See other Religion Articles
Title: The "Rapture" Business -- Part Two
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Aug 14, 2006
Author: Enderby
Post Date: 2006-08-14 22:09:58 by Enderby
Keywords: None
Views: 2625
Comments: 146
I was involved, the other day, in another thread here at Freedom4um, in which the discussion turned to the question of whether "the rapture" is a Biblically-supported concept. After exchanging a post or two with Yertle Turtle and Zipporah, I began to wonder whether we were all working from the same definition of "rapture." Having done some reading, I still think that's the problem (definitional differences, that is). 1 Thessalonians 4:16,17 says (NASB translation, emphasis added by me): For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord. The term "rapture" cames from the Latin verb raptus, meaning "to seize, catch, or carry away." The same verb supplies the root of the name of a whole category of birds that get their groceries in this way: "raptors" are eagles, hawks, buzzards, condors, and so on. If we take "rapture" to mean simply a catching-up from above (which, since I am a simple-minded person, is how I understand the term), I don't think there can be much dispute about whether living believers will be removed from the earth's surface and drawn to the Lord, following the general resurrection of the believing dead. I gather, however, from the reading to which Zipporah was kind enough to provide a link, that others have added to that meaning. I am reproducing the text from that link here, and interjecting some comments in italic font. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Does the Bible teach the "Rapture"? By Donald Hochner There are many Christians today who would love to be able to escape the troubles of this world. They believe that the Church will be "raptured" just before the great tribulation or the destruction of this world, depending on which "futurist" view you hold to. However, this kind of "escapism" is not taught in Scriptures. "Rapture," "futurism," and "escapism" haven't been defined yet -- nor will they be in the rest of Mr. Hochner's essay. And that's not good. Also there is no guarantee in Scriptures that would lead us to believe that the Church will be "caught up" in order to avoid suffering or persecutions because Jesus prayed that the Father would "not to take them (elect) out of the world, but to keep them from evil one" (John 17:15). But what if there was some other reason for a catching-up? I agree with Mr. Hochner that the church is not promised immunity from suffering and persecution. Indeed, the New Testament is pretty well filled with promises to the contrary: promises that were already being made good for the savagely-persecuted first century church. Also, I think Mr. Hochner is stealing a base by putting that parenthetical "elect" after "them" in John 17:15. As usual, context is everything; this is right in the middle of a chapters-long discourse by Jesus to his twelve disciples at the Last Supper, and the "them" absolutely refers to those disciples. What is said may apply also to believers in general, and it may not ... but the plain and direct meaning of the text is not to be casually "blown off" with a single word in parentheses. Besides, when Jesus says He's not praying for His disciples to be taken out of the world right then, that obviously does not mean that they will never be taken out of the world in any way, at any time. Every one of them died, as have all believers that I know of since then, apart from the small minority of us who are alive today -- and I'm old enough now that I can sort of see my opportunity to sneak off by way of the grave coming up, too. The "rapture" theme is the most popular and well-known subject among evangelical Christianity. Most believe (I once did) that we will "zoom" up to meet with Christ in the air without experiencing physical death or have our faith tested, to see whether it be real or not. They usually refer the passages in 1 Thes. 4:13-18 as their proof text. But I believe they have taken these verses out of context. Most futurist's views have fallen short in their failure to properly take into account the historical-grammatical and cultural context of the prophecies; specifically what they meant to their first century audience. In order to understand the passage in 1 Thes. 4:13-18, we must understand the overall view of this epistle by Paul and the NT writers before we come to any conclusion. These passages will be our anchor for this brief study. We cannot look at all the instances for this would be time consuming, and the space required would be prohibitive. You may be able to discern more of the meaning after reading what I have written. Of course, we must go back into the beginning of this epistle of 1 Thessalonians. It was Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy's greeting to the church of the Thessalonians in the first century (about AD 50's). Anytime you see the word "we", it means Paul, Silvanus, Timothy, and the brethren in their time, not to us as the readers in the present time. Keep in mind that the NT was written for us, not to us. Very true ... and Mr. Hochner might have wanted to keep that in mind himself, when he inserted his personal assumption into John 17:15, as I noted above. Paul wrote in this epistle, that they were "in much tribulation" (1:6). They had already "suffered and been mistreated in Philippi, as you know, we had the boldness in our God to speak to you the gospel of God amid much opposition" (2:2). From what quarter was the persecution? It was from the apostate Jews. This can be found in this epistle: "For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea, for you also endured the same sufferings at the hands of your own countrymen, even as they did from the Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus and the Prophets, and drove us out. They are not pleasing to God, but hostile to all men, hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved; with the result that they always fill up the measure of their sins. But wrath has come upon them to the utmost" (2:14-16). Does the phase "fill up the measure of their sins" in verse 16 ring a bell? Yes it does. This can be found in Matt. 23: "Consequently you bear witness against yourself, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. fill up then the measure of the guilt of your fathers. You serpents, you brood of vipers, how shall you escape the sentence of hell? Therefore, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city, that upon you may fall the guilt of all righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zecheriah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Truly I say to you, all these things shall be upon this generation" (vv. 31-36). We must remember the context in which those words were spoken. Jesus told the scribes and the Pharisees "Behold, your house [temple] being left to you desolate!" in their generation (vv. 36, 38). Either we have to say it is all future (and make Jesus a liar for saying any of it would occur in that generation), or make it all fulfilled at AD 70 (and preserve the integrity of Jesus). Also there is another connection in James 5: "Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries which are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments have become moth-eaten. Your gold and your silver have rusted; and their rust will be a witness against you and will consume your flesh like fire. It is in the last days that you have stored up your treasure! Behold, the pay of the laborers who mowed your fields, and which has been withheld by you cries out against you; and the outcry of those who did the harvesting has reached the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. You have lived luxuriously on the earth and led a life of wanton pleasure; you have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. You have condemned and put death the righteous man; he does not resist you" (vv. 1-6). James was the leader of the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem. He warns the apostate Jews to turn into the Lord, otherwise they'll face the wrath of God because they were living in the last days of the Old Covenant system. We know that the temple and the Old Covenant system was burned by fire during the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Obviously, the word "you" was referring to the Jewish people in the first century, to which James was speaking, and not to us. Read the next few verses: "Be patient, therefore, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. Behold, the farmer waits for the precious produce of the soil, being patient about it, until it gets the early and late rain. You too be patient; strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand. Do not complain, brethren, against one another, that you yourselves may not be judged; Behold, the judge is standing at the door" (James 5:7-9). Lastly this also can be found in Rev. 18: "And I heard another voice from heaven, saying 'Come out of her, my people, that you may not participate in her sins and that you may not receive of her plagues, for her sins have