View Full Version : The DaVinci Code
The movie based on the book "The DaVinci Code" is coming out mid-May: http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/thedavincicode/ Tom Hanks is starring in it. I'm a big Tom Hanks fan :). I've never read the book but am looking forward to going to see the movie. Anyone familiar with the book?
Amie
Infinite Grace
03-15-2006, 02:48 PM
My boys have read it (the two oldest). Personally, it is nothing new. The Last Temptation of Christ (TLTOC) brought up the subject first (in recent times anyway. I am not sure what crappy movies were made way back when). The premise is that Jesus DID NOT die on the cross, but lived. Later he married Mary Magdalene, and had sex with a variety of other women (in TLTOC, the sexual encounters were prompted by a little girl who was an angel, only seen by "Jesus"). Sick stuff really.
I am not interested in The DaVinci Code, either the movie or book. My son's will probably want to see the movie, and, hey, they're adults...not me though. Might as well throw our bible away and join the UUA.
Ed,
I never saw The Last Temptation of Christ. It sounded like they used Jesus for porn or something - but I was really young then.
I want to see the movie, just to see what all of the hoo-plah is about. I prefer that to reading the book.
Thanks for the heads up :)
Amie
backtothefuture
04-15-2006, 08:20 PM
Sorry, but this is one of my favorite books. I have read it 3 times and can't wait until the movie. I read it the first time in one day. I had to take that wonderful medicine for a colonoscopy and couldn't do much else but read and run!! I have watched every special on the story that I can.
Do I believe it, probably not. But its been so interesting and entertaining and just something else interesting to think about. Nothing wrong with that I say!
Nancy:clap2:
But its been so interesting and entertaining and just something else interesting to think about. Nothing wrong with that I say!
Nancy:clap2:
Absolutely not! I am still looking forward to seeing it as well!
Amie
Barry
04-15-2006, 09:32 PM
The benefit to many of these movies is not that they are "accurate" as such. But rather they get us to think!
Personal tastes aside, be yourself.
If a Movie or a song or a TV program gets you thinking.... Well that's what I like anyway.
I'm looking forward to seeing it.
Barry
christyG
04-16-2006, 05:21 PM
I have not read it, but have watched many of the shows on the History Channel and National Geographic channel about the book. I would like to read it before the movie comes out. I also cannot wait to see the movie---Tom Hanks ----has to be good:)
Christy
Hey Amie,
If you like to read, I'd highly recommend reading the book before you see the movie. As long as you understand that it's fiction it's a wonderful book.
You might want to disregard my thoughts though because I like the Harry Potter books too. :eek: :)
Bill
Bill,
I'm a Harry Potter fan as well! I do like to read, but I'm working on something right now and wouldn't probably be able to get to the book before seeing the movie.
Dangit!
:) Amie
Interesting interview with Brian McLaren on "The DaVinci Code":
http://www.presence.tv/discus/messages/148/1222.html?1147223021
:) Amie
Paige
05-10-2006, 09:14 AM
That was very interesting. I like his perspective on all the hoopla :)
Paige
Hi all,
My name is Tami. I'm new here. Wrote a bit about myself on the "introduce yourself thread". This topic caught my eye because I'm a huge fan of the Da Vinci Code. Can't wait for the movie. Unfortunately my husband does not share my enthusiasm :rolleyes: So it is nice to find ppl who I can chat with about it. I read the book and what I particularly liked about it was the concept of the divine feminine. Since I feel that God is both male and female, or at least has an extremelely strong feminine side, the story intrigued me. I feel that God is both Father and Mother. Coming from a Conservative Baptist background where men are quite supreme...well...there aren't too many around who share this view :( So this should be fun :D
Tami
backtothefuture
05-12-2006, 01:55 PM
Tami,
I can't wait to see the movie myself. I just loved the book. My husband loved it also. We are going to have a big date night. Dinner and a show, that is how excited I am about seeing it. Let us know if you see the movie and what you thought.:)
Nancy
Tami,
Welcome and good to meet you!! I agree with your take on God. Not only did he plant the seed (functioning as "Father/male"), he brought forth that life (functioning and "mother/female").
How does the book define "devine feminine"?
Amie
Hi Nancy and Amie!,
Nancy, sounds like a wonderful date planned with your hubby. I hope you enjoy! :)
Amie, Loved your question...been a while since I finished the book so have been thumbing through. I don't think I'm finding the passages that give the best idea of what I'm talking about...but the idea is that way waaaay back, it was just common knowledge that ppl worshipped God/Goddess. I have to say that though the book is fiction I do not have any trouble believing this. And the book has caused me to do a bit of my own research which confirms to me that it is so. I believe that even the Jewish ppl in the OT had a feminine name for God...which I will have to find for you guys. But to believe that the "church" turned God into totally MALE is not difficult for me to believe at all! Especially with my background and the fact that all the while I was being taught I felt a very different God/Godess stirring inside of me teaching me things. Ok, here's a passage that you might find interesting.
So dark the con of man,he thought. So dark indeed.
Nobody could deny the enourmous good the modern Church did in today's troubled world, and yet the Church had a deceitful and violent history. Their brutal crusade to "reeducate" the pagan and feminine worshipping religions spanned three centruries, employing methods as inspired as they were horrific.
The Catholic Inquisition published the book that arguably could be called the most blood-soaked publication in human history. Malleus Maleficarum[I]or [I]The Witches' Hammerindoctrinated the world to "the dangers of freethinking women" and instructed the clergy how to locate, torture, and destroy them. Those deemed "witches" by the Church included all female scholars, priestesses, gypsies, mystics, nature lovers, herb gathereres, and any women "suspiciously attuned to the natural world." Midwives also were killed for their heretical practice of using medical knowledge to ease the pain of childbirth--a suffering, The Church claimed, that was God's rightful punishment for Eve's partaking of the Apple of Knowledge, thus giving birth to the idea of Original Sin. During three hundred years of witch hunts, the Church burned at the stake an astounding five millionwomen.
The propaganda and bloodshed had worked.
Today's world was living proof.
Women, once celebrated as an essential half of spiritual enlightenment, had been banished from the temples of the world. There were no female Orthodox rabbis, Catholic priests, nor Islamic clerics. The once hallowed act of Hieros Gamos--the natural sexual union between man and woman through which each became spiritually whole--had been recast as a shameful act. Holy men who had once required sexual union with their female counterparts to commune with God now feared their natural sexual urges as the work of the devil, colaborating with his favorate accomplice....woman
Taken from "The Da Vinci Code pg. 124,125
backtothefuture
05-12-2006, 05:50 PM
Gosh Tami,
That was so interesting. Made me think that maybe some of what is missing on my healing journey is the feminine side of God.
It just breaks me to know what woman have had to go through in the name of God.
Maybe if I could tap into the feminine it would be a break though for me.
Thanks for the post.
Can't wait for the movie:clap2:
Nancy
Barry
05-12-2006, 07:20 PM
It just breaks me to know what woman have had to go through in the name of God.
Yes, and to the detriment of the male. Not only is peace between the sexes indicative of peace on earth, when each esteems the other, they both more truthfully find themselves.
