Raf

Chockfull, would we not need to establish that Moses, et al, agreed with Bullinger on the Witness of the Stars? I agree, if Bullinger is correct, that would be valuable info. But that's a big IF. I suspect most Christians don't even agree with Bullinger on his thesis.

Yes yes yes, but my question as it related to this thread was: when was the idea of "salvation" first expressed in the Bible. And you can answer that in one of two ways. If you go with the believer's perspective, you can cite Titus as evidence that it was there all along. And I would have no Biblical argument against that. But if you go the dispassionate historian's route, you can't use Titus as evidence of what people knew or believed hundreds/thousands of years earlier. (That's why I called it a concession, TLC, because you noted Titus but seem to agree with me that it doesn't prove earlier believers knew what the epistle to Titus would later say). So I'm definitely NOT trying to sap Titus of Biblical authority. I'm just trying to see how early the idea of "salvation" is expressed in the Bible. Job is REALLY early, but there's no "how". What is the earliest Biblical evidence of "do/think/believe/obey this, and you will be saved"? I don't know the answer to that, but if we're going to ask "The Gospel Whereby A Man Is Saved - Has It Changed?" can we agree that we need to first establish where such a promise began in the first place? Titus can give you a Biblical answer, but questioning whether Moses, Joshua, and even Job KNEW what was later written in Titus is still fair from a historical standpoint. Moses, after all, could not quote Titus. Where is it written in the OT that there even was such a thing as a "gospel whereby a man is saved"? What's the earliest reference? I'm really not trying to argue or cast aspersions on anyone's belief. I hope you guys don't see it that way.

His snark was directed at the conversation. Yours was directed at him. See the difference? Good. Now knock it off. I think I made myself very clear both by putting "get away with that" in quotes and by clarifying later that it does depend on how you approach the information. Yes, if you believe in God, you can Biblically use Titus to prove that Job knew salvation was available and how to receive it. But, as I said, I think you're conceding that you can't make the same argument without making that presupposition.

I don't think it's appropriate to read later documents back into earlier ones when it comes to establishing what people knew and when they knew it. You might be able to "get away with that" theologically, but not logically. In other words, the fact that Titus says there was a promise of eternal life before this world/age began does not establish that those who lived through Genesis knew it. I think you concede that point, but I wanted to make it more explicit. Regardless, we know Job believed in a life after this one, and we know he expected it for himself. We have no idea how he knew that or how he could "claim" it for himself, there being (probably) no "scripture" at all at the time he lived. But clearly it was an early belief. If you believe all scripture to be inspired by God, then I agree that Titus gives you a Biblical answer, of sorts, to my questions. But if you don't (and I don't), then you have to go chronologically by what's written and when to determine when and how this belief in an afterlife (and, by extension, a belief in salvation and its "requirements") emerged. P.S. The mods received a couple of complaints about a post on this thread. It was my belief that the post in question is gently poking fun at the discussion, not disrespecting it. Either way, it's not really off topic (and I'm usually pretty aggressive about what's on and off-topic, particularly when I'm engaged in the discussion).

My question is: Job appears to have believed he would be raised again (hence, he was saved). What was the basis of that belief?

Maybe "worthy" was the wrong word, but he seems confident he will be raised. Assured. Not that he deserves it. But expects it.

How would Job have considered himself worthy of the promise of an afterlife?

Job 19:25-26 seems pretty unambiguous to me, and it's my understanding that Job is fairly early, so my hypothesis would appear to be incorrect.

For an "afterlife" reference in Genesis, you would satisfy my request for a reference in Moses, since he* wrote Genesis. I would be pleased to see such a reference, either explicit or by implication. The interesting thing here is to avoid "backreading," (for lack of a better word). That is, we KNOW there are later references to an afterlife, so we are inclined to read them into earlier verses, even though the original writers or readers would not necessarily have done so. That's why I'm looking for something unambiguous. A reference can be implicit and unambiguous, of course. And again, all this does relate to your original question in that the concept of "salvation" requires a promise of an afterlife. (Not that you suggested I was off topic, but you're not the only person reading this thread).

I'm not questioning whether the Bible speaks of an afterlife. It obviously does. I'm questioning WHEN that belief began to surface. I submit it was rather late in the theological development of the,Hebrew religion. I could be wrong. Does Moses make an unambiguous reference to an afterlife?

This game is rigged.

That's a lot less ambiguous.

As I read the whole chapter, verse 12 does not actually look like it's looking forward to a later promise. Rather, it looks very much like this awakening you mention will never take place at all. Mind you, this is Job speaking in despair, so it's not quite doctrine. I asked for an unequivocal reference to an afterlife. I humbly submit that Job 14 is equivocal at best, and at worst it reflects an active belief in no afterlife at all.

I think, in context, Job 14:14 comes off more as "wishful thinking" than a promise that this is going to happen. It really seems there like Job is lamenting that an afterlife is not the case. But I could easily be wrong.

Honest question, and I don't mean to be all "questioning faith atheist" about this one: Where is the first indication in the Bible of anything that can unequivocally be referred to as an "afterlife," a life subsequent to someone's death? Let me know if you think my question is off topic, and I'll move it. But I do think it relates directly to the issue of "salvation," seeing as salvation would be, by definition, the promise of a favorable afterlife.

We got something. I ain't saying what it is. Minor correx, but there it is

Backtracking for a second here because of the botched Superman quote and botched correction. "Fly. Don't look. Just... fly. We've got... something. I'm not saying what it is. Just... trust me."

I will be reviewing one quasi-edit based on feedback and asking other moderators to reconsider the rest. Thanks for the feedback

Dustin Hoffman

Wild guess: tombstone

Ned Beatty Superman Christopher Reeve (Rules note: you CAN go with a sequel, but only to move on to an actor who wasn't in the original. And then you can't go back to another sequel unless you're moving to yet another actor who wasn't in... Example, it's ok to go from Braveheart to Mel Gibson to Lethal Weapon to Danny Glover... but once you've got Danny Glover, you can't go to Lethal Weapon II and pick the actress who played Glover's wife. However, you CAN go to Lethal Weapon II and pick Joe Pesci, because he wasn't in Lethal Weapon. All of which is to say... you can use a Superman sequel here, but you can't go to an actor who was in the first Superman).

Kirstie Alley Look Who's Talking Abe Vigoda

Paul Lynde (I hope) Charlotte's Web Debbie Reynolds

Say hello to grandmama... You're up

Seriously? Okay, um... Life isn't some cartoon musical where you sing a little song and all your insipid dreams magically come true. So let it go. ... I thought this city would be a perfect place where everyone got along and anyone could be anything. Turns out, life's a little bit more complicated than a slogan on a bumper sticker. Real life is messy. We all have limitations. We all make mistakes. Which means, hey, glass half full, we all have a lot in common. And the more we try to understand one another, the more exceptional each of us will be. But we have to try. So no matter what kind of person you are, I implore you: Try. Try to make the world a better place. Look inside yourself and recognize that change starts with you. ... "Actually, it's your word against yours. And if you want this pen, you're going to cooperate with my investigation on finding that missing otter, or the only place you'll be selling pawpsicles is the prison cafeteria... It's called a hustle, sweetheart." "She hustled you good! You're a cop now, Nick! You're gonna need one of these!"