JANITOR 002

Wow, this is fascinating.  Chuck is pulling out a synchronicity between two punnable words for "rope" in the Hebrew text of Rehab and the two spies.  Rehab used a word for rope that also means "suffering" and the spies used a word for rope that also means "hope".  This pun, Chuck claims, shows anticipation of the resurrection.  This is really interesting.  I've been very curious about synchronicities lately, the apparent anticipation of design shown in odd coincidences, and this man says the Bible is full of them.  I think our lives are full of these so called synchronicities as well.

Synchronicities are theoretically like a spiritual bell that rings when you are on the right path.  Reality rings true with the frequency of the truth when you are on the path of truth.  Allegedly.  Which taken to it's ultimate conclusion means we must deny all talk of materialism.  Not to say we are not material or that we do not live in the material, but materialism the philosophy says all causes are material.  This we have to deny if we accept synchronicities.  Synchronicities make no sense in a world where all causes are material.  The coincidences are too random.  They fail the math test because the Holy Spirit who is causing them according to Chuck, is above math.  In other words, Rahab and the Spies were not trying to anticipate the resurrection with their words, but God's Spirit forced their words in the physical realm to synchronize and proclaim the gospel.  Meaning, their words did not originate from a thought in their eight pounds of skull goop, but from God's hand in the spiritual realm, and the pun ringing true with the resurrection is something more that what falls under the term "verbal inspiration" (see point 7).

Perhaps. 

This would mean that even a little acceptance of secular materialism is blinding us to our true reality.  And that maybe in the past organists knew how to play the frequency of truth.... 

At 20 minutes he says portals into hell are a real thing in our reality because they existed in Daniel's time so they exist. But not all things claimed to be portals are actual portals.  Just like not all synchronicities are synchronicities.  He says, be careful about the talk of wormholes in outer space in the secular world, because they are nonsense stories.  He says despite them being the standard stuff occupying the internet conversation, be careful and don't participate in the secular nonsense.

The final NASA lie is claimed to be an alien invasion, which they will use to keep people in the system when God opens his portals and sends in the angels  ...or when he opens the gates of hell and let's the devils loose for a while.

Maybe NASA has been lying for 80 years because 80 years ago someone did a séance with the devil and after signing some dotted line the devil said, "OK NASA, this is what I need you to do.  Despite all I have done, I cannot change the way I look when I walk among humans, my physical body in the closet over there that I use when I come to earth is corrupted.  I have sinned with that body too much.  My nose is long from lying and my ears are pointy from holding my head up so high.  But it's the only physical body I got.  So I need you NASA scientists to spend the next 80 years convincing everyone that ugly half human looking things are real, they are coming from outer space, and they have incredible new tech candy for the humans if only they let me rule for a two week period. 

Chuck's final prayer says we are staggered by the understanding that God is so involved in the very little details of every one of our lives, and this is what I mean when I say "I think our lives are full of these so-called synchronicities."

To Chuck's main point--How to avoid deception: He says we must check our hermeneutical hygiene.  Are we letting secular ideas into our hermeneutic?  Do I need to cool it with this talk of synchronicities?  Is this talk just as bad as talk of outer space?  

I've never heard the term "hermeneutical hygiene" before and I'm glad to have heard it because now I have a term to use when I am asked about my spiritual challenges with the church right now.

Here is an example of Martin Luther using good hermeneutical hygiene:

"There was mention of a certain new astrologer who wanted to prove that the earth moves and not the sky, the sun, and the moon. This would be as if somebody were riding on a cart or in a ship and imagined that he was standing still while the earth and the trees were moving. [Luther remarked] “So it goes now. Whoever wants to be clever must agree with nothing that others esteem. He must do something of his own. This is what that fellow does who wishes to turn the whole of astronomy upside down. Even in these things that are thrown into disorder I believe the Holy Scriptures, for Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth [Josh. 10:12].”  Emphasis mine.  Luther, Martin. Luther’s Works. Vol 54. Table Talk, ed. Helmut T. Lehmann, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967. 

Here is an example of C.F.W. Walther using good hermeneutical hygiene:

A question was raised about the Copernican System and Joshua 10:12-14 where the sun revolves around the earth.  To this Walther answered: "This is a part, not an article of the doctrinal structure. Now, if someone cannot see that Holy Scripture wants to teach this here and in other passages, he can indeed still be a believing Christian. However, one who believes that the author of the Book of Joshua meant to write about the sun’s orbit but was himself in error in this matter, he makes the foundation of all doctrinal theology, Scripture itself, uncertain and therefore attacks the foundation. But one who thinks that Joshua is speaking optically, as the Copernicans also do when they say, “The sun is rising,” “The sun is setting"- one cannot condemn him.  

In this connection the question was again raised whether it can be admitted that the Bible speaks optically.  Answer: "This teaching, whether the sun revolves around the earth or the earth around the sun, is not an article of faith, but at most only an object of faith, a part of the doctrinal structure of Holy Scripture. [But] because such (optical) language is unworthy of God, in that He would then be using a human way of speaking that contains an error, one must regard such a person as being in error but not as a heretic. But on the other hand it is also certain that such a person is setting up a dangerous hermeneutical principle, in that, you see, this statement is not only given to Joshua to say, but is also used by the author of this [book of] Scripture in the same way in verse 13—a principle whose consequences make the Bible unreliable for him...."  Essays For The Church – C.F.W. Walther, Volume I, 1857-1877 (CPH, 1992), pages 185-186.

Here is Pieper using good hermeneutical hygiene on p. 473 of Christian Dogmatics Vol 1 where he quotes Dr. H. A. Daniel who said, 

"The cosmic systems, all of them without exception, are not based on experience, for this would demand a position outside the earth, but on conclusions and combinations.  All of them therefore are and remain hypotheses."

Here is an example of hygiene.