piled up as high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities" (vv. 4-5). Who is this harlot, Babylon the great? Most in the futurist camp would say Rome, the future apostate Christianity. Not quite! The Bible has the answer as to the identity of the great city referred to. Rev. 11:8 says the great city (see Rev. 14:8; 16:19; 17:1, 18; 18:2) which mystically is called Sodom and Egypt, where the Lord was crucified. It was Jerusalem, without a doubt. The harlot was apostate Israel because of her rejection of the Son of God. Before Christ died on the cross, the Jewish people cried and "prophesied" against themselves saying: "His blood be on us and on our children" (Matt. 27:25). They didn't realize what they were saying, as after 40 years (a generation) later God was accomplishing all things as the OT and the NT had predicted (Luke 21:22, 32). In addition, what about the phase "wrath has come upon them (apostate Jews) to the utmost" in same verse in 1 Thes. 2:16? Paul even mentioned this two other times in this epistle: "And to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, that is Jesus, who delivers us from wrath to come" (1 Thes. 1:10). "For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thes. 5:9). This also can be found in Matthew 3 when John the Baptist warns to the Jews: "But when he (John the Baptist) saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, "You brood of vipers (see also in Matt. 23), who warned you to flee from the wrath [about] to come?" ...And, "the axe is already laid at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire". ...And, "His (Jesus) winning fork is in His hand, and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire" (vv. 7, 10,12). Obviously, John the Baptist was warning the apostate Jewish people. Paul wrote to the Thessalonians not to be disturbed by these afflictions because they believed that God had destined them for this and it came to pass (1 Thes. 3:3-4, 7). They knew it was according to God's purpose predestined to occur. Note that Paul was saying that the Lord "may establish your hearts unblamable in holiness before our God and Father at the *coming* of our Lord Jesus with all His saints (1 Thes. 3:13). The word "coming" is very important and we cannot overlook this one. The Greek word for "coming" is parousia. It is mentioned 17 times reference to the coming of Christ, four of them in this epistle (1 Thes. 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23). If you are a futurist, whether you are Premill, Postmill, or Amill: how many "comings" do you believe will occur? I have to interrupt at this point to complain about the jargon. "If you are a futurist," he says ... how am I supposed to know whether he's talking to me or not? He keeps using these terms without defining them. "Premill, Postmill, or Amill" ... not only not defined, but he can't even be bothered to spell them out. From my experience (I was one of them), futurists believe there are two or more "comings" of Christ whether they realize or not. Let me explain what I mean. If you are a pretribulation Premill (or a Dispensationalist), there are three different comings of Christ in the future. You may say, "No way!" I'll show you what I mean with the Greek word "parousia" in these passages: 1. The second coming of Christ in the pretribulation rapture: *1 Thes. 2:19 *1 Thes. 3:13 *1 Thes. 4:15-17 *2 Thes. 2:1 (see below after 7 years of great tribulation) *James 5:7-8 *1 John 2:28 2. The third coming of Christ after 7 years of great tribulation: *Matt. 24:27-31, 37-39 *2 Thes. 2:8 3. The fourth coming of Christ after 1,000 years *1 Cor. 15:23-24 (most aren't sure of this) *2 Peter 3:10-13 So, they believe there are three comings of Christ in the future. Would you agree with that? Does the Bible teach that? I have shown this to some futurist brethren, and their eyes didn't even blink! They were speechless. As for the moderate or "inconsistent" preterist (Postmill or Amill), they believe two "comings" of Christ, one in AD 70 to judge Israel; but the literal, final coming of Christ is still in the future according to their creeds or the traditions of men. I'll show you: 1. In AD 70: *Matt. 24:27-31 (some are sure about vv. 37-39) *2 Thes. 2:1 *2 Thes. 2:8 *James 5:7-8 *1 John 2:28 2. In the future: *1 Thes. 4:15-17 *1 Cor. 15:23-25 *2 Peter 3:10-13 Look closely for the futurist's theological gymnastics here, then ask yourself if the first century brethren would have understood two or more different comings being spoken of using exactly the same Greek word and terminology. If the NT writers understood two or more different comings separated by different periods of time, we would expect them to stop somewhere and explain to this us. Since they did not do that, we must assume the same coming is under consideration. More on that shortly. Tell me, dear reader, if this makes sense to you. Paul writes to the Thessalonians and informs them "to wait for His Son from heaven" who delivers them "from the wrath to come" (1 Thes. 1:10) even if it did not occur in the first century? Those in the futurist camp would say that there is what has now been an almost 2,000 years gap, because "those things simply didn't happen" when the destruction of Jerusalem occurred in AD 70. I would counter with this: Paul says that they (first-century brethren) should wait for the Son. Would it make sense to inform the first-century brethren to wait for the Son, if His coming was to happen in our time? That would be pointless to the Thessalonians, and it would make Paul's informing them useless, because these men would only come in our time. Now, we'll do a little study on 1 Thes. 4:13-5:11. Please make sure you have the Bible in hand, verifying all that is taught to you (Acts 17:11). This may change the way you view the fulfillment of prophecy, perhaps even the way you view the whole Bible, as it did for me. I believe there is a connection between 1 Thes. 4:15-17, Matt. 24:30-31, 1 Cor. 15:50-5 and Rev. 11:15 as being the same event in AD 70 because of the last "trumpet of God": "For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, and remain until the coming [parousia] of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, with the trumpet of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord" (1 Thes. 4:15-17). "And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, the all the tribes of the earth [land] will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the our winds, from one end of the sky to the other" (Matt. 24:30-31). "Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold, I tell you a mystery, we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed" (1 Cor. 15:50-52). "And the seventh (trumpet) angel sounded; and there arose loud voices in heaven, saying, 'The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord, and of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever" (Rev. 11:15 and read vv. 16-19). Also, I think it would be easier for us if we can make a comparison between parallel passages such 1 Thes. 4-5 and Matt 24: 1. Christ Himself Returns Matt. 24:30 I Thess. 4:16 2. From Heaven Matt. 24:30 I Thess. 4:16 3. With a Shout Matt. 24:30 (in power) I Thess. 4:16 4. Accompanied by Angels Matt. 24:31 I Thess. 4:16 5. With Trumpet of God Matt. 24:31 I Thess. 4:16 6. Believers Gathered Matt. 24:31 I Thess. 4:17 7. In Clouds Matt. 24:30 I Thess. 4:17 8. Time Unknown Matt. 24:36 I Thess. 5:1-2 9. Will Come as a Thief Matt. 24:43 I Thess. 5:2,4 10. Unbelievers Unaware of Impending Judgment Matt. 24:37-39 I Thess. 5:3 11. Judgment Comes as Travail upon Expectant Mother Matt. 24:8 I Thess. 5:3 12. Believers to Watch Matt. 24:42 I Thess. 5:4 13. Warning Against Drunkenness Matt. 24:49 I Thess. 5:7 Do these parallel passages cause your jaw drop to the ground? The conclusion is inescapable that 1 Thes. 4-5 is dealing with exactly same coming, judgment, and resurrection that Matt. 24 is. If we don't relocate this prophecy of Matt. 24 into our future, then it was a prophecy to them, who were there at the Mount of Olives, when Jesus spoke, that is: in "that generation" (Matt. 24:34). We must compare Scriptures with Scriptures to interpret them properly. It does not matter what you or I may think, but what saith the Scripture? I do not care what the "prophecy experts" may say; it is the Word of God, "sola scriptura" that makes the decision for me. The futurists realize that a true analysis of biblical text related to the timing of prophetic events endangers their eschatological position. You might ask, "but doesn't the Bible say that we shall be caught up together to meet the Lord in the air?" Yes it does, but what does the word "air" means? Is it in our atmosphere or the air we breath? Well, I'm just a simpleminded man, but I would suppose from reading 1 Thessalonians 4:17 that the "air" being referred to here is the kind of "air" that contains "clouds." Now, maybe those "clouds" can be spiritualized away too. But what happened to the exegetical principle that the plain and straightforward meaning of a text is the preferred one? We can compare with other Scriptures in Eph 2:2: "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience." The