Barry
Barry
05-12-2006, 07:59 PM
Yes, and to the detriment of the male. Not only is peace between the sexes indicative of peace on earth, when each esteems the other, they both more truthfully find themselves.
Barry
That's just my opinion anyway. ;)
I agree Barry. Since I believe God to be both Father and Mother, I believe that opens the door to utmost respect for male and female to have towards each other. I think that truly would bring about much peace. :) Tami
Ya know,
Even if some things aren't true, it's interesting (to me) to ponder them as if they were to see if any thought is ever capable of shaking your (my) faith. Not to mention, if it does, what that means.
For example, I don't think Jesus has children and am not sure the author of the book actually believes it either (isn't the book fiction?). Anyhow, when considering the concept for the first time I concluded that I would still see Jesus as saviour, my faith unaffected, but I felt some general "uckyness".
After thinking about why I felt that way, I learned a bit more about myself and my view of sex - and then why. It's true that sex has been demonized societally. Things are better, but still have a looonng way to go.
I saw a special on nudists on TV. The adults walked around naked along with their children, or their neighbor's children, etc. The narrator said something to the effect that to them, it was as everyday as wearing jeans and a shirt, yet for the general clothed public it was looked down upon. The reason for that, is because society sexualizes (therefore demonizes) nudity.
I haven't gotten over the ucky feeling completely (don't think I will), but I'm learning a lot.
Amie
Barry,
I agree, and may I say, it's so good to hear that from a man. :)
Amie
Amie,
One of the most freeing things on my journey is the freedom "not to know". And then to know it doesn't change a dang thing. Especially how God feels about me. :) Coming from a background where knowledge was so incredibly overrated. I mean, couldn't have a darn coffee social without a "bible study"...meaning someone "elses" interpretation. Fact is...theres a whole lot we don't know about Jesus personal life. Oh well :D Our God/Goddess does know and that's ALL that matters. The truth is in good hands. Meanwhile...ain't it great to explore without fear!!! I loooove it!!! :biggrinbounce:
Hey you guys are a fun group. I'm loving this.
Tami
christyG
05-13-2006, 07:43 PM
Great thoughts you guys. Nice to meet you Tami.
I still want to try to read the book before I see the movie. I hear it's a quick read, because it is such a page turner.
Like the thoughts about God as mother/father.
Amie, you said:
Anyhow, when considering the concept for the first time I concluded that I would still see Jesus as saviour, my faith unaffected, but I felt some general "uckyness".
After thinking about why I felt that way, I learned a bit more about myself and my view of sex - and then why. It's true that sex has been demonized societally. Things are better, but still have a looonng way to go.
I use to only see Jesus as God, with little to no "real" human qualities at all. I didn't know there was any other way to see him. But now, when considering Jesus as a man I see that that can make him even more special. Making him a man instead of a god/man does not lessen him in my eyes. In fact, I find it makes Jesus more accesible, and his life more within my reach. (if you know what I mean?) I am now able to consider many things about Jesus from his birth to his death as being completely human without taking away my ability to see Jesus as a special example to us of a life full of God......not a god/life.
Jesus is still Jesus to me if he had a wife, a child, pimples, whatever. I was actually taught once that Jesus could not have any pimples, or markings on his skin whatsoever because he had to "unblemished." I do not see that necessity any longer...he certainly was blemished after the soldiers got ahold of him:( .
Christy
Paige
05-14-2006, 10:27 AM
I don't know if this is completely related or not, but I think the church is really trying to overcome the thinking that sex is dirty. From what I've seen, there are a lot of books out now and seminars available to help people in their marriages. God designed sex, so marriage and sex are not sinful.
Neither is eating bread...Yet, for some reason when Jesus was fasting in the wilderness, He refused to turn stones into bread. He refused to satisfy His hunger. This is where things come together for me concerning the issue of Jesus having a wife or not. Jesus was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. He came to do His Father's will, so in that sense, having a wife IMO would have been at cross-purposes with His purpose here on earth.
I hope this explains my thoughts on the matter (my head is kind of jumbled right now with BBQ preparations looming :) )
Paige
Barry
05-14-2006, 10:44 AM
This is too hot a topic for me, I'm out of here :eek: !
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
Paige,
I can sure understand that line of thinking. Some of those sorts of ideas pop into my thinking now and again while pondering the possibilities on the subject. :)
Tami
Amie,
Forgot to mention one thing when you mentioned nudist colonies....Ewwwwwwww! LOL. :eek:
Tami
kevinbeck
05-15-2006, 10:56 AM
Hi all,
Haven't read the book, but the movie trailers look great. I wonder what the revenues will look like compared to The Passion of the Christ. I wonder if it makes anywhere nearly as much $ if it will be interpreted in a similar way as The Passion was.
Coming from a background where knowledge was so incredibly overrated. I mean, couldn't have a darn coffee social without a "bible study"
Hilarious! Did we grow up in the same church?
Blessings,
Kevin
Kevin,
Maybe we did :rolleyes: Sometimes I think I need some big fancy machine with lots and lots of wires hooked up to my head to pump it all back out.:beathead: But then again...the Spirit seems to be doing a pretty good job. :)
Tami
Jesus is still Jesus to me if he had a wife, a child, pimples, whatever.
My hubby has always been the most open (out of the two of us) to Jesus's humanity, and it was his saying something along these lines that helped me as Tami said "explore without fear". He answered my frequent "buts" with "why, is Jesus not Savior just because of that?" Intense.
I use to only see Jesus as God, with little to no "real" human qualities at all. I didn't know there was any other way to see him. But now, when considering Jesus as a man I see that that can make him even more special. Making him a man instead of a god/man does not lessen him in my eyes. In fact, I find it makes Jesus more accesible, and his life more within my reach.
I've been feeling more and more that way as well. I also find that my faith is strengthened as God's abilities survive yet another set of questions.
I don't know if this is completely related or not, but I think the church is really trying to overcome the thinking that sex is dirty. From what I've seen, there are a lot of books out now and seminars available to help people in their marriages. God designed sex, so marriage and sex are not sinful.
Sex is becoming less demonized societally, and the church is finding little choice but to follow imo. It's great that real conversations can now take place on the subject as per health, preference, and ethical practices rather than it being buried like a dirty little secret.
Neither is eating bread...Yet, for some reason when Jesus was fasting in the wilderness, He refused to turn stones into bread. He refused to satisfy His hunger.
Alright Paige. I've been thinking on this one for days and still don't have a response... lol!
Forgot to mention one thing when you mentioned nudist colonies....Ewwwwwwww! LOL.
My husband had to deliver to a local one (he's a courier for Fed Ex). He said it was NOT pretty, hahaha! I won't say anymore, I'll spare ya!
I wonder if it makes anywhere nearly as much $ if it will be interpreted in a similar way as The Passion was.
I don't see it being graded on the same sliding scale as The Passion. The Passion was not as fictional.. if that's possible, lol.
Amie
kevinbeck
05-16-2006, 09:17 AM
I don't see it being graded on the same sliding scale as The Passion. The Passion was not as fictional.. if that's possible, lol.
