Augury-steria
“The sun will be turned into darkness and the moon into blood before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes.” Joel 2:31 NASB
Great and awesome day– Start here: CLICK THIS LINK
When I read things like this, I am amused, insulted, dismayed and querelous. Amused because this is such a clear example of total paradigm thinking. Insulted because of the general lack of scholarship that accompanies such marketing ploys. Dismayed because so many otherwise rational people seem unable to think when it comes to biblical “prophecy.” Querulous because I cannot understand the human penchant, displayed in every generation, to know the “end times.”
Then I read something in Bewilderments.
“ . . . Berger discusses the significance of the sociology of knowledge for religious faith. He explores one of the basic suppositions of the sociologist Karl Mannheim’s study of ‘the relationship between human thought and the social conditions under which it occurs . . . The plausibility, in the sense of what people actually find credible, of views of reality depends upon the social support these receive . . .’ (emphasis mine). Social processes ‘manifest themselves as psychological pressures within our own consciousness . . . It is in conversation, in the broadest sense of the word, that we build up and keep going our view of the world. It follows that this view will depend upon the continuity and consistency of such conversation, and that it will change as we change conversation partners.’”[1]
In other words, the reason human beings accept auguries is simply because they belong to a social group that supports these claims. They want to believe because the ethos of the group allows them to believe. If they leave the group, for whatever reasons, their belief system may change to fit the new social context of acceptability. It’s not stupidity or obstinance or intransigence that produces these prophetic headlines. It’s social acceptance. If we all refused to tolerate such codswallop, it would cease to exist. And the reason it does not exist in some circles has much less to do with scholarship, marketing or credibility than it has to do with social consent. If enough people accept an idea, it becomes true no matter what outsiders may say.
Ah, you think this is only a religious defect. No sir. After the explosion of the atomic bomb over Hiroshima, a large number of world-prominent physicists claimed that the news was fabricated, that such a bomb could not exist and that it was all a government-backed media ploy. The reason they held this position was based on their acceptance of a model of the atom; acceptance that was uniform across the group. This “group think” was not reversed by the evidence. In fact, many of these men continued to deny the bomb until they died. A new generation of physicists with a different “group think” simply replaced them. Science is just religion in different garb.
The lesson: your beliefs are intimately connected to your social sphere. “Choose wisely,” says Joel.
Oh, by the way (and now I know there will be an outcry of objection—and probably some reader will decide I am a heretic—even a Hebraic Messianic one), if you want to see the same kind of “group think” social acceptance happening in the argument over the author of the Torah, then read the comments on the video “Patterns of Evidence” (CLICK HERE). You don’t have to actually watch the video to recognize the necessity of social acceptance in these comments. I am quite sure you’ve heard them all before. But this time, pay attention to the assumptions behind the comments. Of course, this doesn’t mean that Moses didn’t write the Torah. Perhaps he did (although obviously not some portions, like the end of Deuteronomy 32). But that isn’t the point here. The point is that Berger’s analysis of the role of what is acceptable to the social group plays just as important a part in Hebraic Messianic thinking as it does in prophetic prediction and atomic bombs.
Topical Index: prediction, blood moon, belief, social system, Joel 2:31
[1]Avivah Gottlieb Zornberg, Bewilderments: Reflections of the Book of Numbers, p. 38.
I totally agree it has been said that hebraic Messianic thinking has added UPS to the face that has been so valuable it cannot be ignored…. Let’s venture to keep it this way. It’s been known that there are some very significant hebraic Messianic leaders interpreting the Bible with the insights of Isaiah 51 through 57, causes me to think let’s keep it this way. Again this is so important that we keep a balance come and let us reason together with the Western Christian mindset.
Brett, please define UPS.
Thank you, I totally lost my my train of thought. Continue from the roots and the original well. And let them spring again like the root of Jesse. It is bringing up all over. Can we not see it. Or perceive it.
WHO told you?
“I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught
it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.”
Paul
WHERE did your information come from?
“But when he, the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide
you into all truth.”
Yeshua
And the future . . .?
“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow
will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble
of its own.”
Yeshua
And wasn’t it Paul who said: “I consulted no man.”?
The truth comes from God.
Sorry for the unclear sentence breaks.
Skip, this is a timely, excellent and so very useful Post.
In his delightful book “The Bible Tells Me So; Why Defending Scripture Has Made Us Unable To Read It”, Peter Enns defends the view that Torah was written after the Babylonian exile, somewhere in 500-600 BCE. I highly recommend this book, and not just because the guy is hilarious! 🙂
I immensely enjoy the internal crisis your thinking causes me as it makes me WORK OUT FOR MYSELF the G-d of MY understanding. We need a ‘like’ or ‘explore this more’ or ‘wait while I catch my breath’ button….. I really appreciated today’s word. Very introspective for me.
Let’s also keep in mind that while Avivah Gottlieb Zornberg and Karl Mannheim may appear to be objective observers within a rational, non-pagan, post-Enlightenment system of scientific illumination, they also live, breath, and think within a sociological bubble that produces patterns of thinking endemic to Western rationalism. In the world of modern thought, the obverse of family experience (Father knows best) is celebrated (child knows better than parent, i.e., the enlightened scientist/sociologist/physician who comes one generation after the last). But have they/we really progressed? Or have we become a product of observation overload and undertow? Shall we become agnostic doubters in line with skeptics who proclaim, “Where is the promise of his coming?” Are the Bible, religion, and descriptions about God merely the product of the cultural religious thought induced by great turmoil or need? It appears to me that much of the New Testament could fit into the mold of psychologically induced religious fantasy spawned by Hellenistic paganism. I’m sure the Torah could have found similar inspiration in its time. It just happens that the Jews have a 600-1500 year head start, so their paradigm isn’t quite as amenable to attack (because we are largely ignorant of ancient cultures).
