<body>
Hip and Thigh: Smiting Theological Philistines with a Great Slaughter. Judges 15:8

Monday, June 26, 2006

Web Watch

I will be much busy as we prepare for inventory for the end of this week here at work, and then the family and I will take a quick 4th of July weekend road trip. I have some posts in the works that I hope to file this week, including the next review of in my series critiquing Chaz the Christ hating anarchist blues guitar player.

In the meantime, I came across a couple of fun websites.

www.proofthatgodexists.org

I heard Canadian Dutchman, Sye Ten Bruggencate, interviewed for a couple of hours on Gene Cook's webcast. I would recommend creating an account at Unchained Radio and give the interview a listen. It is stellar. In fact, pretty much all of Gene's webcasts are outstanding and worth the time spent listening.

Anyhow, Sye is a recovering evidentialist oriented evangelist-apologist who is now a biblical presuppositionalist. His clever website, which is about 2 to 3 weeks old at this posting, challenges atheists to justify their worldview convictions by asking them a series of 8 set of questions. Each set demonstrates the reality of a sovereign creator and to deny that reality is due to rebellious foolishness, not a lack of evidence. I look forward to Sye's work to become a fine tool on the Web.

www.insignificantthoughts.com

I am sure that by now many of my readers have heard Vincent Ferrari's aggravating phone call with an AOL customer agent in which he attempts to have his AOL service discontinued. After repeated attempts to have his account cancelled, the agent still would not allow him to leave AOL, insisting that Vincent was using the AOL account in question. Just recalling the entire phone call is infuriating to the point of wanting to lay a beat on the agent with a rubber hose. In a manner of speaking, the whole thing is an example of why you must be careful not to push geeks too far. Vinny was prepared to tap the phone call and expose the horror of customer service for the world to see.

One of the great talents my wife has is the ability to twist customer operators into pretzels. She practically has them giving us free stuff when she hangs up the phone. A lot of that has to do with the fact she is tenacious and undetered in her personality, but she also informs herself about promotional scams and the interworkings of customer agents. I just love her for this, because I tend to be a gullible pushover.

Anyways, I link to Vincent's site because he has a lot of fun geek links in his blog roll. I spent about 10 minutes checking a variety of them out, so if you are into electronics, optical illusions, and odd gadgets, you may want to check some of them out yourself.

I Drank What?

And I cannot end this web watch post without giving a shout out to the newly graduated, Officer Pecadillo. He is fresh from his LAPD bootcamp and will be out on the beat in the near future. He is also free to return to blogging about his life and other amusing things.

I saw him at church this past Sunday and he had a police like appearance to him as he was hanging with his homies outside the college department. He even had a pair of those mirrored sunglasses so common among law enforcement officials. You know the kind where you can't see the eyes of the person wearing them and all you see is yourself talking. They can be quite intimidating. Maybe one of these days he can become a motorcycle cop and wear those cool breeches with the white strip running down the legs, along with those sweet knee-high leather boots.

The one thing he needs to do as a brand new recruit is to expunge the word "chief" from his vocabulary so he won't be using it when he pulls over people. You know, like, "So what's the hurry there, chief?" or "Do you not see that stop sign back there, chief?" It may also be helpful to give up chewing gum so he won't be smacking it when he is asking a motorist for his or her driver's license.

9 Comments:

Blogger the Pilgrim said...

Busy doing inventory? Sending out more of the abomination called the NASB which turns Lucifer into Christ?

8:10 PM, June 26, 2006  
Blogger Peter D. Nelson said...

Is there an echo in here?

Nice post Fred I'm going to have spend some time and redo my website and add a few links especially that proof that God exists website.

11:07 PM, June 26, 2006  
Blogger Fred Butler said...

Busy doing inventory? Sending out more of the abomination called the NASB which turns Lucifer into Christ?

(fred) Pilgrim... SHHHH! You'll give away our secret plans to hurry up the coming of the anti-Christ so the timing of Jesus's return will be moved up.

Fred

4:35 AM, June 27, 2006  
Blogger the Pilgrim said...

Fred, Why the sarcasm? Isaiah 14:12 in the NASB turns Lucifer into Christ. Why not read it!

7:43 PM, June 27, 2006  
Blogger Fred Butler said...

Why the sarcasm?

(fred) Honestly? Sometimes silly ideas need to be responded to in such a way.

Isaiah 14:12 in the NASB turns Lucifer into Christ. Why not read it!

(Fred) A couple of things:

1) Lucifer is a latin translation of the Hebrew phrase we know as "son of the morning." The KJV translators kept with the Latin Vulgate here rather than dealing with the original text. This was due more in part to their Anglican traditions than dealing fairly with translating the text.

2) The NASB text does not read "Christ" in place of the phrase "lucifer." You are being a tad dishonest in your complaint.

3) You are assuming from KJV Only tradition, born out of a misinformed American, dispensational angeology, that "lucifer" is the name of Satan. Nothing in the text of Isaiah 14 warrants that conclusion. In fact, in context of Isaiah's prophecy, chapter 14 is about the pride of Babylon being brought down. It is a bit eisegetical (reading into the text) to conclude Isaiah is addressing Satan specifically.

