Posted on 02/09/2008 4:52:54 AM PST by Edward Watson
N.T. "Tom" Wright is one of the most formidable figures in the world of Christian thought. As Bishop of Durham, he is the fourth most senior cleric in the Church of England and a major player in the strife-riven global Anglican Communion; as a much-read theologian and Biblical scholar he has taught at Cambridge and is a hero to conservative Christians worldwide for his 2003 book The Resurrection of the Son of God, which argued forcefully for a literal interpretation of that event.
It therefore comes as a something of a shock that Wright doesn't believe in heaven — at least, not in the way that millions of Christians understand the term. In his new book, Surprised by Hope (HarperOne), Wright quotes a children's book by California first lady Maria Shriver called What's Heaven, which describes it as "a beautiful place where you can sit on soft clouds and talk... If you're good throughout your life, then you get to go [there]... When your life is finished here on earth, God sends angels down to take you heaven to be with him." That, says Wright is a good example of "what not to say." The Biblical truth, he continues, "is very, very different."
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
Uh... just what is a `world yardstick’, anyway?
I don't recognized at what point in Trinty Cosmology did the meaning of words changed is there a scripture telling us the deviation from the original terms of certain words like the meaning of Father and Son?
There is the temporal way the world measure things and there is a spiritual way the Lord measure things.
Man has a tendency to want to measure from our familar ways instead of elevating our thoughts to understand the Lord ways!
Get a real Bible and check out the part about "false prophets".
The bishop had previously spoken for the literal interpretation of the Resurrection of our Saviour. I am a Bible-literalist. I believe (only reading from your summary) that, OF COURSE, the bishop is much closer to a biblical description than “sitting on soft clouds” and all that mystical stuff that came from paintings on Catholic Church ceilings, etc., etc., . . .
I like the fact that you do seem to ponder with the Lord.
I was reminded when we pray to the Lord we are talking to him, and when we read the scriptures the Lord is talking to us!
I like to borrow a concept from Orson Scott Card title "Revelation is pure, but words are translation"
So when we read the words in a humble matter are able to receive from the Lord the his understanding that he wants us to know.
I am sure you have experience passagesyou have read before and than seem to take on new meaning in your life.
It seems as we grow in the Word the Lord is able to impart more knowledge to us!
Get a real Bible and check out the part about "false prophets".
I see you can read the words in the Bible, but you still haven't received the Spiritual language of the the Lord
Learn how to listen to the Lord in your real Bible than you will hear the Lord where ever the Lord chooes to be, even in the Book of Mormon!
Napoleon brought the Rosetta Stone back to Europe where it was deciphered, giving scholars a handle on hieroglyphics.
Once the doctrinal interpretation is known and obeyed (where some obedience is invoked), the very same verse may yield a dozen spiritual applications.
I believe that one should seek the correct doctrinal interpretation first. Also the Christians should not confuse doctrine with spiritual application, or turn application in to doctrine.
I think that you nail this. When I read this article on a Catholic thread, what stunned me was how close this interpretation of scripture was to the doctrine taught by the LDS Church.
You believe, how do you feel about what the Holy Ghost teaches, does that have to comply with what the world believes in order for it to be so?
I humbly submit to be taught from on high by the power of the Holy Ghost!
Did you read the article? He already answers your question.
“You believe, how do you feel about what the Holy Ghost teaches, does that have to comply with what the world believes in order for it to be so?
“I humbly submit to be taught from on high by the power of the Holy Ghost!”
The Bible IS the Holy Spirit’s Book. God could have chosen to put his thoughts and desires and will into your mind without using a Book at at all. But He uses a Book. Therefore the words must have specific meaning, or it is of no value. If ten people are in a room, and each one says that the Holy spirit taught him about John 5:24 (just for example), and each one spues a different message, then how can I know which one is truly the Holy Spirit’s message? Or rather, can I accept the specific meaning of the words in the text, know that THOSE ARE the Holy Spirit’s words, and judge the words of the ten in the room by those words in print.
I choose the above latter, and still recognize that once the SPECIFIC doctrine is understood from the text, the Holy Spirit also may yield side applications to some or all of the ten in the room. The side applications can not contradict or violate the specific words or doctrine of the text.
Warning: It is also possible for Satan to plant thoughts in the mind.
I spell out the Mormon connection to the Bishop’s remarks on my blog: http://denniswendt.blogspot.com/2008/02/christians-wrong-about-heaven-says.html
Mark for later reading...
Always astounding, when people try to slog through endless human opinions, instead of going straight to the Word of God.
The Mormons did kill a whole wagon train, women, children, and men, at Mountain Meadows though.
Instead of fretting over things we cannot grasp, we should be contemplating the things we can, like loving our brethren. It's almost humorous that we argue how many angels on the head of a pin, and yet can't seem to have church without the preachers running off with the piano players and the budgets coming up short with unexplained checks.
You may be interested in this book as well. Justin Martyr, Lactantius, Tertullian, Origen and many other Christian fathers from the early Centuries after Christ had views similar to the LDS church. When people get past the "Mormons are Cults" spin and actually look into Mormon Theology it is eaiser to understand the point that Mormons claim that we are a Restorationist church. Some of the differences in theology between Mormons and other Christian Churches are due to the Reformationist vs. Restorationist nature of the church. It;s why our name is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. signifying the differentiation between the ancient and modern Church.
Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity
Incidentally Fred Thompson belonged to a Church that rejects the Post Apostolic Creeds as well. But not too many people mseemed to be too interested in discussing that point. Perhaps it was part of the reason the South went with the liberal Huck over the Conservative Thompson. There were hit pieces about Thompsons moral character from some southern Huck supporters. I don't think it was the reason but I do think it is an interesting point.
Mormons did commit the atrocity. And good Christian folk massacred Mormons. And a good Christian governor ordered the State of Missouri to kill all Mormons found in that state.
And Protestants massacred European Jews. Catholics massacred Muslims. Jews massacred other tribes.
But the LDS Church never sanctioned any criminal acts against any person.
Your point?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.