Today, we want to know, “Is it true?” My question is, does it really matter?
Aren’t both of those questions still part of the Western paradigm?
That question is so Jewish. 😉
I’ve appreciated the political use of the phrase “virtue signalling”, as it’s helped expose how much of my “faith” is really just that. I exhibit Jesus-talk (now mostly Yeshua-talk), and hyper-vigilance in some areas while letting others go as some sort of accepted “original sin”. So how many of my outward expressions of faith are really Fig Leaves? Difficult to say, because it is more obvious in others, right? Of course, hyper-vigilance and Christ-talk can be justified as a sort of “hide-it-under-a-bushel?-No!”, but Yeshua also taught important lessons about secrecy in prayer, fasting, and alms-giving. It’s good to step back and check ourselves.
Similarly, I probably do need to take a cold hard look at my own group-think tendencies and socially acceptable compromises.
P.S. Thank-you. I was first attracted to this forum by the scholarship AND reverence for scripture. Most of the scholarship I had been exposed to previously had been stupidly one-sided attacks on the bible and faith (with a few good points mixed in). I continue to appreciate the discussion here because of the difficult questions asked, and the struggles shared. Within my own circles, it is often not safe to share questions about the trinity, atonement, ect.
I also appreciate the reference to Niels Bohr and others. I share this with my classes when we cover the Bohr model of the atom 🙂
You must know Thomas S. Kuhn’s work and its enormous impact on how we view science. 🙂
I’m familiar. I read 1/3 of The Structure… so far. But it doesn’t seem like his insights have been absorbed into the scientific community much at all,… especially the teaching of science. My curriculum is still largely: “Here’s the scientific method, that’s how we found out X,Y, Z, now you do this controlled experiment and you are doing science, too.”
Yes, but you are teaching “normal science,” and at that level there is little if any consideration of the actual practice of scientific discovery and probably no discussion or comprehension of how paradigms determine “facts.”
I found out when I homeschooled my children that logic, as a formal discipline, is not taught in schools at any level. The study of logic, when I pursued it with my children, opened my eyes. We energetically set out to use truth tables on published literature, and ended up dissecting editorials in Wall Street Journal, etc. and finding fallacies in every one. The concluding statements so many times did not hold through on the tables well, either. I was not trying to find problems! I was trying to find examples of how the tables worked!
We think we are creatures of reason, but this in itself is, I think, a fallacy because I don’t think we really want to know the truth: we want confirmation bias. Sad busting of the balloon. My children headed out into the world as skeptics. It was depressing!
Correct. In most ways, I’m a foreign language teacher – presenting the foundational concepts and vocabulary just to be able to understand the wider conversations later.
Augury-steria. March 30, 3019.
I was shocked when I learned what the physicists said was not possible was true! I was making a yearly trip to the museum until then. I was not, however, shocked to find out that we had been tricked again! Lied to. Funny though because I remember thinking about it at the museum when I read about how things had grown back in such a short period of time. How could that be? That’s what I thought. Firebombed like Tokyo. That made sense.
They say that Nixon said that people will believe anything they see on TV. That’s truer than true. On YouTube there is a recording of Nixon talking to the astronauts who supposedly were on the moon! Ha ha ha ha. Ridiculous! A line to the moon? Isn’t that enough? Excuse me, are we THAT stupid and gullible? They know we are! Anyone who still believes that men walked on the moon are possibly beyond any kind of remedial help in the area of reason (unless they actually are willing to look it up with a mind wanting to know the truth). No one really needs to study it or do any research with this one. Just think about it. Look up at the moon. Next they will be trying to land on the sun! Ha ha ha ha The same thing.
I hope I haven’t offended anyone who is going along with this hoax. We have all been duped but even in worse ways than this. If you look anything up, also look up the ex-Nazi at N A S A. I heard about it recently in a talk titled ‘The Nazi Next Door’. I think that’s the title of the book/talk. Sadly the man giving the talk doesn’t know it’s a hoax. How many Nazi ‘scientists’ (if they can be called scientists) escaped to the States after the war? All those organizations that people think are looking out for ‘us’ are doing just the opposite. Like the CDC. Another subject.
I am glad Skip brought up a subject that is one of those topics that can’t be discussed with people publicly because of cognitive dissonance (one reason). I live here which makes it more complicated. It is almost like telling Christians that the idea of the Trinity is false but the bombing is a subject that is actually taboo. Too much for most to accept. Regarding the Trinity (I didn’t realize that I had always been a Unitarian in thought), you as a believer are rejected automatically along with it for the most part. Keeping the Sabbath was first I think. Maybe that’s why I never really fit in with most groups after leaving the RC church though I was a part of that world for around 25 years until I came to keep the Sabbath in 2005.
How different this world would be if no lies were there to be believed! Maybe it will be like this in the last one-thousand year period! I only wonder what it will be like!