Amie
"Not as fictional"...that's pretty good.
I see how someone might find The Gospel According to Mel to be totally offensive by capitalizing on the crucifixion. Not having a context to put the story in. What if Quentin Tarantino had made The Passion, and not Mel Gibson. Would it have been received as well? Or would the conservative Christian community have excoriated it? The world may never know.
I guess I'm just speculating on the interpretation of the movies' receptions. Passion makes millions and people see it as the triumph of fundamentalist Christianity. If DaVinci has success, I don't think it will be interpreted the same way. Few folks are going to run out and buy copies of the "Gnostic Gospels."
The reception of the movies tells us a lot about ourselves.
Have you seen the South Park episode, "The Passion of the Jew"?
Blessings,
Kevin
The world may never know.
I hope not, lol. Tarantino do "The Passion", now that's a scary thought..
If DaVinci has success, I don't think it will be interpreted the same way.
It will be interesting to see actual responses to it after it is released. Mel seems to have appealed to the left and the right and those who are in the middle (like I claim to be), while The DaVinci Code in my mind threatens to only appeal to the left and the middle - while being seen as an invasion by the right.
The reception of the movies tells us a lot about ourselves.
As do the movies themselves. The most successful movies seem to understand the priority of heart over law as the heart triumphs over (or endures) different obstacles. As well, typically the movies confirm life after death.
Have you seen the South Park episode, "The Passion of the Jew"?
No! I'm not a sick freak like you! Haha! Kidding! I haven't heard of that one. I think it's funny how Stan (the Jew) seems to make the most sense in the shows... probably why Cartman is my favorite, lol!
Amie
As do the movies themselves. The most successful movies seem to understand the priority of heart over law as the heart triumphs over (or endures) different obstacles. As well, typically the movies confirm life after death.
Amie
Amie, Beautiful, and so true aisi. Same with music and other art forms I think...but I know...this is about MOVIES:biglaugha: I'm a terrible side tracker so just trying to get back on track before sending off. :) Tami
christyG
05-17-2006, 06:56 PM
Hey, I am a bit of a movie buff so I thought I'd but interupt.....
It was said:
Tarantino do "The Passion", now that's a scary thought..
I don't mean to offend, but I have to admit I've seen some Tarantino and I don't think his version would be very different. :eek: Blood and violence, and playing with our minds are things that I saw in the Passion, that Tarantino movies also do.
Tarantino is a bit "scary", but honestly Mel scared me just a bit also.... with his powerful conviction.
Christy
kevinbeck
05-18-2006, 08:55 AM
I don't mean to offend, but I have to admit I've seen some Tarantino and I don't think his version would be very different
Christy, my thought exactly. If QT makes a blood and gore movie, then it is reviled. If a vocal Christian makes that same movie, then it is hailed as a high art form. Art is in the eye of the beholder.
Blessings
My mental picture of a Terantino "The Passion" (And you didn't offend at all Christy!) has lots of crazy camara movements, strange lighting, lots of cussing and S&M like violence. My mental picture is what is scary to me I suppose. Gibson seems like a safer place. I could have it all wrong, lol!
I wonder how reviled Terantino's movies really are. He's a box office sure bet, isn't he?
Amie
And I do get your point Kevin, lol.. I'm being alittle facetious :)
backtothefuture
05-20-2006, 12:51 PM
Hi,
Even though I have not yet had a chance to see this movie, it is all over the news and cable shows. One word that is coming up a lot is the divine feminine. Can someone explain to me, just what this is. I know on other posts I have read God mentioned as Male/female and the Bible says he created them male/female. There is a lot of uproar about the divine feminine for some reason.
Any help to understanding this would be appreciated.
blessings,
Nancy
I saw the movie and LOVED it! I won't give details away. The style reminds me of the movie "Titanic" in that there are fictional characters, a fictional story, intermingled with factual happenings. I won't give anything away ;)..
Nancy,
In the original Greek language, women have prominant positions in the church. There is the "diakonos" ("deacon") Pheobe, and Junia the apostle for example.
In Greek thought, as was in many ancient (and paganistic) cultures, female roles were extremely important and high ranking. There were "Goddesses" for goodness sake.
Mary Magdalene has her own Gospel that the councel at Nicea rejected, and in part of it Peter actually sounds a bit jealous of her. She followed Christ just as the men did. A Pope in the Catholic church declared her the "prostitute" in the story of the prostitute who Jesus forgives. MUCH later (as in recently) that was recanted without apology. By all standards, she was a disciple. She was the first person Christ revealed himself to after rising, and among the last walking away from the cross at his death.
IF (as someone around here pointed out so beautifully) male and female is the image of God, part of that image within the modern Christian church(es) has been sorely overlooked. No doubt "she" is devine too.
"The DaVinci Code" touches upon this strongly, seemingly suggesting that it was a cover-up and an on-going conspiracy. It is true that it would shake the powers within modern church on their ears.
Conspiracy or no, I'm glad to see us getting noticed :).
Amie
backtothefuture
05-20-2006, 09:20 PM
Thanks Amie,
What you said, is what I kind of thought. We almost went today to the movie, but they are a sell out here, so maybe next week.
So are most of the churches more worked up over the fact that the Book states that Jesus was married, or the fact that the divine Feminine that has been pushed back on the back burners, may start appearing, not to their liking? Makes me wonder what the real issue is here.
I have read the book of Mary Magdalene and just about every other one that was not included in what is our Bible now.
After reading some of the others, does make me wonder at times, what is what.
Anyway,
Glad you enjoyed the movie. I can't wait:biggrinbounce:
Nancy
Ok guys, this is soooo cool. I had heard there's a female name for the God of the OT. Although, in doing a bit of research I can't conclude if it's the female name for God or actually a separate person or maybe one but separate. I'm leaning toward thinking that the Spirit is female. Ok, so the name is Asherah.
This website explained it better than others I thought...although...I will have to do more research on the authenticity of the research...if that makes any sense.
Why is it, that whether it's true or not, when I hear or read about this possibility, I get sooo very excited and overwhelmed with happiness inside??? Makes me think there's something to it. Cuz I can usually trust that deep feeling of connectedness.
Here's something to read...enjoy! And please give me feedback...Tami
http://northernway.org/hgoddess.html
Paige
05-21-2006, 11:02 AM
Tam,
Read the article. I too, would be interested in the research on the research. Here is something interesting and perhaps someone can explain this...Asherah is mentioned in 1 Kings 18:19, and it is a negative story involving Jezebel and her prophets. My question is how come I can't find the word listed in Strong's? Does anyone know the answer?
Anyway, I have heard that the pronoun (I think) for the Holy Spirit is a feminine pronoun. I need to do more research on this myself to double check and make sure I'm factual.
In all honesty, I have a hard time thinking of "Asherah" in a positive manner. I don't know why that is. It could be conditioning, or it could be the negative association with Jezebel.
Let me know if you find out more...
Paige
christyG
05-21-2006, 04:07 PM
Why is it, that whether it's true or not, when I hear or read about this possibility, I get sooo very excited and overwhelmed with happiness inside??? Makes me think there's something to it. Cuz I can usually trust that deep feeling of connectedness.
