Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* - - - - 2 votes

And the Sun Stood Still


  • Please log in to reply
191 replies to this topic

#61    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 7,785 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 14 March 2013 - 10:28 PM

View PostSherapy, on 14 March 2013 - 10:20 PM, said:

You know Jor el, I do agree (and I don't think either perspective works for me for  that matter to be honest.) I think both interpretations are just that personal takes on what the bible means.  In fact, I think that literal interpretation is more a reflection of the personal world view and influences of each of us more than any thing else.

In truth there is nothing one can say that is not a personal take on a particular issue.

That being said one can find some evidence to support one view over another, the starting point however must be whether one can honestly choose a metaphorical intent over a historical intent in the text.

In my case I don't deny that a metaphorical view is the easier approach. When confronted with the apparantly unexplainable, that is usually the easiest take. But, again can the text honestly support such a view?

The argument here is not whether the event actually happened but whether the text was written as history or merely as metaphor.

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#62    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 21,996 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • Dysfunctional you can fix, ******** can't be.

Posted 14 March 2013 - 10:30 PM

View PostJor-el, on 14 March 2013 - 10:28 PM, said:

In truth there is nothing one can say that is not a personal take on a particular issue.

That being said one can find some evidence to support one view over another, the starting point however must be whether one can honestly choose a metaphorical intent over a historical intent in the text.

In my case I don't deny that a metaphorical view is the easier approach. When confronted with the apparantly unexplainable, that is usually the easiest take. But, again can the text honestly support such a view?

The argument here is not whether the event actually happened but whether the text was written as history or merely as metaphor.

Are you going with metaphor?




#63    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 7,785 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 14 March 2013 - 10:35 PM

View PostSherapy, on 14 March 2013 - 10:30 PM, said:

Are you going with metaphor?

Nope. That is Bens corner of the market.

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#64    spud the mackem

spud the mackem

    Spud the Mackem

  • Member
  • 3,580 posts
  • Joined:28 Oct 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Yeo Valley,Darkest Somerset.

  • man who ask for nothing shall never be disappointed

Posted 14 March 2013 - 11:05 PM

Yer ,and they told lies in those days,the same as they do now.

(1) try your best, ............if that dont work.
(2) try your second best, ........if that dont work
(3) give up you aint gonna win

#65    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 7,785 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 14 March 2013 - 11:18 PM

View Postspud the mackem, on 14 March 2013 - 11:05 PM, said:

Yer ,and they told lies in those days,the same as they do now.

They told the truth as they saw it through their own eyes, just as we do now. Lies are purposeful distortions of a truth and we know them to be so unless we are mentally ill.

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#66    Paranoid Android

Paranoid Android

    ????????

  • 25,929 posts
  • Joined:17 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney

  • Paranoid Android... One Mippippi, two Mippippi, three Mippipi....

Posted 15 March 2013 - 06:14 AM

View PostJor-el, on 13 March 2013 - 10:33 PM, said:

Hmm, here I would have to disagree, to use this particular parable in regard to Jesus own ressurection, is oblique and indirect. Only the last line would connect with the resurrection theme. The overall morality of the story is that you reap what you sow. This applies to both the rich man and to Lazarus both recieved their just reward.

Righteous and Wicked are separated at death and held till a great judgment. (1 Enoch 22; Pseudo Philo 32:13; 2 Baruch. 21:33; 30:1; 4 Ezra 4:35, 41; 7:32, 80, 85, 95, 101, 121)

As one can see the connection is not without precedent in Judaism, even if it is rejected today. It was especially evident in the 2nd temple period,  of wich Jesus himself was part of.

One of two conclusions can be drawn from this, a) Jesus believed as most other Jews of the day in the things related to us in the Gospels, such as separation of the righteous and the wicked till judgement, or b ) that Jesus was in the minority in what he preached to the Jewish audience.

That books like Enoch, Baruch and a number of other pseudoepigrapha written in the inter-testamental period were not only extremely popular but well recieved and accepted by most of Judaism is self evident, thus indicating that (a) is the logical answer.
Possibly.  "You reap what you sow" is a biblical theme.  However, we still cannot then use the parable in Luke 16 as a basis for deciding that the description given there is an accurate one of what awaits the wicked in the next life.  Nevertheless, I feel with the final comment that no one will believe you even if you rise from the dead was a commentary on Jesus' death and resurrection.

Posted Image

My blog is now taking a new direction.  Dedicated to my father who was a great inspiration in my life, I wish to honour his memory (RIP, dad) by sharing with the world what he had always kept to himself.  More details, http://www.unexplain...showentry=27811

#67    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,373 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 15 March 2013 - 08:13 AM

The criticism of miracles based on the difficulties about them our modern knowledge creates are useful.  After all, if the text says, "Such and such happened," then we cannot sidestep this by saying God made it appear to happen, or God did something else that had that effect.  We have to stick with the sun stood still in the sky, etc.

