Are you listening to a pied piper?

Are you listening to a pied piper?

This video is a rebuttal of the after analysis of the debate with Christopher Bjerkness moderated by Dr Kevin McCairn.   I was rather disappointed at the assessment with phrases like “Christopher won the debate” and “Paul was trounced” and the charge that I was not polite.  I believe that whereas Christopher resented  John Brisson sarcastic tone he actually thanked me and said he would look into some of the things I suggested because they were interesting.

Do I sometimes go on?   Yes, because that is necessary when people make sweeping claims about things they do not understand.  Kevin complained about the back and forth over the academic  minutiae because it is about pointing out who is the enemy and who is the useful idiots. Well you can’t do that unless you understand the the academic  minutiae otherwise you are at a disadvantage when false claims are made. If the foundation is built on sand the house collapses.

Christopher presents a deluge of information that he strings together but they come from different sources and different contexts on which he places equal weight.  How can you place the same weight on the Old Testament as on the Zohar that appeared in 13th century Spain?  He makes sweeping claims (without evidence) that the Greek Bible (LXX) is not a translation but that it is the original Old Testament (which they presumably translated back into Hebrew scrolls some even written in paleo-Hebrew and scattered around everywhere.)   He even points to the Massoretic Text (MT)  being written about 1000 AD as a “gotcha” moment (lolz).

This demonstrates to me that he has no understanding of textual transmission and his Biblical knowledge (inter-textual hermeneutics) is poor.  I think I remained very polite and I had to bite my tongue and show restraint on numerous occasions.   The problem is that there is some truth to what he is saying and it needs to be honestly examined but we cannot throw the baby out with the bath water.

I do not have to answer for other Christians nor do I carry the same burdens.  Just because Tertullian and Origen misunderstood the typology of the scapegoat does not mean that I do.  Just because some Christians may believe in Ransom theory and a bet with the devil does not mean that I carry that burden and it does not mean that Scripture even teaches it.  As to burning in hell Christians would do well to remember that Jesus went to hell and came back on the third day.  Moreover, who are we to judge another man’s servant?  The Lord makes one vessel to honor and another to dishonor.   The clay cannot cry out to the potter..why have you made me thus?   Understand the meaning of the Lord’s name:

"And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy" (Exodus 33:19).

Some men’s hearts will be hardened, other will fall by the wayside and yet others will bring forth tares. Some will die in ignorance and some will be as if they had never existed.  Your lot is not to judge but to do what is right towards your neighbor and love the Lord they God with all they heart, soul and mind. Amen.

Are you listening to a pied piper? (1:10)

Resources:

Psalm 82 in the Fourth Gospel

Soteriology and Atonement Theory

The Language of Atonement

See the original debate for more links:

Are You Being Punked?