Know that feeling Tami, will check it out!
Christy
Tam,
Read the article. I too, would be interested in the research on the research. Here is something interesting and perhaps someone can explain this...Asherah is mentioned in 1 Kings 18:19, and it is a negative story involving Jezebel and her prophets. My question is how come I can't find the word listed in Strong's? Does anyone know the answer?
Paige
Hi Paige, I come up with strongs # H842. But for some reason some translations leave it out. Rotherham uses “Sacred Stem.” Looks like something is going on.
H842
אשׁירה אשׁרה
'ăshe^ra^h 'ăshe^yra^h
ash-ay-raw', ash-ay-raw'
From H833; happy; asherah (or Astarte) a Phoenician goddess; also an image of the same: - grove. Compare H6253.
H833
אשׁר אשׁר
'a^shar 'a^she^r
aw-shar', aw-share'
A primitive root; to be straight (used in the widest sense, especially to be level, right, happy); figuratively to go forward, be honest, prosper: - (call, be) bless (-ed, happy), go, guide, lead, relieve.
H6253
עשׁתּרת
‛ashto^reth
ash-to'-reth
Probably for H6251; Ashtoreth, the Phoenician goddess of love (and increase): - Ashtoreth.
The Ugaritic texts that mention Asherah were found in Ugarit. There's some really good info here: http://www.theology.edu/ugarbib.htm
From what I understand, after Israel was established, it conquered Canaan. They brought with them into Canaan their culture, and the name of their God.
I'm not sure they ever rid themselves completely, of the paganistic beliefs and cultures that they had come from either.
Abraham came from a world whose stories closely resemble the ones we are familiar with today (see: http://www.sacred-texts.com/ane/stc/index.htm). When God introduced himself to Abraham, he introduced monotheism (belief in one God). When God stopped Abraham from sacrificing Isaac, he set himself apart. The gods from which Abraham came demanded human sacrifice.
Every country that Israel mixed with, whether by conquering or by being conquered, has influenced its' culture. You can see modern Christian symbols mirroring ancient ones for that reason. The movie shows some beautiful examples. One is the Egyptian symbol of life called the ankh (see here: http://touregypt.net/featurestories/ankh.htm). How long was Israel captive by Egypt anyway?
The 'fun' part, is in deciphering what makes sense.. distinguishing what came from Egypt, and what came into Egypt, and even how that which came from Egypt evolved in Israel from that point (I'm using "Egypt" as an example of any country they mixed culture with).
I don't know about y'all, but the more answers I find, the more questions I have.
In the Syriac texts the pronoun for the Holy Spirit is feminine. In the OT, there are a great deal of feminine similes concerning God ("like a hen", "like a woman doesn't forget her suckling child", etc), though I haven't personally found anything that refers to him as female directly. Just type "female imagery God" in your search engine.
Tami, I think there is something to the "devine feminine". Why couldn't/wouldn't a woman's face reflect the face of God?
Amie
Lou,
All that I can think of right this second is "wow". This stuff is blowing my mind honestly..
Amie
Hi guys,
"Asherah" was the Canaanite mother-goddess associated in the OT with Baal - Jdg 3:7. This goddess' "image" [idols] came to be known by that name, and was duly worshiped. Israel was commanded to cut her [the Asherim] down to size - Ex 34:13 & Deut 12:3.
Paige
05-21-2006, 11:16 PM
davo,
Thanks for posting those vss. I knew I remembered reading over that name in the OT, but couldn't remember quite where it was...
I think some of this is going over my head a bit :uhh: :o
Lou said:
Hi Paige, I come up with strongs # H842. But for some reason some translations leave it out. Rotherham uses “Sacred Stem.” Looks like something is going on.
Any guesses as to what might be going on? I'm clueless here...
Paige
Paige,
I haven't looked very deep into this but Rotherham is one of the better OT translations (IMO) and the way the term "Sacred Stem" is used it has to mean something. Then in most translations were it is ignored or "pole" is used looks like something is being hidden.
The meaning of "Asherah" returns again to Eve's function: "rib". Ribs in the body hold form, as the ribs in a boat holds its' form. The ribs of a house would be the support beams. Keeping that in mind (from http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=1942&letter=A):
A Hebrew word occurring frequently in the Bible (R. V.) and signifying, except in a few late passages noted below, a wooden post or pole planted near the altars of various gods. In the Authorized Version the word is rendered "grove."
It has often been inferred from Deut. xvi. 21 that the Asherah was originally a tree, but the passage should be translated "an asherah of any kind of wood" (compare Moore, "Ency. Bibl." and Budde, "New World," viii. 734), since the sacred tree had a name of its own, el, elah, elon, and the Asherah was sometimes set up under the living tree (II Kings xvii. 10). This pole was often of considerable size (Judges vi. 25), since it could furnish fuel for the sacrifice of a bullock. It was found near the altars of Baal, and, down to the days of Josiah, near those of Yhwh also, not only at Samaria (II Kings xiii. 6) and Beth-el (II Kings xxiii. 15), but even at Jerusalem (II Kings xxiii. 6). Sometimes it was carved in revolting shapes (I Kings xv. 13), and at times, perhaps, draped (II Kings xxiii. 7). It is most often associated in the Bible with the pillars ("maẓẓebot") that in primitive days served at once as a representation of the god and as an altar (W. R. Smith, "Religion of the Semites," 2d ed., p. 204). It was proscribed in the Deuteronomic law and abolished in Josiah's reform (II Kings xxii. 23).
In a few passages (Judges iii. 7; I Kings xviii. 19; II Kings xxiii. 4) Asherah appears to be the name of a goddess, but the text has in every case been corrupted or glossed (compare Moore and Budde, as cited above). In the first of the three passages the name Ashtaroth should stand, as it does elsewhere, in the case of similar charges of defection from Yhwh (compare Judges ii. 13, x. 6; I Sam. vii. 4, xii. 10). In the other two passages, the term Asherah is superfluous. These passages may indicate, as Moore suggests, that the Asherah became in some localities a fetish or cultus god.
Asherah the Name of a Syrian Goddess.
Asherah was also the name of a Syrian goddess. In the El-Amarna tablets of the fifteenth century B.C. her name appears with the determinative for deity as a part of the name Arad-Ashirta (or 'Ebed-Asherah). It also appears in a Sumerian hymn published by Reisner ("Sumerisch-Babylonische Hymnen," p. 92), on a hematite cylinder ("Zeit. f. Assyr." vi. 161), and in an astronomical text of the Arsacide period (ib. vi. 241). She appears to have been the consort of the god Amurru, a Baal of the Lebanon region (compare Jensen, "Zeit. f. Assyr." xi. 302-305). Arad-Ashirta in the El-Amarna tablets represents not only a sheik, but a clan, and is possibly the one which afterward became the tribe of Asher. Possibly a trace of this goddess is to be found in an inscription from Citium in Cyprus, which dedicates an object to "My lady mother Ashera" (compare Schröder, "Z. D. M. G." xxxv. 424).
Many scholars, however, interpret the passage otherwise (compare Moore, l.c.). Hommel has recently announced ("Expository Times," xi. 190) that he has discovered in a Minæan inscription a goddess Athirat. phonetically equivalent to Asherah. This would indicate that Asherah was a name for an old Semitic goddess long before the fifteenth century B.C.; but for the present this must be regarded merely in the light of a possibility. The relation of this goddess to the pole called Asherah in the Bible is a difficult problem.
The name in the Bible is masculine; the plural "Asherim" occurring sixteen times, and the plural "Asherot" but three times. The latter is clearly an error. Asherah must be a nomen unitatis. G. Hoffmann has shown ("Ueber Einige Phönizische Inschriften," pp. 26 et seq.) that these posts originally marked the limits of the sacred precincts, and that in the Ma'sub inscription it is the equivalent of "sacred enclosure." Moore finds in this fact the explanation of the use of the word in Assyrian (ashirtu, ashrâti; eshirtu, eshrâti), in the sense of sanctuary. Hommel fancies that he sees in the original form of the ideogram for Ishtar (compare Thureau-Dangin, "L'Ecriture Cunéforme," No. 294), a post on which hangs the skin of an animal.
Quite apart, however, from Hommel's somewhat imaginary conjecture, the Assyrian and Phenician use of the word in the sense of "sanctuary," taken in connection with the Arabian and Syrian use of it as the name of a goddess, indicates that the posts were used at the sanctuaries of the primitive Semitic mother-goddess, and that in course of time their name attached itself in certain quarters to the goddess herself, and has survived in South Arabia and Syria. When, therefore, the late editors of the Old Testament books made of the Asherah a fetish or cultus god, history was but repeating itself (see Ashtoreth; Worship, Idol; Maẓẓebah; Phenicia).
From http://www.theology.edu/ugarbib.htm:
One of the most interesting of these lesser deities, Asherah, plays a very important role in the Old Testament. There she is called the wife of Baal; but she is also known as the consort of Yahweh! That is, among some Yahwists, Ahserah is Yahweh’s female counterpart! Inscriptions found at Kuntillet ‘Ajrud (dated between 850 and 750 BCE) say:
I bless you through Yahweh of Samaria,
and through his Asherah!
And at ‘El Qom (from the same period) this inscription:
Uriyahu, the king, has written this.
Blessed be Uriyahu through Yahweh,
and his enemies have been conquered
through Yahweh’s Asherah.
That Yahwists worshipped Asherah until the 3rd century before Christ is well known from the Elephantine Papyri. Thus, for many in ancient Israel, Yahweh, like Baal, had a consort. Although condemned by the prophets, this aspect of the popular religion of Israel was difficult to overcome and indeed among many was never overcome.
I totally recommend reading over the last link I quoted from if this interests you.
If "Asherah" were the "rib" to "Yahweh" then she would be considered "temple post", "pole", etc. It makes sense. The railing against her (the above link says as well as Davo's great reference) makes sense if my pet theory is correct and Israel had taken Yahweh for Baal.
Exodus 32
1 ¶ And the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mountain. And the people gathered to Aaron. And they said to him, Rise up, make for us gods who may go before our face. As for this Moses, the man who brought us up from the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.
The word translated "gods" is "elohim", which is a name for God.
Understanding that these people had just left Egypt, and the beliefs of the Egyptians helps to make sense of this. The Egyptians believed that the world was alive, and their bodies were no different than a piece of wood, a brush, or a knife. Bodies were lifeless objects inhabited by Gods and spirits. They were not mummified for a future bodily resurrection, they were about to be launched into a new existance and their 'launching pod' so to speak, was made top notch.
Anyhow, they believed that not only could spirits inhabit anything, but that they could become anything as well. All life was interchangable. It's how Pharaohs were seen literally as gods.
To thank and worship a god, even if he was Pharaoh, one only needed to make an image for that god to enter into to be thanked and worshipped. The image was therefore no different than the god itself. If the god entered a piece of wood, the god was 'dumb' (couldn't speak). If the god entered a human body, the god spoke.
In Exodus, we find Israel performing a very Egyptian ritual. They are creating an image for a god to enter into. In Exodus 32:4 Aaron said "These are your gods (Elohim), O Israel, who made you go up from the land of Egypt."
Yahweh brought them out of Egypt, who is also called "Elohim" - a name possibly picked up in Canaan.
Exodus 32:5 reads "And Aaron saw, and he built an altar before it. And Aaron called and said, A feast to Jehovah tomorrow."
This seems to equate "Elohim" and "Yahweh".
In the day of the new covenant, God says in Hosea 2:
16 And at that day, says Jehovah, you shall call Me, My husband; and you shall no more call Me, My Baal.
Asherah was the wife of Baal, and perhaps even symbolic of that which supported the temple itself (or even symbolic of the temple's very altar).
Amie
Tami - Thank you so much for bringing this up! It is so very interesting!
Amie,
Wow, thanks for all this. This is getting so way over my head. But I'm absolutely enjoying it and am looking forward to trying to digest what you said here.
Tami
Maurice A. Williams
05-22-2006, 09:58 PM
It's sad that something really controversial gets so much coverage on forums. If you are Christian and believe that Jesus is God become a human to save us from our sins, then I have a big question for you.
If Jesus married a woman and had children and their children lasted through the generations so that there are still descendants of Jesus alive today (as "Holy Blood Holy Grail," one of Dan Brown's non-fiction sources has it), wouldn’t his offspring be different than the rest of us? Most likely (like so many of the people promoting the book) you would no longer believe that Jesus really is God, as John 1:1 puts it: “the Word made flesh.” Remember that Jesus many times said that he was both God and man. His enemies understood his claims. They had him put to death precisely because he claimed to be God.
I read the book because I write about these things. The book is very well written. Dan Brown has a unique new cliff-hanging style that makes his book hard to put down. But his message (even though he calls it fiction) is very hostile to the idea that Jesus is God and hostile to at least one church that claims Jesus is God.
Books like this are poison. They set the stage for a rejection of Christianity. This book and the other similar ones mentions in this forum, not to mention our current rebellion against the sexual conduct God commands from us will get us believers way over our heads into a confrontation with the secular state. I can just see that coming. The question is "Will God allow a persecution to purify us lukewarm Christians or will God intervene to stop all rebellion?" Don't let books like "Left Behind" lull you to sleep. I see a real moral struggle on the horizon for us.
Sincerely,
Maurice A. Williams
The question is "Will God allow a persecution to purify us lukewarm Christians or will God intervene to stop all rebellion?"
G'day Maurice,
I should imagine that IF God has an issue with some Christian's supposed lukewarm-ness, then potential "persecution" in the name of "purity" would be the Divine order of the day and thus quite appropriate.
What do you think?
Barry
05-23-2006, 07:04 AM
Hi Maurice, great to hear from you bro!
I read the book because I write about these things. The book is very well written. Dan Brown has a unique new cliff-hanging style that makes his book hard to put down. But his message (even though he calls it fiction) is very hostile to the idea that Jesus is God and hostile to at least one church that claims Jesus is God.