Still, if you are talking about a being that can do anything, then maybe we should just forget all this and just accept it as a miracle and relax.

Except there is a more general problem with miracles.  If God created it all in the first place, why does He have to do special things to interfere with the working of His creation?  Its as though what he made is not quite functioning and he has to make adjustments here and there.

This is also a problem I have with certain kinds of prayer -- those where we ask God for something.  It may not be selfish -- say we are praying for world peace.  What are you really doing here?  You are asking God to interfere.  You are in effect asking God to replace what He wants with what you want.  No wonder these prayers so often end with a sort-of apology "Above all Your will be done."  Such prayers are a bit much -- please do what I want but if You don't want to then please don't.


#68    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 7,785 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 15 March 2013 - 06:19 PM

Sorry people I seem to be having problems editing this post for some reason...

Edited by Jor-el, 15 March 2013 - 06:32 PM.

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#69    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 7,785 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 15 March 2013 - 06:31 PM

View PostParanoid Android, on 15 March 2013 - 06:14 AM, said:

Possibly.  "You reap what you sow" is a biblical theme.  However, we still cannot then use the parable in Luke 16 as a basis for deciding that the description given there is an accurate one of what awaits the wicked in the next life.  Nevertheless, I feel with the final comment that no one will believe you even if you rise from the dead was a commentary on Jesus' death and resurrection.
You reap what you sow, is definitely a biblical theme, one that extends from Genesis right down to Revelation. Besides being directly quoted in Galatians 6:7, there a huge number of verses on the subject and idea. it is also the basis for the parable of the rich man and Lazarus.

http://www.openbible...ng_what_you_sow

Naturally the last line is relevant as an indicator to Jesus future death and resurrection, but as I said that is not what the central theme of the parable is about. We might call it a little jab at the Pharisees, but that is all.
Most of the commentaries I glossed over do not even give either of our reasons for this parable, To them the parable is about using money wisely and justly.
I do get what you are saying though, I am led to think about another Lazarus we all know of, the one who was raised from the dead. I wonder if this is the same man. If that is so it says alot about how the theme of death and resurrection fits here.

This is how Jesus' enemies reacted:

John 12:9-11

"Meanwhile a large crowd of Jews found out that Jesus was there and came, not only because of him but also to see Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead. So the chief priests made plans to kill Lazarus as well, for on account of him many of the Jews were going over to Jesus and putting their faith in him."

So it seems that Jesus jab in this parable implies alot more than what is apparant. Either way, there is no way to disprove or prove that the afterlife is exactly described as is written down here in this parable. I personally believe it is, there is no reason for Jesus to invent when the truth serves equally well.

Edited by Jor-el, 15 March 2013 - 06:35 PM.

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#70    Ben Masada

Ben Masada

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,982 posts
  • Joined:06 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 15 March 2013 - 06:54 PM

View PostWoIverine, on 14 March 2013 - 08:43 PM, said:

I posted this months ago!  Nobody even considered it. No one had any explanation for "a missing day during the historic record."  Glad to see you brought it back Ben. :tu:

Always thought references like this were interesting:

Discussion of the Missing Day in Earth's History(The Day the Sun Stood Still)

It is reported by historians that records of the Chinese during the reign of Emperor Yeo, who lived at the same time as Joshua, report "a long day." Also, Heroditus, a Greek historian, wrote that an account of "a long day" appears in records of Egyptian priests. Others cite records of Mexicans of the sun standing still for an entire day in a year denoted as "Seven Rabits," which is the same year in which Joshua defeated the Philistines and conquered Palestine. ("Bible-Science Newsletter," DAILY READING MAGAZINE - Supplement, Vol. VIII - No. 5, May 1978, Caldwell, Idaho.) Additionally, the historical lore of the Aztecs, Peruvians, and Babylonians speak of a "day of twice natural length."

In 1970, a story appeared in "The Evening World," a newpaper in Spencer, Indiana, about a consultant to the space program named Harold Hill (deceased) citing that he was told a computer program had found a "missing day." Though the computer program story could never be validated, interesting speculations and studies ensued about what astronomical mechanism might result in the "Earth standing still" for 24 hours.

One person suggested a large asteroid, perhaps 480 miles in diameter, may have struck Earth's mantle slowing Earth's rotation to a standstill by causing the hard mantle and molten core to separate for 24 hours as a bicycle's speed brake might slowly bring the wheels to a halt with the inter spokes continuing to rotate. After 24 hours, the friction between the stationary mantle and rotating core would accelerate the mantle to rotate once more.

The mechanism and collision would have to be somewhat viscous so that both the deceleration and acceleration was so gradual as to go unnoticed by Earth's inhabitants. The theory cites Professor Totten as writing that Newton described a way Earth's rotation could abruptly be slowed without its inhabitants noticing the slowing. A close encounter with the asteroid Hermes (500,000 miles) by Earth in 1937 is given as an example of the likelihood that such a collision might have occurred in Joshua's time.

The existance of a depressed (sink ) region of great size between Hawaii and the Philippines featuring long fracture lines at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean which extend outward to the continents is offered as the remains of the asteroid causing the loss of a day in the Earth's history. ("How To Live Like a King's Kid," Harold Hill with Irene Harrell, Bridge Publishing, Inc., South Plainfield, New Jersey, 1974, p. 74.)

It is very probable that those legends about a missing day in the history of the universe were known by the author and influenced the writer of this text about Joshua at his conquest of Canaan. Then, he used the simile to embellish the quasi-miraculous strategy Joshua applied to keep the five kings locked up in the cave of Makkedah while the Israelites fought the five armies and defeated  them. It must have been indeed a "long" day.

Ben


#71    Ben Masada

Ben Masada

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,982 posts
  • Joined:06 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 15 March 2013 - 07:01 PM

View PostSherapy, on 14 March 2013 - 09:23 PM, said:

Ben, to be fair hypothesizing  is part and parcel of thinking logically, it is a way in which we address the unknowns in our reality. It is in this we can get to the reality. We do this by sifting through the 'how bout's' and 'what if's'. Eliminating, revising as we go.

I agree with you Sherapy; it does make a lot of sense. That's a kind of approach to the Truth by eliminating possibilities.


#72    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 21,996 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • Dysfunctional you can fix, ******** can't be.

Posted 15 March 2013 - 07:18 PM

View PostBen Masada, on 15 March 2013 - 07:01 PM, said:

I agree with you Sherapy; it does make a lot of sense. That's a kind of approach to the Truth by eliminating possibilities.

Indeed, I tip my hat to Euclid and Descartes for it too.




#73    Ben Masada

Ben Masada

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,982 posts
  • Joined:06 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 15 March 2013 - 07:22 PM

View PostJor-el, on 14 March 2013 - 09:58 PM, said:

I am sorry but I must disagree, there is no evidence that the hypothesis you put forward is implied or even understood in the text itself. It is as you initially put it, the interpretation of one man who lived centuries ago.

Throughout the Bible we have references to the fall of kingdoms and political powers reported as the fall of the stars from heaven and other instances of catastrophical disasters in the heavens above. Then the author chose to embelish Joshua's strategy of the five kings in the cave of Makkedah to metaphorize the inertia of the sun and moon in the sky. If it were possible the use of a time machine to go back in time to that event, I am sure Joshua would refer that success to his strategy and not to a literal interpretation that the sun indeed stood still. And I am sure you agree with me, but it is almost equally catastrophic to watch one's illusions washed through under the bridge, especailly after many years that one has been fed on them. This happens more often with old people. You know, habit is too hard to break.

Ben


#74    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 21,996 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • Dysfunctional you can fix, ******** can't be.

Posted 15 March 2013 - 07:26 PM

View PostJor-el, on 14 March 2013 - 10:35 PM, said:

Nope. That is Bens corner of the market.

I enjoy reading Ben's thoughts on the biblical metaphors, his posts reflect that he has put thought into his perspective, I think he adds a lot to the discussion and it is my impression that he is framing his opinion as just that. You are not suggesting that your perspective is the only one possible are you?




#75    Ben Masada

Ben Masada

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,982 posts
  • Joined:06 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 15 March 2013 - 07:45 PM

View PostFrank Merton, on 15 March 2013 - 08:13 AM, said:

The criticism of miracles based on the difficulties about them our modern knowledge creates are useful.  After all, if the text says, "Such and such happened," then we cannot sidestep this by saying God made it appear to happen, or God did something else that had that effect.  We have to stick with the sun stood still in the sky, etc.

Still, if you are talking about a being that can do anything, then maybe we should just forget all this and just accept it as a miracle and relax.

Except there is a more general problem with miracles.  If God created it all in the first place, why does He have to do special things to interfere with the working of His creation?  Its as though what he made is not quite functioning and he has to make adjustments here and there.

This is also a problem I have with certain kinds of prayer -- those where we ask God for something.  It may not be selfish -- say we are praying for world peace.  What are you really doing here?  You are asking God to interfere.  You are in effect asking God to replace what He wants with what you want.  No wonder these prayers so often end with a sort-of apology "Above all Your will be done."  Such prayers are a bit much -- please do what I want but if You don't want to then please don't.

What is a miracle Frank, is it not an act against nature or supernatural event? If man could do that, yes, it would be a miracle. But a miracle could not be of God because what could be a miracle to the Creator of the universe? So, the miracle is ruled out. Now, for prayers, what is a prayer, isn't it an attempt to make God change His mind? Since God is not like a man to change His mind, prayers become an exercise in futility; unless we become conscious that it functions from us to us about ourselves.(Num. 23:19)

Ben





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users