Archive | August 2017

How globe earthers should not communicate with flat earth believers

FE“Always be ready to give a DEFENSE to everyone WHO ASKS you a reason for the hope that is in you, with MEEKNESS and fear” 1 Pet. 3:15  (NKJV)

The flat earth movement is getting increasingly more popular, and this means that it is logical to take an interest in the subject – to find out why people believe in a flat earth. (Whereas others for some reason get angry at people who do so.) Especially if there is someone out there who believes flat earthers are not even saved due to their incorrect view of the shape of the earth. Unfortunately many globe earthers engage in flat earth discussions with the completely wrong attitude, which leads to that they are wasting their time and make the flat earthers even more confident that they are on the right track. Why else would the globe earthers make so little effort to prove their arguments wrong but resort to demeaning remarks? Is that all they can do? The only way to convince the flat earthers that they are in error, is to study what they believe and debunk those arguments. If you are not able to do so (because you only superficially understand their model and make the wrong assumptions) then it is a lot wiser to remain as a person just asking questions. You will not gain anything by raising up straw man arguments – debating something that no one believes.

Please do not get mad at people who honestly believe something! Sure, they might be in error, but if they have investigated something and are TRULY convinced that it is true, why being upset about it? Would it be better if they lied and denied what they believe, like saying one thing with their mouths and another thing in their hearts? Do you want to scare them into silence? If you manage to scare them into silence, then you will of course not help them out of their errors, but they will continue to believe as before but they will not share their thoughts with you. If they are wrong, is it not better to have a mature conversation about it and get them on the right track? Would Jesus Christ really ridicule and patronize people who honestly believed something is true? Would that behavior convince them that they are wrong? Jesus took the time to explain why the pharisees were in error. When Jesus met the woman at the well, he did not get mad, or raise his voice, or jump up and down, but he explained to her how she could turn her life around for the better. Paul had many discussions with misinformed people.

There are two common reasons to be interested in the flat earth movement that I have noticed. I can say from the start that I belong to the first group:

  1. Since the flat earth idea has become so popular, it is interesting to find out how the flat earth model works and which arguments flat earthers use to support their theories (and which arguments they use to disregard the globe earth). For example, how do they explain the fact that it is possible to circumnavigate the earth? If I have plans to make claims that the flat earth theory does not work, then it would be dishonest if I did not first made sure to understand the theory I am complaining about. I would like to treat others they way I would like to be treated myself. If I do not even know how their theory works, I lack enough knowledge to debunk them.
  2. The other alternative: Since the flat earth theory (which I know almost nothing about) is wrong, I would like to explain to the lost person why it is easily debunked. I will therefore not waste my time by watching flat earth videos, but rather videos which debunk the flat earth (from their opponents). IF I choose to watch a flat earth video, it better be short and I would make sure to have pen and paper handy in order to list things I am about to debunk. That would be my only reason for watching it, and to be able to say “Yes, I’ve watched flat earth videos, and I therefore know all about their model”. What is presented about the flat earth model in those videos (from the opponents), that IS what the flat earthers believe! Of course I can trust the flat earthers’ opponents to get it right.

The four seasons occur when the sun’s rotations over the earth follow circular paths, going from tighter to wider. This will explain both the constant tropical climate and the midnight sun.

Below are some common mistakes which globe earthers make in their discussions:

Demeaning and patronizing remarksearth 7  

Globe earthers do not seem to understand that all flat earthers used to be globe earthers. As globe earthers, they had the exact same sentiments and used the same arguments which present day globe earthers use. It is therefore a total waste of time to use excessive descriptions about how ignorant, fooled and deceived those are who believe in a flat earth. They already know this is how you feel! They used to feel the same way! They used to have the very same arguments! It would not help in the least if you compared them with mormons, Jehovah’s witnesses, muslims, etc and spent time explaining in detail how easily fooled they are. Again, they already know this is how you feel! You can write page after page with explanations about how deceived and confused they are, because you will still get nowhere. Your information is not new to them. They would only say “been there, done that”. Adjectives such as ridiculous, absurd, insane, horrid, stupid, foolish, awful, laughable, childish, preposterous, unbelievable, etc, mean nothing to them even if you add several exclamation marks, add several “lol:s”  and scream tin-foil hats and kooks after them. You are wasting your time. Please note that many (or most, or maybe even all …) of them started to check out flat earth videos in order to debunk them and get examples of  how deceived flat earthers are, and instead they were converted themselves. Not because they like conspiracy theories (they might hate them), but because they felt the facts point to a flat earth and away from a globe earth.

“The flat earthers know better”!

Maybe the most important thing to remember about the flat earthers is this:
They TRULY believe the earth is flat! People might say that they of course already know this, but the same people might still claim that the flat earthers “know better” than believing in their theory and “deep in their hearts they know they are wrong”. So make up your mind now. Do you believe that the flat earthers truly believe in the flat earth model, or do you believe that they do not truly believe it after all? Does it matter? Yes, it matters a great deal, because the first option means they still deserve respect, and the other option means the opposite. The first option means that the flat earthers speak the truth about what they believe, and the other option means they are liars and purposely spread falsehood. If you purposely spread a theory which you KNOW is erroneous and fake, this is indeed to cause confusion – as in lying. How then can such a person be a saved Christian? Does not this mean that you cannot be a flat earther and a Christian at the same time? Surely God would have told us in the Bible that it is not enough to repent, believe in Jesus Christ and follow his commandments, but that you must also believe in the correct form of the earth in order to be saved?

If a globe earther does not believe that flat earthers believe in their own theory, he/she is deeply mistaken. Flat earthers (unless they claim otherwise) are convinced about their theory and TRULY believe it is true. It is rather disrespectful to not even trust that people  believe whatever they claim they believe in. Why the doubt? This does not mean they are right about their model, but it means that they likely know better than you do what they themselves believe and why they believe it. If they are wrong, then just explain why by using proper facts and arguments. Can you do this without understanding their model? If you make false assumptions about their model, the conversation might deteriorate because of you. Flat earthers will not be persuaded by patronizing remarks, but they might be persuaded by facts.

“Conspiracy theorists are intentionally LOOKING for ways to turn an official story into a conspiracy theory and are PLEASED to find conspiracies. They are NOT interested in looking for ways to see if the official story might work!”

A statement like the above is a great way to close doors for communication and obstruct a meaningful conversation. I personally know a lot of conspiracy theorists (truth seekers), but I know of no one who is looking for conspiracies. I find that the complete OPPOSITE is true. They absolutely H A T E conspiracies, and the first step they take is to see if they can find ways to save the official story – in order to not end up with yet another government story that does not fit the evidence. Non-conspiracists might reason: “Since these people believe in multiple conspiracy theories and refuse to budge, this means they love to turn official stories into conspiracy theories just for the joy of it”. What about the opposite alternative, that they do everything they can to save the official story but fail to do so since the facts refuse to cooperate?

If a story does not work due to anomalies (like steel beams turning into dust for no reason) and strange coincidences (like the coroner’s presence at the Sandy Hook school hours before the arrival of the shooter), then unfortunately a person will naturally start to believe that the official story is a lie and that there is a conspiracy. He might investigate the matter even further and find even more anomalies, impossibilities and lies. What is stupid about siding with the facts?

Could it be the Globe earthers who are far more interested in debunking the flat earth theory, than understanding the theory?

Many globe earthers are way more interested in DEBUNKING the flat earth theory than DOING RESEARCH about the flat earth theory to see how it works. This means that the globe earthers have not made their homework and it will be extremely difficult to have a conversation. The flat earther knows about BOTH theories, and the globe earther only knows about ONE theory. The confusion deepens when the globe earther does not even understand his/her lack of knowledge.

A conversation could still run smoothly if the globe earther chooses to ask questions, because no previous knowledge is required for asking questions. Unfortunately many globe earthers work in the exact opposite way. They start off sticking their chins out by making brave claims that they know “everything there is to know” about the flat earth, or that they know it “very well”, or that they have “studied it thoroughly for years”, or similar. Still, many might not even know how a flat earth map looks like! They want to debunk the theory and think they can do this convincingly without studying it.

Learning about the flat earth model through their opponents

Globe earthers often link to videos which supposedly debunk the flat earth, but since the globe earthers avoid flat earth videos as the plague, they do not detect the straw man arguments presented in the globe earth videos. This will make a discussion hard to follow since the flat earther must take his/her time to explain their model to the globe earther who has not done his homework. You can lead the horse to the water, but you cannot make it drink. The safest way to avoid misrepresentations of a model, is to go the source of those who are proponents to that model. Not their enemies! 

Globe earthers often assume that they are the ones with the wider knowledge about the topic (the shape of the earth), but if they have not studied the flat earth model they only know ONE side of the argument and not TWO sides as the flat earthers.

NASA – “Never A Straight Answer”earth 6

Just about all information about the moon landings and the flat earth comes from NASA. This is ONE source and it is not an objective source. NASA receives billions of dollars every year from American tax payers (like 19,3 billion dollars for the year 2017), and would of course like to display great success in order to continue getting a steady stream of money. It is a good thing to be skeptic about information from NASA because they have proven to be liars, cheaters and green screen lovers. You will also find military and/or free masons in the very top. There are lots of flat earth believers, but there are even more people (me included) who believe the moon landings are fake. Bart Sibrel’s (a Christian man) movie “A funny thing happened on the way to the moon”, proves that NASA faked half way to the moon and this website shows that the photographs are fake. I can also recommend Jarrah White’s video channel “Moonfaker” .

Globe earthers should try to understand why flat earthers will not accept NASA as a source.  Not all flat earth arguments must involve NASA, so it is probably easier to focus on those arguments if you want to debunk the flat earth.

Why has no one been to the edge? 

Because they have been to the edge. The edge = Antarctica. Globe earthers would save a lot of time if they read about the Antarctic treaty and about admiral Richard Byrd as well as his expeditions to Antarctica. No one is allowed to go anywhere near Antarctica without authorized company, and if anyone tries he/she will be shot.

How could all NASA employees and other millions of people keep such a secret?

This is a very common question, and if the globe earthers had studied the flat earth, they would know that the flat earthers do not believe that a lot of NASA employees are aware of either a faked moon landing or a flat earth (particularly not the latter). They rather believe that only a few people in the very top of certain affected organisations would know about it, and they are likely tied to the military (or CIA) and have signed secrecy agreements. For example, think about the famous films/pictures of the control center i Houston, in 1969, where loads of people can be seen in front of their screens (or elsewhere) screaming and shouting. How many of them would know that the moon landing was a hoax? None of them would have to know.

Why would not some of the insiders disclose their findings? Likely because they are military and/or free masons, but some do disclose it. But who would they really tell, and who would believe them and spread it further? A newspaper? And the reporters on that newspaper would immediately start to write about it? Of course not. Others have spread the news, or intended to spread the news, and suddenly died very young in suicides or sudden accidents.

The flat earth theory highlights a trustworthy Bible which means what it saysfootstool

Some globe earthers claim the flat earth theory is of Satan because it is causing confusion and deception. I am not afraid of the flat earth theory at all, because it promotes a trustworthy Bible – which Satan would never do. The flat earthers often highlight that the the Bible means what it says when it comes to the creation order (the earth before the sun), the description of the sun, moon, stars and the firmament, but also the various details provided about the earth. The earth is described as being stationary (does not move…), placed on pillars, having four corners earth 8.jpgand with a dome over it like a tent – where we are living under and inside the firmament/tent. The earth is also described as being God’s footstool. Naturally it would not be a literal footstool but if the earth looked like a ball, the analogy would not make any sense whatsoever. On the other hand, a flat earth, with four pillars beneath it and four corners, would look precisely as a footstool. There is a Hebrew word for “ball” which is not used in the Bible when it comes to describing the earth, but the word for “circle” is used. Joshua’s long day, where both the sun and the moon are claimed to stand still, does not make any sense in a heliocentric model, but makes perfect sense in a geocentric model. Again, flat earthers often point out that we can trust the Bible exactly as it says, from beginning to end, and this is the opposite of what Satan would do. Satan would try to lead us away from the Bible by fooling us to believe that the Bible contains multiple anomalies and things that do not fit the reality. Satan is responsible for popularizing the Evolution theory, and there are still Christians (old earth creationists) who try to combine a billions of years old earth with the Bible.

The other day I happened to see a person (Person 1 below) who entered a flat earth thread on Facebook and spent several posts in describing how important it was to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. He explained that it was his discovery of the flat earth which made him think harder and realized that the earth is way too unique to not have a creator, etc. Even if the concept of a flat earth is naturally not the only reason for believing in God, for some people it can still be the catalyst to think twice about the big bang, Evolution, billions of years, earth being a tiny speck in the vast universe, life on other planets, etc.