Books like this are poison. They set the stage for a rejection of Christianity. This book and the other similar ones mentions in this forum, not to mention our current rebellion against the sexual conduct God commands from us will get us believers way over our heads into a confrontation with the secular state. I can just see that coming. The question is "Will God allow a persecution to purify us lukewarm Christians or will God intervene to stop all rebellion?" Don't let books like "Left Behind" lull you to sleep. I see a real moral struggle on the horizon for us.
Those are some interesting points Maurice. It seems to me though that dividing such things between "Christianity" and the "secular" is a little precarious at best. Historically, each has affected the other for “good” and “bad”.
The question then may be what is most dangerous for society at large? The "Left Behind" or the "DaVinci Code"?
Left Behind teaches that God cannot salvage his creation so he comes back to destroy it. Portraying a false picture of God and the work of Christ. It manifests the "us and them" mentality that is the source of most of our sociological conflict. Interestingly enough much of the concepts of "common brotherhood" that Christianity is supposed to be promoting is now coming from the secular.
Of the two those who have presented us with the "Left behind" claim a greater "factual" fundamental than those of "DaVinci Code". Maybe the "DaVinci Code" is getting Christians to question what they are supposed to question anyway.
This is of course just my opinion. So don't take me too seriously. :biggrinbounce:
Amie: interesting stuff.
IMHO Moses had some understanding concerning the unity and diversity of God.
Peace,
Barry
Paige
05-23-2006, 08:59 AM
Hey guys,
I just heard that "Elohim" is a feminine Hebrew word. Has anyone else heard this?
Paige
backtothefuture
05-23-2006, 09:07 AM
I just read that is some of the stuff I have been researching also Paige.
What do you think the world would be like if the Divine Feminine was allowed to continue forth on a natural path?
Nancy
Barry
05-23-2006, 09:20 AM
I just read that is some of the stuff I have been researching also Paige.
What do you think the world would be like if the Divine Feminine was allowed to continue forth on a natural path?
Nancy
The end of the world as we know it.
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
Barry ;)
kevinbeck
05-23-2006, 09:38 AM
As I understand it, the Hebrew word for "compassion" comes from the same word as "womb." So when the OT talks about God's compassion it carries the connotation of "motherly protection, life giving, and nurturing/feeding." I find that to be a powerful "feminie" image.
then there is Paul in 1Thessalonians who applies feminine imagery to his own relationship to that group. He nursed them. Interesting image considering he saw Christ living in him.
Blessings to all
then there is Paul in 1Thessalonians who applies feminine imagery to his own relationship to that group. He nursed them. Interesting image considering he saw Christ living in him.
Yes interesting Kevin, which IMO speaks more of "characteristics" than "gender" -- something that also IMO has received over-rated and over-stated and consequently misguided attention.
I went and saw the DaVinci Code last night -- a lot ado about nothing. It was an interesting plot etc, but based on a number of "assumptions" that fed the story-line. I naturally don't buy the film's basic premise, but I enjoyed it nonetheless. I can see how the Catholic church is cranky about the movie as the RCC practices are called into serious question. Some people however have been trying for century upon century to discredit the "message of Jesus" -- but THAT I think "traditionalism" has already successfully done anyway -- folk don't really reject Jesus/God so much as rather the condemnatory message that has been brought forth in THEIR name -- big difference.
Maurice,
I'm sorry that this story has affected you so negatively, and that you feel that it will affect Christianity so negatively as well. I'm also sorry that the attention it gains is sad for you. That hasn't been my experience, nor have I ever known a "lukewarm Christian". In my experience, people either say they are Christians, or they say they aren't Christians.
"The DaVinci Code" has been far from poison for me. I am really enjoying talking about the concepts and topics that have come from Dan Brown's book and have gained a great deal from it.
You are definately more than free to disagree with whatever you wish, I mean no disrespect in sharing my experience.
Amie
"Rauch" ("spirit", "wind") is a feminine noun. ""Elohim" is a masculine noun.
The "shekinah" ("presence of God") is feminine :).
What do you think the world would be like if the Divine Feminine was allowed to continue forth on a natural path?
My hope: balance.
then there is Paul in 1Thessalonians who applies feminine imagery to his own relationship to that group. He nursed them. Interesting image considering he saw Christ living in him.
Where in 1 Thess? I'd like to read (or reread) it :).
..folk don't really reject Jesus/God so much as rather the condemnatory message that has been brought forth in THEIR name -- big difference
Exactly!!
Amie
Maurice A. Williams
05-23-2006, 06:52 PM
I just read that is some of the stuff I have been researching also Paige.
What do you think the world would be like if the Divine Feminine was allowed to continue forth on a natural path?
Nancy
Hello Nancy,
I couldn't help adding my two cents on this one. God is a pure spirit. God is not a physical being that reproduces sexually like we do. Therefore God is neither male nor female. English does not have pronouns that are specific for spiritual beings. Other languages do, but not English. Our only other choice is neuter, but "it" would be absolutely improper for God.
God created masculinity and feminity when God created the physical universe, which includes us physical beings that reproduce sexually. God, in God's revelation applied some masculine traits and some femine traits to God's divine nature, but God is not a male or a female. For us to insist on developing the "Divine Feminine" is a risky business. We may offend God by confusing what God has already revealed.
Incidentally, Hebrew uses masculine and feminine pronouns for other things besides sexually reproducing beings. English at one time did. There's very little of it left. We still refer to ships as "her." German and Spanish do this frequently. The Hebrew word for "spirit," the "Holy Sprit" and "wisdom" (sometimes substituted for Holy Spirit) are all feminine nouns.
Those languages, especially Hebrew, don't have the problems with gender that we English speaking people do. Think of the Father as representing some aspects of masculinity, the Holy Spirit as representing some aspects of femininity, and the Word who became a human male. Don't overlook the importance of Jesus' mother who is a human female. Both genders are very well represented in the revelation God gave us. My advice is don't try to change it because today it is fashionable.
And don't think women got a raw deal from God. There is no human being in existence (other that the human nature of Christ) that has a closer relation with God or greater honor than his mother. She is a woman, and she outranks all of us and has been elevated even above the angels.
Sincerely,
Maurice A. Williams
Barry
05-23-2006, 07:18 PM
Some people however have been trying for century upon century to discredit the "message of Jesus" -- but THAT I think "traditionalism" has already successfully done anyway -- folk don't really reject Jesus/God so much as rather the condemnatory message that has been brought forth in THEIR name -- big difference.
Ain't that the truth.
Barry
Maurice,
I really appreciate what you wrote to Nancy. Some things stood out for me.
For us to insist on developing the "Divine Feminine" is a risky business. We may offend God by confusing what God has already revealed.
Not saying that you are suggesting anyone here is developing the "divine feminine" as defined by Brown, I want to clarify that we are not. We are exploring what you so wonderfully point out in your post.. where females are included in God.
..And I agree, "he" is sexless. It is my understanding that the Hebrew language assigns sex to clarify function and not biological makeup.
My advice is don't try to change it because today it is fashionable.
Who is trying to change what?
