journals – Judge an article by its content more than administrative reasons – example with tertullian
1) JonR – Chiliasm Prophecy – 1 Thessalonians 4:17 (“Rapture” Verse) and 1 Corinthians 15:52 (“Twinkling of an Eye Change” Verse) is Separated by 1000 years. (Original: 18 Sep 2024; NEW update: 21 Sep 2024)
*Link for Ms Word download:
*Link for PDF download:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ty4DaD0pcA9xUnw0e6rBQ0k3AtFSRZvC/view?usp=sharing
2) JonR – Non Elect Salvation Possibility (8 August 2024; NEW update: 21 Sep 2024)
*Link for Ms Word download:
*Link for PDF download:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XCsdag6_7Sd7WYbhBs_YSADzYiS4KJvZ/view?usp=sharing
Yet again, another journal wrote this (on 21 September 2024):
“Your manuscript was received in the editorial offices of The Journal of XXX on 09/18/2024. Unfortunately, we cannot proceed with review of your manuscript for the reason(s) listed below. Please be sure to adequately address all of the issues listed if you wish to return your manuscript. The length of this article far exceeds the permitted length: Submissions cannot exceed 40 pages. Submissions cannot have a table of contents. Submissions should not have a bibliography but rather only footnotes. References should be more than internet sources. The author’s own exposition on the biblical texts should be longer than the quotes.” As it is, the file submitted does not qualify as a submission.”
My Reply (slightly modified):
“All the man made rules for your journal does not reflect any academic nor knowledge based reason for rejection but rather just reflect administrative reasons. For example, if I were to comment on a Bible Verse/Church Father Writing, it does not mean my number of words being longer than the quoted Bible Verses/Church Father Writing means more accurate truth since I may be just highlighting a particular key aspect but yet need to quote it all so a reader can see the context and judge whether my shorter comment makes sense or is logically consistent or not even if they disagree (that’s all an editor should do, i.e. check consistency).
If an editor disagrees with a meaning, say when a Church Father writing is against the editor’s opinion which exists too (like I presented even possible Scripture level Shepherd of Hermas and so nothing “scholarly about his opinion either as another scholar would agree with the Shepherd of Hermas quote”) so an academic journal should print it to show that these variety of thoughts exist but let God decide which was more accurate on that Day.
Doing anything more is playing God which is okay if the journal or editor turns out right but is say the Non Elect Salvation quotes of the Shepherd of Hermas turns out right, then they could be cast into Hell because it is said to be Scripture Level including by St. Irenaeus of Lyons and Tertullian, both Chiliasm Church Fathers. Interestingly, for example, in the Non Elect Salvation submission pages 27 – 28, Tertullian himself had trouble with the Non Elect Salvation quotes of the Shepherd of Hermas (which proves this part is preserved authentically according to even Tertullian himself who is disagreeing or having trouble with its meaning) but yet please observe carefully Tertullian’s wise and scholarly reply (no wonder Tertullian is the Father of Latin Christianity and Founder of Western Theological Scholarship) since he writes as follows, [1]
“But I would yield my ground to you, if the scripture of the Shepherd, which is the only one which favours adulterers, had deserved to find a place in the Divine canon; if it had not been habitually judged by every council of Churches (even of your own) among apocryphal and false (writings); … I, however, imbibe the Scriptures of that Shepherd who cannot be broken.” [2]
Basically, Tertullian in his discussion here (with Bishop of Rome, Pope Callixtus I at that time) is saying he has problem because the Shepherd of Hermas since it gives some type of Non Elect Salvation to “adulterers” (implied) and that’s a reason for his hesitance that it has been included in the Divine Canon (e.g. Muratorian/Roman Canon which are first oldest known Bible Canon, etc.) but yet he says that he will “imbibe” (absorb) it since it is “Scripture which cannot be broken”.
Ah, that’s how we are supposed to do proper academic reporting and commenting honestly based on evidence like this regardless if we agree to the Shepherd of Hermas or not like how Tertullian did and that’s exactly the methodology I followed. So I guess Tertullian himself or the other Church Fathers I quoted may not be published in your journal if their original writings were submitted since sometimes the Bible Verses they quote is longer than their commentary for that part etc. breaking your administrative rules.
Wow, your journal must have apostles and prophets greater than Chiliasm Church Fathers themselves, is it? If not, then let’s humble ourselves and present the evidence as it is for we cannot be judged for presenting truth honestly (like Tertulian did here) and if the Shepherd of Hermas say turned out to be not Scripture, we have nothing to lose since God also can clearly see that this is the “preserved evidence” that we have.
The worst reason given is should not contain Internet sources. I agree if the Internet source is somebody’s opinion. However, please notice that all Internet sources which I quoted for content part is Church Fathers writing where for example my hardcopy for St. Irenaeus of Lyons’ Against Heresies reads the same either way.
This means every single Chiliasm Church Father writing I quoted exists in hardcopy and has more value in its content than any journal publishing in the whole world (because they’re written by true Christians in those early centuries from lineage of the Apostles themselves). If any writing was tampered with in history is beyond my ability to know so that doesn’t count but all that matters for honesty is I only quoted from available scholarly translations of the Church Fathers and not write in some personal man made opinions of unbelievers, pagans and not Spirit filled Christians that your journal publishes probably most of the time.
Anyway, my part is done and let God Decide on Judgment Day whether what I sent in is accurate or nor. Since I cannot determine this part either, I don’t feel any motivation to do anything further apart from just trying so that God doesn’t judge me for hoarding it.
When a journal rejects it and if their theological interpretations for these Verses quoted becomes right, they are justified but if mine was right, then they will be judged for not giving it a fair publishing right beyond silly man made rules for not judging it by its content value only as I just demonstrated. Shalom.”
[1] A Catholic encyclopedia writes, “St. Irenaeus and Tertullian (in his Catholic days) cite the “Shepherd” as Scripture. Tertullian, when a Montanist, implies that Pope St. Callistus had quoted it as an authority (though evidently not as Scripture),” in his reply here. www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/hermas
[2] Tertullian (c. 155 AD – c. 240 AD), On Modesty (“De pudicitia”), Chapter 10, www.newadvent.org/fathers/0407.htm (4 August 2024).
P/S: This is Slide 30 in #MiscellaneousPPT – Earthly versus Heavenly Ranking – What did CHRIST teach? Most important element for University Ranking (example recent link: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/oxford-cambridge-universities-knocked-top-33710549 ) should be “number of new and significant discoveries” and not opinions of student satisfaction or employment hire because these can be influenced by “nepotism”.
For example, in Theology, “most accurate prophecy + doctrines” affect “eternal ranking and heavenly glory” (Matthew 5:19) beyond “number of conversions with errors” (Daniel 12:3) which only God can determine who is more accurate but knowing this should help us be more careful where for me, I try to match it with Christians before me by providing say “Chiliasm Church Father” quotes.
Earthly discoveries no matter how great say in Math or Technology doesn’t affect anything in eternity so are not of any eternal value unless it is used to do “Charity Doctrine” say via money earned and only then it converts to “treasure in heaven” for Christians as Christ Taught for “Perfection” in Matthew 19:21 and Luke 12:33.
Please remember that following Christ must include Charity Doctrine too by “relative measure” since he told this to a “rich” man (so how much is by human free will and heart, Luke 12:34) as MOST BLESSED LORD JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF TAUGHT both as follows:
“Jesus said to him, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” … 33Sell what you have and give alms; provide yourselves money bags which do not grow old, a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches nor moth destroys. 34For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” (Matthew 19:21, Luke 12:33 – 34, NKJV)
By the way, in my recent PDF (Book) on “Non Elect Salvation Possibility” and “Chiliasm Prophecy 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and 1 Corinthians 15:52 separated by 1000 years” in the Appendix, when I called a particular journal as publishing “not Spirit Led Christians, unbelievers and pagans”, please don’t be offended since it was a “secular Modern Religion” type which includes “New Age stuff etc.” and please don’t misread me as I never use such word on a Christian journal “generally”.