Person 1: when I finally found it it blew my being to pieces and shattered all my preconceived ideas. But it took a personal encounter and I had to get to the end of myself to be willing to give it a go. That was way way back in time but I havent walked away from it since…..

Person 2: when I found out about the flat earth that was a rollercoaster ride for me mentality lol going from a atheist to believing a creator, I definitely don’t rule out the bible not at all, it’s early days for me iv only been a flat earther for a year

Person 3: i was atheist before coming to FE

I have seen many similar confessions, and that is why I am not at all afraid of the flat earth movement. The devil would not help out promoting a trustworthy Bible nor move us closer to a Creator, but he would do the exact opposite.

“They have answers for everything!”mark twain.jpg

When it comes to conspiracy theories in general, it is actually the official story believers who always have answers (excuses) for everything. They are ready to excuse lie after lie coming from the government (or NASA), and they will excuse any anomaly there is even if they really have no valid solution to a known problem. Just like a muslim who is ready to defend their prophet no matter what he has done. Why did WTC7 decide to fall at free fall speed for no reason? How come the fall was announced 22 minutes before it fell? Why did the plane at Pentagon and the one in Pennsylvania leave any trace of either luggage och passengers? Why so many cell phone calls from the planes, when such connections have proven to be absolutely impossible? The excuses might go:

“There simply must be a valid reason even if it is not known … The government wouldn’t lie to us … That would be just too absurd …”, etc

conspiracyIf you do not even believe the moon landings are fake, or that 9/11 is an inside job, you will likely not be able to understand flat earthers

You would be too far apart. If you believe man has been on the moon, it is better that you start with this issue before you engage yourself in a flat earth discussion.

Can you explain why portable toilets and refreshments were ordered to the Sandy Hook school before the day of the shooting? You might ask “What are you talking about? I’ve never heard of that!”, and that is the point. Always remember that the conspiracy theorist knows about TWO sides of the story (the official one and the conspiracy) whereas you only know about the official one. YOU lack in knowledge. Not the conspiracy theorist.

There are too many false flag events to study in depth, but I have studied numerous by reading books, articles and watched/listened to youtube films. Some might claim it is a waste of valuable time, but I have managed to cover a lot of information through listening to my ipod when I am out running, and my night shift job also enables me to study. On the other hand I do not wast my time watching football …

I have encountered Christians who are upset (angry) when they understand that I do not swallow the official story of 9/11 (for example) and they lack in patience. They might on one hand ask me to prove a conspiracy, but on the other hand refuse to go through any of information/links I provide which can provide answers. It is like they want me to prove a conspiracy in five sentences and if I am not able to do that then they “won” and my view is deemed as incorrect. I certainly do not open all links myself that I receive from others, but I would if I am the one starting out with the claim that there is no proof for something.

Jesus som GUD och ORDET /logos i Joh. 1:1 – Jehovas Vittnen har fel

only god.jpg“I begynnelsen var Ordet (ὁ Λόγος), och Ordet var hos Gud, och Ordet var GUD! (Joh. 1:1)

Jehovas Vittnen gör fel som begränsar översättningen till “en gud” för att den bestämda artikeln saknas på grekiska. De är ensamma om att tolka Joh 1:1 på det sättet, och man kan fråga sig varför översättare i alla länder skulle ha haft fel men Jehovas Vittnen rätt – trots att översättarna till deras (JV) Nya Testamente inte hade kunskaper i grekiska med ett undantag (och den personen kunde endast grunderna i grekiska). Intressant nog vill Jehovas Vittnen gärna tolka det grekiska ordet för “tillbedja” olika beroende på om det handlar om tillbedjan av exempelvis Satan eller tillbedjan av Jesus (som är känsligt för JV). Är verkligen Bibeln så otydlig? Nej, inte alls.

På grekiska krävs ibland bestämda artiklar (“the” på engelska), där man inte kan ha det på andra språk, t ex svenska eller engelska. Personnamn används ibland med bestämd artikel (framför allt första gången personen presenteras i en text), medan så inte görs på svenska eller engelska. Obestämda artiklar (såsom en/ett) finns däremot inte på koine grekiska, och därför måste man vara försiktig och inte ta för givet att ordet ska skrivas i obestämd form med en/ett framför. Ibland låter det bäst på det svenska språket att sätta in ett extra en/ett men ibland inte. Att skriva in en/ett framför ett ord kan ändra textens betydelse, så säkrast översättning får vi om vi läser meningen noga samt studerar kontexten.