word "air" is an another word for heavenly or spiritual realm. Satan was always an opponent of the scheme of the redemption as we can see throughout the Bible. He was (but is no longer) the prince of the power of the air. In Rom. 16:20 Paul says that Satan would be crushed "shortly" (see Gen 3:15). Jesus now has taken over that sphere and rules in the "air" with the saints since the destruction of Jerusalem. If that is the same "air" where the saints were to meet and be gathered, then there is no necessity for us to believe that the rapture gathering and meeting was to be physical and visible either. It was accomplished when the faithful remnant of Jewish believers with the ingrafted Gentiles was transformed (and transferred) into Christ's new spiritual Israel (new covenant) when the old fleshly-based (old covenant) was taken away in AD 70. The "gathering together" is the heavenly places in Christ - the spiritual kingdom of God. Satan is no longer around here; he is now in the lake of fire. Also notice what Paul wrote: "By the word of the Lord, thatwe who are alive, and remain until the coming of the Lord" in both verses 15 & 17 of 1 Thessalonians. They were expecting of an imminent parousia in their lifetime. We need to step back out of our 20th century mindset and stop looking at the NT as if it was written in our generation. Otherwise Paul was mistaken and not an inspired writer. The Bible is inerrant, infallible, and sufficient. As we have seen 1 Thes. 5 cannot be isolated from the context of 1 Thes. 4. 2 Thessalonians cannot be ignored either. In this context (1 Thes. 4:13-5:11) Paul calls this parousia, "the coming of the Lord" (1 Thes. 4:15) and the "day of the Lord" (1 Thes. 5:2 with numerous passages in the OT and the NT) and says it will be like "a thief in the night" (see Matt. 24:42-44; 2 Peter 3:10; Rev. 3:3) with "birth pangs" (1 Thes. 5:2-3) in the same event during the first century. The "destruction" of Jerusalem had come upon them in AD 70 (1 Thes. 5:3) from the Roman armies as God's instrument. In conclusion, there is no evidence in the NT that teaches the two comings of Christ in the first century and another one in the future. Also, nowhere is there any mention of a multi-coming of Christ like as the Dispensationalist system claims (parousia or "rapture" before 7 years of tribulation, the parousia after the great tribulation and the parousia at the end of 1,000 years). The word "rapture" is nowhere to be found in the Bible, neither is it taught there. Ah, now where have I heard an "argument" like that before? Why, I believe it was the last time I had a crew of Jehovah's Witnesses in my living room, explaining solemnly that the word "trinity" appears nowhere in Scripture. And they're correct, as far as that goes; it's just that the doctrine of the trinity is supported so extensively by Scripture. I'm always ready to hear a reasoned argument that says I've misunderstood 1 Thessalonians 4, or any other part of the Bible; but I'm short on patience with "the word '[fill in word here]' isn't in the Bible. Mr. Hochner should confine himself to honest arguments. There is no Scriptural support for this kind of dream, and we should reject it outright. This escapist philosophy is pure fiction. We are not taught to escape reality in the Scripture, but rather to face it knowing that God will work all things out for our good (Rom. 8:28-30). Mr. Hochner's argument depends on his attribution of base motives to those who disagree with him: they are "escapist philosophers;" they want to "escape reality." I'm sure that is true of some who disagree with him; I am equally sure it is not true of others. He is our sovereign God and nothing can happen to thwart His plan. To say otherwise is blasphemy to God. Soli Deo Gloria! Donald Hochner = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = I don't really have much of a detailed eschatological position. While I am convinced that God is going to wrap up this phase of the story at some point, after two millennia of church history, I guess my feeling is that it's pretty unlikely that it (the conclusion) would happen during my brief lifetime on the planet's surface. I think that the Bible's instructions for Christians are quite plain, are repeated many times, and I don't see that there's anything about the way I should live, or the manner in which I should attempt obedience to my redeemer that depends in any way on the details of how God is going to finalize history. I think that exchanging views about these matters is a fine exercise in logic, reasoning, and scholarship -- as long as the exchange is conducted with respect and charity. Sadly, that's seldom how it's done.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-32) not displayed.
.
.
.
#33. To: Starwind (#25)
If I'm dead when He tosses me into the LOF there isn't pain, right?
Morgana, pardon me for being bold, but can we do the Rapture together, butt naked? I'll sing Fly me to the Moon, while you can whistle Would you like to Swing on a Star as we ascend.
My reading of the bible (the "Traditionalist" view) says there is, that it is eternal torment. There is also the "Annihilationist" view which argues (without biblical basis IMO) that the punishment or perishing that God meets out to the unrepentant sinner is a one-time event after which their body, soul, and spirit are completely annihilated and accordingly they no longer exist and don't "feel" or "think" anything. The only support for this view is an argument from silence that the bible does not teach the soul is immortal, but there are many passages about immortality being bestowed upon the saved, hence the unsaved have nothing immortal and their punishment whatever/wherever it is, is of limited duration. However, the Tradtionalist view is that the punishment of the unsaved is eternal (ongoing and never ending) and with torment, anguish, pain, and regret. Here are some of the passages that convey that teaching: How it is that the physically and spiritually "dead" at the white throne judgement can "feel" anything, I don't know. Ostensibly, they've been re- animated enough to stand at the white throne, and presumably their souls and spirits are conscious of their circumstances. It isn't a big stretch from there to being able to feel the torment of the lake of fire, and if God wants to perpetuate that for eternity, I have no doubt He can and will. The smart move would be to not risk it. As I've posted elsewhere, why not re-examine the sacrifice Jesus Christ has made on your behalf, recognize the tremendous free (for you) gift of eternal salvation He is offering you, and choose "life" - not out of fear of eternal torment but out of gratitude that He offered you, a sinner, a choice (a second chance really) at all.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
So in your religious view, I either acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, or be condemned to eternal torment in a lake of fire? I assume this belief applies to those who practice other religions and believe their way is the light and the truth.
Joh 3:16-18 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. (17) "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. (18) "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. Joh 14:6 Jesus *said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me. Act 4:12 "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
The underlined words in the above quote are very misleading in that James says (KJV) in James 1:1: James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. (ASV) Jam 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion, greeting. (GNB) From James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ: Greetings to all God's people scattered over the whole world. (CEV) From James, a servant of God and of our Lord Jesus Christ. Greetings to the twelve tribes scattered all over the world. He is not addressing his comments to the jews or christians in jerusalem, but to the israelites scattered abroad, which would be those taken in the Assyrian dispersion, and the Babylonian which refused to return, as well as any others that had gone elsewhere, whether thru captivity, i.e., Egypt, or migrated on their own initiative. Furthermore, 10 of those tribes were NOT jewish (jewish being defined as being from judea for this comment). They were israelites, meaning from the northern kingdom, rather than the southern kingdom where jerusalem is. So, obviously the word 'you' is NOT referring to jewish people in the first century as those to whom james was addressing. Technically this may have nothing to do with the meat of the non-rapture or rapture discussion, but it tells me I'd have to research ALL this author is purporting.......which is OK because I don't take none of them as the only RIGHT opinion.
I agree, Rowdee. And in general, without regard to the main point that he's trying to make, I found Mr. Hochner's work to be both slipshod and contentious. On the other hand, none of the epistles are actually addressed to us; yet most of what is said can be applied to us. I guess the "bottom line" is that some discernment is called for. As with everything in life, that is.
