PaulS

After the Kingdom has come and enemies have been overthrown. Once the Kingdom has arrived. Prophets like Isaiah say that also - the horrible ending is for the powers that subjugate Israel. They were to be overthrown and destroyed. 'Innocent' individuals so to speak will survive if they aren't against the God of Israel. These are the ones who will 'flock to learn' etc.

I think the devil is in the detail. Israel's prophets did not mean salvation in the same context as Paul to the gentiles. Indeed, is the word salvation directed at the gentiles in Isaiah? No. The salvation that any of the prophets may have referring to for non-Jews was that gentiles got to exist after the Kingdom came if they capitulated to the God of Israel. Paul on the other hand, and definitely not in line with the prophets, was preaching salvation to gentiles by belief in Jesus. Totally different. Which Jesus sayings did Jesus indeed refer to non-Jews entering the Kingdom? Which ones does Ehrman claim to be Jesus' sayings? Jesus may have interacted with non-Jews - I don't imagine that he lived in a bubble. But just because he interacted with them, or even had sympathy for them, doesn't mean he was inviting them into the Kingdom. He simply doesn't according to the NT - ever. I'm guessing by 'violent ending' you are referring to God overthrowing his enemies when the Kingdom came. I don't think Jesus view or that of the Prophets was a violent ending for all non-Jews. Those that capitulated and subjected themselves to the God of Israel would live. I don't think you're deliberately twisting to be devious, I just think you have to do some NT-gymnastics and harmonizing to present a Jesus and a Paul that both align with the Prophets on the Kingdom. Again, Jesus isn't recorded explaining the Kingdom to non-Jews and isn't recorded as encouraging them to join the Kingdom. I thought that was what I said. It is speculative either way, presently. We need their help yes, but even scholars speculate and guess or 'lean' a certain way, not necessarily based on inarguable evidence.

So are you talking about the quote ""Paul took seriously the words of the prophets that at the end of time God's salvation would extend not only to his people, Israel, but to all the nations of the earth.................the word of salvation, therefore, was not only for the people of Israel, but for all people."? If so, I addressed it in the paragraph that I wrote following where I said I thought you were reading too much into Bart. At the time I wrote "At the end of time, not before it. And at the end, they will be saved if they capitulated to the God of Israel. They were not being 'invited' into the Kingdom. The prophets (Isaiah) were prophesying the end results after God had intervened. There was no talk in Isaiah or other Jewish expectations about gentiles 'preparing' for the end times. I think you misread 'Jewish expectations' in this regard." See above (if that is the quote you are referring to). It seems convoluted and twisting Jesus to fit what otherwise to me seems pretty clear - that Jesus did not practice outreach to the gentiles and could so easily have made it clear that the Kingdom was an invitation for them also, if he just said so. He is never recorded as saying that, which to me, seems the most telling evidence. So it seems to you. Jesus didn't rule at all, and it is likely he believed he wasn't going to rule as he seems to have believed the Son of Man and/or God would be the rulers - in line with Jewish expectations. There is speculation that Jesus may have been referring to himself as the Son of Man, but it is just that - speculation. I think jesus expected a Kingdom like Isaiah where God would defeat his enemies and overthrow the powers that subjected Israel, then God would rule like a king. The 'love' that Jesus was sharing was his message of the love that God had for the Jews, not the gentiles. Hence why Jesus wasn't interested in preaching to the gentiles. Again, relying on two or three verses in all of Isaiah, when so clearly the language in the rest of the entire book of Isaiah is talking about defeating gentiles and their kingdoms. It just doesn't weigh up, in my opinion. Like I said, I think you read too much into Ehrman in this instance.

Onya Dolly! https://www.perthnow.com.au/entertainment/celebrity/dolly-parton-renames-a-dollywood-ride-amid-black-lives-matter-movement-ng-b881639269z ""As soon as you realise that [something] is a problem, you should fix it. Don't be a dumba**. That's where my heart is. I would never dream of hurting anybody on purpose."

The lack of evidence is for the argument that Jesus encouraged inviting gentiles to the Kingdom. That just isn't there.

Okay, so now that you acknowledge outliers (your actual understanding of statistics yet to be revealed) I guess you're no longer saying that covid only endangers octogenarians in long term care. CV kills less than flu and pneumonia? What, are you talking over the history of man? Tell me - how many people have died from flu and pneumonia in the US in the last 6 months? I don't think you are keeping a very good track of statistics, just quietly. Covid has nearly disappeared in the US? If that is the case, you are very lucky Burl (to live in the world you live in) unlike the cursed state of Victoria and that camp in Zealand! Camps! Really, where do you get this stuff?

Night mate. (Translated - goodnight, my friend).

I prefer the evidence provided by science over any 'belief'. The science (the longest running covid19 study to be conducted in the world) says covid antibodies (as any antibodies typically required for immunity, according to science) whither within 3-months so that less than 17% of people previously infected can prevent reinfection. You seem to 'believe' these scientists are mistaken and that most people will somehow resist reinfection, even though they don't have enough antibodies (which according to the science of immunology would be normally required) and you base this on which scientific study again? Now that's true 'belief'.

