That depends on the beginning . . . (just kidding about?) . . . or where in between one arrives.
We all die, but the world has a few more billion years.
The jellyfish are plotting against us. You know that.
They go great with peanut butter fish though.
...adding banana's will make it more tasty
... jellyfish? ... what have politicians to do with the question ...
Even if Politian have the highest IQ of any group of people on earth. sacking the deck with religion brainwashing and lying is not everything. I wish mankind would connected their brain much better with their backbone for better results.
A jellyfish need either a brain nor backbone to be far more successful than man in population, areas traveled and mortality. The water bear for space travel. A very serious Christian threaten the earth will End hundred of times over the course of his assume 6000 years on earth. With a lottery ticket hope he will live immortally in heaven because all he can do on earth his reproduce and pass his knowledge and genes on to the next generated. A species of Jellyfish has been immoral for 650 millions years and still will be here if human destroys and ends his own species as the rest the world turns and many other species continue.
The end of the world is near. What? Again?
There is always that possibility. A wayward asteroid is possible, but not probable. Our sun will go into a red giant phase in possibly 4-5 billion years destroying the earth, but then due to the heating up of the sun the earth will be uninhabitable in about 2 billion years. We, the Milky Way, will collide with the Andromeda galaxy in about 5 billion. So, all and all, our future is bleak and no matter what happens the earth we will not be here, with the brightest estimate, in 5.5 billion years, no matter what.
If you are speaking to our own suicide, I would doubt that as we do not have the power to destroy the earth. We may be able to destroy human life though.
As for the gods, well, they are of a capricious nature, but sense most of them are given the attribute of all-knowing, they knew going in the exact time and date that they would destroy the earth if that was their plan when the existence was created.
In terms of Mans inhumanity to Man, that has been around since someone wanted what someone else had. We just have much bigger rocks now and there is a great many more of us and we have television'
... cj ... interesting point comes out of your comment ... your thots please ... you put all gods on a par including the God of creation, that being non existence ... considering the greeks and romans patterned theirs after man so they man has a reason to be frail ... considering ganesha has an elephant head ... kali many arms ... ptah the goose ... and of course the gods that live inside of the trees and rocks etc ... setting aside your bias to God as an entity, if you will, and looking at the above, and others you have probably studied ... from a point of believing in God or a god ... can you say which ones might really make any sense to you given their purposes and life styles ... yeah, its kinda convoluted but it is hard to phrase it while stepping of egg shells ...
There are more chickens Doc. Do not be light of foot. I believe your question to be sincere and I will address it accordingly. Until I approached the Jesuit seminary, I truly and devotedly believed that a stern, but yet loving god was the guiding force of the human condition and all things Catholic. It would be this god that made sense. It would be as the loving parent, capable of punishment and simultaneously love. Parents do not however, send their children to hell for doing what the parent knows the child will do.
From that point on simple contradictions became major philosophical points of reason, not just, in terms, of academic studies, but real time experiences, to include combat in Vietnam, world travel and immersion into many cultures and beliefs.
All gods are patterned after the want of Man. The God of Israel was a god of war and vengeance at a time and for a culture that was steeped in such things, as all such gods were at the time. The monotheism of the Israelites is the same god of Akhenaten by a different name, He who has no name. Too, the God of Israel choose the Jew as his own people, a special people. Christianity is based on Judaism. Islam is based on both.
... thanks ... now can we explore a bit more ... why do you think man would develop gods with physical characteristics of the animals which they supposedly dominate ... given, some of the animals are larger and more powerful but, from this view point, lacking mental ability, instinct not being a mental ability ... just brain picking at this point ...
Most of these, and I speak mostly to ancient Egypt, were characterizations of attributes deemed vital to war, farming, virility, gods, and even resurrection in the snake, which in other cultures (earlier) was the symbol for fertility and even virgin births. The snake in the garden of Eden.
It is difficult to understand such thinking, as it is difficult to understand the slavery of early America, but if empathy is utilized to the culture of the time, it helps.
That such symbols were used and in themselves were not worshiped, but rather the particular attribute that was represented in the animal.