I pray for that daily before taking up the Bible or doing biblical study.
Tom 14:6: And this I say to you; My Lord is a loving Lord. All those who are kind and decent shall *not* be tortured eternally in some pot o' fire. Rather, the good among you will be with me in one hell of a groovy place. Go now and spread this word, for it is truth.
At this point, I would have to disagree. I'm in the process of shutting down my computer because it is freezing up, but you might want to take a look at DAYS OF VENGEANCE by David Chilton on Rev. 20:7-10. http:// freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/html/dcdv/dcdv.html , starting on page 541. Chilton died before 9/11, but also take a look at his pages 326-329, I believe, where he discussed the birth of Christ, on SEPTEMBER 11, 3 BC. Therefore, I don't believe Chilton could have foreseen what has transpired on earth these last few years, and the forces behind it. What he is saying, and I have only read quickly to page 550, taking into consideration what we know now, I believe confirms what I said on my post last night. In order to fully understand this, you have to know the identity of True Israel, True Jerusalem, i.e., "the beloved city", and the true identity of Gog and Magog. I believe Chilton understood who True Israel is, but God's timing was perhaps not right for him to understand the identity of True Jerusalem and of Gog and Magog. I have identified these entities before, and it all fulfills Old Testament prophecies, and what is happening today. One such prophecy, Rev. 21:2 corresponds directly with Isaiah 62:4, Zechariah 2, and Zech. 9:9-17. We're talking about PROPHETIC Jerusalem. If you need me to be more blunt, I can be, after I get rebooted, which will take awhile. Or just see Gal. 3:16-29, special emphasis on verses 16 and 17 and 29. I had to look up "disannul". It means "annul". The 430 years refers to Genesis 15:13-14, and Exodus 12:41. Another hint: Micah 4. Psalm 2, remembering from your article above, that Old Jerusalem had become the Whore of Babylon.
BWAHAHAHA!!! I guess that's why I haven't been to "man's church" in years.
"Freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in ...into an unbearable hell and a choking life." Welcome to my church, Indie. Wanna be a Deacon?
On the other hand, none of the epistles are actually addressed to us; I agree too that Mr. Hochner's work is something to be "wary" of. In Rowdee's response in #37, it is pointed out that Peter is adressing the Tribes of Israel. So couldn't it be adressing us, if indeed we are of those Tribes? If it were possible to trace it that far back, there are no doubt descendants of those Tribes walking the planet today. AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt addressed this issue of True Israel in another post. When it comes to the "rapture", I think it's BS. The particular verse(s) used to support this "theory" are taken from the writings of Paul. When it comes to the writings of Paul, I feel a GREAT deal of discernment are in order. After all, many of his writings tend to fly in the face of all the rest of Scripture. Paul was sent to Jerusalem at about the age of ten to attend the rabbinical school of Gamaliel, who was the son of Simeon the son of Hillel. Hillel, (the grandfather of Gamaliel), held that tradition was superior to the Law. Gamaliel was a most eminent rabbi who was mentioned both in the Talmud and in the New Testament (Acts 5:24-40; 22:3). Gamaliel was called Rabban - one of only seven teachers so called. He was a Pharisee, (remember the warnings of the Messiah about the Pharisees?) but he rose above party prejudice. He composed a prayer against the Christian "heretics". He lived and died a Jew. The religious school of Gamaliel (Hillel) was chiefly oral and usually had a prejudice against any book but Scripture. They used a system of Scriptural exegesis, and Josephus in his writings expressed the wish to have such a power of exegesis. When school was in session, learned men met and discussed scriptures, gave various interpretations, suggested illustrations, and quoted precedents. The students were encouraged to question, doubt, even contradict. From his education, both from Gamaliel and in the desert from the Messiah, Paul developed a divine viewpoint attitude toward human history. Back to the topic of rapture. As I have posted before (and not wanting to search all my posts to find the thread) wouldn't it be a bit more prudent to forego whatever Paul's writings may be interpreted to say and use the teachings of the Messiah Himself? After all we see in 2 Peter (note, NOT a writing of Paul).... 2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. So about the "rapture" as taught by the Messiah: Matthew 13:36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. 37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; 38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; 39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. 40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. 41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; 42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear. That sure doesn't sound like all those "rapture believers" have a whole hell of a lot to look forward to. Maybe they should get out of those churches full of masonic symbolism, where they're learning Babylonian Talmudic teachings in disquise by some pulput parrot, and put their noses in Scripture and STUDY to show themselves approved as we were told to do. Hey, if they don't want to do that, then they can't complain about the spanking they get. After all what Father worth his salt won't discipline his kids when they don't do as they're told!!!! I intended to end this post at the paragraph above, but feel I need to add a bit more. When it comes to the writings of Paul, I am extremely leery.. Satan knows Scripture better than any of us, and it's certainly NOT beyond his scope to use them in some way to deceive us if he can. Considering Paul's history, I think his writings present that opportunity. When I see something written by Paul which is in direct conflict/opposition with what the entire rest of Scripture says, I find it suspect. Look at grace, which Paul spoke so much of. In ALL of Old Testament, the word grace came from the Hebrew chen an adjective meaning favored; in Paul's writings it came from the Greek word charis a verb meaning an act of gratification..... I find it conceivable that the Creator could indeed find favor in some people, but I find it very hard to believe that ANY of us have done anything so special that He should be in gratification of it - let alone ALL of us with the only requirement being to believe in Him. Just my 2¢
Surgeon General's Warning: Society's problems must be solved. We have the solutions and you must buy them from us. No unauthorized solutions will be permitted. Uh, yes, I did. But I'm not a proponent of the Ten Tribes doctrine. I believe the CHURCH is Israel, from every tribe, nation, and tongue [Rev. 5:9- 10]. John 3:16 For God so loved THE WORLD...... Look at grace, which Paul spoke so much of. In ALL of Old Testament, the word grace came from the Hebrew chen an adjective meaning favored; in Paul's writings it came from the Greek word charis a verb meaning an act of gratification..... I find it conceivable that the Creator could indeed find favor in some people, but I find it very hard to believe that ANY of us have done anything so special that He should be in gratification of it - let alone ALL of us with the only requirement being to believe in Him. Just my 2¢ I also believe in grace. See this link, and just read the related verses spoken by Jesus, if you want: Eph 2:8 — For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: http://www.blueletterbi ble.org/tsk_b/Eph/2/8.html As far as gratification, doesn't the Bible say, "It PLEASED the LORD to bruise Him." That rather seems to mean to me that God is gratified to be able to save us, IF WE BELIEVE, not because of anything we did, but because God is love. 1Jo 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. 1Jo 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son [to be] the propitiation for our sins. http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1Jo/1Jo004.html#10 What I refrained from saying earlier, is that I also believe America is prophetic Jerusalem, the daughter of Jerusalem [faithful Jerusalem], dwelling with the daughter of Babylon [the whore Jerusalem] and I don't see how anyone who is witness to all the Satanic, demonic attacks being made against this country from EVERY angle can't see it, and that fact puts a whole new complexion on the issues, as far as I am concerned. I was just given a new link earlier today, that reveals the truly ancient, other-worldly nature of the battle being raged over America. It's freaky, but in a way, also comforting, because I know we have no control over THAT, and that makes me feel that this battle is God's, and He is going to go before us in it. For an example, see II Chronicles 20:11-30. The Old Testament is FILLED with prophecies for this day and this country. Micah 4 and Psalm 2 are just two of them. But I do NOT believe there is going to be a rapture, and I am not saying we will see no persecution and all the rest, but I DO think America is going to be delivered from all those who hate her, including those inside her, and I guess that is the point I was trying to get across.