I det första kapitlet av Johannesbrevet så används theos (Θεὸς) 12 gånger, och ungefär hälften av gångerna så används ordet utan artikel. Bör man därför även där skriva “en gud” i stället för “Gud”? Nej, det är helt klart Jehova som avses. Avsaknad av bestämd artikel betyder helt enkelt inte alltid att ordet eller personen är obestämd. Att översätta Joh. 1:6 med “En man trädde fram, sänd av en gud” är fel, liksom att översätta Joh. 1:18 med “Ingen har någonsin sett en gud”, eftersom det inte är vad författaren vill förmedla. Det är Jehova som Johannes talar om.

Ibland för att förtydliga sig, om man anser att man inte uttryckt sig klart nog, så kan man lägga till det grekiska ordet “tis” ihop med ordet för att klargöra att det handlar om en obestämd form (och en obestämd sak eller person). Detta verktyg använder Johannes sig inte av när han inleder sin epistel. Första gången han använder sig av ordet för Gud i kapitlet och i meningen så syftar han helt klart på Jehova i ackusativform, och sedan följer samma ord i nominativform. Om Johannes plötsligt skulle tala om en falsk gud i nominativform (eller om människor kan kallas gudar trots att Bibeln så ofta talar om att det endast finns EN Gud), så borde han verkligen förtydliga detta högst oväntade påstående med ett “tis”. I stället har nu världens översättare översatt denna mening (likesom andra meningar med “Gud” i samma kapitel) såsom att det handlar om en bestämd Gud, nämligen Jehova – den ende Guden.

Det skulle alltså gå att tydligt beskriva att det handlar om Jehova när Johannes talar om Gud första gången men en mindre sorts gud andra gången. Alltså en helt annan gud än den gud som den han först talar om. Så har dock inte Johannes uttryckt sig, och det mest självklara sättet är att förstå det som den ende Guden vid båda tillfällena. Något annat vore helt förbryllande. Även min lärare i grekiska, på Uppsala universitet, förklarade att Jehovas Vittnen tolkar versen på ett restriktivt och ologiskt sätt. Läser vi även i resten av kapitlet och i resten av hela Bibeln, så framstår Jesu gudom väldigt klart, samt att det endast finns en Gud som är den vi ska tillbe. Inte undra på att Jesus lät sig tillbes vid upprepade tillfällen, och inte undra på att Petrus och Ängeln Gabriel vägrade att låta sig tillbedjas av orsaken att de är människor precis som andra.

Kan människor och änglar kallas Gudar?worship 4

Jag har skrivit om detta ämne i denna artikel. När vi läser om Gud eller Herren i Bibeln så åsyftas för det mesta Jehova skaparen (ganska självklart), men i ganska många fall så åsyftas ibland även falska gudar (i plural), och där förklarar Jehova att de falska gudarna inte är några gudar alls. Människor kan alltså tillbe gudar som de själva gjort av exempelvis trä eller sten, men i själva verket är de inga gudar utan bara en självproducerad bluff.

Herrens Ängel (en speciell budbärare) kallades ofta för Gud, vilket kan bero på att han verkligen är Gud. Det handlar då inte om någon skapad ängel utan en speciell gudomlig budbärare vilken högst troligt innebär Jesus Kristus i en annan skepnad. (Jesus har alltid funnits med i treenigheten sedan innan världens tillkomst.) Läs gärna min artikel om Herrens Ängel.

Det finns egentligen endast ett enda ställe i hela Bibeln (Joh. 10:34-35 som är en referens till Ps. 82:6) där tolkningen om ordet för Gud är mer osäker och denna vers är därför ohyggligt populärt hos människor som gärna vill hitta stöd för att vilken troende ledare som helst kan kallas för gud, och att Jesus därför är en gud bland andra (fast åtminstone en lite större och mäktigare gud än andra). Detta berömda ställe handlar om Jesus som frågar de som vill döda honom ”Står det inte skrivet i er lag: JAG HAR SAGT ATT NI ÄR GUDAR? (Där en psalm åsyftas.)

Om vilken Gudstroende som helst kan kallas gud, och om detta står att läsa i skrifterna, så hade fariséerna totalt missat denna viktiga information trots att de betraktas som otroligt belästa i sina skrifter. Hur kunde de missa en sådan väsentlig sak? Om både Jesus, de själva, eller vilka skriftlärda som helst kan kallas gudar, då finns det ju heller inget behov att stena Jesus till döds? Han vore ju då bara en gud bland andra och gjorde inget fel i att kalla sig gud? Fariséerna var mycket tydliga med att det Jesus gjort sig skyldig till handlade om hädelse där man gör sig själv till Gud. Detta var orsaken till deras iver att stena Jesus för att kunna vara skrifttrogna:

Joh. 10:33 Judarna svarade: ”Det är inte för någon god gärning vi vill stena dig, utan därför att du hädar och gör dig själv till Gud, DU SOM ÄR MÄNNISKA.”

Fotnoten på Bible Gateway förklarar ”Jesus syftar på Ps 82:6, där överhetspersoner kallas gudar på grund av sitt gudomliga uppdrag. Ett gudomligt uppdrag är ju precis det Jesus hade, och som Guds son är han en överhetsperson. Om t o m människor symboliskt/poetiskt kan kallas ”gudar”eftersom de representerar Gud genom deras ämbeten här på jorden (präster och domare), hur mycket mer har då inte JESUS skäl att kalla sig Gud eftersom han ju inte bara är en överstepräst utan GUD I KÖTT och direkt utsänd av Fadern som varit med honom i treenigheten sedan begynnelsen INNAN världen var till (Joh. 17:5)?

Judarna kände självfallet till även psalm 82, men tolkade den definitivt inte som att det bokstavligen skulle gå att kalla även överhetspersoner/domare som gudar, för de tror ju att Gud är EN, vilket skriften är mycket tydlig med. Varken Jesus eller judarna var polyteister. PSALMER ÄR POETISKA och kan spegla verkligheten! Vad skulle Gud själv (skaparGuden) anse om människor som gör inflation på Gudstermen genom att göra vem som helst till gudar, och därmed komma undan skriftens klara budskap som säger “han som ensam är Gud” (Jes. 45:18)? I själva verket så springer det alltså runt fullt med massa smågudar i våra kyrkor? Vore det då fel att även skriva “Gud” på visitkorten om man arbetar som präst?

Ex. 4:16 So he shall be your spokesman to the people. And he himself shall be as a mouth for you, and you shall be to him AS GOD. (NKJV) 

Precis som att Mose skulle vara SOM en Gud för Aron, så kan en överhetsperson som dömer enligt skriften vara SOM en Gud för andra människor. Det innebär inte att Aron kallade Mose för Gud, och inte heller att människor kallade domare för Gud. Det är auktoriteten som åsyftas.

KJV har ibland översatt Elohiym (Gud) till “domare” vid fem tillfällen där andra översättningar (såsom översättningar på andra språk) även här håller sig till “Gud” som översättning.

Att Jesus temporärt gjort sig lägre än både Fadern och änglarna är förstås inget bevis för att han inte är del av treenigheten.

Det har även gjorts försök att använda några psalmer (andra än Ps 82 ovan), för att försöka få det till att änglar (skapta änglar) kan kallas gudar, men då måste man dels brottas med en omtolkning liksom det faktum att psalmer är poetiskt beskrivna. Att använda sig av poetiska uttryck för att starta en ny lära som går på tvärsen med resten av skriften är givetvis livsfarligt. Att det endast finns en enda Gud är en väldigt central lära inom Judendomen och Kristendomen eftersom Bibeln är väldigt tydlig på den punkten. Därför känns det tryggare att tro Guds egna beskrivning om monoteismen i exempelvis Jesaja 45, än att tolka psalmer på ett sådant sätt att läran om en enda Gud ska tas med en nypa salt då vi i stället ska intala oss att det vimlar av smågudar lite överallt.

Tanken är förstås att kunna slippa se Jesus som skaparGuden som kommit i köttet, och på så sätt förneka att Jesus är del i treenigheten.

Joh. 6:51 Jag är det bröd som ger liv, det bröd som har kommit ner från himlen. Den som äter av det brödet skall leva i evighet. Och brödet jag ger är mitt kött, för att världen skall leva.”

2 Joh. 1:7 Ty många bedragare har gått ut i världen, och de bekänner inte att Jesus är Kristus, som har kommit i köttet. En sådan är Bedragaren, Antikrist.

Läs gärna denna artikel om ordet för Gud i Bibeln, och denna på engelska.

Ps. 45:7 Gud (Elohim), din tron står i evigheters evighet, ditt rikes spira är rättens spira. 8 Du älskar rättfärdighet och hatar orättfärdighet. Därför, Gud (Elohim), har din Gud (Eloheyka) smort dig med glädjens olja mer än dina medbröder.

Hebr. 1:8 Men om Sonen säger han: Gud, din tron står i evigheters evighet, och rättens spira är ditt rikes spira.9 Du älskar rättfärdighet och hatar orättfärdighet. Därför, Gud, har din Gud smort dig med glädjens olja mer än dina medbröder.

The apostle Paul had a revelation rather than a regeneration on the road to Damascus

paulus2“I was not disobedient to the vision from heaven” (Acts 26:19)

We can read about Paul’s meeting with Jesus Christ in Acts. 9 in the Bible.

Paul was a zealous man, and he even threatened to kill the disciples of Jesus because they were Christians. He was on his way to Damascus where he would be getting the proper documentation for bringing Christian men and women bound to Jerusalem and bring them before the chief priests. Paul did not realize that he was not serving a good cause, and by his actions he was actually persecuting the son of God and God in flesh – Jesus Christ. Paul was certainly not a lazy man when it came to religion and if he could be converted to the right side, he would be a very good choice to be a disciple of Jesus Christ. Paul had inflicted much grief and pain in innocent people, and for the rest of his life he would be getting several doses of his own medicine.

However, Paul was not chosen to believe, and not chosen for salvation. He was chosen to receive a special revelation from Jesus, with the aim that he would be converted and thus become a useful missionary for the gospel. Jesus likely knew the likely outcome through such a revelation, since he knew Paul’s heart. It is true that not all people get this type of revelation from Jesus, but it is also true that all people on earth in fact have different kind of backgrounds, living environments, chances to hear the gospel, etc. God is fair and we will be judged based on our conscience and abilities (Romans 2:7-15).

Paul saw a light from heaven and spoke to Lord Jesus. Paul was blind for three days and was also praying to God during this time. Ananias was instructed by Jesus to lay his hands on Paul to induce the miracle to give Paul his sight back. He did so, and told Paul that Jesus had sent himthat you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit” (v.17). This is therefore an example of a person who is able to seek and pray to God before he receives the Holy spirit, Cornelius in Acts 10 is another example. It is also an example of a person who was not among the initial disciples, and yet had the gift of healing and inducing the Holy Spirit by laying on of hands. The spiritual gifts are still applicable today. As soon as Paul received his sight and the Holy Spirit, he rose up to be baptized. 

Acts. 9:15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel.16 For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.” NKJV

It does not say above that Paul was chosen for salvation, but again he was chosen to receive a revelation. He responded well to it as expected (that was the aim of the revelation after all) and was therefore correctly described as a chosen vessel of Jesus. This does not mean that Paul did not have a will of his own, or that he had no choice in the matter.

Calvinists often say that we are chosen for salvation (or damnation) from the foundation of the world, but if that is true one must wonder if Paul was chosen yet again on the road to Damascus? Was he not chosen the first time from the foundation of the world? If someone also suggests that Paul was chosen for salvation from his mother’s womb (see verse below), then it would make Paul chosen for salvation no less than three times! Besides, if Paul was chosen for salvation once or twice before Acts 9, his divine revelation would be irrelevant anyway, since he would be chosen for salvation with or without it. 

Clearly no one is chosen to believe or not believe, because if this had been the case then it would naturally be God’s fault if someone does not believe. We can read in Acts 17 that we are even created to seek and find God, and that he is not far away from any of us. Also, keep in mind the parable of the wedding party of the King’s son in Matt. 22. Those who were called “chosen” were those who had chosen to go to the party, and they were not even on the initial guest list.

Paul had an option to obey or disobey Jesus’ calling. Fortunately he obeyed and was a useful chosen vessel.

So then, King Agrippa, I WAS NOT DISOBEDIENT to the vision from heaven (Acts 26:19)

God separates us all from our mother’s wombs, and again, we are all created to seek him and find him. We can be saved through God’s grace if we respond well to his calling. The reason for the revelation at Damascus, was to shake Paul up so that he would hopefully get converted and be a good preacher of the gospel. It worked out well, just like Jesus had anticipated.

Galatians 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, 16 to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus. (NKJV)