These people placed greater value on internal organs then the human brain, which was discarded upon mummification and the other organs were mummified, so that the dead would have them in the afterlife. That is the intellect you are dealing and then they build the pyramids--figure that one.
The statues of animals assisted in focusing the people and brought to "real life" the words of the priests and the power of the Pharaoh. They became a representation and manifestation of a belief. This whole process was re-invented with the Catholic or early Christian Church in the form of the statues of jesus, mary and other deemed saints. The story of Osiris is interesting and is said to have been the pattern for the story of the resurrection of Jesus, 2400 years later.
Animals and gods of Egypt.
As I understand it, those "gods" of Hinduism are not specific gods, but manifestations, caricatures of the One God.
The end of the world won't occur for another ~5 billion years, when the sun has reached its red giant phase and finally gets big enough to swallow up the earth.
And then it's trillions upon trillions of years until the universe comes to an end, whether it be via the Big Crunch or the Big Rip or the Heat Death, whichever it turns out to be.
So, no. It's not "near." It's nowhere near "near."
If it is or if it isn't, we should be ready... 'cause there is only one way to get off of this planet and that is through death.....
That's simply not true. People have been to the moon and many people have been to space. There are plans to inhabit Mars.
... considering some of the comments here ... i think the martians are alive and well ... and giving input on this page ...
If the lord who love you, comes to end the earth, I hope God has the decency to cut loose most people in the world who are not aware of him into space rather than allowing Satan to teach them lessons in hell forever.
He is the God of mercies, and I pray and trust in his mercies on all.
Many of the other Gods claim the same thing, must be a fear thing Religious leaders love to mess with for their own greedy ego control.
Relying on his mercy must be a fear thing? "Perfect love drives out fear"; "the one who fears is not yet made perfect in love" (the love of God).
"Mercy triumphs over judgment!"
Mercy? End the Earth, Oh mine
Why would God End the earth to prove his love to us?.
Why would God allow Satan to torture people forever (worst than the crime) to prove his love.?
Why dose God allow Satan to torture people forever, because he love them?
It seems they are safer not knowing your God at all and take their chances with his so called mercy or by their fruits, like me?
Love- Makes good Sense,
Your God dose not make sense at all, to End the earth would be the most insane doggy fear act ever...
Mother Nature help those people, who think for themselves.
In what context do you refer to the "end?"
Do you mean for humans? Or everything else that lives? Or Geologically?
Would the World end if humans ceased to exist? Yes, it would in one form or another.... but it is also possible that the world only exists when we are conscious of it.... the world is nothing, really
Confusing? Sure, so is every other possibility.
... this was not a statement or assumption ... it is a question ... why do i always have to explain things to you emile ... seems you always come at things with your hackles up ... have fun once in a while ... but since you commented on "evidence" ... what evidence do you have to support the continuation of the world ...
Hackles up? Maybe, you simply can't take a statement at face value?
I would think one would need evidence to support an end, not a continuation. The earth seems to be lumbering along, quite well. Humanity is plugging along also. If things continue along those lines; continuation is a given.
NO the end ISN'T near at all. All this end of the world stuff is pure hyperbole and conjecture that's all. I just love these forums, DON'T you all?
Well Matthew speaks of the end times being when the ppl of Israel (Judea) flee into the mountains, which has literally just happened.
1 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 "Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down." 3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. "Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" 4 Jesus answered: "Watch out that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ, ' and will deceive many. 6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains. 9 "Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. 15 "So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,' spoken of through the prophet Daniel--let the reader understand-- 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let no one on the roof of his house go down to take anything out of the house. 18 Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak. 19 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! 20 Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now--and never to be equaled again. 22 If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. 23 At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect--if that were possible. 25 See, I have told you ahead of time. 26 "So if anyone tells you, 'There he is, out in the desert,' do not go out; or, 'Here he is, in the inner rooms,' do not believe it. 27 For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 28 Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather. 29 "Immediately after the distress of those days " 'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.' 30 "At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. 32 "Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. 34 I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.
"I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."
That was more than 2 thousand years ago, I'm sure that generation has been gone for a while now.
