• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

When is JC returning?

kurious_kathy said:
We were created to have a relationship with our loving Heavenly Father. It's not about religion, it's all about relationship!
Click to expand...
Sorry, but that only sounds as if your so-called god needs a support group and if you're not part of that group, you go to hell, no love there, only need.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Tanstaafl said:
I have wondered at times if you understand at all that you have traded one addiction for another. I may have underestimated you, it sounds like you do at least have a clue.

At least this addiction is less harmful.
Click to expand...

This has been pointed out to her by a number of people, myself included. Ah there is no one so blind as she who refused to see.
 
Mephisto said:
Actually he already did, but he made the mistake of appearing as an illegal immigrant wandering through an ethno-phobic American desert and was beaten and left for dead.

Now try wearing that symbol on a chain around your neck. ;)
Click to expand...
If the murder weapon was one of those 4 ended lug wrenches, I'd say the symbol is already sorted out. :)

DR
 
AgingYoung said:
SezMe,

I'd be more interested in the reasoning as opposed to the conclusions. If you've read Who Wrote The Gospels repeat the case for a late dating of Luke. I'd like to hear it.

Gene
Click to expand...
I can't do that, for two reasons. First, I read the book a couple of years ago so cannot adequately summarize the argument from such a distant memory. The reason, however, that I could cite the dates in my previous post is that the book starts with a nice, graphic timeline of important dates in the history of the gospels. I just grabbed the dates above from that timeline.

Second, there is not a simple "case" to be made. It is a complex story that I am not competent to repeat, even if I did go back and reread the book. In which case, it would be better if you read the book and get the case first hand. It's a short book (165+ pages) so give it a go. I found it to be a fascinating read...and I am an atheist.
 
SezMe said:
Second, there is not a simple "case" to be made. It is a complex story that I am not competent to repeat, even if I did go back and reread the book. In which case, it would be better if you read the book and get the case first hand. It's a short book (165+ pages) so give it a go. I found it to be a fascinating read...and I am an atheist.
Click to expand...

A similarly titled book, Who Wrote the Bible? by Richard Eliiott Friedman on the Old Testament source hypotheses is a fantastic read, and I would imagine that is true irrespective of your beliefs. Highly recommended if J, E, P & D mean very little to you. :)

cj x
 
Jesus will return when Hell freezes over. He has an ice skating date with Satan's daughter. Those crazy kids! :D :D
 
A PS to my post about Helms' book.

He will be the February Skeptic Society speaker. Go here for details. If this general topic area interests you and if Helms is as good a speaker as he is a writer, this lecture should be worthwhile.
 
kurious_kathy said:
Soon means I believe it could happen any day and perhaps not for several years, but we are closer than we've ever been.
Click to expand...

You could say the same thing about your own death, or the death of any person in here. It's the scariest realization of all, and the basis for many organized (or disorganized) religions - you could die any day, and everyday that you live you're one day closed to the day you die.

You're not the first, and you likely won't be the last of a generation of X-tians who believe that Jesus is returning during your lifetime.
 
That has happen with ever generation.

Paul

:) :) :)

They always think that they are the chosen to see it, yea right
 
SezMe,

Thank you for the answer. The dating of the gospels and their authorship is and has been a major debate in christianity for a long time. One of the basis (as I understand it) for the Tubingen school of thought (the gospels were romantic writings that originated in the 3rd century) were the inconsistency in terms, the geography, etc. Specifically the book of acts didn't accurately describe what was known about the ancient world.

From my perspective the reasoning behind a conclusion is equally as important as the conclusion; if not more so. One reason I’ve read for a late dating is that nine out of ten scholars believe it’s so. That doesn’t satisfy my curiosity. Another is that there is no way Luke (for example) could have known the details of the destruction of the temple before it happened; therefore it must have been written after the fact. I see that as a more viable explanation. I do reject it but it’s more viable.

The crux of the dating/authorship of the gospels and new testament is this: If it can be shown they are in part not what they claim or what is claimed about them then their entire testimony can be impeached. I know from personal experience that a sworn officer of a court can lie under oath but her testimony about me breaking the law still be true. It was a minor offense of running down the side of the road around very slow traffic. Although the gospels could in part be wrong that is no reason to dismiss them in their entirety. It does pose a very valid question though: ‘How can we know what to believe?’ I think that’s a good question and everyone answers it for themselves.

Gene
 
AgingYoung said:
From my perspective the reasoning behind a conclusion is equally as important as the conclusion; if not more so.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The quality of a line of reasoning surely affects one's willingness to accept it.

AgingYoung said:
Another is that there is no way Luke (for example) could have known the details of the destruction of the temple before it happened; therefore it must have been written after the fact. I see that as a more viable explanation. I do reject it but it’s more viable.
Click to expand...
Hmm, I'd be interested in your basis for the rejection of that argument.
 
I know how dangerous this can be, but I've been thinking....

Is there any explicit text that states that God's original, and exclusive, agreement with the Jews to be His chosen people has been rescinded?

I realise that He wasn't very good at keeping His side of the bargain - they all moved into Canaan which turned out to be a land so flowing with milk & honey that the population regularly had to holiday in Egypt to escape famine, and of the twelve tribes that came from Abrahams loins, ten just disappear in the Babylonian captivity. I've not seen the film "Home Alone", but I know the "plot", though I'm sure not even Mel Gibson could make a sequel where ten whole tribes are forgotten into a box-office success. :)

Granted the disappearance of the 10 tribes gave rise to many of the early conspiracy theories, but I scarcely thing that this was God's purpose.

I wonder if, when KK turns up at the pearly gates, "Saint" Peter will check the ledger, and say, "So, you're not Jewish, then? Put down that harp immediately, and second door on the right, please. Yes, the one marked "Dupes". Thank you."

YBW
 
YouBelieveWHAT? said:
I wonder if, when KK turns up at the pearly gates, "Saint" Peter will check the ledger, and say, "So, you're not Jewish, then? Put down that harp immediately, and second door on the right, please. Yes, the one marked "Dupes". Thank you."
Click to expand...
I imagine a somewhat different scenario. KK and Pete get to jawin' and he asks, all innocent like, "Hey, did you ever answer all those questions on the JREF fora?" KK, of course, says, "Yeah." Pete then gives her the world's (heaven's?) biggest raspberry ("PZZZZBT") and pulls the lever labeled, "Hot."
 
SezMe,

There are several reasons. I don't think a first century Jew could dispassionately speak of Jesus going up to Jerusalem if they were writing after the temple had been destroyed. That event had to have scarred them to the core. I think to say it was quite a loss would be understatement.

Paul makes a point recorded in acts…
  • For the king knoweth of these things, before whom also I speak freely: for I am persuaded that none of these things are hidden from him; for this thing was not done in a corner.
After the resurrection the apostles were traveling the known world establishing churches. Communication was slow, yet with letters to churches people became familiar with these same events. Also some were witnesses. If the gospels and/or epistles were written after the destruction of the temple I think it would have been pointed out as fulfillment of prophecy. That’s a common pattern in the gospels
  • That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet …

Gene
 
kurious_kathy said:
No I believe many will stay lost. But God's perfect will is that all would come to repent and know Christ. He's the only one that can save someone, we are just here to testify that Jesus is the way, truth, and life. No one comes to the Father except by Him!

And yes I believe there are still many that will come to know Jesus before He comes back.
Click to expand...

BTW Kathy, I do appreciate the answer. So you're sticking with B, and backing off from A. Fair enough.

I probably won't be posting much for a few days, so I'll wish you (and others here of a similar persuasion) a Merry Christmas now.

And may His noodly appendage touch the rest of you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom