[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Religion See other Religion Articles Title: The "Rapture" Business -- Part Two 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 Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 72.
#47. To: Enderby (#0)
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.
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.
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.
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...
There are no replies to Comment # 72. End Trace Mode for Comment # 72.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||