On another thread B-man characterized Jesus as "a perfect human being." This seems like it's treading pretty close to Docetism. What distinguishes a perfect human from a Divinity? Isn't the latter defined by its perfection? And if perfect, could Jesus have been human, beyond what the Docetist's taught: God simply taking on the shell of a human? ************************************************************ 02-21-07, 10:31 AM doñadiana If you google "docetism+Jehova's Witnesses" you will find a lot of sites that connect the two. The Coran is also considered to be influenced by docetism.
DD
02-21-07, 12:21 PM Bibleman From Insight on the Scriptures, volume 2, page 602, published by Jehovah’s Witnesses:
PERFECTION
The thought of perfection is expressed through Hebrew terms drawn from such verbs as ka•lal´ (perfect [compare Ezekiel 27:4]), sha•lam´ (come to completion [compare Isaiah 60:20]), and ta•mam´ (be completed, come to perfection [compare Psalm 102:27; Isaiah 18:5]). In the Christian Greek Scriptures the words te´lei•os (adjective), te•lei•o´tes (noun), and te•lei•o´o (verb) are used similarly, conveying such ideas as bringing to completeness or full measure (Luke 8:14; 2Corinthians 12:9; James 1:4), being full grown, adult, or mature (1Corinthians 14:20; Hebrews 5:14), having attained the appropriate or appointed end, purpose, or goal (John 19:28; Philippians 3:12).
Importance of Correct Viewpoint. For correct Bible understanding one must not make the common error of thinking that everything called “perfect” is so in an absolute sense, that is, to an infinite degree, without limitation. Perfection in this absolute sense distinguishes only the Creator, Jehovah God. Because of this Jesus could say of his Father: “Nobody is good, except one, God.” (Mark 10:18) Jehovah is incomparable in his excellence, worthy of all praise, supreme in his superb qualities and powers, so that “his name alone is unreachably high.” (Psalm 148:1-13; Job 36:3, 4, 26; 37:16, 23, 24; Psalm 145:2-10, 21) Moses extolled God’s perfection, saying: “For I shall declare the name of Jehovah. Do you attribute greatness to our God! The Rock, perfect is his activity, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness, with whom there is no injustice; righteous and upright is he.” (Deuteronomy 32:3, 4) All of God’s ways, words, and law are perfect, refined, free from flaw or defect. (Psalm 18:30; 19:7; James 1:17, 25) There is never any just cause for objection, criticism, or faultfinding regarding Him or his activity; rather, praise is always due Him.—Job 36:22-24.
The Perfection of Christ Jesus. Jesus was born as a perfect human—holy, sinless. (Luke 1:30-35; Hebrews 7:26) His physical perfection, of course, was not infinite but was within the human sphere; he experienced human limitations; he became tired, thirsty, and hungry; he was mortal. (Mark 4:36-39; John 4:6, 7; Matthew 4:2; Mark 15:37, 44, 45) Jehovah God’s purpose was to use his Son as his High Priest in behalf of mankind. Though a perfect man, Jesus had to be ‘made perfect’ (Gr., te•lei•o´o) for such a position, completely filling the requirements his Father set, being brought to the appointed end or goal. The requirements called for his becoming “like his ‘brothers’ in all respects,” enduring suffering, learning obedience under test, even as his “brothers” or footstep followers would. Thus he would be able to “sympathize with our weaknesses, [as] one who has been tested in all respects like ourselves, but without sin.” (Hebrews 2:10-18; 4:15, 16; 5:7-10) Additionally, following his death as a perfect sacrifice and his resurrection, he would have to receive immortal spirit life in the heavens, thus being “perfected forever” for his priestly office. (Hebrews 7:15–8:4; 9:11-14, 24) In a similar way, all those who will serve with Christ as underpriests will be ‘made perfect,’ that is, be brought to the heavenly goal they seek and to which they are called.—Philippians 3:8-14; Hebrews 12:22, 23; Revelation 20:6.
—End of Quotation—
Jehovah’s Witnesses do not accept Docetism, despite the misperception of our beliefs by those who fail to understand them, as evidenced by the many sites listed when one does the suggested search. Jesus Christ is exactly who the Bible described him as being, the Son of God who became a human being for about 33½ years.
02-21-07, 03:50 PM philalethist Try James 3:2 KJV It tells of a perfect man.
02-21-07, 06:21 PM GarColga When I saw the topic title, I thought "Finally, I'm getting the recognition I deserve"!
But as for Jesus, sinless does not = perfect IMHO.
Besides, wasn't he sometimes behaving as a petulant, immature megalomaniac?
"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. "
Does a perfect human condemn the majority of his human brothers and sisters to damnation?
02-21-07, 07:13 PM babthrower Perfection is the adaptation of form to function and should display nothing short of what is needed to function, and nothing in excess. Jesus as a good Jew and as a good human being, should have reproduced.
If he was a perfect human being then he had a normal human body complete with a full complement of parts, all funcioning well.
If he reproduced, he abandoned his children. Nowhere in the scriptures does he give them a mention.
If he did not reproduce, either he did not use his reproductive organs in a manner so as to lead to reproduction, or if he did use them properly they failed in their function.
Hmmm. Roll EyesHardly perfect.
02-22-07, 10:43 AM newnickname God point, Babs. What is a perfect human? There seems to be an idea of a perfect human as a kind of Hollywood being, circa 1940's - one who never goes to the toilet, never has sex, and is always 'on'. That's not a human.
02-22-07, 02:25 PM VelvetVoice Docetism
1. an early Christian doctrine that the sufferings of Christ were apparent and not real and that after the crucifixion he appeared in a spiritual body. 2. Roman Catholic Church. an ancient heresy asserting that Jesus lacked full humanity. 3. An opinion especially associated with the Gnostics that Jesus had no human body and only appeared to have died on the cross. 4. 1846, heresy holding that the body of Jesus was a phantom, from Gk. Doketai, name of the sect, lit. "believers," from dokein "to seem, have the appearance of, think," related to doxa (see decent). 5. the heretical doctrine (associated with the Gnostics) that Jesus had no human body and his sufferings and death on the cross were apparent rather than real
Gnosticism
1. RCC-a group of ancient heresies, stressing escape from this world through the acquisition of esoteric knowledge. 2. The doctrines of certain pre-Christian pagan, Jewish, and early Christian sects that valued the revealed knowledge of God and of the origin and end of the human race as a means to attain redemption for the spiritual element in humans and that distinguished the Demiurge from the unknowable Divine Being. 3. a religious orientation advocating gnosis as the way to release a person's spiritual element; considered heresy by Christian churches
Philippians 2:6who, although He (K)existed in the (L)form of God, (M)did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7but [a](N)emptied Himself, taking the form of a (O)bond-servant, and (P)being made in the likeness of men.
Like taking off a new, clean garment and putting on an old, dirty rag. It's as if by taking on humanity into his being, He put Himself under willing humility and obedience. Sure He was hungry and tired, but if He didn't He would not be qualified to be our high priest.
Hebrews 2:10For (Z)it was fitting for Him, (AA)for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to (AB)perfect the (AC)author of their salvation through sufferings. 11For both He who (AD)sanctifies and those who (AE)are sanctified are all (AF)from one Father; for which reason He is not ashamed to call them (AG)brethren, 14Therefore, since the children share in (AK)flesh and blood, (AL)He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that (AM)through death He might render powerless (AN)him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, 17Therefore, He had (AP)to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might (AQ)become a merciful and faithful (AR)high priest in (AS)things pertaining to God, to (AT)make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18For since He Himself was (AU)tempted in that which He has suffered, He is able to come to the aid of those who are tempted.
The Quran states that Christ never died, and that God exchanged Jesus for Judas on the cross. If that was the case, all the Gospels would be incorrect. One of my Quran threads talks about this issue.
The Quran also states that Mohammed was a perfect man. It also states that he was a sinner and needed to seek forgiveness. How can that be?
Gar: Zeal for the things of the Lord is not a sin. Besides, He didn't kill anyone or do anything against the commandments, did He?
02-22-07, 02:50 PM bik74
quote: Originally posted by VelvetVoice: The Quran states that Christ never died, and that God exchanged Jesus for Judas on the cross. If that was the case, all the Gospels would be incorrect. One of my Quran threads talks about this issue.
One small correction. Quran does not say that it was Judas that died on the cross. Gospel of Barnabas states that. Quran just says that Christ (peace be upon him) did not die on cross and was saved. How? Quran is silent on that.
02-22-07, 02:53 PM juanruiz
quote: He didn't kill anyone or do anything against the commandments, did He?
Who knows? The gospels are silent on nearly his whole life.
02-22-07, 03:14 PM bik74 Adding further the relevant verses here in Quran.