I don't know if you are taking a cue from GA Riplinger or some other KJV onlyist who erroneously believe the title "son of the morning" is exclusively a Christological title and thus for any english translation to render the Hebrew expression as it really is meant to be read is equating Jesus to Satan, but that notion is ridiculous.

Fred

5:56 AM, June 28, 2006  
Blogger the Pilgrim said...

Let me respond to your points Fred.
1. The KJV translators took from the Latin Vulgate rather than the original text? They didn't take from the majority texts? textus receptus? How do you know?

2. I never said the NASB used the word Christ. The NASB removes the name Lucifer and then uses the phrase "star of the morning" which an obvious reference to Christ, the morning star. The NASB says O star of the morning. Instead of O Lucifer, son of the morning. This essentially turns Lucifer into Christ.

3. Are you saying that Lucifer is not the name of Satan. Isn't it well accepted that Satan is Lucifer fallen? You think that Isaiah 14 is only about the pride of Babylon being brought down. Is 14:12 states "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer.." Do really believe that Babylon had fallen from heaven? How could it--Babylon was never in heaven? Is 14:16 clearly is not speaking about Babylon but Lucifer. Why would anyone look at Babylon and ask "Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake the kingdoms?" Is Babylon a man?

"Son of the morning" is not a Christological title. "Son of the morning" is a title for Lucifer. "Star of the morning" is a Christological title. This is why the NASB removes Lucifer and inserts "star of the morning". In this deceitful manner, the NASB replaces Lucifer with Christ.

11:34 PM, June 29, 2006  
Blogger Fred Butler said...

Hey again Pilgrim:

1. The KJV translators took from the Latin Vulgate rather than the original text?

(Fred) That is correct.

They didn't take from the majority texts? textus receptus? How do you know?

(Fred) Any book on biblical translations will tell you this as would any good commentary on Isaiah. The word "lucifer" is simply the Latin translation of the Hebrew words, "star of the morning" or "morning star." Isaiah was not providing a specifc name. The Hebrew is actually more of an expression.

2. I never said the NASB used the word Christ. The NASB removes the name Lucifer and then uses the phrase "star of the morning" which an obvious reference to Christ, the morning star. The NASB says O star of the morning. Instead of O Lucifer, son of the morning. This essentially turns Lucifer into Christ.

(Fred) Again, this assumes the expression, "morning star" is referring to Satan in Isaiah. I don't believe this because the text does not warrant such an understanding. Furthermore, the only place where bright and morning star is utilized as something of a messianic title for Jesus is Revelation 22:16. However, the use of a metaphor like "bright, morning star" to describe Satan in one context and Jesus in another is not sinister. See the article I link at the end.

3. Are you saying that Lucifer is not the name of Satan. Isn't it well accepted that Satan is Lucifer fallen?

(Fred) Some folks accept that as to what Isaiah is saying, but that does not mean they are correct. Even if Isaiah is referring to Satan, it is not equating Christ to Satan when a modern translation renders the Hebrew phrase as "morning star." That is what the Hebrew text says. The phrase is not a proper name to begin with.

You think that Isaiah 14 is only about the pride of Babylon being brought down. Is 14:12 states "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer.." Do really believe that Babylon had fallen from heaven? How could it--Babylon was never in heaven? Is 14:16 clearly is not speaking about Babylon but Lucifer. Why would anyone look at Babylon and ask "Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake the kingdoms?" Is Babylon a man?

(Fred) You are reading Isaiah from an American fundamentalist modern day mind set. The biblical writers often used figures of speech and other Hebraisms when they wrote. "Fallen from heaven" is a Hebraism for the idea of a major super power being humbled. Isaiah doesn't have in mind the spiritual heaven where God dwells.

The prophecy against Babylon actually begins back in Isaiah 13 and continues through chapter 14. Note who Isaiah addresses his prophecy to in 14:4? The King of Babylon. Isaiah more than likely had in mind the human king of Babylon, who in their religious mindset, was considered appointed by the gods. In a manner of speaking, he did make the earth tremble and did shake kingdoms. This is clear from the biblical record. Israel for certain was "shaken" when they were taken into captivity,right?

Because the king was considered "deity" He was thought to have dwelled in heaven. Isaiah's words in chapter 14 are meant more to mock the king who thought so highly of himself than to describe his true nature and where he use to live.

Also, look at Doug Kutilek's article on the subject here

6:32 AM, June 30, 2006  
Blogger Joanna Martens said...

I saw the infamous chief as well at church in Grace Life, and became immediately intimidated by his overall authoritative demeanor.
Thereafter I quickly found my seat.

12:28 PM, July 03, 2006  
Blogger Fred Butler said...

Joanna,

Are you the former "9 Digits?"
It is nice to have a face with the name.

Are you related to someone named Frank?

Don't let pec scare you. He really is a big teddy bear.

Fred

9:10 PM, July 03, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home