Here's how I know Christianity and every other religion is bunk. 1. Religion is used as a tool by religious leaders and politicians to further agendas and create wars for no reason other than monetary gain. 2. Religious leaders are the first wave of apologists for what politicians do. 3. If a religion, or a religious leader gets out of line with the dogma preached by either the government or the religious organization, they get slapped down, or assassinated like Martin Luther King. 4. Religion is about mocking the victim. What I mean to say is that only after you die, do you get any kind of reward, instead of reaping a reward in life. 5. With all the souls that have died for the lies of their leaders, none of them have come back for revenge in the form of a disembodied spirit, or a reincarnated person of any consequence. 6. Every generation since the beginning of time has believed the end of the world was coming, and portions of every generations work to bring it about. Why? Because they believe their religion is a means to get to heaven. If that were the case, then surely we'd all be spared the burden of living here on this fucking planet. 7. Every single person who debates me uses scripture to make their point, even though the scripture itself was written and re-written a hundred times by men, who used it to manipulate and create societies based on usury and lies. Nobody seems to see this fact and it proves that all religions are cults and a means to control people. 8. God is not going to finalize this planet, as a REAL God really doesn't need to have a little piece of land called Israel be the center of the universe. If it were so important to God, I can assure you that God would have made it impenetrable from the outside, or simply put it in his big pocket and taken it with him. Israel is important to the Jewish people, and the people who have been duped into believing the Bible. 9. I can assure you folks that God is not coming back here on any time table that is created by fundamentalist muslims and christians. In fact, God really doesn't have much use for people who he created in his image who still act like a bunch of greedy half-monkeys. 10. Those who say they're descendents of Jesus and who have the Holy Right to rule us are all a bunch of fucking liars and deceivers who have used religion, and mythology to assure their right to manipulate, cheat, lie, destroy and fleece the people of the world. If these people were truly sons and daughters of God, God is surely pissed off as hell at these fuckers for not living up to their potential. This is just a sample of the arguments I can make that ALL religions are false, and fake. Sure as shit, there will be some bible thumping retard who will quote scripture to make their idiotic point, which is in fact just part of the con of ALL religions. ALL RELIGIONS ARE CONS. Especially if you have to pay tithe and tribute for redemption.
They're already dead at the white throne judgement, both physically and spiritually.
#34. To: Morgana le Fay (#30)
i have always wondered if your clothing gets raptured along with you
#35. To: Jethro Tull (#33)
If I'm dead when He tosses me into the LOF there isn't pain, right?
The above are excerpts to give the gist of the passage. I suggest you lookup the complete verses and their contexts.
#36. To: Starwind (#35)
#37. To: Jethro Tull (#36)
(Edited)
So in your religious view, I either acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, or be condemned to eternal torment in a lake of fire?
I assume this belief applies to those who practice other religions and believe their way is the light and the truth.
#38. To: Enderby (#0)
James was the leader of the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem. He warns the apostate Jews to turn into the Lord, otherwise they'll face the wrath of God because they were living in the last days of the Old Covenant system. We know that the temple and the Old Covenant system was burned by fire during the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Obviously, the word "you" was referring to the Jewish people in the first century, to which James was speaking, and not to us. Read the next few verses:
#39. To: rowdee (#38)
#40. To: Enderby (#39)
I guess the "bottom line" is that some discernment is called for.
#41. To: Starwind (#37)
#42. To: Enderby, Red Jones, IndieTX, innieway, noone222 (#0)
In conclusion, there is no evidence in the NT that teaches the two comings of Christ in the first century and another one in the future
#43. To: Jethro Tull (#41)
Tom 14:6: And this I say to you; My Lord is a loving Lord. All those who are kind and decent shall *not* be tortured eternally in some pot o' fire. Rather, the good among you will be with me in one hell of a groovy place. Go now and spread this word, for it is truth.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
-OBL
"Prohibition...goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A prohibition law strikes at the very principles upon which our govt was founded."
- Lincoln
All our liberties are due to men who, when their conscience has compelled them, have broken the laws of the land.
--William Kingdon Clifford
#44. To: IndieTX (#43)
#45. To: Enderby, Starwind, AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt, Rowdee, Red Jones, Jethro Tull, Indie TX (#39)
I agree, Rowdee. And in general, without regard to the main point that he's trying to make, I found Mr. Hochner's work to be both slipshod and contentious.
#46. To: innieway (#45)
In Rowdee's response in #37, it is pointed out that Peter is adressing the Tribes of Israel. So couldn't it be adressing us, if indeed we are of those Tribes? If it were possible to trace it that far back, there are no doubt descendants of those Tribes walking the planet today. AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt addressed this issue of True Israel in another post.
#47. To: Enderby (#0)
 | What's that Mr. Nipples? You want me to ask the nice lady about her rack?. |
#48. To: Jethro Tull (#34)
you should join your local Wiccan church. you can go to the skyclad ceremonies there every full moon. the groups are mostly women. here for example there are 27 women and only two men. the two men are the husbands of two members and only come because their wives make them. the group is always looking for male members.
Morgana, pardon me for being bold, but can we do the Rapture together, butt naked? I'll sing Fly me to the Moon, while you can whistle Would you like to Swing on a Star as we ascend.
#49. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#47)
1. 2. 3. If a 4. 5. With all the As you can see, TTMA, your comments can apply to other things....from government to ngos to local water or sewer district organizations. So, to whack around on 'bible thumpers' is a whole lot disingenious. That isn't to say that religion hasn't been used in the most god-awful of ways--so has governments through-out history; of course, mankind has been a bit barbarian, likewise. You use what appears to be a broad brush to apparently condemn everyone who believes in God. God, in order to be The God, can do any damned thing He wants, when He wants, how He wants, where He wants---all without having to worry about whether someone here thinks He is only supposed to be a God of love or some other 'thing' that THEY determine He should be or act as or whatever. He can set up anyone He wants to make an example for anyone else that He wants...or He could set them up to be all that He cares about.....so what's the bitch. If you're more powerful, or anyone else for that matter, go ahead and try. As the joke goes with the scientist who told God he wasn't needed anymore as mankind had learned how to make man; God told him to go ahead and prove it; and the jerk grabbed some of God's dirt----and God told him to put it down and go find his own dirt! That people cannot look at the universe and see the footprints of The God is to their sorrow, whether it is yesterday, today, or tomorrow.
Religion Politics is used as a tool by religious gubmint leaders and politicians to further agendas and create wars mayhem and class envy for no reason other than monetary gain. Religious Party leaders are the first wave of apologists for what politicians do. religion poster, or a religious leader party member gets out of line with the dogma preached by either the government or the religious political organization, they get slapped down, or assassinated like Martin Luther King [or any other voter/citizen/poster]. Religion Politics is about mocking the victim. What I mean to say is that only after you die, do you get any kind of reward, instead of reaping a reward in life there is definitely no reward inasmuch as you're taxed on what you leave behind--all without the ability to protest such confiscation. souls citizens that have died for the lies of their leaders, none of them have come back for revenge in the form of a disembodied spirit, or a reincarnated person of any consequence {, or in any other way in order to reclaim their damned country].
#50. To: Morgana le Fay (#48)
Ah....like i'd be soooooo screwed if I got caught (but I really, really want to go)
the group is always looking for male members.
#51. To: rowdee (#49)
Agreed...all you need to do is look around to see clear evidence of G-d's handiwork; and, regretably; the Devil's, as well.
That people cannot look at the universe and see the footprints of The God is to their sorrow, whether it is yesterday, today, or tomorrow.
Remember...G-d saved more animals than people on the ark. www.siameserescue.org
#52. To: Jethro Tull (#50)
just tell your wife that you are going to a religious function.
Ah....like i'd be soooooo screwed if I got caught (but I really, really want to go)
#53. To: Morgana le Fay (#52)
It's the damn function part.....
#54. To: Jethro Tull (#53)
tell the group about it. almost everyone in the goup fancies themselves to be a healer - and most have no one to practice on. my guess is that they will take you on as a project. a team effort might be very effective.
It's the damn function part.....
#55. To: innieway (#45)
Had Paul not come along when he did, do you believe that christianity would have survived? Reverted back to judiasm? Or what? I can't believe that the man, or any man, would go to his death hawking a lie. I don't have a problem with his background, i.e., Roman citizen, judaism/pharisee, Benjamite. His educational background made him, IMO, a great candidate to be converted and put to use for Christ's benefit. I've been trying to do a lot of background reading the past couple of weeks-- before starting a deeper study of the N.T. One thing I believe many miss, and I'm not saying that you do, or any number on this board do, is that we really need to try to look through the eyes of the people at THAT time. We can't place todays' values on how it was back then. Right now, I'm thinking of sacrifices. Most people in this nation abhor bloodshed, it's repulsive. And yet, it was very much a part of the sacrificial system back in O/T times. Blood signified 'the life of the soul'. I go round and round with a cousin over this. Hey, I'm not crazy about seeing blood or shedding blood--even for juicy steaks or lamb chops! But, I see the symbolism this represented as a forerunner of what Christ would do. Cousin still can't see this. I just have to tell him that when he becomes God, he can do it his way. That was what to me was remarkable about the apostles. Even Judas died an ugly death. But none of them denied Jesus Christ or his message....even though faced with terrible deaths. It would have been a lot easier back then to 'back out' or deny what they had been teaching/preaching.
#56. To: Morgana le Fay (#54)
Well this certainly changes things. I do well with new friends. I mean it's like I'm 18 again. I think this is going to be fine. Do I need to know chants? A working knowledge of incense? Is black an appropriate color to wear?
#57. To: Jethro Tull (#56) (Edited)
Why don't you ask your local group? Tell them that you don't know anything about their stuff but you want to learn. I bet they've been craving someone to teach for years. I've found that the more you let women fuss over you the more they like you.
Well this certainly changes things. I do well with new friends. I mean it's like I'm 18 again. I think this is going to be fine. Do I need to know chants? A working knowledge of incense? Is black an appropriate color to wear?
.
#58. To: rowdee (#49)
Love your posts!
#59. To: ... (#57)
Let me run this by my g/f. My life simply isn't my own.
#60. To: Jethro Tull (#56)
the chants are like folk songs. they keep repeating the same things over and over. you learn that way. there is a lot of singing at the meetings. just wear regular clothing. the women are usually on guard for weirdos and strange dress will put them off.
I think this is going to be fine. Do I need to know chants? A working knowledge of incense? Is black an appropriate color to wear?
#61. To: Morgana le Fay (#60)
How does one go about locating one of these groups?
.
#62. To: ... (#61)
you first get rid of your bad attitude and improper motives.
How does one go about locating one of these groups?
#63. To: Morgana le Fay (#60)
Is there a chance we might conger up an imp or two?
#64. To: rowdee (#55)
I don't have a problem with his background, i.e., Roman citizen, judaism/pharisee, Benjamite. His educational background made him, IMO, a great candidate to be converted and put to use for Christ's benefit. I agree. I think the Pharisees have been poisoning the waters surrounding Paul, maybe because, being a Pharisee, they consider him a "traitor" to Judaism, or because his message of adoption by faith is so threatening to the Jewish supremacist agenda, including the British-Israel NWO agenda. Which is probably why Jesus chose Him!
I can't believe that the man, or any man, would go to his death hawking a lie.
#65. To: Jethro Tull (#63)
you will just have to go and see what pops up.
#66. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#64)
I agree. I see Paul as a man able as a 'international' bridge--he knew both sides of the bridge, and could bring to the gentiles understanding of O/T scriptures and bring to the jews the gospel message. And I think I see this even more clearly today. I was going thru a bunch of urls today and came across a site that explained a good bit about the 'mindset' of the ancient east vs the west and how there is much difference in how they think. My mind is a bit numb right now, or I'd try to bring out an example, which really points up the need for people to put themselves into 'that' mindset vs 'our' mindset today. Translations play a huge part as well.....the old 'there was something lost in the translation' is very true. Anyways, it just seems like all thru the ages that God has chosen certain people to do His bidding....good people and bad people==at least what we consider good or bad. Even Pharoah was used to make His point. Saul...Sampson...Gomer...... Nebuchadnezzar..........hell, even Abraham, who was a liar and who hid behind a womans' skirt to save his arse. And David.....certainly beloved of God, but an adulterer nonetheless, and certainly a polygamist. Rahab. Ruth. Sennnacherib. An endless number of people He chose to use. He might could have found all 'goodie two shoes', but they wouldn't be able to serve the same purposes as these flawed people did. And we can carry that forward to today in our own lives. I'll use as a for instance, the person of Jimmy Swaggart. Maybe this is a bad example--I don't know as I've not seen or heard anything at all about him in ages and ages. And I don't know anything about his ministry. But here is a man that took a huge fall. I do know he was brought down to his knees with the scandal. Is God using the man for his purposes? To show that no matter how low a person falls, he can still be redeemed? I can't judge whether his heart and soul asked for forgiveness and has repented, or turned away from the sin he elected to enter. I have no way of knowing that. I could go by external signs maybe, but that can be deceiving. While many would and no doubt have condemned him, they'd best leave that up to God. As I see it, the preachers, teachers, priests, pastors, dometas, etc., have an extra special responsibility on their shoulders. Should they be leading people astray, their punishment at the end of time will be much greater that a plain, ordinary sinner. That said, I firmly believe we should not be blindly sitting and following any minister/pastor/priest/teacher/etc. I believe we must search on our own and pray for knowledge, discernment, wisdom. There are so many more tools available today than ever before. There is so much information and opinions out there that it is incumbent upon us to study for ourselves.
#67. To: Enderby, robin diana, zipporah, dakmar, red jones, wake up, lady x, sky drifter, aristeides, (#0)
I am pretty sure you can add "rapine" and "rape" to the list. See the Women of the Sabines circa 715 BC in Rome. One of my favorite paintings by Jaque Louis David(1799). From this event came the custom of carring the bride over the threshold by the "rapine" male.
The term "rapture" cames from the Latin verb raptus, meaning "to seize, catch, or carry away."
