Dems & Reps

[DoinTime]

quote:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
You put to much faith in the physical words of the bible.
------------------------------------------------------------------------



How much faith should we ascribe to the words of the Bible? We find the answer in 2Tim 3:16. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God..."

Interesting how you provide "the answer" from the very material that is question.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Interesting how you provide "the answer" from the very material that is question.

Forget it...I tried to make that point weeks ago...

Them: "The Bible is the living word of God!"

Me: "But how do you know?"

Them: "Because the Bible says so!"

 

[Timebuilder]

Them: "Because the Bible says so!"

AND because...

God is trustworthy, and would not allow us to be mislead. We, for some unfathomable reason, are important to Him.

So it's not just that the Bible says so, it is because He is in sovereign control, and nothing gets by Him. The tragedies we cry over are but a short moment to Him, and our sadness ends here, with these limited earthly bodies.

What better way for a God that needs no other certification other than His own awesome creation, to give creedence to His word by putting it right into scripture by His own inspiration.

No one but God can be so bold, and only the lost will complain. What an interesting synergy.

 

[fLYbUDDY]

Forget it...I tried to make that point weeks ago...

Them: "The Bible is the living word of God!"

Me: "But how do you know?"

Them: "Because the Bible says so!"

No it is not just because the Bible says so, it is because the Bible claims so and we (or at least I) have found those claims to be true. We (the people that are true Christians) have evaluated its claim and found it to be true based on scientific truths, prophetic truths, rational thought, and the evidence of change happening miraculously in one's life who has decided to accept Jesus as their Lord and savior. If you don't want to buy that then it is cool with me. Christianity is not for everyone. As Jessie Ventura says "it is for the weak minded who need a crutch." Let him, and whoever else wants to, think that way. I hope no one misunderstands me. I don't share my beliefs in God because I want to see people accept me or agree with my view on the way things are. I respect other people's beliefs but when they challenge my beliefs I will give a response when I see one is appropriate. Some of you have brought up some interesting points (maybe even trying to criticize Christianity) and it was a good opportunity to reply and clear up any misconceptions. If you follow the belief of Jessie Ventura (as I already said) that is cool with me. I am only worried about what one person thinks of me, and that is Jesus. That is why I follow what He says. Not just because He says so either, but because I know so through the above mentioned findings.

BTW—Typhoon, You have limited God to a specific revelation that you have created. You would not accept God being real unless He revealed Himself the way you have decided is best (as you described a few weeks ago.) Unfortunately I don't think you will find Him that way. You claim that we are narrow minded as Christians (which I can understand someone thinking that way even though it is a misconception) but I challenge you to think a little outside of the box you have limited God to. And that is not a personal attack, just a friendly challenge on your beliefs.

 

[Typhoon1244]

fLYbUDDY...no. I'm not going to let you pull me into another religious discussion on this forum. If you want to argue, go to YGBSM or P.M. me...but not here.

This is about Republicans and Democrats, remember?

 

[fLYbUDDY]

fLYbUDDY...no. I'm not going to let you pull me into another religious discussion on this forum. If you want to argue, go to YGBSM or P.M. me...but not here.

This is about Republicans and Democrats, remember?

I am not trying to pull you into anything. You brought it up. If you wish to further discuss it then you can PM me or go down to the YGBSM (PM me if you do cause I rarely check that board.) That is ONLY if you are wanting to discuss it. My goal in life isn't to convert people to Christianity (even though I am sure some of you have labeled me as that.) Once again you brought up a point about the Bible and I simply gave a response. No arguing is/was intended.

Getting back on track here.......

Do you fly from the right seat or the left seat?

 

[Timebuilder]

This is about Republicans and Democrats, remember?

I just checked, and the original post in the tread contains the beginning of a discussion of the establishment clause, so right from the first post on page one there has been a religious component to this thread.

So, I guess we're still on the right track.

 

[Super 80]

Interesting how you provide "the answer" from the very material that is question.

The Bible has something that verifies its source and that is prophecy fulfilled.

The prophecy that foretold of the Messiah was completely accomplished with Jesus' death and resurrection in a way that confounded the conventional wisdom of Jesus' day because they did not discern between the year of the Lord's favor and the day of vengeance of our God from Isaiah 61:2.

This is the verse that Jesus read when he returned to his synagogue to read and expound on the Scripture in turn as they went through the law and the prophets as was the custom then. This is the verse that starts his ministry. Jesus stopped reading at the year of the Lord's favor because the very next words were for a time some two thousand years distant now.

Only God can tell you what will happen before it does and only the God of the Bible has consistently done that.

I have over 300 prophetic statements made about Jesus describing some 60 aspects of his ministry that were all fulfilled in Jesus.

Don't like that; I have more. Prophecy fulfilled. No other book or religion can make that claim.

 

[fLYbUDDY]

I just checked, and the original post in the tread contains the beginning of a discussion of the establishment clause, so right from the first post on page one there has been a religious component to this thread.

So, I guess we're still on the right track.

I know it was from the beginning and I know Typhoon is just covering himself so when the usual crybabies start saying alls we talk about is religion and politics he can say "no not me, I am talking about politics but I have already linked the politics to aviation and am against the religious (or whatever they are) discussions on this thread." As I already said I will not be the one to start the religious debates, but when someone else starts it and all I do is give a response, and then you accuse me of starting it and looking for an argument I will have to say that I feel (yes it is just my opinion, so take it for what it is worth to you) that it is wrong!

PS-Did I use too many “ands” in that sentence above?

 

[Typhoon1244]

You brought it up.

The hell I did. Doh referred to religious freedom in the originating post, WrightAvia questioned him about it, and you started the revival meeting...with the help of Timebuilder.

All I did was agree with DoinTime...

 

[fLYbUDDY]

The hell I did. Doh referred to religious freedom in the originating post, WrightAvia questioned him about it, and you started the revival meeting...with the help of Timebuilder.

All I did was agree with DoinTime...

No, I didn't bring up the whole "is the Bible true stuff(?)." What I brought up did involve politics, even though it centered around a religious theme. You and DoinTime were the ones to shift the gears into a "how true is the Bible" thread. I was talking about the political injustice given to other "religious" groups verses that which are given to Christianity. You don't have to believe in the Bible to see that.

The reason I targeted you rather than DoinTime as starting it (the validity of the Bible) is because, even though you both kinda started it, you were the one that accused me of wanting to argue about it and "pulling you into another religious debate." That is obviously not true.

 

[Typhoon1244]

The reason I targeted you rather than DoinTime as starting it (the validity of the Bible) is because, even though you both kinda started it, you were the one that accused me of wanting to argue about it and "pulling you into another religious debate." That is obviously not true.

Posted earlier by fLYbUDDY
Typhoon, You have limited God to a specific revelation that you have created. You would not accept God being real unless He revealed Himself the way you have decided is best (as you described a few weeks ago.) Unfortunately I don't think you will find Him that way. You claim that we are narrow minded as Christians (which I can understand someone thinking that way even though it is a misconception) but I challenge you to think a little outside of the box you have limited God to.

Now...tell me again how it's "obviously not true" that you were trying to draw me into a religious argument.

So I started it, huh? I'm sorry, I thought it was somebody else who started quoting scripture...

Posted even earlier by fLYbUDDY
"And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed."(John 3:19)

 

[fLYbUDDY]

Now...tell me again how it's "obviously not true" that you were trying to draw me into a religious argument.

So I started it, huh? I'm sorry, I thought it was somebody else who started quoting scripture...

Yeah, so I didn't get into the apologetics of it all (that is, the scripture you quoted me quoting). That wasn't to start a religious debate that was to show where I get my beliefs from. Which is obvious. So just because I lit a match doesn't mean I was trying to burn anyone with it. Although that seems like what you have accused me of.