That's good. That's what a democracy is about. Good luck to you.

I think the virus got the jump early on Italy & Spain, and Australia would have been the same if it was as densely populated and slow to react. I'm not being unfair - I think all of the world didn't know what was coming when it got its first cases. What is telling is that once they did get their act into gear, the death rates of these countries fell astronomically. So too did their infection rates. Italy learnt its lessons and implemented appropriate practices and measures, and you know how many people are dying there each day now? Single digits.

It's not about credit or brownie points - I thought we were talking about the science of covid19 herd immunity and also the effectiveness of good hygiene practices, social distancing, and the wearing of masks. You know, pretty much all of the things your President has showed by example that he doesn't value. It's not about my glorious, sunburnt country of open plains and beaches trumping (no pun intended) the horror of a covid-ridden US at war with itself.

I'm not arguing that our population density is much less, I'm saying that where we did have spread, that spread was stopped in its tracks by social distancing and hygiene measures. I have no doubt it is easier to do in our country compared to yours, but that doesn't detract from it being an appropriate way to manage it. Are you now arguing that because your population is more dense, social distancing and good hygiene aren't the best way to deal with the disease?

I'm glad you're happy with your situation.

To the contrary, Australia has had social distancing issues which have resulted in resurgences. The most recent was in Victoria where poor quarantine procedures (i.e. the supervisory personnel let the quarantines out of quarantine for extended periods into the community). Australia too had people shouting at close distances and young people partying etc. What was evidenced though was that when that stuff was shut down, the spread stopped. If you are now saying that the issue is that it is too hard for Americans to practice these measures to stop the spread, well, we're going down a different discussion path now.

Pretty much the science has already established that if you don't have antibodies to a said virus then you can be infected/reinfected with the said virus. That's normally how it works. I don't think it is guesswork that has established such scientific principles on immunity. I'm not sure anybody is going to start a study where we deliberately reinfect people with covid19 to prove that their lack of covid19 antibodies will still protect them?

If you're saying that it is just a 'might' then I can't disagree with you. For some, the couple of months worth of antibody resistance may have had some affect on infection spread. I think on the balance of probabilities though, as evidenced in Australia, social distancing/hygiene controls/lack of group meetings & audiences has definitely seen the spread stop in its tracks. Perhaps that approach may not work in the US because of people's focus on individual rights. Largely Australians didn't have that concern when it came to stopping the virus.

On one hand we have the longest running scientific study into covid19, saying that after 3 months less than 17% of an infected cohort still retained antibodies. On the other hand we have zero scientific evidence of herd immunity actual working to minimize the spread of covid19. I know where I'm putting my money.

We can see there are gentile influences to some of Matthew and I'm sure there was editing done throughout the ages also. That largely Matthew says nothing about Jesus encouraging non-gentiles into the Kingdom says more than these couple of verses, in my opinion. It just would not be hard, if it were true, for Jesus to utter one sentence such as "the Kingdom is for Jew and Gentile alike", if that is what he actually believed.

Well I would have thought you would be able to show me seeing as you are convinced (presumably based on evidence) that herd immunity works for covid19.

That's one bet that I wouldn't want to be staking lives and an economy on.

It will be devastating, as it will be for the Australian economy. Will your country be destroyed - no. What will be more devastating is if you have Trump continuing his mixed messages about opening or not-opening and the continuation of this pandemic that will never see you able to get back to normal because people are continually sick, contagious, and overwhelm your public health system.

The word 'suggest' in a yet-to-be-peer-reviewed-study is like using the word theory when discussing evolution. They are saying the evidence is showing you that very few people (less than 17% of the cohort) have antibodies at the 3-month mark. That is beyond dispute in the study. 'Why' or 'how' that occurs is the only 'suggestion' - the science that they drop off is proven in the study.

I agree that we pretty much can't know for sure about any of it because of the untrustworthy nature of much of scripture, added to and edited throughout the ages. Puff piece where the authros believe Jesus said stuff because it is quoted in Acts. No scholarship has really gone into this piece. Directed at the Jews. There were Jews who were going to cop it and there were Jews who were considered lesser who God would restore. Only Jews though.

There is. The Kings Study from London. Read it. I have faith that eventually a vaccine will likely be found. But the quickest time-frame ever that the world has seen a vaccine developed for a disease, is the one for mumps - and that took 4 years. So whilst I have hope that technological advancements will speed up the process today, I think it is prudent to treat the virus as though no vaccine will be found. At least until we can get a handle on it and manage it better. 0.05% of your population dead in a matter of months, is not my idea of excellent management if you ask me.

Undoubtedly there is much harm being caused economically by this virus. My comment did not mean to sound flippant but was in the context of Burl's comment that your whole country was being destroyed. I'm sure for those small business people it will feel like their world is being destroyed, but the fact remains that your country itself will get through this and is not being destroyed.