004.157 ..... but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:- 004.158 Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;- 004.159 And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him (or in this) before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them;- _______________________________________
conjecture an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation
That is what i believe people did after the crucifiction.
quote: The Quran also states that Mohammed was a perfect man. It also states that he was a sinner and needed to seek forgiveness. How can that be?
for my knowledge please do quote the relevant verses.
02-22-07, 04:02 PM bik74
quote: Originally posted by Bibleman: From The Perfection of Christ Jesus. Jesus was born as a perfect human—holy, sinless. (Luke 1:30-35)
Luke 1: 30-35 says this:
The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[c] the Son of God. 36Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. 37For nothing is impossible with God."
38"I am the Lord's servant," Mary answered. "May it be to me as you have said." Then the angel left her.
39At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40where she entered Zechariah's home and greeted Elizabeth.
I pasted the intl version above. I cant see where it says about sinless or a perfect human. Jesus (peace be upon him) was holy. That statement is acceptable and logical. Do we have any verses from the 4 gospels that talks about Jesus (peace be uon him) being sinless or perfect human ? (for my knowledge)
02-22-07, 04:29 PM GarColga
quote: Originally posted by VelvetVoice:
Gar: Zeal for the things of the Lord is not a sin. Besides, He didn't kill anyone or do anything against the commandments, did He?
According to "The Second Gospel Of The Infancy Of Jesus Christ", attributed to the Apostle Thomas, he violated the sabbath, maimed one of his playmates, killed another, and blinded some people.
02-22-07, 04:33 PM juanruiz
quote: Originally posted by GarColga:
quote: Originally posted by VelvetVoice:
Gar: Zeal for the things of the Lord is not a sin. Besides, He didn't kill anyone or do anything against the commandments, did He?
According to "The Second Gospel Of The Infancy Of Jesus Christ", attributed to the Apostle Thomas, he violated the sabbath, maimed one of his playmates, killed another, and blinded some people.
That's why it's not in the NT. Who wants a homicidal brat for a saviour?
02-22-07, 07:41 PM babthrower Maybe he had just discovered that the only thing that would satisfy his father's lust for blood and pain was his own death by torture. Wouldn't that tick you off, too?
02-23-07, 08:09 AM VelvetVoice I was reading an excerpt of this Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ. When was it written? How can we verify that Thomas knew Jesus in his childhood? The fact that he was doing miracles at a young age, you'd think the people around Him would have asked for healing.
I also stumbled on this website and came across some interesting stuff. I bookmarked this site and shall return to critique some of the readings. Again, I may not get to it for a while, since I still have half of the Quran to go through, and I received Sid's book Cutting Remarks, and I want to get to that soon.
From Problems with Evolution: 16. Expanding on the previous comment, how would evolution work with homosexuality? Darwin described that one of the main driving forces in evolution was the survival of the fittest. If evolution created people with homosexuality, that would cancel their natural ability to reproduce, and place them into one of Darwin's "doomed sub-species" category. Mainly all of Darwin's evolution principles do not mix with homosexuality, which presents a large problem for evolutionists.
02-23-07, 08:27 AM Bibleman
quote: Originally posted by bik74:
quote: Originally posted by Bibleman: From The Perfection of Christ Jesus. Jesus was born as a perfect human—holy, sinless. (Luke 1:30-35)
Luke 1: 30-35 says this:
The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[c] the Son of God. 36Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. 37For nothing is impossible with God."
38"I am the Lord's servant," Mary answered. "May it be to me as you have said." Then the angel left her.
39At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40where she entered Zechariah's home and greeted Elizabeth.
I pasted the intl version above. I cant see where it says about sinless or a perfect human. Jesus (peace be upon him) was holy. That statement is acceptable and logical. Do we have any verses from the 4 gospels that talks about Jesus (peace be uon him) being sinless or perfect human ? (for my knowledge)
In quoting me above you stopped short of a full quote as regards the Scritural citations. Immediately after the Luke citation was one for Hebrews 7:26, which in the NWT reads:
quote: For such a high priest as this was suitable for us, loyal, guileless, undefiled, separated from the sinners, and become higher than the heavens.
Hebrews 4:15 says he was "without sin." See also 1 Peter 2:22.
I cannot find a specific reference in the Gospel accounts.
02-23-07, 08:33 AM bik74
quote: Originally posted by Bibleman: In quoting me above you stopped short of a full quote as regards the Scritural citations. Immediately after the Luke citation was one for Hebrews 7:26
Apologies. I did see the other quote. I just wanted to stick with the 4 gospels. I will go through the other quotes as well, but a relevant verse from the 4 gospel would strengthen your argument. peace
02-23-07, 08:48 AM GarColga
quote: Originally posted by VelvetVoice: From Problems with Evolution: 16. Expanding on the previous comment, how would evolution work with homosexuality? Darwin described that one of the main driving forces in evolution was the survival of the fittest. If evolution created people with homosexuality, that would cancel their natural ability to reproduce, and place them into one of Darwin's "doomed sub-species" category. Mainly all of Darwin's evolution principles do not mix with homosexuality, which presents a large problem for evolutionists.
Actually it doesn't present a problem for "evolutionists"
1. There are several possible explanations for this: * Although homosexuality probably has a genetic component, much of its cause, perhaps most of it, appears to be nongenetic (Haynes 1995; Kendler et al. 2000; Kirk et al. 2000). To the extent it is not genetic, selection would not affect it. * Homosexuals still have children. Sexual orientation is not an either-or trait but exists as a continuum (Haynes 1995). Those with some heterosexual orientation can still contribute homosexual genes (to the extent it is genetic; see above). And even the most extreme homosexuals sometimes have children.
The most manifest heterosexuals may have homosexual tendencies, too. Homophobic male heterosexuals showed more arousal to homosexual images than did nonhomophobic heterosexuals (Adams et al. 1996). Societal condemnation of homosexuality may contribute to its genes being propagated by causing latent homosexuals to behave heterosexually. * Genes for homosexuality could be beneficial on the whole. In bonobo chimpanzees, homosexual interactions are a form of social cement. It is possible that homosexuality evolved to serve social functions in humans, too (Kirkpatrick 2000). After all, social cohesion is still a main function of sex in humans.
The genetic etiology of homosexuality may come from a collection of traits that, when expressed strongly and in concert, result in homosexuality; expressed less strongly or without supporting traits, these traits contribute to the robust nature of our species. The genes for these traits persist because they usually combine to make us better at survival and reproduction.
Genetic factors linked to homosexuality in men apparently boost fertility in women. Female relatives of gay men, on their mother's side of the family, had more children than female relatives of heterosexual men. (Corna et al. 2004)
It should be noted that the question of explaining homosexuality is not limited to humans. Homosexuality exists in hundreds of animal species (Bagemihl 1998).
quote: I was reading an excerpt of this Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ. When was it written? How can we verify that Thomas knew Jesus in his childhood? The fact that he was doing miracles at a young age, you'd think the people around Him would have asked for healing.
Scholars have dated the work to ca 150 CE. Its attribution to Thomas is simply reflective of a common practice: associate a work with the name of a known person. This is what happened with the gospels and a number of Paul's letters. Based on the number of editions and translations, it apparently was a very popular work. Perhaps of greatest interest is the way the author completely separates Jesus and his family from Judaism, as his profaning of the Sabbath at the very beginning exemplifies.
02-23-07, 09:22 AM babthrower Perfect Human? Homosexuality and other traits that don't give an immediate reproductive advantage (i.e. produce more offspring) for that organism can still persist in the gene pool if it is not absolutely detrimental. That is because mutations are random (not designed or planned). So a trait e.g. albinism that would make its bearer easy for a predator to spot against a dark background or at night may not be common, but it can persist. But stringent selection ('hard times') tends to weed these traits out.
The strong bond that form between troops in warfare may be one factor that make homosexuality tolerable for a species. The men really love each other when trust is established. If members of such a 'band of brothers' were to have a strong aversion to this emotion, he would fail to benefit from the altruism which results.
But in most men, it seems, the bond is potentially strong but there is not usually a sexual acting-out, or even sexual desire for the loved ones.
So the bond with the sexual component present could be a trait that is ambiguous: it does not encourage reproduction directly but tends to persist due to empathy.
If this theory is correct then there would be a higher rate of homosexuality within social species: e.g. more homosexual or bisexual wolves than cougars.
I have no idea if this (homosexuality or bisexuality more prevalent in social animals) actually occurs in nature.
02-23-07, 11:36 AM DorianGreyed "16. Expanding on the previous comment, how would evolution work with homosexuality? Darwin described that one of the main driving forces in evolution was the survival of the fittest. If evolution created people with homosexuality, that would cancel their natural ability to reproduce, and place them into one of Darwin's "doomed sub-species" category. Mainly all of Darwin's evolution principles do not mix with homosexuality, which presents a large problem for evolutionists."
Using the same line of "reasoning", it is easy to understand how homosexuality actually helps the survival of the species. By not reproducing, the small percentage of homosexuals in a tribe of primitive man helps to keep the size of the clan from getting too large, thus allowing more food per person during times of famine. At the same time, a homosexual, during times of famine, is not tempted to share food with his offspring, and thus, is more likely to survive the famine. Male homosexuals are also able to defend their family group better, since it is obvious that two men can fend off maurading dinosaurs better than one. (The hetero couple has only one male, and the female would have to guard the children in such a dinosaur attack.)
(It's amazing the conclusions you can arrive at it you just ignore logic when trying to prove your point.) ********** "And even the most extreme homosexuals sometimes have children."
What are "extreme homosexuals"? What makes them extreme? How are they different from "regular homosexuals"?
02-23-07, 12:36 PM babthrower To try and illustrate using an example less loaded with baggage, take the example of the celibate.
Celibates don't choose to have sex. Some have a low sex drive. Some have religious reasons. Some fear intimacy. There aren't a lot of statistics available,although the behavior is coming under study. But these people can be warm and quite normal in every respect but one: sex is not something they want to do.
They do not reproduce but they can benefit their group. And since in evolutionary times the group was composed of close relatives, their contribution to the group -- hunting, gathering, guarding the young, fighting off enemies -- in general, altruistic behavior would tend to increase the likelihood that their own genes would survive in the next generation, via their sisters and brothers who did do sex.
So, present in their group's gene pool is a tendency to be disinterested in sex. As long as it is only represented in some (and not all) of the offspring of those who do reproduce, the trait will persist.
02-23-07, 01:00 PM babthrower An example from nature of a non-reproducing member of a social animal species is the worker bee. Though infertile, she benefits the group and that helps the survival of its genes -- which are the same as her genes.
02-23-07, 01:08 PM dance girl
quote: Originally posted by babthrower: .
Celibates don't choose to have sex. Some have a low sex drive. Some have religious reasons. Some fear intimacy. There aren't a lot of statistics available,although the behavior is coming under study. But these people can be warm and quite normal in every respect but one: sex is not something they want to do.
Am I misunderstanding you here babs? Because the way I understood celibacy is that it is sometimes a choice, and at other times due to circumstances. Many people who choose to be celibate do in fact have sexual urges. Shouldn't people who have no interest in sex more properly be described as asexual?
02-23-07, 01:56 PM GarColga
quote: Originally posted by DorianGreyed: What are "extreme homosexuals"? What makes them extreme? How are they different from "regular homosexuals"?
You must live a sheltered life DG!
02-23-07, 02:00 PM babthrower The word comes from a word meaning 'unmarried', but it has come to mean people who choose not to have sex (as opposed to those who choose to have sex and either have it, or can't get any but want to.)
People can choose to be celibate for religious reasons. But having a low sex drive is a common reason. It just isn't worth the trouble. If you have a spouse, your spouse would usually feel that it was his/her fault for being insufficiently attractive. Yet people with low sex drives say that's not the case; they find them attractive, just not very often. So they find themselves in 'kissless marriages' because physical closeness becomes a tense situation: both partners feel uneasy because one may feel desire and the other not.
Unmarried ones avoid 'dates' because of the pressure to have intimacy turn to sex; if this causes anxiety, it affects performance in both sexes.
There are even social clubs for celibates so they can avoid the pressures of the meat-market.
Example
Some people with high sex drives may choose celibacy, too, because, again, physical closeness leads to tension with a normally-sexed spouse. As one woman said to me, about her marriage, "We can't be affectionate any more". Sad, isn't it?
02-23-07, 07:58 PM newnickname Homosexuality is not a problem for the theory of evolution. It's included in it.
The theory of evolution is based in part on the idea that every generation throws up haphazard variations, thnaks to glitches in and mixing of DNA. Of course, most of these variations have no effect, or are harmful, in terms of survival and reproduction. (As Babthrower points out, some of these variations can persist for a long time, re-occuring in different generations - it's tendency for the DNA blueprint to get wires crossed at that particular point.) Every so often, however, some of these chance variations turn out to be beneficial in terms of reproduction and therefore naturally spread throughout a species, changing it.
Homosexuality, and other "flaws" (in terms of reproduction or survival) such as Down's Syndrome, blindness or deafness are, however, a challenge for proponents of Intelligent Design to explain.
If there is an Intelligent Designer behind our DNA, then what was He, She or It playing at when designing in these problems? ID-ers have to fall back on that old "God moves in mysterious ways" cop out.
If you believe that there was divine intervention in our evolution, or even that we were all created five minutes ago by a miracle despite what seems to be evidence to the contrary, then fair enough. That's a belief that no one can really challenge - it's your belief.
But 'creation science' or 'intelligent design' doesn't propose that; it masquerades as science when it's really a politico-religious campaign.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
Posts: 7681 | Location: On Vacation | Registered: 06-06-02
Exodus 4:11 And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?
People with birth defects, Blind, deaf, etc, It was not a case of God not getting it right, It was a case of God building that into the System.
John 9:1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. 2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? 3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
God made mankind, He made many beautiful systems, which we do not really appreciate. The Gift of Sight is seldom seen for it’s real value, Till we see someone without it, or till we do not have it.
The Gift of hearing is wonderful, Those who play rap music in their cars will learn to appreciate this. Being able to hear your child cough in the Night is very important.
The Gift of sight was manifested (made obvious) by the man who was born blind, People could see the Value of the Gift of sight. And the gift of seeing colors, That also, The Ability of the eye to heal, Etc.
We seldom look close and consider how wonderful God made this Body, Seeing others with limited use, or almost no use at all has us look closer and thank God for making it as good as He can.
Mothers do not count those ten little toes and ten little fingers once. They count them over and over. From a Sperm, an egg and about nine months. And a beautiful Baby is born most of the time. The eye starts out on the side of the face then migrates to where it wants to be seen by the mother.
It is in seeing a three year old little girl, With her legs strapped to a pedestal. Oblong on the Bottom so by twisting her body, She can move around a little bit, and by using two wrist clamp crutches she can move forward by dragging the pedestal forward.
Things like God and love come to mind, Things like thanking God for healthy Children, Things like opening your heart to others. Things like your heart aching for her. God teaches us love. It is easy to ignore a healthy Child, But Sickness and handicapped Children, and adults manifest the works of God.
Most Prayers do not work. Nice to pray to God, She gets out of the straps, tosses away the Crutches, and runs and plays. Can you wait 22 years?
Prayers have a WHEN, and a THEN.
2-Chronicles7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
Isaiah 58:9 Then shalt thou call, and the LORD shall answer; thou shalt cry, and he shall say, Here I am . If thou take away from the midst of thee the yoke, the putting forth of the finger, and speaking vanity; THEN is 2029 A.D.
The day of the Cross is seen as times or as 2,000 years in Psalms 90:4 and Ecclesiastes 6:6. The Dividing or half a time is from the Cross in 29 A.D. till 2029 A.D.
The day as 4 time periods or as 1,000 years each, 29 A.D. to 2029 A.D. is the third and fourth Generation the Iniquity of the Father’s is poured out, or mankind does not have the relationship with God they want. That comes in when Israel sees Jesus is the Messiah in 2029 A.D. And most of Mankind will follow also.
Seen as the 4,000 cubit measurement in Ezekiel 47:8
Ezekiel 47:8 Then said he unto me, These waters issue out toward the east country, and go down into the desert, and go into the sea: which being brought forth into the sea, the waters shall be healed. 9 And it shall come to pass, that every thing that liveth, which moveth, whithersoever the rivers shall come, shall live: and there shall be a very great multitude of fish, because these waters shall come thither: for they shall be healed; and every thing shall live whither the river cometh. 10 And it shall come to pass, that the fishers shall stand upon it from Engedi even unto Eneglaim; they shall be a place to spread forth nets; their fish shall be according to their kinds, as the fish of the great sea, exceeding many. 11 But the miry places thereof and the marishes thereof shall not be healed; they shall be given to salt.
That River is living waters. The Word of God going thought out the land, a few holdouts so we do not put our Bibles away, and mankind or fishers of men, Do not have big enough nets. Nor big enough Churches or Temples. How does about five Billion believers in Christ sound? God will bring it about using Israel.
And the Meek shall inherit the earth.
Ken ************************************************************************ 05-05-07, 08:00 PM dance girl
quote: People with birth defects, Blind, deaf, etc, It was not a case of God not getting it right, It was a case of God building that into the System....
John 9:1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. 2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? 3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
God made mankind, He made many beautiful systems, which we do not really appreciate. The Gift of Sight is seldom seen for it’s real value, Till we see someone without it, or till we do not have it.
Why would I want to worship a god that intentionally includes suffering in another's life, just so that I can appreciate this gift of sight, or be able to hear, or be able-bodied? ************************************************************************ 05-05-07, 08:29 PM juanruiz The idea that people suffer due to the will of god, so that others may benefit from it, is absolutely without merit. This is the sort of rationalization believers have been proposing forever, as a means of explaining untold pain. Sorry, I have lost too many loved ones to believe there is any god involved. ************************************************************************ 05-06-07, 01:40 AM babthrower Nature's operation is impersonal. Mutations are random. The results for the mutated individual depends entirely upon its fitness for survival. Pain is a side effect -- it is a device to cause the organism to avoid a harmful stimulus; but it's not a perfect device. It can occur in cases where no avoidance behavior will help at all.
Still, pain works well enough that in most cases it assists an organism to survive long enough to reproduce. That's all that's important, in nature.
Some organisms are 'sports' - they change because of chaotic molecular behavior. This is not part of nature's 'plan'. Nature has no plan.
But you have to really, really utilize all the manipulative capability of language to explain your god's little predilections to pain. A baby conceived by a previously virgin couple, married in the church, can still be born:
-- with everted organs: the organs usually contained within the body cavity are developing outside of it. This condition may still allow a fetus to come to term; the mother's placenta supplies the individual tissues with oxygen and nutrients; but the baby cannot survive birth. A surgeon can't just stuff a lump of liver tissue into an incision in the newborn's peritoneum and expect it to start functioning normally; -- conjoined with its twin; -- having absorbed its twin, which died at some point, but some of whose organs became encapsulated within the body of the survivor; (Where is its soul????? Sometimes these oddities are not discovered during the lifetime of the 'host' twin. How can we baptize and Christianize the absorbed twin?) -- with no brain, just a spinal cord; yet it can survive until birth; in fact, it can survive beyond birth if oxygen and whole blood is continuously supplied, as it had been in the uterus; -- with no face, or with everted organs normally housed within the skull; -- with anachronism, or 'spider baby' syndrome -- with hydrocephalism, or the inability for the cranial cavity to excrete excess spinal fluid, so that the skull must become enormous in order to contain the fluid; in cases in which the skull does not expand sufficiently, the brain is compressed and the tissue dies, and decays, eventually causing death; -- spina bifida, in which the spine is open because the normal surrounding protective membrane simply doesn't develop;
and many other conditions that are quite natural, but horrifying to parents.
Some congenital problems are caused by 'parental sins', such as alcohol in either the father or the mother. But the vast majority are due to random factors.
__________________ Okay. I could give more examples, but this has been sufficient. Or I could broaden the subject to include other impersonal and random factors that cause human pain, misery and death, such as weather effects.
Well, we know how some of us explain it: the random actions of a clockwork universe; the consequences of chaotic factors in nature; and so forth.
But it is the way that theists explain it, also known as the 'justification of god to man', that I find the weirdest.
The parents sinned; and if it turns out that the parents were faithful to the observances their religion required, and lived moral lives, then it must have been ancestors, up to the fourth generation; because who knew what the ancestors were up to, especially in those illiterate or barely literate times?
The nation (the people) sinned. They didn't pay the priests enough animals to sacrifice; or unknown to them, they suffered a sodomite or a witch or an adulterer to live in their midst;
their god was just testing them, by dealing with them unfairly; which they must tolerate, uncomplaining, still making sacrifices and singing his praise, because their god is mighty and they are weak (also known as the 'might makes right" god-defense);
they followed the wrong god; they faithfully followed the god their loving parents taught them to adore and obey in order to save their souls; but the parents were wrong; so the children must suffer and be punished.
I like to think that I am a reasonably humane (empathetically evolved) person; so there is no contest as to which explanation for human suffering is more acceptable to me -- allowing me to retain my sanity.
If I see these sad occasions, among many others I haven't mentioned, as the result of random factors, I can preserve my sanity; it's sort of like accepting buying a losing lottery ticket;
but if I accepted that I must love and adore the creature who designed the system and consciously imposed these horrors on innocent people, I would be obliged to instantly go nuts. ************************************************************************ 05-06-07, 02:07 AM Ken1Burton Dance Girl.
I can not answer why YOU would want to, or not want to.
God has many lessons, and sometimes we need to be reminded a lot. So we see things a lot. God did not make mankind indestructible. We need to protect ourselves and those around us a lot, We do this knowing how easy it is to be hurt.
A lot of mankind believed born Blind was a punishment for what the parents did, or even for God knowing this person would be bad and punished in advance.
God claims credit for making the Blind and dumb. But it is also mankind who is responsible also. Many things hurt a child in the womb. Mankind has had to search out what many of those things are.
The more we know of Birth Defects, the more we know of sickness, the more we are able to deal with it. The more we can prevent it. We need sickness to keep healthy. Our Bodies have to fight disease. Even AIDS has us looking very close and getting us to understand the Immunity System, and how it works.
God wants us to learn, So we can learn to dance, or learn why the Toddler pokes at his ear after eating pizza? Or learn how to deal with a Child born blind.
A Child is a gift from God, One healthy, one deaf, one blind. God does a lot of things for reasons we do not understand. Good thing He does.
Juanruiz.
You think you have lost loved ones? I think any departed loved ones got Home before I did. But I guess that is in the eye of the Beholder, and in things which we can not see physically.
I knew one woman who was quite advanced in MS. She could just swallow, She had no ability to turn her head, and it bothered her, Not the MS, Her Daughter not knowing God is what bothered her.
Her two sisters can to see her. One was from out of state, the other I knew from her daughter going with my brother. The one who did not see her very much was crying, and asking people to pray for her sister.
I asked her why? Her sister had no problem with her MS, But the Daughter not knowing God is what bothered her sister every day. The Daughter came to know God, Her Mother also was transported to see her only Daughter married, Later her daughter was to have a Child, and told her Mother. She died before the Child was born.
She died very happy, Very content.
God gives us many reasons not to believe in Him. Maybe far more then to believe. Maybe the way a loving God justifies those who do not believe. I assume you would not blame God for a lost loved one, unless you believed He is able to have prevented it?
We all have to cross over. Death waits for us from the Moment of Conception. If we can pass over without a lot of pain and suffering, That is nice. God takes the Young, the old, the sick and the healthy. But the day will come, He takes us. Every day God takes home about 200,000.Some days He sends a Cyclone and takes home a million.
Many see Death as terrible. God sees it as you are here, or there. And If God has something for you to do here tomorrow, You will not be going there today.
We are in this for the Duration. And God will still be in Charge no matter how much we want Him replaced. We can fight Him, Or accept Him. We can not remove Him.
When God takes someone Home, We all get to go forward one step. And who knows how close to the door we are. One Woman opened the door and died in the doorway, She thought her apartment was on the other side of the Door, Heaven was.
God’s love is more then sufficient for all the hate we can muster. He does not stop loving us. And those who have gone to Him are alive and well. But we have to wait till it is our turn to see this physically. Now we can trust or fret. But we can not have our way.
Ken ************************************************************************ 05-06-07, 02:27 AM Ken1Burton Babthrower
You do not have to love or adore God, That is a freewill thing, Either way, that has no effect on God’s love to you, or your salvation which was established by grace before you were conceived.
But if you do decide to go nuts: Consider a Coconut, It has milk, It has Meat, and it is a very hard Nut to crack.
Song of Solomon 6:11 I went down into the garden of nuts to see the fruits of the valley, and to see whether the vine flourished, and the pomegranates budded.
Ken ************************************************************************ 05-06-07, 08:09 AM juanruiz
quote: I assume you would not blame God for a lost loved one
Why would I blame something in which I don't believe? Loved ones die for many reasons: unhealthy life style, lousy genetic material, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or just that they lived out their life. I don't believe some imagined supernatural force, portrayed as a Bronze Age tribal chief, has anything to do with it. ************************************************************************ 05-06-07, 08:44 AM babthrower Ken, I like your 'coconut' saying. It sounds like something from 'The Little Book of Calm'. Smile
Your belief system is very strong, so you must need it. Some people cannot look at the human condition straight on; it would fill them with despair. Others accept the bad stuff and cherish the good stuff, just as theists do.
So it is better to say 'god is good, and must have wise but secret reasons for all he or she or they do, way beyond what we can understand; so god is good to send us all this evil and pain; god is good no matter what.
At this point it is always a good idea to insert some self-loathing: "Who am I, blind as an earthworm, dumb as a clod of dirt, sinful and filthy and corrupt to the core, to judge the goodness and wisdom of the god(s)?
"If god told me to throw my newborn into the fire I would do it because god is good and so there must be some righteous reason for the command."
So what is wrong with a 'constructed' belief like that, if it seems to comfort so many? Well, like political totalitarianism, it causes people to act in a way contrary to their own best interests. And if the 'believers' have sufficient numbers in a democracy, the value system they impose on the rest of us is harmful.
And people do such things, because they have so surrendered their judgment to the denial of evil that they have lost all sense of it.
The writer Orwell called this 'doublethink', as he described a dystopia in the future in which everyone was brainwashed to believe that "War Is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength."
But Orwell didn't invent those concepts. He just invented the words to describe them. The methods of totalitarianism, political groupthink, and organized religion are in essence the same. ************************************************************************ 05-06-07, 10:31 AM dance girl Originally posted by Ken1Burton:
quote: The more we know of Birth Defects, the more we know of sickness, the more we are able to deal with it. The more we can prevent it. We need sickness to keep healthy. Our Bodies have to fight disease. Even AIDS has us looking very close and getting us to understand the Immunity System, and how it works.
I don't think you answered my question at all Ken. If anything, you made me more certain that I want nothing to do with a god that supposedly creates imperfection in another human being just so that I, with my inquiring mind, can wonder how science can correct it. What a sick and twisted game your imaginary friend plays.
Don't you see that imperfection is in most cases the luck of the draw. One accepts it, and moves forward. It has nothing to do with some perfect and omnipotent being.
As I see so often on this forum, you are yet another believer that urges us to accept god without questioning the rationality for what has been created. ************************************************************************ 05-06-07, 11:09 AM juanruiz
quote: As I see so often on this forum, you are yet another believer that urges us to accept god without questioning the rationality for what has been created.
This seems to be characteristic of religionists. Ken gives us a plethora of Bible verses to validate his 2029 eschatology scenario. Jack Van Impe does the same and arrives at 2017. Hal Linseed gave us 1988, and then subsequent years.
There are some very intelligent people here: VV, B-man, Doña Diana, bik. Yet they all seem to check that intelligence at the door when it comes to religion. Is an afterlife that important? ************************************************************************ 05-06-07, 03:32 PM frankvan There has to be something other than intelligence or lack thereof to account for religious belief. How is it that otherwise intelligent people can reason that because we are here, the visible world exists, there had to be a cause. If we don't know what caused the universe to exist, a centuries old belief, (or hodge podge of beliefs) in some omnipotent god or gods must have created it. The obvious flaw in that line of reasoning is, to me, that it doesn't answer anything. What caused god? And if he/she/they always existed, why couldn't the universe and everything in it have just as logically always existed? Confining our inquiry to what is observable and testable in the world we note that we can neither create nor destroy any smallest part of it, only change its form: solid to liquid to gas to energy, in both directions. Am I too easily satisfied? Confused ************************************************************************ 05-06-07, 04:44 PM babthrower Frank wants to know, "Am I too easily satisfied?"
Only if you aspire to becoming an ontologically anxious joiner of a like-minded cluster, and spend many hours of your life trying to wrap your mind around paradoxes that make sub-atomic physics seem like playing with kiddie-blocks. Instead of playing out-of-doors and making love and reading really good books. ************************************************************************ 05-06-07, 10:24 PM KaelSaxen
quote: Originally posted by Ken1Burton: The day of the Cross is seen as times or as 2,000 years in Psalms 90:4 and Ecclesiastes 6:6. The Dividing or half a time is from the Cross in 29 A.D. till 2029 A.D. Ken
After reading this entire post, I know for sure that you can add a lot better than I can. However, I see a few discrepancies. One of which, I will inquire about. How does your statement there, contend with the following:
Matthew 24:44 "So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him." (NIV) ************************************************************************ 05-07-07, 09:19 AM babthrower Ken, you and all other scriptural interpreters have a problem to overcome in your analysis. Remember Matthew 24:
"36"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,[f] but only the Father."
You have said this was correct then, but since that time Jehovah has decided to reveal it -- to you. And to many others he has revealed different dates. You justify your date with some complicated word-busting; others do the same.
But here is the problem. Why would Jehovah reveal it now? What was wrong with his original plan, in which he would not reveal it even to the apostles, the founders of Jesus' religion?
The only reason I can think of is that it's some kind of confidence-trick on Jehovah's part. He didn't want to reveal it in Jesus' time because it would have dampened the zeal of the apostles and converts to the early church to know that it would be two thousand years before all the wonders would come to pass.
Of course it's more likely that all you interpreters are just making it up, to get attention from the credulous.
But say it's true. What was it he needed from humans for all those ages? Did he have some sort of compulsion to watch people killing each other in huge numbers and in horrible ways over precisely who had the real, true version of the facts?
This would be the thought and action of a very, very sick individual. A compassionate Jehovah would not play favorites and give only a minute fraction of humanity the truth.
A perfect, strong and independent Jehovah would not crave the adulation of his own little creatures that he chose to make very imperfect.
A just Jehovah would not select a few to live eternally and torture all the rest eternally just on a whim. A mere human, who kept animals, and took a few selected at random and put them in a green pasture beside still water, and then proceeded to torture all the rest horribly, hoping that they could live eternally so that their torture would never end, would be caught and slapped in prison right smartish in any just state in the human world.
But you and your likes, the prophets and the preachers, expect us to love and to worship this sicko? Mad
Build a better god. Then we will come. ************************************************************************ 05-07-07, 03:10 PM aminator2002 A perfect human would have brought peace in his time.
My opinion - everyone is perfectly human. ************************************************************************ 05-07-07, 04:42 PM Ken1Burton Juanruiz
Do you go to a web site for the tooth fairy to tell them there, The Tooth Fairy does not exist? Why would anyone spend a lot of time telling others that God does not exist? For if God did not exist, The life we have is it.
I know a lot of people like to aggravate others, and it might be a nice pastime for them. But God said all would know Him, God did not say all would admit to knowing Him. P.T. Barnum, “You can fool some of the People.” Etc.
I think God sees you as a Believer, Maybe a disgruntled one, But a believer. So fight on.
Babthrower
I don’t know if I need my belief system, I have it, and I like having it. The Coconut came from “agree with thy adversaries early.” and being called a nut in the chat rooms. I think Jesus spoke a little book of Calm at the Sermon on the Mount.
Most of us have to deal with Children, and they do not see us very nice most of the time that is going on, Later in life, hopefully they look back, Mainly when they are going through the same problems with their children.
God is good, But He has to deal with mankind also. You can be both mean and good. Sometimes for the Good of the Child, the Good of the parent has to be set aside.
With the assumption God is in Control, And God is responsible, “He has His reasons” seems to be a logical conclusion.
I find it kind of hard to believe, With mankind having the power to destroy this world many times over during the last fifty years, and the Hatred between Countries. That if there were no God, that it would not have already happened. I believe someone constrains us.
If God tells YOU to throw your newborn into the Fire, Remind Him of freewill, And that all tests, do not end up with a passing grade.
Christianity does have people act in a way that is not in their best interest. It is a way that is in the best interest of all mankind. Unless you were to consider the well being of the Person. Most who have come to accept Christ, Freely, not feeling a have to be in Christ, Most would not change.
Many see a loving God, In Christ or not, Saved by Grace, So there is no Heavenly incentive to believe, We get all the rewards as Jesus rendered to man His righteousness. What harm we do to our own interests we do out of interest of being a better person for it. To grow. To do that which we would not do if lead by self interests.
The Value interest you speak of as harmful. TOO BAD. Many governments have Value interests. They also have what is called Classes of people because of those value interests. Those who have rights, Those who have no rights, If Christianity in a Country seems too much to bear, I think China has more Value interests, Just hope you are in the right group.
We have a world with many different Countries, Many different cultures and religions, Now, I seem to see that PROTESTant Christianity seems to be the best Countries to live in, to grow in, to have freedoms and rights in.
The way you seem to be speaking here, Those who are Atheist Countries should be the Best with such great Value interests they have. What you are speaking of exists, We can see them, We can see what NO GOD does to self interests.
A Basic Christianity ideals Government allows others to have their Religion, It is not forced as some religions do. And if you were speaking of Christianity forcing values on people, Is it Actually forced by law? And enforced under that law?
Adultery is against the law in a lot of Countries, But not enforced. Unless the religion is not Christian, Then you might have a big problem. And they have the Solution.
Dance Girl.
You want a world with no sickness or pain. No suffering, and you will not accept there being a God if He designed a world with those things.
Our World is kind of like the Roach Motel, Once we check in, we are stuck here. Healthy, Sick, Handicapped. Loved, Alone, Hated. Rich, Poor, Persecuted.
Where there is medication, Where there are caring people, or where it exists only for those who can afford it.
If God exists He is not going away because you do not want or like Him, and If God exists He is still the same no matter what words or concepts I attribute to Him, Correct or wrong.
And if God does not exist, we are still in the Roach Motel.
I did not say or imply that God deals differently physically with a believer or unbeliever, I also do not urge anyone to accept God, I tell people of God, What He is like, How He put the Scriptures together to show He does exist, and that Jesus is whom He sent.
I know we do not need to believe in God, or accept God, or do this, or do that, His love has saved all mankind, has forgiven all mankind, Has placed on all mankind the righteousness of Christ,
Christ or hell was one Man’s Choice, and Jesus chose hell that we might all live, and He could get into hell by dying a sinner, and be there the third day to take them all out and fulfill Scripture.
Most people do not reject God, they reject what their own eyes see as the Package of God. What you have to do, How He will respond if you do this or if you refuse to do that. Etc.
Now many people make those packages up. And a lot of it is Made up. Very little of those packages are true, You can hate God. No problem. His grace is more then sufficient. Like a Baby spitting up on you, God does not take offence, He sees us angry, and does not at all mind if we vent that anger at Him.
Question all the rationality you want. Sometimes He answers those questions, Sometimes those answers are years in coming.
Juanruiz.
More a characteristic of the relationship between a Christian and Christ. Doing that which He asked us to do, Share the Gospel, Speak in light, that which He has shown us in Darkness.
You are in here also sharing what you believe. Do not many who do not believe, urge believers to give it up? Sure you do. Would this help to support some of the non-believers, and strengthen them? Or do people get points for turning away a believer from God?
For those who have been in the Chat rooms before Y2K for the year we call 2,000 A.D. They would know I said it was not a Second Coming, or end of the World, That is was really 4 years off, and that 2,000 years after Bethlehem with Jesus in a manger, was in 1996.
Now some of the others who were mentioned did preach Y2K. They are ESTABLISHED as False Prophets. Those who preached 1988 (40 years after Israel became a Country) or “This Generation” Also have been ESTABLISHED as False Prophets, It is not a case of keep tying till you get it right. It is one wrong prophecy and you are OUT.
Because people still listen to them, or did not mark their words, That is their problem. I still go with 2029 A.D. and that is Israel seeing Jesus is the Messiah, Not a second Physical Coming, not a end of the World.
We all have afterlife, if it is important or not, all of us with the Righteousness of Christ on us. Some people will be bothered at the Broken down Gate of Heaven, Those out of hell are there speaking of the love and Mercy of God to those who did not want any part of God. They are the ones seen in the Book of Revelation as had come out of great tribulation.
Hell was only a place sleep till Jesus died for sins. Then they had to wait till the third day to be raised up.
Frankvan.
We do not know if God always existed or not. God might have evolved, A Spirit could be some form of Energy Creature, not needing to be fed, or have a digestive tract, or needing to reproduce.
But life as we know it has to not only live, It has death coming right away of all those other systems needing to be existing have not evolved in the moments before death knocks at the simple life form’s door.
If God evolved, then Created life as we know it, of if God always existed (would be strange) and created life as we know it, Either way, Life as we have it on earth needs a Creator.
The Beginning of life, has to be answered with life beginning. Like the dumb answer that life was brought here from another planet by UFO’s, That only moved the question to where their life began, Not an answer to it. Just extending how long it could have had extra for life to come into existence.
KaelSaxen.
Matthew Chapter 24 is speaking of end times, and that is for the day of the Cross, That is the Hour no man knoweth.
Jesus sets alone as a Sparrow on the Housetop on the Cross, So let Him on the housetop not come down, The Sepulchre is in a Garden or a field, So let Him in the Field not return to take up his Clothes, Jesus only has the Linen Sheet and the Napkin.
Jesus dies and go into hell, He is DEAD, a Carcase:
Matthew 24:28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
Isaiah 26:19 Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.
There is the Carcase, Seeing Jesus in hell. As the Earth cast out her dead. Jesus had the power to take up His life, He could not use it, He has to WAIT ON THE LORD, as He has to be there the third day when they are raised up to fulfill the Scripture.
Hosea 6:2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.
Isaiah 40:31 But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.
There is the Carcase, There are them mounting up as Eagles, The Day of the Cross seen as 3 pictures, they will be seen as Locust in Revelation.
The first picture is as 4 6-hour periods seen as 4 beasts with 6-wings, also all the first 4 seals, angels soundings, Trumpets, Etc.
Sunset to Midnight is Old Heaven, Midnight to Sunrise is Old Earth, Heaven and earth flee from his Face, seen as the Face of a Man on the third beast with 6-wings which is New earth, Noon to sunset is New Heaven.
Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
All prophecies, every jot and tittle fulfilled the day of the Cross, All of Daniel’s 70 weeks is for the day of the Cross, all fulfilled, For the Overspreading of Abominations is all future sins placed on Christ, He shall make it desolate, or Jesus had to die.
John 19:28 After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.
Jesus had to drink of the Fruit of the Vine (VINEgar) new with them in the Father’s Kingdom, Which is now is, and allow himself to die.
John 19:29 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. 30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
Remember the first time Jesus tasted of the VINEgar, He would not drink it.
Babthrower.
I just deal with that concept, End times was the day of the Cross, and the BEGINNING is also the day of the Cross. Jesus is the Ending and the Beginning, in that order. And the last shall be first, and the First shall be last.
You know when Pearl Harbor was attacked? Because you are seeing it AFTER?? I am seeing Matthew 24's end times AFTER the EVENTS. Jesus was speaking of people not knowing, BEFORE the events.
2029 has nothing to do with the End times Jesus said “No man knoweth the Hour.” He did not say no one knows when Israel will see He is the Messiah, But that it was not given to the Disciples (which were all Jewish) then to know when God would restore the Kingdom to Israel.
As far as why would God reveal it now. God does nothing without showing it first. God showed what would happen the day of the Cross over and over, Now God is showing what will be happening with the Jewish nation. That is 22 years away, 14 years from the Searching to start destroying the Arguments against Jesus not being the Messiah.
Christianity does not see Jesus clearly, Israel will, Christianity is getting a Chance to see, If they will look and check it out fine, If not, I guess they can not complain if they hardened their hearts and looked not. Either way, They are being told.
Yes, I think telling them the Jewish nation had a 2,000 year blindfold on, Would not have made them too happy, Like preaching Jesus coming again in 4007 to Christianity, But Jesus said He was not coming again Physically in John 14:19, So I do not preach a Second physical coming after Golgotha.
Making it up to get attention, I had enough of Attention in the Service. Those who make things up, Do not have them too far in the Future, Maybe one, two years at the most, They want to scare you NOW, And pass the Collection plate so you buy your salvation.
2029 A.D.? I doubt very very much, I will be watching that from earth, And it is so far in the Future for a forecast, That it is not beneficial to me, Not worth attention, Not scary, too far in the Future to cause more then a ripple in theology.
I have been preaching of 2029 A.D. for over 20 years, and it has not gotten too much attention yet, Like Stammering lips, over and over.
Your view of God is not what I see. He has saved all mankind, All have eternal life, which is length of days, and all will come to have Eternal life which is Knowing the One True God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent.
You want a God who has most of mankind going to hell to suffer for eternity, Go to most of the Churches, They preach Him every day. And many online preach Him. But no such God exists, and Scripture really shows no such God. The Old Testament prophecies are what had to be fulfilled to the Jot and Tittle. Not what Peter, or Paul said.
God sent out a Gospel message of caring for one another, Lots of people accepted and did, many changed the message to benefit themselves. Lots of Countries have become better for the Message. But many people use the message to control, and as a stick against others who will not fall in line behind them.
There is no need to build a better God, For it is a case of Seeing God better.
Ken ************************************************************************ 05-07-07, 05:09 PM clarebear
quote: A lot of mankind believed born Blind was a punishment for what the parents did, or even for God knowing this person would be bad and punished in advance.
God claims credit for making the Blind and dumb. But it is also mankind who is responsible also. Many things hurt a child in the womb. Mankind has had to search out what many of those things are.
If this is true then why doesn't God make all the child molestors blind? If God is all knowing and knows that a person is a child molestor then why would he allow it to happen? Hey Rocky, watch me pull some free will out of my hat! So it is God's will for a little child to be molested? He can't prevent that? Can he prevent it but he chooses not to? So, that is part of the grand plan? God knows about it and does nothing to stop it. Ooo... time to get a new hat. ************************************************************************ 05-07-07, 06:04 PM Ken1Burton Clarebear.
You want God to make all the child molesters blind, Not a great idea, A Blind molester would still be a molester. Neuter would be better. Wait, A man cheated on his wife, She has things she wants done to unfaithful husbands, A man was mugged, He wants muggers shot dead.
And on and on we go, and in the end, I guess most of the babies get to starve as most of the parents are dead.
John 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. 8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 9 And they which heard it , being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
I assume the “Go and sin no more” was more of telling her they would get her the next time they caught her, So you better stop.
Jesus went to Golgotha with all the future sins of mankind on Himself. They were paid for by the death of Christ, They were as if Jesus had done each and every one of them Himself.
Jesus rendered to man His righteousness in Job 33:26 which was from the Cross, So God knows this, That molester is Innocent in His eyes. He had already got the person who hurt the Child. And He killed Him at Calvary.
Ken ************************************************************************ 05-07-07, 06:27 PM clarebear
quote: You want God to make all the child molesters blind, Not a great idea, A Blind molester would still be a molester.
You think it is a bad idea? Do you really think that a blind person could have an easy time molesting someone? How exactly would that be?
You didn't answer my questions. I don't need bible quotes. For every quote you post, I can post an equally opposite one. It is all a matter of interpretation. I would like to hear a real answer of your own and not one you must read from a book. Please put your bible down and answer my question.
You stated that
quote: A lot of mankind believed born Blind was a punishment for what the parents did, or even for God knowing this person would be bad and punished in advance.
God claims credit for making the Blind and dumb. But it is also mankind who is responsible also. Many things hurt a child in the womb. Mankind has had to search out what many of those things are.
Question 1: Based on your comment, then why doesn't God make all the child molestors blind?
Question 2: If God is all knowing and knows that a person is a child molestor then why would he allow it to happen?
Question 3: So it is God's will for a little child to be molested?
Question 4: He can't prevent that?
Question 5: Can he prevent it but he chooses not to?
Question 6: If God knows about it and does nothing to stop it, is that part of the grand plan? How does this make sense to you?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
Posts: 466 | Location: Ilion NY | Registered: 04-18-07
Matthew Chapter 24 is speaking of end times, and that is for the day of the Cross, That is the Hour no man knoweth.
Ken
Correct my tired eyes if I read you wrong, but you seem to be stating that Matt. 24:44 applies only to the time that Christ died on the Cross?
People have been trying to predict the return of Christ since He told us that He would return. Just a few dates "predicted":
1897 "Our Lord, the appointed King, is now present, since October 1874," Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 4, page 621.
1899 "...the ‘battle of the great day of God Almighty' (Revelation 16:14), which will end in A.D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of earth's present rulership, is already commenced." The Time Is at Hand, page 101 (1908 edition).
1916 "The Bible chronology herein presented shows that the six great 1000 year days beginning with Adam are ended, and that the great 7th Day, the 1000 years of Christ's Reign, began in 1873." The Time Is at Hand, page ii, (forward).
1918 "Therefore we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old, particularly those named by the Apostle in Hebrews 11, to the condition of human perfection." Millions Now Living Will Never Die, page 89.
1922 "The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures than 1914." The Watchtower 9/1/22, page 262.
1923 "Our thought is, that 1925 is definitely settled by the Scriptures. As to Noah, the Christian now has much more upon which to base his faith than Noah had upon which to base his faith in a coming deluge." The Watchtower, page 106 4/1/23.
1925 "The year 1925 is here. With great expectation Christians have looked forward to this year. Many have confidently expected that all members of the body of Christ will be changed to heavenly glory during this year. This may be accomplished. It may not be. In his own due time God will accomplish his purposes concerning his people. Christians should not be so deeply concerned about what may transpire this year." The Watchtower, 1/1/25, page. 3.
1925 "It is to be expected that Satan will try to inject into the minds of the consecrated, the thought that 1925 should see an end to the work." The Watchtower, Sept, 1925 page 262.
1926 "Some anticipated that the work would end in 1925, but the Lord did not state so. The difficulty was that the friends inflated their imaginations beyond reason; and that when their imaginations burst asunder, they were inclined to throw away everything." The Watchtower, page 232.
1931 "There was a measure of disappointment on the part of Jehovah's faithful ones on earth concerning the years 1917, 1918, and 1925, which disappointment lasted for a time...and they also learned to quit fixing dates." Vindication, page 338.
1941 "Receiving the gift, the marching children clasped it to them, not a toy or plaything for idle pleasure, but the Lord's provided instrument for most effective work in the remaining months before Armageddon." The Watchtower, 9/15/41, page 288.
1968 "True, there have been those in times past who predicted an ‘end to the world', even announcing a specific date. Yet nothing happened. The ‘end' did not come. They were guilty of false prophesying. Why? What was missing?.. Missing from such people were God's truths and evidence that he was using and guiding them." Awake, 10/8/68.
1968 "Why are you looking forward to 1975?" The Watchtower, 8/15/68, page 494.
The Bible quotes were the answer. God does not see the person as guilty. God does not see the sin of the molester. That is why God does not make what you see as a molester blind. That is why God does not deal with what we see as sin today.
The only exception would be if the person themselves asked God to correct them. Then God may out of love, Help the person. Not dealing with it as a sin, or a way to be forgiven, that has been dealt with. But helping to make the person at peace with themselves.
I do not have police records, I assume there are a lot of blind child molesters. Where you see blinding them would prevent them, Only if they believed God did it as a punishment, and it scared them out of it. A lot of blind people function quite well without their eyesight.
Post the equally opposite Bible quote. Then we can deal with what the context is. I do not put the Bible down, I go by it. Not very well sometimes, But by what I see it as saying.
You want the law to be in existence and it is not. Grace is. The law has been fulfilled. Future sins were paid for in full at Golgotha. The law required you to be put to death for your speech. You speak against God. Do you really want the law? But I do not see you seeing that.
You see others. The law was to be applied to all. Even a man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath was put to death. Most of mankind would be dead because of this law. The sin most of us see as terrible, is not dealt with by God making molesters blind. They seem to be blind already. They seem to be sick already. But they are under grace, Like it or not.
The law dealt with what to do with sinners, Christianity dealt more with how we should love and pray for them. He did not say we would be able to overcome our hatred for them, He said to try.
You want to see God as guilty for not stopping it. See it that way. Be angry with Him, He can take it. I assume many child molesters are angry with Him also. Some may even love God. But they are still humans saved by grace.
If God can not see them as sinners, He would not act as if they were sinners. Many may see God as going to throw them in hell, So they do this just to get even before that happens. Their way of fighting God.
The Grand Plan is them seeing what loving one another is about. God allows a person to go as far away from that as they want. The grand plan is when they see and change. Many do not do this till they die, Then they will see and change.
Ken **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 01:32 AM Ken1Burton KaelSaxen
I use the King James version of the Bible. So the different Books, Chapters, and verses can link to the concepts or references.
Matthew Chapter 24 is referring to the day of the Cross, Which started at Sunset as the Last Supper began, and ended at sunset just after Jesus was placed in the Sepulchre.
What mankind sees as the Second and third physical days were fulfilled the day of the Cross, They are future similitudes for what was already fulfilled, He had taken sins, or was Spiritually dead, Then He was resurrected from the dead, “With His Stripes we are healed.” or now as spiritually alive.
You said: [People have been trying to predict the return of Christ since He told us that He would return. Just a few dates "predicted”:]
If you are referring to Jesus saying He would return BEFORE He died at Golgotha, He did when He was resurrected on Easter morning, But where do you see another physical second coming as Paul spoke of? Paul believed Jesus would come again in His lifetime, Paul was wrong. He must not have read John 14:19
John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
The kingdom cometh not with observation, God and Jesus come and make their abode with us, The Kingdom is within us.
What these “Studies in Scriptures.” are? I do not know. Or of what denomination, they may have taken these concepts from? Many books have been written on Scripture. Many dates given, Most have been seen as wrong. That just established them as false prophets. Many believe you keep guessing till you get it right, That is not how that works. The first one seen as false established God is not speaking through them.
God blinded the Disciples from seeing what was fulfilled, Even Jesus Himself was sealed by the Father.
Isaiah 29:10 For the LORD hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered. 11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed: 12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.
When Jesus returned from praying in the Garden that spirit of deep sleep was poured upon them, Jesus might not have see that, But the words Jesus spoke, God gave Him, and God knew what the words meant:
Matthew 26:45 Then cometh he to his disciples, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. 46 Rise, let us be going: behold, he is at hand that doth betray me.
A Very short nap? No, about 2,000 years of nap from seeing all the prophecies were fulfilled the day of the Cross, Even Isaiah 29:10/12.
Many of the dates you listed are repeated false prophecies from the same people or group of people, Like I said, One wrong, you are seen as a false prophet. Why people would continue to listen to their prophecies? Must be Gullible.
Jehovah Witnesses and the Watchtower they put out, have been wrong a lot. They dated the Rapture for 1987. Seventy years after 1917 when they said Jesus began His 1,000 year reign in Heaven, 1917 might have looked like the Great Tribulation began as World War one started, But looking back, It does not appear that way now.
There is a reason for searching the Scriptures of these things be true. Like the Blind leading the Blind.
Truth is truth no matter if one sees it, or a billion. And a billion claiming what is truth does not change if it is, or if it is not.
Ken **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 08:03 AM juanruiz
quote: Paul was wrong. He must not have read John 14:19
You're kidding, right? That's like saying Shakespeare must not have read Dickens. **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 08:19 AM babthrower Ken, your practical wisdom is sadly lacking. You said:
quote: Where you see blinding them would prevent them, Only if they believed God did it as a punishment, and it scared them out of it.
The mind boggles. Suppose you feared a very evil man, and got an e-mail from him that said:
"I am coming to hunt you and kill you."
Now, of course you would pray to Jehovah to protect you. Good luck on that one. But (and I want you to be honest, now) would you rather it be (a) from a blind man, or (b) from a man with all his physical abilities fully functioning? In which case would your odds of escaping him be better?
quote: God does not see the sin of the molester. That is why God does not make what you see as a molester blind. That is why God does not deal with what we see as sin today.
Ken, Ken, Ken. You're just making this up as you go along, aren't you? You're like a secretary in some CEO's office that keeps telling the customer who's complaining about a defective product that the Big Guy is not responsible for defects; and besides, he's out of town on business; and besides, he's in a very important meeting with very important people and can't be disturbed, etc etc.
What about the little sparrow falling? What about the millstone around the neck warning? **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 10:54 AM dance girl Originally posted by Ken1Burton:
quote: Dance Girl.
You want a world with no sickness or pain. No suffering, and you will not accept there being a God if He designed a world with those things.
Our World is kind of like the Roach Motel, Once we check in, we are stuck here. Healthy, Sick, Handicapped. Loved, Alone, Hated. Rich, Poor, Persecuted.
Where there is medication, Where there are caring people, or where it exists only for those who can afford it.
If God exists He is not going away because you do not want or like Him, and If God exists He is still the same no matter what words or concepts I attribute to Him, Correct or wrong.
And if God does not exist, we are still in the Roach Motel.
Of course I'd like a world without human suffering. That's not the reality of the world we live in though, and through quirks of nature, and our own self destructive behaviour, we are faced with an imperfect world.
But I think we go on, and we try to make our lives, and the lives of others better. We look to the advancements of science to cure disease. We don't pray for miracles from some god, that supposedly created the imperfection in the first place. We have no need to look to some heavenly being for guidance, because no such thing exists. Your explanations are full of rhetoric, and are, for the most part, negative.
I do not see our existence in this world as being comparable to living in some "roach motel". I see life as being, for the most part, full of meaning and happiness. Only someone that is dissatisfied with their life, and has the false hope of an afterlife, would have used such a ridiculous analogy.
This is it Ken. All that we have to look forward to is here and now, for as long as we are able to draw breath. Enjoy it, because there is nothing else. **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 11:04 AM juanruiz "This is it Ken. All that we have to look forward to is here and now, for as long as we are able to draw breath. Enjoy it, because there is nothing else."
It is the dissatisfaction believers have with this scenario that forms the basis of their faith. I am now reminded of the Peggy Lee song "Is That All There Is?"
On a side note, it seems unbelievers are now in the majority here, what with the apparent sabbatical of VV, Aire, DD, Mike, and others. Whodda thunk it? **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 11:09 AM dance girl
quote: Originally posted by juanruiz: I am now reminded of the Peggy Lee song "Is That All There Is?"
Wow, are you ever showing your age now. Just dont suggest to Clare that she uses this as her first dance song. **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 11:13 AM juanruiz
quote: Just dont suggest to Clare that she uses this as her first dance song.
I was going to suggest "The Teddybear Picnic" or "Waltzing With Bears." **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 11:21 AM babthrower Or another old favorite of computer buffs, "Waltzing my ~"
Juan! Get your mind out of the gutter! That's a clean joke!
No, Ken, it's a beautiful and amazing motel, full of such a variety of weird and charming creatures that in a hundred lifetimes I could not explore them all. Mind you, the human animal is not the species I most admire.
But the delusions of religions cause a lot of trouble and pain. And religions are readily enlisted into the service of some pretty nasty people, both theists and non-theists. **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 12:52 PM juanruiz
quote: Juan! Get your mind out of the gutter! That's a clean joke!
All I know are clean jokes...well mainly...well one or two. "No nurse I said..." "Sheep lie!" Well, you know what I mean. **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 02:57 PM frankvan "I see life as being, for the most part, full of meaning and happiness. Only someone that is dissatisfied with their life, and has the false hope of an afterlife, would have used such a ridiculous analogy". dg
"It is the dissatisfaction believers have with this scenario that forms the basis of their faith." JR
I think the above sums it up nicely. I've often wondered why it is that some people seem to always prefer fantasy to reality. What's wrong with the real world, even with all its warts and blemishes, that myths and superstitions seem preferable, and why must they be wrapped in pious sounding archaic language?? Is "pie in the sky" worth a lifetime of subservient dread and wasted effort? Ah, take the cash and let the credit go. Nor heed the rumble of some distant drum. **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 03:31 PM GarColga
quote: Originally posted by juanruiz: "Sheep lie!"
OMG I know that one! **************************************************************** 05-08-07, 09:49 PM Ken1Burton Juanruiz
John 14:19 shows Jesus saying He will not be coming back physically, excluding His being raised from the Dead. Jesus coming back later to set up a physical Kingdom on earth is not Scriptural. After Jesus rose to be at the Right hand of God.
Babthrower.
Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
Daniel 9:24 was fulfilled the day of the Cross, God made an end of sins, and that is as accountable unto man. And brought in everlasting righteousness which is Jesus renders to man His righteousness. So God does not see a child molester as most of mankind sees them.
He sees them without sin. And with the Righteousness of Christ on them. So that is why He does not punish them for what was paid in full at Calvary.
And my response of blinding a child molester would not stop them is common sense. I suggested Neuter. So when it was brought up again, I said the only way blinding a child molester would stop them is if they knew God was punishing them and they were afraid to do it again.
Your example of an evil man coming to get me is not the same thing. People are around Children all the time, it is not a case of seeking for one person, with blind being a handicap. And a blind man can hear children around him.
God knows when the Smallest sparrow falls to the Ground, God also feeds the cats. That is reality, and a normal cat in it’s lifetime, consumes a lot of fallen birds.
As for the Millstone, I would not like to go to heaven with the Righteousness of Christ, seeing the love of God for me, and knowing how I was to others on Earth. And have to live with those memories for Eternity.
Dance Girl.
Your “We don’t pray for some miracle from some God.” is error. For a lot of people do, The open “We” is not expressed as to whom you refer to. Like the Atheist in a fox hole, When a miracle is needed, You’d be surprised who an atheist turns to.
The Roach Motel was used because it contains “Glue” and like it or not, we are kind of stuck here for awhile. There are options, But I did not want to list them, and it might get you from one Roach Motel to being stuck in Heaven. There is no other option after death.
You see life as full of meaning and happiness? Your post sure do not sound like you do. With so much meaning and happiness, God or no God should not bother you. But God seems to bother you a lot.
This is all there is? No problem. God will not give Eternal life? No problem, God does not have rewards in store, No problem, God will not protect me, No problem. God is also a fisher of men, and I grabbed a line which had no hook on it. His words are worth following, The Concepts are worth knowing here, day by day. So with no reason whatsoever to be a Christian, I still chose to be one, Not too good a one, But one none the lest.
I have lived as a non-believer, I have lived as a believer who had no use for God whatsoever, But it is as a Believer that I freely give myself to Him, If He exists or not. And if I thought He would harm His enemies, I don’t think I would follow Him to the Corner.
Juanruiz.
You too? Oh well, As long as we are able to draw a breath? I thought I had reached that point 20 years ago. And when drawing a breath is hard to do, and you get so tired in doing it, You are ready to leave at any time, Hereafter or no hereafter.
You are like a person telling Lazarus he is going to die, I don’t think it would bother him too much. I have long since known the world would be getting up, and I would not be among them. So what? What do I have to look forward to? Nothing is Beautiful. Like sleep with no dreams, no awakening. No thoughts.
But that is not the case, God was able to set up all the prophecies with the Jewish nation. Then have them all fulfilled the day of the Cross with Jesus. He is able to do as He said. And most of the Prophecies have not even been seen by the Churches, Let alone put in the right place or order.
Israel will do this in 2029 A.D. And most of mankind will Follow this illusion I like so much. I don’t like having to break the news to you, But, An Atheist is an endangered Species. Agnostic is an endangered Species. Etc. Most of mankind will follow Jesus, Not as Christians see Him, As Israel will see Him, and See Him right. All in the Scriptures, not physically till they die and go to Heaven also.
Just so long as I have NOTHING. No problem.
Psalms 39:5 Behold, thou hast made my days as an handbreadth; and mine age is as nothing before thee: verily every man at his best state is altogether vanity. Selah.
The Age of Christ, or time of Christ is NOTHING.
Peggy Lee? Naw, Ed Ames with “Who will answer?”
Unbelievers are now the Majority here, Great. Like having the Store full of preferred Customers. And this store does not sell Salvation, But just tells you, Jesus purchased it for you, and it will be ready for you at Death. You have God’s word on it.