It is obviously not true that I was trying to draw you into a religious argument because the scripture and all the other posts I made before responding to your response agreeing with dointime, weren't like "hey this is for Typhoon!" "Lets duke it buddy!" Just because I tie religion into my (limited) political views and that (the Bible and God) is the passion that burns in my heart and drives my every belief doesn't mean that when I express it I want to argue with people. That is where I think the confusion is happening. In fact I don't like arguing at all. And now it seems we are arguing. I have already said I respect you as a pilot and as a person Typhoon and the last thing I want to do is argue with you. In fact I originally thought you wanted to engage in a FRIENDLY conversation about life's purpose and how we got here. I never once thought you wanted to argue it and when you accused me of that being the agenda I responded the way I did
.

 

[Typhoon1244]

If that's your idea of an apology, I accept.

No seriously, the whole religion thing is a lot like the RJDC threads. Nobody is changing anybody's mind, so what's the point? I don't mind a friendly discussion, but when Generaltso comes at me with a stick, I don't need comments like "Typhoon started it" floating around!

(Are you getting any of this Generaltso? Why? It's obviously not about aviation!)

 

[fLYbUDDY]

Cool! Thanks for understanding and forgiving me for possibly misunderstanding you. (yes, it kinda was an apology/excuse)

Also I would like to apologize further since I know you got tagged the last time we had a religious discussion. I probably should have been more sensitive to that. Have a good night!

 

[Timebuilder]

I think the difference is that the RJDC discussion won't reallly affect most people, but the plan of salvation will.

Now a lot of show-me types will carp about the "lack of proof", as we discussed several weeks ago. I didn't formulate this plan for God, and I'm willing to go on the assumption that He did a better job than I would have done.

I guess it's just another general discussion.

 

[fLYbUDDY]

I guess it's just another general discussion. : D: D

I agree that it is a general discussion. Why is that so hard for some to see?

 

[TonyC]

Tony C.

I count four times John uses antichrist. Of those three specifically use the in the Greek. One time that John uses antichrists in the plural it is used as the subject of a clause.

Furthermore, even my study Bible equates John's antichrist to the man of lawlessness and the beast.

So if you don't see it, there's nothing else I can do to show you where the antichrist is written about as the pivotal player in Daniel's midweek of the seventieth 'seven.'



1JN 2:18 "Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming..." I have not studied John's letters as much as other books, but I understand this as a simple declarative statement of a future eventuality. How do you read it?

I guess it boils down to which version of the Bible we're reading. My memory is from the King James version, but I've looked at a couple others to find what you've said. As it turns out, some Greek manuscripts contain the article "the" and some do not. I submit to you that the context of the passages supports the omission of the article.

I was dead wrong in asserting that antichrist is not used as a noun. I maintain that it's not used to refer to a single, evil, powerful beast.

I John 2
18 "Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know it is the last time.
19 "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us."

John proclaims that the end time, the last time, was already upon him and his audience nearly two thousand years ago! He referred to a plurality of antichrists, not a single superpower. AND, he referred to the present tense existance of those antichrists, not some future event. Later, he defines the meaning of antichrist.

22 "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son"

Here, the word looks to me more like an adjective, but I suppose we could stretch for a noun, but that's not the most important aspect. Anyone who denies that Jesus is the Christ (that's a WHOLE lotta people) is against Christ - - anti - christ - - antichrist. It's a characteristic, a description, a label used for those who deny the deity of Christ. Plain and simple. It's not a monster that will come someday to break seals and gobble believers. You've likely spoken to antichrists today, and probably in a pleasant tone of voice.

This concept is repeated in the next letter.

II John
7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist."

The culprits that deny that Jesus Christ came are deceivers and antichrists, and they existed at the time of the writing.

I apologize for relying on my memory whilst chastizing you for not finding "the antichrist" in writing. I should have reread the material myself before forming the questions. I do believe, though, that a careful study of I and II John will lead you to rethink your view of THE antichrist as a single, powerful beast-like creature that will appear at some point in the future. The passages all refer to something that has already happened.

... but I understand this as a simple declarative statement of a future eventuality.

The whole point of John's conversation on the topic is to point out that it's NOT future tense, it's PRESENT tense, then, ~2,000 years ago. Note he said it IS the last time, and even NOW are there many antichrists.

Furthermore, even my study Bible equates John's antichrist to the man of lawlessness and the beast.

Sorry, I don't put as much faith in the commentaries written by men as I do the inspired words. It's hard to find a commentator that can keep his own beliefs from being injected into the interpretations and "comments" that are printed in those so-called study Bibles. Same goes for many versions of the Bible. As we've just seen, the addition or omission of a single word here and there can have a profound impact on the meaning of the passage.

Back to the end times thing. Do you believe there are major events that must occur between now and the rapture? (I perceive that you do, but I may be mistaken.) If so, then you feel pretty safe that it won't be tonight, right? If I'm still on track with you, how can you explain that the second coming will be like a thief in the night, and we should always be watchful, prepared? If there are events that must occur first, why should we bother being ready now? In my mind "I know it's not now" doesn't fit with "we can never know when."

If you're still reading, I apologize for the length of this post. If I had done more homework before opening my mouth in the first place, we could have avoided some of the confusion.

 

[TonyC]

Good story?

You put to much faith in the physical words of the bible. The bible is a story, and a good one at that. If Jesus were to come back to earth and see what Christians had done to Christianity we would surely be in for another wet 40 days and nights. But then, that story was just fiction too.

Consider for a moment...

The Bible claims to be inspired (II Timothy 3:16)

If the claim is true, the Bible is indeed the inspired word of God.

If the claim is false, the Bible is a complete fraud.


How can it just be a good book? Or a good work of fiction?

 

[doh]

doin'time,
I can spin with the best of them! My rant, my spin!

 

[doh]

mr. irrelevent,
Thanks for helping out. They both hate each other so much, they don't care what the truth is any more. One of the big reasons why we didn't get a real pension at CMR is the tax law. It is set up to make defined benefit pensions unattractive to corporations. Congress could change that but then they would have less scare they could throw around about losing social security. That means less power over our lives and they couldn't live with that!

 

[Super 80]

a little word study

The whole point of John's conversation on the topic is to point out that it's NOT future tense, it's PRESENT tense, then, ~2,000 years ago. Note he said it IS the last time, and even NOW are there many antichrists.

This is the NASB version; it has perhaps the best word for word translation of the Greek to modern English:

1JN 2:18 Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.

“antichrist” is in the singular. “The lack of the article (the) stresses the category of quality.” –Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament by Fritz Riennecker/Cleon Rogers

“is coming” comes from erchetai, the root being erchomai meaning come. This verb is in the present tense, middle voice and indicative mood. The present tense indicates a continuous type of action and when combined with the indicative mood indicates something going on at the present time. The middle voice shows the subject acts in his own interest or behalf.

Here John is stressing the quality of antichrist and is saying he is present and in a continuous state. This is confirmed by Satan being cast down by the Angels in the parallel account describing the great dragon in Revelation 12:7-13:1. Previously in the parallel account of the woman (the nation of Israel) in Revelation 12:1-6, at Christ’s birth, Satan had access to ‘heaven.’ Sometime during Christ’s ministry Satan falls, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven”—Luke 10:18. This falling or displacement out of heaven where Satan was able to have an audience with God (Job) is a summary event in the Greek and thus is specific and unique. This makes Luke 10:18 and Revelation 12:7-9 multiple accounts of the same event. Now Satan is at work in this world knowing “his time is short.” Thus John stresses the hour as well a (figure of speech).

Jesus said Scripture cannot be broken, and this interpretation does keep it whole.

The second use of antichrists is in the plural. “have appeared” comes from gegovnasin which is the inflected form of ginomai which means to come into being, to happen, to become. gegovnasin is in the perfect tense, active voice and indicative mood. The perfect tense says it has been completed and is continuing. The active voice shows the subject is performer of the action and the indicative mood means it is a statement of fact from the perspective of the writer, John.

During the first century, the Church was under intense pressure not only from the Pharisees against their own, but also by Rome. Meanwhile, heretical teaching was rampant and the most common form was Gnosticism, or special knowledge. The use of the plural does describe a condition of men as John explains later in 1JN 2:22. So I think you are correct to describe that as characteristic of being against God although it is not used as an adjective.

 

[Super 80]

and now back to the future

Back to the end times thing. Do you believe there are major events that must occur between now and the rapture? (I perceive that you do, but I may be mistaken.) If so, then you feel pretty safe that it won't be tonight, right? If I'm still on track with you, how can you explain that the second coming will be like a thief in the night, and we should always be watchful, prepared? If there are events that must occur first, why should we bother being ready now? In my mind "I know it's not now" doesn't fit with "we can never know when."

In a nutshell, yes. Several events must precede the Rapture of the Church. This does not mean it will not come like a thief, look at the examples of the Churches in Revelation. Not only do these Churches describe physical bodies in the first century, but each has a future promise past this present age. In addition the Churches can be thought to describe the various overall characteristics of the Church age over these 2000 years. But since each style of worship exists from the first century into the future, while the Churches go in turn, each style of worship can be found at any time through the whole period. If your style of worship is like the Church of Sardis, indeed the coming of Christ will overtake you like a thief. That is why I need to personally make sure my style of worship is like that of Philadelphia.

There will be false christs (notice the plural), wars, famine and disease as Jesus said. These are not the end times, but the beginnings of birth pains. Such things must be. This also aligns very well with the first four Seals and they can be thought of as being forces unleashed on the world in order to create conditions that are "ripe" for the end times. The last terrible nation has yet to be formed.

The seventieth 'seven' starts with the antichrist confirming the covenant with many, ostensibly with Israel as that is the focus of Daniel 9:24-27. It starts 42 months where God has given authority (God is always sovereign) to the antichrist. God will protect the nation of Israel from the antichrist's oppression during the first half week. So the antichrist will persecute her offspring, the Christians instead. Towards the end of the first half week the antichrist rushes out like a flood from Daniel 11:40-45. He pitches his tent at the Holy Mountain (used only to describe the hill Jerusalem sits on) which is the same description Luke uses at 21:20. At mid week an abomination occurs. He "swiftly" (which is a translation of wing in Daniel 9:27 like the swiftness of the flood from Daniel 11:40) sets up an idol of himself in the temple that is still to be built described in Ezekiel 40:1-43:9. The false prophet (the beast of the land - possibly from Israel) reinforces the antichrist and requires all to receive an impression (mark) or they cannot buy or sell.

This general pattern of the antichrist reaching his zenith in rebellion, the removal of the Church and His resultant judgment follows the words of Daniel 9:27, the abomination causes desolation and desolation will be poured out on him (that makes desolate). This is also described in Daniel 12:1 where in response to the abomination we can see Mikael (literally -who is like God) arising. Daniel 12:1 describes a time of distress followed by the deliverance of all those in the Book of Life.

Jesus references this same mid-week point in the Olivet discourses in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21. Jesus describes this time as being unequaled (thus specific and unique) and being a great distress or tribulation. If these days were not shortened, none of the Christians would live through it. People will be actively searching for Jesus and not find Him in the desert or the inner rooms. You can see that for a three and half year period, the midweek point and some nebulous time afterward, there is plenty of need for patient endurance for the Christian.

Jesus then tells us immediately after the distress of those days there will be a sun/moon/star event. This is what Zechariah described: On that day there will be no light, no cold or frost. 7 It will be a unique day, without daytime or nighttime--a day known to the LORD. When evening comes, there will be light. -ZEC 14:6 Ezekiel says the same thing but addresses it to the unbelieving nations: When I snuff you out, I will cover the heavens and darken their stars; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon will not give its light. -EZE 32:7

This is the same day described in Revelation I watched as he opened the sixth seal. There was a great earthquake. The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red, 13 and the stars in the sky fell to earth, as late figs drop from a fig tree when shaken by a strong wind. -REV 6:12

During this, the 144,000 are sealed and three angels make their announcements (Rev 14:1-12) Then like the ten virgins waiting for the Bridegroom we see the gathering that Jesus talks about in the Olivet Discourse; The sky receded like a scroll, rolling up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. -Rev 6:14 Isaiah described this as well: In the evening, sudden terror! Before the morning, they are gone! -ISA 17:14 In the parallel account of the seventieth 'seven' (Rev 13 through 16) the harvest occurs in chapter 14. Evidence for the Rapture occurs in the Seal accounts in sequential fashion after the sun/moon/star event as the great multitude appears in God's temple in heaven and it is the Elder that says these have come out of the Great Tribulation and washed their robes white in the blood of the lamb just Jesus spoke of two thousand years before.

After a space of half an hour, all hell breaks loose and that will continue until the end of the seventieth 'seven' as God pronounces judgment on the nations (including the nation of Israel as the OT prophets have spoken of the Day of the Lord.) and literally pours out His wrath. But God will save a remnant of His people as He always does. They go into the Millennial Period. Daniel 12:2 describes the end of the thousand years and like Matthew 25:31 and Rev 20:12-13 describes a time when there is a heavenly judgment.

We Christians can be part of the Rapture at any moment because it is only as far away as our death. And that can happen at any time. Remember the dead in Christ rise first, so if you lose your life by maintaining your faith in a time of trial, you will gain everlasting life, and get a six foot head start on those that are still left alive.

 

[doh]

Now really,I meant for this thread to be about how neither party is particularly honest nor are they very labor friendly. They simply wish to have power over our mortal lives. The religion thing wasn't my idea. Can't we all just pray for each other and kick some political butt together?

 

[WrightAvia]

I hear you doh. I have concerns with separation of religion and state. But as for people people of religion in general...carry on.

 

[TonyC]

Re: and now back to the future

In a nutshell, yes. Several events must precede the Rapture of the Church. This does not mean it will not come like a thief, look at the examples of the Churches in Revelation. Not only do these Churches describe physical bodies in the first century, but each has a future promise past this present age. In addition the Churches can be thought to describe the various overall characteristics of the Church age over these 2000 years. But since each style of worship exists from the first century into the future, while the Churches go in turn, each style of worship can be found at any time through the whole period. If your style of worship is like the Church of Sardis, indeed the coming of Christ will overtake you like a thief. That is why I need to personally make sure my style of worship is like that of Philadelphia.

Ephesians 4
4 "There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
5 "One Lord, one faith, one baptism
6 "One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all."

Ephesians 1
22 "And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
23 "Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all."

So, how many churches are there? Christ has one body, and that body is His church - - sounds to me like there's only one church.

You seem to be well-versed in Greek. Is it possible that the seven groups of believers mentioned in Revelation were congregations of the same One church?

Let me make sure that I read you right on one last point. Am I to understand that the assertion by Christ that the judgment will come as a thief in the night - - no man knoweth the hour - - only applies to people who worship in a certain style?

Luke 12:40
"Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not."

Was Christ not speaking to everyone?

 

[Super 80]

Re: Re: and now back to the future

Was Christ not speaking to everyone?

"He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."

God says Churches in the plural to each of the seven Churches. While we are all one body there are several different types.

Seems to me that Christ is speaking to all the Churches. There are differences between the members of the body.

There are the 144,000. There are those that sleep in the Lord. There are those that live and believe in the Lord, and there are those that are left behind and so complete the fifth Seal.

God will come like a thief and to those that practice an unbelieving faith to them it will come suddenly.

Do you have God placed comfortably in one hour on Sunday? Do you think the rest of the week is yours to live as the culture does? Maybe your faith needs to be re-examined.

 

[TonyC]

Re: Re: Re: and now back to the future

"He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."

God says Churches in the plural to each of the seven Churches. While we are all one body there are several different types.

Seems to me that Christ is speaking to all the Churches. There are differences between the members of the body.

I quoted Christ in Luke and asked you if He was speaking to everyone, and you jump to Revelation. I really wasn't looking for anything complicated, just a simple answer to a simple question:

Was Christ, in Luke 12:40 talking to everyone?

When you refer to seven churches, I assume you're quoting from Revelation, but I'm not sure. You see, it's John who wrote to the "seven churches which are in Asia." (Rev 1:4)

In a book chocked full of symbolism and mystery, why do you choose to assign a literal value to the number 12 squared times a thousand? (144,000) Can you be sure that seven is a literal number, and not symbolic of something more fundamental?

It never ceases to amaze me how so many people are intent on discarding simple interpretations in favor of unreasonably complex ones.

 

[mar]

Remember me? I'm the atheist

Personally, my interest in this thread is merely curiosity. I don't buy any of it 'cause I happen to think if there is one god he'd be a mite more clear and specific.

These parables are sure interesting though.

By the way, if you happen to follow Italian politics you'd realize that The Anti-Christ has already arrived.

Silvio Berlusconi, a man of lawlessness as he happens to conveniently change laws whenever he gets in trouble, is also the current President of the EU.

How about that for coincidence? Not only that but he lives in Rome. Actually he's from Milan but that's close enough for the doomsayers!

Peace!

PS--Doh. I agree. The Dems and Repubs suck buttermilk.

 

[fLYbUDDY]

Jesus says "I am the way the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through me." As far as how to connect with God, I don't know how much clearer it could be? The other stuff that TonyC and Super80 are going through isn’t necessary to figure out God and what his main message to us is. Now remember I am not trying to turn anything into a religious debate/argument/whatever. I appreciate your input and was just making a friendly comment on it.

Ohh and here are some other specific verses (to name just a few)
(Romans 8)- 1So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. 2For the power[1] of the life-giving Spirit has freed you[2] through Christ Jesus from the power of sin that leads to death. 3The law of Moses could not save us, because of our sinful nature. But God put into effect a different plan to save us. He sent his own Son in a human body like ours, except that ours are sinful. God destroyed sin's control over us by giving his Son as a sacrifice for our sins. 4He did this so that the requirement of the law would be fully accomplished for us[3] who no longer follow our sinful nature but instead follow the Spirit.

(Isaiah 44:6) - "This is what the LORD, Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty, says: I am the First and the Last; there is no other God. 7Who else can tell you what is going to happen in the days ahead? Let them tell you if they can and thus prove their power. Let them do as I have done since ancient times. 8Do not tremble; do not be afraid. Have I not proclaimed from ages past what my purposes are for you? You are my witnesses--is there any other God? No! There is no other Rock--not one!"

(1 John 1:1)- 1The one who existed from the beginning[1] is the one we have heard and seen. We saw him with our own eyes and touched him with our own hands. He is Jesus Christ, the Word of life. 2This one who is life from God was shown to us, and we have seen him. And now we testify and announce to you that he is the one who is eternal life. He was with the Father, and then he was shown to us. 3We are telling you about what we ourselves have actually seen and heard, so that you may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ.

(John 3:18)- 18"There is no judgment awaiting those who trust Him. But those who do not trust Him have already been judged for not believing in the only Son of God.

(Hebrews 6:16 )- 16When people take an oath, they call on someone greater than themselves to hold them to it. And without any question that oath is binding. 17God also bound himself with an oath, so that those who received the promise could be perfectly sure that he would never change his mind. 18So God has given us both his promise and his oath. These two things are unchangeable because it is impossible for God to lie. Therefore, we who have fled to him for refuge can take new courage, for we can hold on to his promise with confidence.
19This confidence is like a strong and trustworthy anchor for our souls. It leads us through the curtain of heaven into God's inner sanctuary. 20Jesus has already gone in there for us. He has become our eternal High Priest in the line of Melchizedek.

So why is that other stuff (like what TonyC and Super80 are discussing) in the Bible? To make us aware of the final chapter of this world and to make us aware of the awesomeness of God. And it is good they are discussing it because iron sharpens iron. They are digging deep into their faith seeking the truth (hopefully) about what the context of the verses mean. The Bible is one of the few books that can be very very simple and spelled out while at the same time consume an entire lifetime of diligent study and still not be able to figure it out 100%. The stuff we need to know is what is spelled out clearly. The other stuff is just part of the complexity of our Lord! I cited those verses just so you can see there are some verses that are pretty straight forward as far as context is concerned. I once again say that I am not trying to convert you to my way of thinking or change your beliefs; I am just showing you a few verses in the Bible.