"With respect to the English word 'generation' used in Matthew 24:34, we find that the English word ‘generation’ has undergone a somewhat semantic transformation so that the meaning of the word today is much more narrow than that compared to the Greek word ‘genea’.
For example, the older Oxford English dictionary relates the following now obsolete (latest attested use 1727) definition of the word ‘generation’ which is defined as a ‘class, kind or set of persons’. The Strong’s Greek meaning of the word ‘genea’ also echoes this same definition – the persons of an age where the time frame of the ‘age’ is used in a broad and figurative sense – i.e., from the foundation of the world, form Abel to Zacharias, etc. (emphasis added) ."
http://shalach.org/Rapture/translation_ … hew_24.htm
LOL, so you can't trust any translation of the bible? What else is wrong?
Im not sure what your response meant Radman. When there is something youre not sure of, it's good to go to the original text and find out what the exact translation of a word(s) means. There is always an answer if you make an effort to gain understanding.
I think radman considers writers of biblical text to be merely simple goat herders.
Obviously insinuating they were ignorant, uneducated & superstitious peasants.
Therefore seeking a deeper understanding of either the text, or it's "authors" is a waste of time.
They were simple and and uneducated, but then so was everyone. They were not just superstitious, superstition was their life. These were people, like all of this time, had no knowledge of anything and believed anything that would explain anything.
It is appalling that people of today seek to find answers for life from a people that did not know what the organs of thier body were or what they did. These people had a reason for their ignorance, as there was little or no knowledge of anything. The people of today have no such excuse, but yet continue to find and search for answers from an absence of knowledge. They were the smarter people. In many way, I think that is true.
I have to agree with you. Which should bring up the question of, .... what exactly was he talking about when speaking of the end? The end of what exactly? When we examine Matthew 23; we see Jesus talking to the scribes and Pharisee, telling them that they (personally) are going to kill the wise men and disciples being sent to them. And as soon as this conversation is finished, four of the disciples come to him "PRIVATELY" and ask him "When are those things going to happen?"
Jesus tells them, They are going to kill you, and they are going to beat you, ... and when YOU see this happen and that happen know the end is near. Who is he talking to? The end of what?
Considering that 100 years later, there isn't a single Hebrew to be found through out the Promised land; I would think he was speaking of the end of an age. The Hebrew Nation has come to an end!
All of the prophesy that were given to the children of Abraham had been fulfilled and come to their conclusion. Jesus said he had come to fulfill all the prophesy concerning him.
The 62nd week described in Daniel was fulfilled when they killed the Messiah.
The 69th week was fulfilled when Jesus appeared to John on the Isle of Patmos.
The 70th week certainly must have passed before that that Nation of Israel had been scattered to the four winds.
Approx 300 years later the Church age officially began when Constantine created the Universal church, of which he was the chairman of the board.
IMO the end of days Jesus was speaking of, was for the Hebrew people as a Nation; Not the end of the world.
And for whatever it means (?) good or bad (?) according to scripture, we are coming to the end of this age. It is written that for everything there is a season, a time to be born and a time to die.
We are coming to the end of this church age in accordance with Gods will.
Read into this as we please. again ... Just my opinion.
"30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth[c] will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.[/b]
32 “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it[e] is near, right at the door. 34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away."
Clearly all the people of the earth didn't mourn when they saw the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven.
This is referring to the return of the Christ and that has not happened yet.
It has not happened yet despite his saying it will happen before the current generation dies.
I explained that to you by showing you what the actual definition of the word "generation" was, remember?
When you see the son of God returning in the eastern sky, you will know it is the moment you are referencing.
The actual definition of generation.
The actual definition of day.
The actual definition of bird.
What you are saying is that unless you are fluid and have studied the languages in which the bible was written there is ho point in reading any English translations as all the translators had no idea what they were doing.
We are to study and determine the original meaning and the meaning within the context. We also understand that God has reason for the manner in which the message is given and that sometimes truths are intentionally spoken in a way that reveals much about the listener.
You can see clearly the symbolism throughout the Word (fisherman become catchers of men, we're covered in the blood of Christ, etc.), so why get so hung up on certain words? Through the Spirit we understand the truth Jesus Christ revealed.
