreted as symbolic of something else, unless a historian records that these actual things took place?
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 14, 2011 22:31:35 GMT -5
I don't see any relation between the scope (affected area) of the flood and Jesus' using it as an illustration. Jesus had just finished telling his disciples what signs to look for and that they should flee to the mountains when they see the abomination of desolation. They should heed the signs because the exact day and hour is not known. I think the fleeing to the mountains is equivalent to Noah entering the ark (Matthew 24:38). Though Noah and his family entered the ark, the people still did not understand, they continued about their business (Matthew 24:38-39). When the Christians flee to the mountains, the residents of Jerusalem will pay no nevermind and continue their business until disaster will suddenly strike. So it's about watching for the signs and heeding the signs without delay because they wouldn't know how much time they have from the time of the signs to the destruction of the city. Bev, Have you considered vs. 21 in your analysis of vs 38-39? Regarding vs. 21, are you implying that because there would be tribulation greater than what had occurred before, the flood of Noah's day could not have been global? My question then is what tribulation was there in Noah's day leading up to the flood? You might respond that the earth was filled with violence (Genesis 6:11-13), but that was a reason for bringing the flood, not a sign of its imminence. Noah did not have to look for signs because God told him when he should enter the ark (Genesis 7:1-4). |
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Jan 15, 2011 1:19:11 GMT -5
Bev, Have you considered vs. 21 in your analysis of vs 38-39? Regarding vs. 21, are you implying that because there would be tribulation greater than what had occurred before, the flood of Noah's day could not have been global? My question then is what tribulation was there in Noah's day leading up to the flood? You might respond that the earth was filled with violence (Genesis 6:11-13), but that was a reason for bringing the flood, not a sign of its imminence. Noah did not have to look for signs because God told him when he should enter the ark (Genesis 7:1-4). Bev, I believe you will see that Josephus disagrees with you. When we get to Chapters 7-9, the major issue we tackle is the physical scope of the flood. |
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Jan 15, 2011 1:33:04 GMT -5
My question is regarding signs and wonders on pages 65 and 66. One of the hallmarks of preterism is the proper interpretation of apocalyptic language; that it does not describe literal events. That things like the sun, moon, and stars represent things other than the actual bodies in the sky. Yet on these pages, the historical testimony of Josephus seems to substantiate a literal interpretation of those things. An actual comet streaking across the sky, the appearance of a real star over the city, and the appearance of troops of soldiers among the clouds. So should apocalyptic language be interpreted as symbolic of something else, unless a historian records that these actual things took place?Bev, The point of Chapter 3 is to show that historically, the church has believed these things are fulfilled. You already believe that. So I don't need to convince you. If you were not a preterist, how would that stuff hit you? "How come no one ever told me this!" An actual comet would not have done Josephus claims was seen and reported. Josephus was a native Aramaic speaker. We don't know who translated his work to Greek. It is my understanding that Greek does not have a word for "comet." That is an interpretation by the English translator. The Greek says "star." In Aramaic, Josephus would have said "sign." |
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jan 15, 2011 9:23:21 GMT -5
Taking Bev's point that those in the ark were saved like those who fled Jerusalem, I agree. Jesus taught that some were taken and some were left which sounds backwards to what we saw with the ark and Jerusalem but those who were taken were the ones who paid the price with their lives in those two events while the ones who were left were the living - safe from the destruction.
|
|
