In response to a celebration of a supposed take-down of evangelistic methods of the apologist Ray Comfort, I demonstrate how one sub-argument is uncogent:
You might ought to rethink the awarding of IO/Preterist of the Week to Michael Bradley. His Tu Quoque rebuttal of the evangelistic method of Ray Comfort has holes in it.
“In Revelation, chapter 21, there were no gates into the New Jerusalem for non-Israelites, yet Christians today believe they can enter. What do you call someone who tries to enter someone else’s house, without permission? A trespasser…” While the rhetorical challenge question and answer are correct, nothing in Rev. 21 supports applying it to a Christian who believes he or she can enter the “New Jerusalem”. There is nothing about the gates being named for the mythical “twelve tribes” of Israel that entails anything about movement through those fantastical gates.
Rev 21:12 “And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:”
[skipping ludicrous description of foundation stones of the city, being of gems only precious to mortal men, not to any “god” who is above all of that materialist crap]
21:21 “And the twelve gates were twelve pearls: every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass”
…nothing about who can go in and out of those fabulous gates -each made of a pearl(!) [So, either the gates are totally ineffective, in that anyone could step over the pearl serving as a gate OR the pearls are man-sized or larger, in which case, they are NOT pearls, only having the APPEARANCE, maybe, of pearls OR men shall be down-sized, perhaps to the same scale as the many angels who can dance on the head of a pin.]
Much the rather, the implications* of a preceding verse, 21:3 “And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.” seems that the inhabitants should not be limited to the Israelites, also implied* by 21:24 “And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.”
Fun fact, those gates of “pearl” turn out to be totally superfluous, in that, they are unused. 21:25 “And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.” So… does one call one who enters by an opened door, one not only having a WELCOME mat in front of it, but also a “Don’t bother to knock; come on in” sign on it, a “trespasser”? No.
And. letting all matters be established in the mouth of two or three witnesses (2nd Corinthians 13:1), the following verse, again, implies* invitation to others than members of the Israeli nation: 21:26 “And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.”
As a postscript to this refutation of the mischaracterization of Michael B. on what is meant in this chapter, why are the gates named with the fabled twelve tribes of Israel, if not to signal limitation as to who can use the respective gates? Being that, at best, this, along with the rest of the book, is speculative FICTION, or, at worst, a HALLUCINATION mistaken for divine impartation of knowledge of the future, the question is merely an academic exercise, and any answer mere speculation about nothing that is, or shall be, REAL.
*They say that understatement is a high form of humor, so I’m trying it out, here.
Views: 140