#68. To: rowdee (#49)
Here's the thing Rowdee, I do believe in God, but NOT the crap that everyone was forced into. Christianity, like every other religion since the dawn of time has been about controls being put in place to get people to act a certain way, and to get people to follow along. Seeing God's footprints is a lot like seeing God's shit piles too. Especially when you see what this planet has to offer the universe. That's the real problem with all organized religions, they all seem to think that just because they believe in THEIR god, they're better than everyone else who thinks differently, or who doesn't share their same indoctrination or programming. You took the first 5 sentences on and made a valid point, but unfortunately you have the wrong impression that I somehow associate believing in God, with being Christian, Buddhist, Muslim whatever. That is WRONG. I don't follow ANY religion that demands my money, my fealty, or demands I join a church or some other herd of morons who believe the same things. The reason? Because the God I've come to know, really can't be bothered too much with people using his ideologies to make money, or further an extinction agenda while pretending to be his genetic offspring. Jesus Christ, and Christianity is a religion about mocking the victim. Why do you suppose that all of the visuals of Christ are of him on the Cross? It surely isn't to put that thought in your mind that he died for our sins, there are many ways to do that without a representation of him on the cross. Showing that over and over again, is about mocking the victim, who was Christ. Saying he died for our sins is a joke compared to the real reason why he died was because of the EVIL of humanity of that time. The Pharissees, or what I like to call the LIARS, THIEVES and USERS of the day didn't like the idea of Jesus coming in there and wrecking their scam, so they had his ass killed. They took him to Pilate, and guess what happened? Nothing, so they took him to Herod, and again, nothing, so they took him back to Pilate, and of course we all know what happened. Why would people of that time, who had a so called foreknowledge of Christ's coming do their damndest to have him killed? Because all religions are about falsehoods, lies and indoctrination. The church that Christ spoke of isn't the blasphemy that ALL Christian churches have become. It's not the Catholic Church. It's not Islam. It's not Buddhism, and it sure as shit isn't Satanism. Christ didn't die for the sins of humanity. Christ died because OF the inherent sins of those people who lived so long ago, and the true evil here, is the lie that has been perpetrated on subsequent generations that believing in this lie of salvation and of the second coming. Jesus is NOT coming back the way the Bible says it. The reason? Because the bible is a lie, and the things that are happening now, were happening then, and there's not a fucking thing that has changed in 2000 years. The same evil people who were around then, who were ruling the known world are the same group of assraping weasels that are ruling the world today. In 2000 years you'd think that God would have gotten sick and tired of the bullshit and wiped out everything on this pathetic planet. Nope, it just goes right along and keeps on rolling. Every generation seems to have the right situation arise where people are fooled into another con, where they give their lives so that some elite cocksucker can reap a profit. Every generation thinks it's the end of days. Every generation expects the world to end, and guess what happens? THE SHIT JUST KEEPS GOING ON AND ON. Everything that you're seeing is NOT the hand of God, but the hand of these assraping weasels that have not only been responsible for all the evil in the world, but for sponsoring and creating the very religions that everyone worships to. Think about that for a minute. Where did these religions come from, and who are responsible for their being passed down? Last time I checked, it's the same group of evil people who have kept mankind from thriving, from innovating, and prospering. Before you get all high and mighty with me, realize that I do indeed believe in God, but Not the god you worship, because my God has more important things to do than save a planet full of retarded half-monkeys who can't seem to live and let live.
| What's that Mr. Nipples? You want me to ask the nice lady about her rack?. |
#69. To: rowdee (#55)
Hmmmmmm.... I don't know. I do know one thing - the word Christian only appears in Scripture 3 times. And it was never once a word used by the apostles to describe themselves. In each instance it was a name given them by someone else. If someone calls you a communist (just because you've read The Communist Manifesto, or happen to know a lot about it) - doesn't mean that you ARE a communist. What about Bush, Hitler, et al? OK, I know they are of a whole different ilk to start with, but... ALL men are liars. Well, at least according to Paul. But he's right. Not that a person may intentionally be lying, but it happens. I'm sure we've all had a situation where something happened that we would have bet the house on, and later found out we were wrong. Wasn't intentional - man makes mistakes. God doesn't. His background did make him a GREAT candidate to teach to the ones he was sent to teach! Remember, Paul was a lawyer. And lawyers are very adept at clever wording to convince others of their arguement. He HAD to, or else there was NO hope of achieving his goal. That alone makes Paul's writings considerably more difficult to deal with. How many lawyers do you really trust? I feel that what we're missing today is the same thing that was missing when the Messiah walked the planet. Adherence to God's Laws. From the very start of Scripture man always thought he had a better way than what the Creator asked. From the moment Eve went against the Creator's law and partook of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil right up to this very day. The Creator made a contract (covenant) with man, and we've violated our end of that contract from day 1. He told us not to eat pork or rabbit or shrimp; but we do. He told us not to pay or charge usury; but we do. He told us not to have hybrid crops or crossbreed cattle; but we do. He told us to keep the Sabbath but we don't. He told us not to worship other gods but we do. The Messiah attempted to get us back on track and follow His Father's Laws. He even said as much while teaching in the temple - "Did not Moses give you the law, and yet you keepeth not the law?" They weren't then, and we're not now. It does seem to me that the ones that claim to be christian seem to quote from Paul a great deal, even more than they quote from the Messiah Himself. I'm not saying you do, or anyone else in particular, just a general observation. I don't claim to be christian. I'm not jew, amish, or any "organized" religion. They all have a certain "standard", and I don't ascribe to those standards. I am very spiritual. I study Scripture. I'm not the sharpest tack in the box, and all I'm after is the truth. I think we're ALL in pursuit of the truth. I enjoy your posts, as well as AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt's posts, and noone 222's... I learn from all of you guys. I hope that the offerings of insight I give don't offend any of you, and that maybe you can glean something from my posts. My method of study is really quite simple - I don't interpret any of it; to do so in my opinion is to create a diversion, and allow the opportunity to fall from truth. I take it all literally. When He said don't wear fabrics mingled of woollen and linen; I take that seriously, and make sure what I wear is 100% cotton or whatever. I feel if we lived by the Law the Creator gave us in the first place, there would never have been need for the sacrifice of His Son, hence I place considerably less importance on New Testament than Old, save for the actual teachings of the Messiah Himself. But I have found the Messiah reinforced the Mosaic Law, not contradict it. I realize my beliefs place me in a very tiny minority, and I accept that. And I think He has rewarded me for that. Adhering to His Laws has kept me from participation in the abundant Babylonian Talmudic nonsense we're surrounded with, and I thank the Creator everyday for it.
Had Paul not come along when he did, do you believe that christianity would have survived? Reverted back to judiasm? Or what?
I can't believe that the man, or any man, would go to his death hawking a lie.
I don't have a problem with his background, i.e., Roman citizen, judaism/pharisee, Benjamite. His educational background made him, IMO, a great candidate to be converted and put to use for Christ's benefit.