Amie
christyG
05-23-2006, 08:18 PM
Just to chime in... I am totally loving this discussion...still chewing on much of it...but loving it:)
First a side note:
originally posted by Maurice:Remember that Jesus many times said that he was both God and man. I read a book once that stated that Jesus referred to himself as God in an effort to speak out against the unjust social systems of his day---he was referring to himself in the same way that Ceasar referred to himself. He being a poor Jewish, living the life of a peasant among peasants.
Amie has mentioned balance on a few occasions, in reference to the Divine Femenine. Balance does seem to be the key. From my studies balance was important to the Jewish concept of God. It is also a concept that seems to be important to other ancient religions.
Barry said: Maybe the "DaVinci Code" is getting Christians to question what they are supposed to question anyway.
IMO God is not afraid of questions and actually welcomes them.
Also, Amie you said:
nor have I ever known a "lukewarm Christian". Maybe thats because you don't go to church. Please don't take that too harshly anyone. But I see "lukewarm" Christians everyday. They attend church to be seen. They attend Bible study also to be seen. They learn a little...but most of their knowledge comes from their childhood Sunday School classes. They've got their ticket to the afterlife and thats all they need to know about. I would call these people lukewarm Christians. I would not identify anyone that studies Christianity from all angles, comes to their investigation with an open mind, carefully considering each possibility to be a lukewarm Christian. I hope I have not offended anyone. At one time I probably could have been considered one of the afore mentioned "lukewarm" individuals.
Anyway, I am enjoying going through the information that has been shared. I am also working my way quickly through the book.
Christy
Christy,
You sure haven't offended me :). You spend so much time in study and put forth so much effort that I can understand how you might view them that way ("lukewarm Christians"). To me, the only qualifier for a person to be a Christian, is that they think so and say so. I don't expect their zeal to equal my own, even though I want so badly for them to feel that zeal the way I do.
IMO God is not afraid of questions and actually welcomes them.
I agree!
Amie
Paige
05-23-2006, 10:56 PM
even though I want so badly for them to feel that zeal the way I do.
I knew it, Amie. You're a closeted zealot! No hiding it now because the cat is out of the bag, lol!:fence: :biglaugha:
Paige
backtothefuture
05-24-2006, 09:32 AM
Thanks Maurice for the nice post.
I am not interested in worshiping a woman God or looking for that. I am looking for the Balance kind of like what Amie said.
In my own experience the Feminine anyway you want to look at it has been missing from the church as I grew up to know it. Totally a man run institution.
I only recently became interested in the divine feminine. Just wondering how things would have turned out for the church, if this wasn't something that maybe intentionally has been removed. Don't know. Have no facts to back this up, just wondering.
I think of my Catholic friends. Many of them have statues of Mary on their mantels and in their yards. In my old days as a whacked out fundamental, I would have thought of those as idols. In fact we were taught that in the church. Now I think of them as something, maybe my Catholic friends can identify with on a feminine side. Maybe she brings comfort to them in ways woman in the evangelical world have missed.
Most everything that is Christian anyway, came out of a pagan setting. In the old testament wasn't it Rachael who took the idols when they were leaving. Maybe they were not of Male Gods, but maybe the Fertility Gods. The female, that brought them the comfort they needed.
Anyway, don't know if I am making an sense, And I sure don't mean to offend anyone with my crazy thoughts.
I really enjoyed the DAVinci Code book. I am looking forward to the movie. I think the great thing it has done, whether a great movie or a real bomb, is its got people talking and thinking. To be, that makes a blockbuster!!
Blessings,
Nancy
Just saw the movie today. Thoroughly enjoyed it. Tami
Anyone know if Tom Hanks' hairline is really receding, or if that was for the movie?
Amie
kevinbeck
05-26-2006, 12:13 PM
Amie,
I'm pretty sure he was trying to look like the Mona Lisa.
Kevin,
I think you're onto something...
check it out (http://www.womenbeyond.com/hanks)
;)
backtothefuture
05-27-2006, 09:57 PM
Ha! What a picture to see right before bed!
That was great Amie,
Nancy
Maurice A. Williams
05-30-2006, 03:05 PM
Hello Backtothefuture,
I don't agree that "most everything that is Christian came out of a pagan setting."
Wouldn't it be more logical to believe that most of what is Christian came from Jesus, his Apostles, John the Baptist, with a great deal of support from Old Testament prophets and Moses?
The pagans did their very best to understand God, but they did not have a public revelation to instruct them as the Israelites and Christians do. Nevertheless, it's undeniable that, even with a public revelation to guide them, the Israelites (and their remnant, the Judahites -- Judeans or Jews) and we Christians have not wholeheartedly believed what God and Jesus have revealed.
When Jesus came the first time, very few Judahites believed him, even though the whole Old Testament was a preparation for his coming. When Jesus returns, it looks like very few formerly Christian people will believe him, even though these 2000 years of Church history have been a preparation, a warning, that he will return. How many will believe him when he does returns? Will any be so foolish as to try to defeat him a second time?
My advice is don't accept these criticisms of Christianity and pass them on. Rather, try to defend the work of Jesus and refute his critics. After all, what Jesus has done means everything to him and his Father. How much more should his efforts mean to us who risk everything if we don't believe?
Sincerely,
Maurice A. Williams
backtothefuture
05-30-2006, 03:13 PM
Maurice,
By saying that most everything Christian came out of something Pagan, that was to general and I apologize.
Thanks for your input. I am down with a sinus infection, but will try to re-read what you have to say again later tonight.
Blessings,
Nancy
Wouldn't it be more logical to believe that most of what is Christian came from Jesus, his Apostles, John the Baptist, with a great deal of support from Old Testament prophets and Moses?
Why would that be "more" logical? The prophets, Moses, Jesus, his Apostles, etc came out of different time periods and were entrenched in different cultures.
Maurice, do you have the fulfilled view of eschatology?
Amie
Maurice A. Williams
05-30-2006, 06:52 PM
Hi Amie,
I think it is logical because Jesus is the savior God promised from the beginning to Adam and Eve. Even though Moses, Jesus, his phophets, etc. came out of different time periods and were entrenched in different cultures, the common thread is that God spoke through these peoples to reach, not only them, but all of us so that all of us might know what God has planned.
Jesus, I have no doubt, will be the central figure in fulfilled eschatology.
Sincerely,
Maurice A. Williams
backtothefuture
05-31-2006, 01:52 PM
Jesus, I have no doubt, will be the central figure in fulfilled eschatology.
Maurice, I don't think that he will be, I kind of think of it as he is the central figure in fulfilled eschatology.
Its done. He has done it all. He is not coming back a second time. At least Thats what I believe anyway.
Blessings,
Nancy:biggrinbounce:
Hi guys, Wanted to start a thread regarding a different movie? Anyone know how I do that. I'm afraid of messing up the board. Tami
Hi guys, Wanted to start a thread regarding a different movie? Anyone know how I do that. I'm afraid of messing up the board. Tami
Go to index "talk-grace.com"
Click "Movies and TV"
Click "New Thread" at top of page
Maurice A. Williams
06-02-2006, 07:54 AM
Hi Backtothefuture,
I think Jesus is coming back, but for the final judgment, not to reign on earth for the 1000-year millennium.
Sincerely,
Maurice A. Williams
backtothefuture
06-02-2006, 11:29 AM
Hi Maurice,
Why do you think he is coming back?
When would you say he is coming back?
What would he be coming back for?
I would be interested in your thoughts.:biggrinbounce:
Blessings,
Nancy
If Maurice is interested in talking about it, I would be happy to get a new thread going on the subject :). If so, what shall we title it? The second coming?
Amie
backtothefuture
06-02-2006, 01:14 PM
Amie,
Please start a thread. Let's call it the Second Coming:clap: I would be interested in some peoples views on this, even though I know what mine is. It is interesting to talk among one another and learn from each other.
Thanks,
Nancy
Maurice A. Williams
06-12-2006, 08:30 AM
Hello Nancy,
I saw where you suggested that Amie start a new thread entitled “Second Coming.” I searched for it, but didn’t find it. I would be happy to post comments on it. I think you are right. This would be an interesting topic because of the various interpretations of Revelation. I’ve found that people have conflicting views on all three questions you asked of me. Much of their views are based on popular “end times’ interpretations, like the “Left Behind” series.
The three questions you asked me are:
Why do I think Jesus is coming back?
When do I think he is coming back?
What would he be coming back for?
My answers to the three questions are:
WHY DO I THINK JESUS IS COMING BACK? Scripture said so. “Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). And Jesus said so: ”But I tell you, hereafter you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of the power, and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Mt 26-64).
WHEN DO I THINK HE IS COMING BACK? I think he will come at the end of this present world. “Immediately after the tribulation of those days . . . and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Mt 24:29-30). “But in those days, after the tribulation, . . . And then they will see the Son of man coming in clouds with great power and glory” (Mk 13:24-26).
WHAT WOULD HE BE COMING BACK FOR? I think he will be coming for the final judgment. All my writings elaborate why I think so. “When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, . . . then he will say to the [sheep] ‘Come O blessed of my father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world,’ . . . then he will say to [the goats] ‘Depart from me you cursed into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels’” (Mt 25:31-41)
There’s an eschatological dimension to people’s concept of what happens when Jesus returns. I, for one, believe Jesus will return at the end of history, as we know it—the end of the world, and inaugurate eternity for all of us. Some, like Tim LaHaye (Left Behind) think Jesus will return, defeat the unrighteous and rule with his saints for 1000 years before the world ends. Others think God will first warn, then chastise the unrighteous, purify the world, and then grant the world an era of peace before the end of the world. Regardless of these conflicting opinions, I don’t think there should be any doubt that Jesus will return.
Hope Amie does make a thread for “Second Coming.” I think it will solicit some interesting comments.
Sincerely,
Maurice A. Williams
Paige
06-12-2006, 09:10 AM
Maurice,
The topic was discussed somewhat here:
http://talk-grace.com/showthread.php?t=217
Feel free to read through it and add your questions and comments.
Paige
Sorry about that Maurice!!
No one answered so I made the assumption that no one was interested! The thread "Second Coming" is now here: http://talk-grace.com/showthread.php?p=3011#post3011. I hope you don't mind - I took the liberty to copy/paste the post that you wrote in answer to Nancy over there.
Thanks for your patience!
Amie
backtothefuture
06-21-2006, 09:41 AM
This gave me something to ponder at bagel church Last week. My old Sunday school teacher came. She brought with her a paper her church was passing out about the DaVinci code and how they were doing some Sunday Services on it. Said the book, no Christian should read and the movie, my gosh she would never even go to it. I told her I read the book and loved it. And was still trying to get to the movie.
With that she got also on the topic of homosexuals and how we are to dust off our feet and walk away from them. I told her, I didn't believe that. And with that she said that, possibly some of those people would go to heaven, even those who read the DaVinci Code, but they would probably just be the gate keepers or have a menial job! All the way home I thought to myself, is it possible to have a bad job in Heaven:uhh: I would be happy to just be there, with God day and night. Anyway, shows you how messed up some church theology really is.
I was thanking God all day, for being free and out of all that.
(Hoping to see the movie this week:)
Nancy
This gave me something to ponder at bagel church Last week. My old Sunday school teacher came. She brought with her a paper her church was passing out about the DaVinci code and how they were doing some Sunday Services on it. Said the book, no Christian should read and the movie, my gosh she would never even go to it. I told her I read the book and loved it. And was still trying to get to the movie.
With that she got also on the topic of homosexuals and how we are to dust off our feet and walk away from them. I told her, I didn't believe that. And with that she said that, possibly some of those people would go to heaven, even those who read the DaVinci Code, but they would probably just be the gate keepers or have a menial job! All the way home I thought to myself, is it possible to have a bad job in Heaven:uhh: I would be happy to just be there, with God day and night. Anyway, shows you how messed up some church theology really is.
I was thanking God all day, for being free and out of all that.
(Hoping to see the movie this week:)
Nancy
Didn't Jesus say the least would be the greatest?
Like every thing else today's "Christians" have turned it all upside down. She believes it is what she does instead of what God/Jesus has done.
The question should be asked is why are they afraid of a book or movie?
This gave me something to ponder at bagel church Last week. My old Sunday school teacher came. She brought with her a paper her church was passing out about the DaVinci code and how they were doing some Sunday Services on it. Said the book, no Christian should read and the movie, my gosh she would never even go to it. I told her I read the book and loved it. And was still trying to get to the movie.
With that she got also on the topic of homosexuals and how we are to dust off our feet and walk away from them. I told her, I didn't believe that. And with that she said that, possibly some of those people would go to heaven, even those who read the DaVinci Code, but they would probably just be the gate keepers or have a menial job! All the way home I thought to myself, is it possible to have a bad job in Heaven:uhh: I would be happy to just be there, with God day and night. Anyway, shows you how messed up some church theology really is.
I was thanking God all day, for being free and out of all that.
(Hoping to see the movie this week:)
Nancy
Nancy, What is bagel church? I'm so confused:scratch: What this lady told you is just so SAD. How awful. Honey, you'll be fightin me for a seat on Jesus' lap. If they wanna work their fingers to the bone while I'm on Jesus' lap, then fine with me:biggrinbounce: . As far as homosexuals... Dear Nancy...she's in for a very BIG surprise:eek: Tami
backtothefuture
06-22-2006, 02:42 PM
Tami,
Bagel church is a bagel place that I have gone every day for a year and a half since leaving organized religion:biggrinbounce:
It just kind of turned into the term Bagel Church. When I left my last church, I was in quite a bit of grief in my life. So I started going to this bagel place by me and started all over reading the Bible. This time from a fulfilled view.
Anyway, to make a long story short. It has been wonderful. I have met so many friends. Others like me who have left the church and some who still go, join me almost everyday. The Lord gave me an Oasis in the wilderness. Its been a great community for me. After 8 months I asked my husband if he would like to come and now he has made some great friends also. I learned to walk through the wilderness there. I learned to sit some days just in quiet. And I learned that there are lots of people in this world in pain, and just want to chit chat, even with a stranger at lunch time.
Nancy
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.