No. I am saying when translating a language that is thousands of years old, and something doesn't make sense, it is a good idea to look up a word. If I was reading something in Spanish and it didn't make sense... for ex. when Hispanics say "you're welcome" they say, literally translated, "Of nothing." If you thought to yourself, "Why did he say, 'of nothing' when I thanked him, you could use a book of translation to help you understand what "of nothing" means in his language. It's basic stuff.
... context, context, context ... listen to the lady on this one ... a generation (genea) is a time frame not a group of people or life span ... its an age .... most likely the church age which ends at the rapture ... and i'm certain there will be more than 144k "flying" in that spectacle ...
Right, so if you don't trust the current expert translations you can go back and translate it to your satisfaction. You are then at the point of not trusting any of it.
If you are a person of reasonable intelligence, and a word, verse, or portion of scripture does not make sense, you look it up in a concordance the way you look up any word in the dictionary. The Bible is like any book in the way that way.
But it does make sense the way it is, it's just wrong. Not making sense is not the same as being wrong. For example we know that farm animals (livestock) did not come before people, That doesn't mean that the translation must be wrong, it simple means that it was written wrong.
There are references where the word was translated "earth" that clearly was not talking about the whole planet.
King Cyrus made references that God has given him the kingdoms of the whole earth, and certainly he was talking about that whole region and not the whole planet.
Didn't Jesus say he would come as a thief in the night? He came and left with what he came fore, and all not involved were none the wiser.
During the first century after 30 AD, hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Hebrews died from hunger and disease and hundreds and hundreds of thousands were hunted down and killed by the Roman army. Great tribulations indeed!
And what better time for 144000 people to simply vanish, being caught up in the air than when the entire remaining population being deported through out the rest of the Roman Empire.
It just appears clear to me that for the past 1600 years plus, there has been a gros misinterpretation of scriptures being taught. These misinterpretations have been ingrained into our minds so completely that we no longer see the meaning of the message we are reading.
We get side tracked arguing over the misinterpretations of individual words that we no longer see the forest for the trees.
I think we need to rethink our interpretations of what Jesus was talking about when he said .... "This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled"
Just my opinion.
Sure, you mean change it until it does make sense.
The goal is to translate. Your definition is not translation and no one who seeks to know the truth of the scriptures would do that. You are creating an argument where there is none.
My definition? I defined nothing, I'm simple reading the English words that are the excepted translations. You are the one who is attempting to say that these translations are inadequate because they don't make sense. Do you do that when they don't make sense?
Your summation of how simple translations are done is inaccurate.
I am not saying that the modern translations are inadequate. Many *do understand them.
I'm saying when a person reads something (like in any book) and it doesn't make sense to him/her... they should look up the original translation. This doesn't see to me a complicated or strange action. It is the most common and basic way to gain understanding.
So when something doesn't make sense to our current understanding of the natural world we simply change the definitions of previously translated words until they fit? A day now means an era even when it states what a day mean in the very sentence.
Change the definition? No. When my Hispanic friend says "Of nothing" I do not change the definition. It is spoken clearly, I lack knowledge, so I pick up a book that offers more insight and there it is, "You're welcome."
How big would a book be if it offered endless translations? A book offers one translation and if a reader does not comprehend it, he looks up the word, gets clarification and finishes the book. This is not hard stuff to understand Radman... it's what ppl do every single day with books and any sort of communication. The last time you looked up a word online.... you did this. As I said, basic stuff.
Sure, but I understand the sentence just fine. You are simple attempting to retranslate parts and not look up words you don't understand. It's like saying that they couldn't have meant livestock so we'll assume they meant mammal.
... Rad ... here in the USA, September 2, 1752 was a Wednesday ... so what would be the date for the following Thursday ... its a question that on its face seems evident and could be perceived and answered with present day knowledge quickly, but its not so easy to answer ... this issued had to be factored in to space travel for folks like nasa ... if it doesn't make sense in today's parlance or doesn't jive, check out the meaning of the day it was written ... by study, especially with the mass of info available at finger touch today, i have yet to find a so-called error in the Bible ... i hope your thinking "Well, that's cool" ... in 1752 it would mean my comment was chilly ... times change ... so do the meanings of words
Again, whenever something appears to not line up with our current understanding then we assume it's because the expert translators were incompetent.
Someone will eventually translate the word day to mean era even though the definition of day is given in the same sentence.
What's next? Do we change the fact that the bible says Caesar Augustus' decree that "all the world should be enrolled" as there is no evidence that it happened and it goes against what the detailed records the romans kept? It was however a way to explain the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem with without it wouldn't have filled the prophecy. Was that a little lie for Jesus? Why not change the text so that is says they were simply vacationing?
... the answer is Thursday, September 14, 1752 ...
Day already is widely recognized to mean an era as well as a 24-hour day. They wouldn't have cause to translate the word any differently because 1) both meanings are already known, 2) it MAY mean a literal 24-hour day OR an era because with God ALL things are possible (personally I won't be surprised either way); we interpret it as best we can, and 3) if it's making use of symbolism or describing a vision seen, then it should remain as is, just as all the parables and descriptions of visions are.
Evidence does in fact exist for Caesar Augustus' census / registry / taxing - found in the "Acts of Augustus" and remarkably close to the estimated time of Jesus' birth.
The film Forrest Gump claims that its titular character was the one who invented the smiley-face shirt. The fact that smiley-face shirts were once a thing corroborates this claim.
Therefore, Forrest Gump is the true word of American history and anyone who questions it or doubts its validity is a heathen and should be run out of town like the sinner they are.
We have at least two accounts that Caesar Augustus ordered such a decree - a biblical account and a secular account (The Acts of Augustus). Attempts are made to discount the biblical account, with the clear reason that the decree was a factor in fulfilling a prophecy about Jesus and unbelievers don't want to believe the prophecies are in fact being fulfilled (though we have much evidence for them and we even see many biblical prophecies fulfilled before our very eyes). Now you want to dismiss the secular account as well because it supports the biblical account. But you have no reason to discount it, and the secular writers had no reason to lie about it and make it line up with Scriptures, especially since Caesar Augustus was NOT a Christian.
I'm truly not intending to be rude (and please excuse me if I do sound rude) but honestly I found the Forrest Gump example irrelevant.
There is a bit of a problem with the census timing in relationship to the birth if Jesus. According to Augustus Caesar himself, he ordered three wide-spread censuses: one in 28 BCE, one in 8 BCE and one in 14 CE (These are from his notes in his Res Gestae - The Deeds of Augustus). These are the only three that we know of. I am fairly sure that Augustus Caesar would have mentioned others had he ordered them. So, there was no world wide census taken at the time.
Other problems with this census was that while Josephus does mention a census in Judea in 6 CE, it was only a local census, not one that would enable "all the world to be taxed." Its purpose was to count the male population so that they could be taxed at a later time. And it triggered a major uprising among the Jews, who regarded a census as against scripture and the will of God. He does not refer to an earlier census and poll tax.
At the time of Jesus' birth, the Jews were still subject to King Herod. Since Palestine was a client kingdom of Rome, only the king had powers of taxation in the land. It was only in areas that were operated under direct Roman rule that Caesar Augustus could have taxed the citizens directly. Additionally, there is no record of a mass migration of adults to their ancestral cities in order to be registered.
Another issue is that Luke 1:5 states that Jesus was born when Herod was King of Judea. Luke 2:2 states that Jesus was born when Cyrenius (a.k.a. Quirinius) was also governor of Syria. This appears to be an impossibility. The historical record shows that Herod was king from 37 until his death in 4 BCE. Quirinius was not governor of Syria at any time during this period. He came to power in 6 CE.
Lastly, Matthew 2:16 describes King Herod's order that all of the boy infants who had not reached their second birthday in Bethlehem and vicinity were to be murdered. The date of that mass murder would give an approximate idea of Jesus' birth. Unfortunately for historians the killings never appeared to have happened. If the children were killed, then historians of the era would have been certain to have recorded the event. No such record exists. Josephus wrote in great detail about even minor actions and decisions of Herod. The mass murder was never mentioned.
Consider that two ANCIENT texts (the Scriptures and Augustus' text) remarkably speak of a census ordered by Augustus in VERY close proximity of each other. The exact, correct year of Jesus birth is unknown and debated and the 8 BCE lines up with the general timeframe and many thoughts on the more accurate date for Jesus' birth.
When we rely solely on the ancient manuscripts, we are of course limited. Limited by what has been FOUND, limited by the FALLIBILITY of humans, limited by the unfortunate truth of CORRUPTION. You believe Scriptures have been tampered with, yet you unquestioningly trust that there is 100% precise accuracy and truthfulness of these other ancient texts. What makes you assume the Scriptures have been tampered with, but these other texts are necessarily pure?
You also make the assumption that we can ascertain things that cannot be ascertained given all the unknowns of any time and place, out-of-the-ordinary events and such that we KNOW frequently exist in life even based on our own personal experiences in life (the reason for the cliché - "Truth is stranger than fiction"). For example, you state, "It was only in areas that were operated under direct Roman rule that Caesar Augustus could have taxed the citizens directly." You state it as if it's fact, when it is only assumption. How do YOU know he wasn't given this authority? Was someone's heart moved by God so that such power was granted Caesar Augustus? Wasn't there a particular situation that caused such a possibility? People study the texts and give their best assessments, but these assessments are only HUMAN ones and can tell us nothing definitively.
You address the timing of King Herod and Cyrenius the governor of Syria, in which we're getting VERY close dates from these ancient records, yet slight differences. You assume the Scriptures are off or mistaken, but take the other records as "gospel" truth (forgive the irony of that statement). One or the other or both may be off slightly in their recording of events. The Spirit-inspired truth still is there. You'll trust your documents, I'll trust mine.
You say of Herod's order for the murder of boy infants, "If the children were killed, then historians of the era would have been certain to have recorded the event. No such record exists." Again, you are making an ASSUMPTION. More precisely you may say "no such record has been FOUND TO OUR KNOWLEDGE" and/or "no such record STILL exists to our knowledge", as there exists the possibility that such a record was intentionally destroyed by those with their own motives. Again, if you consider that there's a big conspiracy to present a "false story" within Scriptures, then why overlook a similar possibility of false portrayals and tampering for those who may be working under a worldly conspiracy of deception. Why is deception by the world (with Satan the deceiver as its prince) far fetched while deception within the Word sounds rationale to you, when from a natural perspective - if one is a possibility than the other is a possibility.
People are making such great efforts to "catch" Scriptures in an untruth that they hone in on the tiniest of details. Yet if Scriptures did not reveal truth and the entire thing is one hugely successful scam, then why would the little "problems" not long ago have been "fixed", given the supposed falsehood of it all anyway?
Actually, I don't say anything about it, I found scholarly works that do, paste links and in that particular post, pase a couple paragraphs that directly addressed what you claimed.
History - any history - Is the study of probabilities, it's not hard science. Clearly we can't go back and test it. When scholars who study this subject for a living point out the flaws in this census being historical, and even noted apologists who are in your side agree that the census described in Luke is not only highly improbable, it is practically impossible and there is no extra biblical source for an empire wide census as described at all, while there is plenty of evidence for a different kind of census that is much more realistic, I'll go with the experts unless damning evidence is discovered to the contrary, I'll go with the experts and assume that your insistence that the biblical story is accurate due to bias.
Don't you know that all the bible translators are incompetent and not inspired by god?
When you look at someone and say "your generation" or "your age" is a wicked and adulterous one it means his/their whole lineage till it get extinct is wicked and adulterous, not the present one alone!
That was an apocryphal age of jews who thought the end world is near should never be taken into consideration especially when one considers there were a lot of apocryphal Christian literature belonging to that age.
In a sense I was agreeing with you.
Jesus did say "This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled"
He also said "Some of you (standing there before him) shall not taste of death till you have seen the son of man coming in the clouds".
SOooo, either Jesus was wrong, (?) OR ... we need to recheck our interpretation of what we think he meant when he said these things.
I think Jesus is the messiah spoken of in the Old Testament. And every thind did happen just the way he said it would, in its simplest form.
SOoo you were arguing with what I said ... when I was agreeing with you.
Going to give this a shot. If you read what comes before those verses, Jesus speaks of a time in the future. Mat 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. The word shall in this verse speaks of a future happening.
Mat 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: Also speaking of future happenings. Those days He speaks of, what are they? There are many who will say that Jesus is the Christ but yet they do not truly believe Him to be the Messiah. They do not believe Him to be the Son of God. He is called a great teacher by some, a prophet by others but when He asked Peter, "Whom do you say that I am?" peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God."
We can also reference Mark Chapter 13, Mar 13:28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near:
Mar 13:29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.
Mar 13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
It is like a season beginning, just as Jesus used the fig tree as an example of summer coming.
Luke also wrote about this. Chapter 21.
What it boils down to is this. The generation that sees these things come to pass is the generation Jesus speaks of.
Yes, SirDent! I pointed out this very thing - that the generation that sees these things happening is the generation that will not pass away before they are accomplished - to Rad Man in another forum recently.
How do we know that ,.... that generation did not see all of those things happen ?
When i read the History about the Jews of the 1st century as recorded by Joseph; I could see describing them as Jesus described them in Matthew 24.
And in Chapter 23, ,,,,, While Jesus was looking the Scribes and Pharisee IN the FACE, while being in a crowd, (Among other things) .. he was telling the Scribes and Pharisee "THEY" were going to kill the wise men and disciple,s he was going to sent unto them. And after hearing this .... four of his disciples ask ask him "PRIVATELY"! When are they going to do all of that ? And when is the world going to come to an end ?
We should take note ... Three disciples when talking about this, think it important to describe this as a PRIVATE conversation between the five of them!!
Jesus says, " they are going to kill some of you, and they are going to beat some of you". Adlibing here, ... "You are going to see a lot of bad times, " There is going to be earthquakes in the sea/ocesn and lots of other stuff ".
"You are goinna see the sky turn dark in the day time".
"And you are going to see me coming back another time".
BUT he never did answer the question about when the world will come to an end!
It is written that, 60 something years after his death, Jesus came down/back and appeared before John while he was here on earth, on the Isle of Patmos, and gave his
THE" Revelation of things to come.
Jesus says that some of these things John is about to see are about things that has already happened, and some of these things are happening now, and the rest of things are getting ready to begin. using the phrase, "They are even at the door"
C. 13 Jesus shows John a "New" kind of worship will rise up out of the see " Blaspheming " proclaiming themselves The Only true religion, and anyone not agreeing will be persecuted and/or killed.
240 years later .. a new form of worship was created by the Emperor of the Roman Empire, with himself as the ultimate authority.
This institution didn't want anyone to know what has just happened, SO .. for the next 1000 years,
no one except for a very very few select people were given access to the actual written word.
By then ..... "private interpretation" had corrupted our understanding of the story we were reading.
How would any one know if the second coming had already happened as Jesus proclaimed it would .... or not ?
Why is it that when we get right down to the nitty gritty ... every body backs up and start circling the may pole.
We like to sling beliefs against unbelief's,one belief against other different beliefs, insult each others intelligence, but when we get close to getting down to the nitty gritty; everybody shuts up!
I believe in God, and Jesus was the Messiah spoken of in the Old Testament!
Jesus wasn't wrong, he meant everything he said; he said exactly what he meant to say! He said it the way he meant to say it!
His words don't need to be interpreted!
The Messages delivered by angels don't need to be interpreted!
Interpretations which angels gave in scripture concerning visions the prophets recieved don't need to be further interpreted!
This is what is what is wrong with religion today; some of us think we are entitled to follow our own interpretations, believing the holy spirit is leading us. That might be true concerning personal things, but not for the over view of what scripture is actually saying.
....throw beliefs against unbeliefs..... you do it quite well.
Well .... I guess we are all doing it.
and we might need to quit it ?
It seems to me we are all looking for something, but we
are only willing to go just so far to find it.
When we stop going forward because we come to something that seems to
contradict the foundation of our belief system.
Maybe that foundation does have a few flaws in it?
A few flaws?! There are two flaws as I see it.
First, you rely upon written texts from centuries ago, without any interpretation at all.... when any words you can read today have by their very nature been subject to interpretation by all who wrote them. Suggesting that any "god" put all those words into the minds of people who wrote them, in whatever language and cultural influences that prevailed at the time of writing beggars belief!
Secondly, "...... that seems to contradict the foundation of our belief system......" If it seems to, it most probably does, with a lot more authenticity than the belief itself. So, when are you going to look closely at your belief system and make one hell of a lot of changes in the beliefs?
I can't argue with a single thing you wrote. In fact, I've made comments very similar.
Including the post you are replying to.
Whether the bible, or any other book we might be reading causes the reader to interpret to some extent. But when blue suddenly becomes red by interpretation; and has been taught that way for a thousand years or two, ... well I don't know what to say!
When Jesus said, "Some of you standing here shall not taste of death till you see the son of man coming in the clouds" and this is interpreted to mean 2000 years into the future.
Well ... there is a problem which scrambles up every aspect.
good becomes bad, wrong becomes right.
If my interpretation of what Paul was saying contradicts my interpretation of what Jesus said (?) and I go with my interpretation of Paul, how can I say I am following Jesus ?
I suspect you and I would agree on lots, Jerami. Although I don't go along with the common and traditional christian ideas about the bible, I can and do see things in the bible which reflect common human needs, aspirations, emotions, etc. These aspects of our lives do not change much down the centuries, and if we can see them in relation to reality, then those "scriptures" can be very useful to study, mark, learn and inwardly digest.
Is there really an end? Now, think of this. Each end will always have a beginning. Everything is neverending really. Just think of it.
Yes, I believe the end is very near (though perhaps longer than we impatient people think "near" should mean) because 1) the end time prophesies are RAPIDLY being fulfilled; 2) people of faith together INCREASINGLY have a strong sense that the end is very near - just a few decades ago you didn't hear so much about it; now every pastor and most people of faith express such a belief; 3) the Holy Spirit confirms with my spirit that the end is NEAR and causes my spirit to rejoice in this truth (though again exactly how near, he doesn't say).
@ Johny and all
I don't get to get on the net very often. but her I get to be ..again.
I noticed I didn't comment on the last part of your previous comment.
Secondly, "...... that seems to contradict the foundation of our belief system......" If it seems to, it most probably does, with a lot more authenticity than the belief itself. So, when are you going to look closely at your belief system and make one hell of a lot of changes in the beliefs?
If it seems to, it most probably does .....
(me) That is what I discovered a long time ago.
(you) So, when are you going to look closely at your belief system and make one hell of a lot of changes in the beliefs
Been there done that. And for over a decade I put my beliefs aside and did a lot of examining as to what is actually written in the bible.
and was shocked as to the differences between what is taught concerning what is written; and what is actually written.
My belief system changed drastically. IMO it continues to mature. In my world it doesn't matter what you believe or do as long as you don't do it to me against my will, what ever that might be. And I expect everyone else to feel the same way.
What I believe should not affect you one way or another and what you believe shouldn't affect me.
I sure would hate for everyone else in the world to be just like me.
by Alexander A. Villarasa8 hours ago
The above question I see a lot being asked by materialists when the discussion turns to topics about the spiritual and supernatural. They off-handedly deny the existence of the spiritual and...
by Rabgix4 years ago
But every now and then I feel straight, or at least fool myself into believing it.Why can't I just accept this
by David Bowman2 months ago
Warning: This thread is intended as a serious discussion for those interested in philosophy. Posts that attempt to proselytize or derail the discussion with an unrelated subject matter will not receive a response from...
by Cindy Vine5 years ago
Was wondering if anybody out there has had any funny dating experiences.
by prophet20126 years ago
oops, did you read the forum rules first??the grey box next to the reply box.<--------please read before posting.
by God shet2 years ago
We have been bombarded with (utterly absurd) 'Western materialism'. We have been forced to believe that we (as consciousness) are a product of matter and this is the predominant way that we view it (the entire material...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.