Surgeon General's Warning: Society's problems must be solved. We have the solutions and you must buy them from us. No unauthorized solutions will be permitted.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote" - Ben Franklin
#70. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#68)
First, TTMA, if you or anyone else got the impression I was trying to be high and mighty with you, I assure you that was certainly not my intent. I don't do 'uppity', and if I did, I surely did a pisspoor job of it! :). I believe this is the first time I've seen where you've indicated you believe in God, whichever one you have; you did note your God is not the one I worship. If GOd made man in His image, why would you call them retarded half-monkeys-- would you not think He'd be offended at your opinion of his works? I don't understand your comment 'but NOT the crap that every was forced into'. I don't understand your usage of 'crap'. Could you expound on what you believe are the 'controls in place to get people to act a certay way or to follow along'? Seeing God's footprints---you have low regard for this planet as well as the universe as a whole? You think God made a shitter? What do you consider 'belief' or 'faith' means? Even Satan believed in God and Jesus Christ. He know they're real. But just believing in their existence doesn't guarantee anything. If that was the case, then Satan would be back in Heaven singing in the holy choir. I can't vouch for 'all organized religions' as it regards believing they are better than everyone else who thinks differently or not the same doctrine or programming. I'm not a part of that. But I do read scriptures and I believe that Jesus Christ has said the only way to get to the Father is thru Him. So, if a jew or a hindu refuse to believe that, I don't think I'm better than they-- but I do think I'm going to be some place that they aren't. As I noted, I don't belong to some church sect or denomination. I believe in going right to the source of my salvation. That isn't to say that I won't listen to people on occasion or that I don't read lots and lots of literature. I'm about as 'unperfected' as one can get. I don't understand what you're talking about 'genetic offspring of God' comment is. That whole paragraph I'd like to see an exposition on to help me understand where you're coming from., As to the pics of Christ on the Cross.........I'm totally against that. I see them as icons, as idols.........to me it represents Christ dying daily whereas he only had to die once on the cross...that is the only thing I could see that I would consider mocking him. BTW, I've seen pics of Christ showing him with multitudes, praying in Gethsemane, with children, ascending, and certainly at the last supper. Have you considered that Jesus Christ did NOT have to agree to go to the cross? That he could have said NO? He knew what was coming if he said yes....... He didn't consider himself a victim. The Pharisees didn't like the idea of him calling them hypocrits; where they were putting man made laws about God's laws--the traditions making void the word of God. This seems to be what you are up in arms about, and that is to your credit if you are. Can you imagine a world where the 10 Commandments were adhered to by all; and that there were not the 50,000 'do do this' and 'don't do that' or the 'buy this prayer shawl for $20 and we'll toss in some anointing oil, too'. Those who had a foreknowledge of Jesus Christ......they were told of a Messiah and they were thinking of a blood and bones here on earth king like King David, king of a secular nation. For the record, TTMA.....the Church was a body of people, not a building, or a sect, or a denomination. Outcalled ones is how the greek is translated, I believe. Surely, you can understand that anytime one goes around saying "ALL" or "NEVER" that it will come back to bite ya in the butt--that old broadbrush paint stripe gets us every time. CAn you provide evidence the Bible is a lie..........just because history has a way of repeating itself doesn't make the cut, so to speak. I don't think God would 'this' or 'that'.......doing that has us trying to paint him in a box of what WE think He should be doing or thinking. Frankly, I don't worry about when He gets sick and tired of the bullshit down here--that time willl come. I don't much worry about no end time stuff, either--the thing to do is be right with God now--while you can. The hand of God.........God has given man free will. Along with free will comes responsibility. Evil perps will be dealt with by God on His terms and at the time He selects. So why worry about it--he can do a hell of a lot better job at vengeance that we ever could. Tommy, do you have kids? If so, did you and the Mrs. have to teach them how to be bad? If so, you're the first person I've ever met that did. That should be a little bit of a hint. We have to teach our kids how to be good. Anyways, there was something I was going to try to find to share with you and I can't find it....it came to mind as I read and reread your comment regarding the LIARS, THIEVES, the Pharrisees comment. Something I read this afternoon and it had to do with the thought processes of eastern type peoples vs western type peoples. If I can find it, I'll share it with you. It explained much better than I could about how the Israelites thought in terms of Messiah/Christ.
#71. To: innieway (#69)
I've got to hit the sack......today has been a bummer...........but I do want to respond to you. I enjoy discussions like this when they don't devolve into the 'rapture monkey' or 'bible thumper' assinine comments. I would really like to know how others view matters. Will get back tomorrow...
#72. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#68) (Edited)
I agree with you particularly in that practioners of every religion seem to have some ignorant conception that their way is right, and the rest are just screwed. Christians seem to be unaware that their religion only makes up 20% of the population. So the Moslems are shit outta luck because they aren't followers of Christ? The Christians scream about abortions, but guess what? It's not IRAN where abortion is legal... It's not Iran that's attacking other nations... It IS Iran where everyone worships God several times a day... Judging by (supposed) Christian standards, sounds like Iranians are better Christians than Christians are...
Surgeon General's Warning: Society's problems must be solved. We have the solutions and you must buy them from us. No unauthorized solutions will be permitted.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote" - Ben Franklin
#73. To: TommyTheMadArtist, rowdee (#68) (Edited)
butting in here with a couple brief points, if you don't mind :) It is Catholicism that favors the crucifix (Jesus 'fixed' onto the 'cross') whereas Protestantism has just the empty cross, each emphasizing their different culture. The Catholic crucifix emphasizes the sacrifice made by Christ whereas the empty Protestant cross emphasizes the resurrection of Christ and His victory over death and sin. Neither mocks victimhood. Christ was not a victim, but rather a willing sacrifice. Both celebrate different aspects of what God through Jesus Christ offers us - forgiveness and salvation. Humanity is no less evil today. Arguably it is far more evil (abortion, pornography, corruption, world-wide scale of war, murder, terorrism, etc). God is in fact timeless and the human sin requiring atonement naturally spans all human existence, not just what had accummulated by 30 AD. Christ died for both. He died for all humanity (including you and me) because of all humanities sin (including yours and mine). I'm not entirely sure of what you do believe, but arguing the bible is a 'lie' is demonstrably false. The historical accuracy of the bible has been proven repeatedly. Aspects remaining to be proven or disproven by science, archeology or history (e.g. Noah's ark) cannot reasonably be construed as 'lies'. The prophectic accuracy of the bible has likewise been proven repeatedly, and again prophecies that are yet future cannot reasonably be construed as 'lies'. As for the bible's theological doctrines, some like "substitution" can be deduced from a straightforward reading while others like "salvation" can only be proven to each individual who makes the prerequisite step of faith in believing. But even in this case the consequences of salvation (e.g. indwelling Holy Spirit and transformation) are evident to the individual, they're just not verifiable to others, especially other unbelievers. But that doesn't make salvation a lie, just unmeasurable. The miracles are unprovable, and because they're miracles of God they likewise can not be disproven either. But again that doesn't make them lies. The logical scientifc or legal mind does not declare as a 'lie' what it can not prove or disprove either way. OTOH because so much of the bible has been proven correct, there is a compelling reason to believe (on faith) that someday the as yet unprovable will likewise be shown to have been correct as well.
Jesus Christ, and Christianity is a religion about mocking the victim. Why do you suppose that all of the visuals of Christ are of him on the Cross? It surely isn't to put that thought in your mind that he died for our sins, there are many ways to do that without a representation of him on the cross. Showing that over and over again, is about mocking the victim, who was Christ.
Saying he died for our sins is a joke compared to the real reason why he died was because of the EVIL of humanity of that time.
Christ didn't die for the sins of humanity. Christ died because OF the inherent sins of those people who lived so long ago,
and the true evil here, is the lie that has been perpetrated on subsequent generations that believing in this lie of salvation and of the second coming. Jesus is NOT coming back the way the Bible says it. The reason? Because the bible is a lie, and the things that are happening now, were happening then, and there's not a fucking thing that has changed in 2000 years.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
.
.
.
Comments (74 - 146) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest