Man, it's been a while.
Anyway Harry, I'd like to argue that the Christian religion is meant for all the world. God doesn't want only the Jews to be saved. It is true that at first, Jesus did not preach to Gentiles. However, after He had risen, He did instruct His disciples to convert Gentiles. He gave Israel a chance first; after all, they are the chosen people. However, they aren't the only people God made. He started with them, then went big. A time for everything, right?
It's only fair that we have a 'Christian Bashing thread'
Started by
Reflectionist
, Jul 28 2005 12:52 PM
288 replies to this topic
#212
Reflectionist
-
- Banned
- 2,165 posts
Follow the smoke; find the fire.
- Location:Missouri
- Gender:Male
-
Posted 09 August 2005 - 10:27 AM
More importantly 'reflectionist' is the first chriatisna i have come across who claims lost sheep means the whole world. ****He claims to have profound knowledge of the bible, yet he seems to be ignorant of the fact that Jesus was reluctant to cure a lady and her daughter for the fact that she was 'not from the lost sheep' and he answered her "i am sent only for the lost sheep".
Actually, I never said that. Thank you for putting words into my mouth. Are you just losing the debate so horribly that you have to resort to personal attacks? You attacked Korhend, because he proved you wrong. I'm sorry but telling us that you can prove something isn't proving it.
John 12:46: "I have come into the WORLD as a light, so that no ONE WHO BELIEVES IN ME should stay in darkness."
John 3:16: For God so loved THE WORLD that He gave His one and only Son, that WHOEVER believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life.
Mark 16:15-16: He said to them, "Go into all the WORLD and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."
Notice how Jesus doesn't say that his gift of eternal life is for the Jews only. Actually, he never says that in the Gospels. Period. You need to give it up, seriously.
I'm sorry, dude, but you made me laugh on this thread.
EDIT - thank you for completely missing my point.
#213
Nevermind
-
- Members
-
- 9,417 posts
Building consensus...
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 09 August 2005 - 10:48 AM
Actually He does. Read Matthew chapter 15. About the Canaanite woman. She begs for Him to heal her daughter and He doesn't say anything and the disciples urge Him to do it, and He says "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel" (there's the famous verse). And then she says "Lord help me!" and begs him and He goes "It is not right to take the children's (Israelites) bread and toss it to their dogs (Canaanites and others)."
So she says "Yes Lord, but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters' tables."
Jesus says "Woman you have great faith! Your request is granted." And then the allies push back the Nazi invasion and good times are had by all.
So she says "Yes Lord, but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters' tables."
Jesus says "Woman you have great faith! Your request is granted." And then the allies push back the Nazi invasion and good times are had by all.
#214
Guest_WikkaWikka_*
Guest_WikkaWikka_*
-
- Guests
Posted 09 August 2005 - 11:09 AM
You want to know what i think is illogical? Giving you arguements from the Holy Quran!!!
What sort of LOGIC is that? You don't beleive in it!! what sort of a guidline is that for YOU? You beleive in the Old & New Testamanet, don't you think if i provide versus from what YOU BELEIVE in, that would be a better source of guidance for you?... thank about it man!
I mean, you beleive Prophet Muhammad, God Forbid, 'made-up' the Holy Quran and not God's word. Why would i want to quote that here, and wait for your insults on my beloved prophet?
i would very much like to know what the Quran says about the subject, if even just to know about your religion. i doubt very seriously anyone here will insult muhammed.
Right. I just wrote all this to say "im alive". About the blood controversy, guess ill just have bring up 'proofs' with me eh? cause seems like we got physists here!!
That too, and i have to right about what happened to Jesus's body. This is crucial. And you would be suprised.
i'd also like to see the proof you have about the blood. and also what happened to jesus's body..
#215
arunma
-
- Members
-
- 3,615 posts
Physics and math maniac
- Location:University of Minnesota
- Gender:Male
Posted 09 August 2005 - 12:19 PM
i doubt very seriously anyone here will insult muhammed.
If they do insult Mohammed, I'll kick them off Contro (assuming they repeatedly do it after a warning).
And remember Harry, the same goes for insulting Saint Paul or any of the other apostles.
#216
Reflectionist
-
- Banned
- 2,165 posts
Follow the smoke; find the fire.
- Location:Missouri
- Gender:Male
-
Posted 09 August 2005 - 01:00 PM
Isn't it acceptible that Jesus was simply testing her faith?
#217
arunma
-
- Members
-
- 3,615 posts
Physics and math maniac
- Location:University of Minnesota
- Gender:Male
Posted 09 August 2005 - 03:07 PM
Isn't it acceptible that Jesus was simply testing her faith?
It's always seemed to me that this was the case.
On a slightly different issue, skeptics can never get their story straight. Some say that the Gospel is anti-semitic, but others use this to claim that our blessed Lord hated Gentiles. So which is it?
#218
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 09 August 2005 - 03:56 PM
Skeptics are not one body, Arunma. I, for one, believe that everyone who disagrees with me is wrong. I mean, otherwise, why would I disagree? Some of the people who are wrong are atheists, some are theists. Not one group.
#219
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
-
- Guests
Posted 09 August 2005 - 04:27 PM
I SAID
YOU SAID EARLIER
I gather from replies, that yes you guys seem to agree that Jesus 'iniatially' told his diciples to go ONLY to the lost sheep, and nowhere else, but after the 'resserection' he changed his theory on being sent only to the lost sheep and asked his diciples to go EVERYWHERE, splendid.
Now could you please quote me the verse where he says so? Cause this is EXACTLY what im on about. That after the so-called 'death' of Jesus, diversions occured. Misunderstandings.
********************************************************************************
************
POST CRUCIFIXION
All right clear from my previous quotes Jesus makes mention that they are 'other' flocks, and they too will hear his voice, as there will be one flock and one shepherd. This other flock cannot mean the world at large, cause its understood that Jesus will not mean the whole world, but a selected few.
The caananite woman you say, Jesus later on cured right? But you must understand the 'reason' Jesus gave behind not curing her, saying 'I am not meant for you' basically. If you say he wanted to test her faith, by all means, but to give an argument saying that i am not sent but to the lost sheep of Israel is something else.
The verse which is so crucial . . .
I want you to go to your 'fathers' (is that what you call them?) and ask, how many tribes of Israel were they? You will get a TWELVE. How many were they at the time of Jesus in Israel? You will get a TWO.
Now when Jesus says I am sent but to the 'lost' sheep, its quite clear that they arnt really physically present in Israel yeah? The quoted verse of John is crystal clear that he will be 'physically' amongts them (the other ten tribes) as he was with/is with the tribes of Israel present in Israel.
For the sake of arguement, ill say all right fine, Jesus was sent to the whole world, lovely splendid. But the next question arises from the quote of John 10:16 and that is, regardless of the fact if Christianity is a universal religion or not, does or does not Jesus CLEARLY say that he will be with the other flock, as he is with the tribes present in Israel? Fear God, and your answer should be a yes.
But then i am told he died on the cross, miraclously rose from the dead, and went flying up to heaven, and people are still in wait of his 'second-coming' a theory which Jesus Christ himself BASHED outright.
When Jesus lay claim to the title of the Promised Messiah, one of the accusation the Jews mocked were "Where is Elijah???" They were waiting for a prophet of the past to come to down from heaven with fire chariot, but Jesus said, that he has already come and he pointed to John the Baptist.
He did rise from the dead, metaphorically speaking, it quite right to say that a person suffering the pain and suffering of the cross to come out of it alive, as 'risen from the dead'. Jesus was known to give his prophecies in parables. Infact all prophets talk in parables, but no generation understands. The Jews till TODAY wait for a messiah who would be a 'literal' king. The Muslims also wait for a Messiah, who will wage war and do all sort of 'fairy tale' sort of things, for the same reason taking words of wisdom with deep inner meaning to be literal.
First of all, the body being allowed to be taken by Jospeh is an highly questionable act of Pilate, but what follows next is even more suspicious. But LOADS of spices. And Jesus was was wraped in linen with spices on it. The Bible goes on to say that this was a custom of the Jews. It most certainly is not.
members of our group asked the Shema Israel Torah Network International Burial Society
They replied...and you too can ask themHERE
It is not normall, that first Pilate lets UNKNOWN people take away a body that is SO contoversial and then, another man (nicodemus) joins the party and they put oinment on the body of Jesus. You don't need to put ointments on a person who has powers to rise from the dead do you?
They were infact wraping Jesus with linen covered with spices of healing powers.
In order to convince the Disciples that he had survived the crucifixion, Jesus asked them to realize that spirits or ghosts or apparitions are not composed of human flesh and human bones. To make his point firmly, he asked them for a piece of meat. They gave him fish and a honeycomb, and he ate in front of them while they watched.
Now that it is stated that Jesus was seen BODILY after crucifixion, ill next time round show how THEN 'Peter & James the righteous' build up the Jerusalam Church, and what saint paul did on the contrary.
YOU SAIDMore importantly 'reflectionist' is the first chriatisna i have come across who claims lost sheep means the whole world.
Actually, I never said that. Thank you for putting words into my mouth. Are you just losing the debate so horribly that you have to resort to personal attacks?
YOU SAID EARLIER
So, yes...im so sorry for putting words in your mouth. Honestly, reflectionist, everyone here except you comes up with logic or a counter verse, while you just start 'fighting'.Lost sheep means the human race. Sorry to bust your bubble... you know, the whole, Jew and Gentile thing...
I gather from replies, that yes you guys seem to agree that Jesus 'iniatially' told his diciples to go ONLY to the lost sheep, and nowhere else, but after the 'resserection' he changed his theory on being sent only to the lost sheep and asked his diciples to go EVERYWHERE, splendid.
Now could you please quote me the verse where he says so? Cause this is EXACTLY what im on about. That after the so-called 'death' of Jesus, diversions occured. Misunderstandings.
********************************************************************************
************
POST CRUCIFIXION
All right clear from my previous quotes Jesus makes mention that they are 'other' flocks, and they too will hear his voice, as there will be one flock and one shepherd. This other flock cannot mean the world at large, cause its understood that Jesus will not mean the whole world, but a selected few.
The caananite woman you say, Jesus later on cured right? But you must understand the 'reason' Jesus gave behind not curing her, saying 'I am not meant for you' basically. If you say he wanted to test her faith, by all means, but to give an argument saying that i am not sent but to the lost sheep of Israel is something else.
The verse which is so crucial . . .
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. (John 10:16)
I want you to go to your 'fathers' (is that what you call them?) and ask, how many tribes of Israel were they? You will get a TWELVE. How many were they at the time of Jesus in Israel? You will get a TWO.
Now when Jesus says I am sent but to the 'lost' sheep, its quite clear that they arnt really physically present in Israel yeah? The quoted verse of John is crystal clear that he will be 'physically' amongts them (the other ten tribes) as he was with/is with the tribes of Israel present in Israel.
For the sake of arguement, ill say all right fine, Jesus was sent to the whole world, lovely splendid. But the next question arises from the quote of John 10:16 and that is, regardless of the fact if Christianity is a universal religion or not, does or does not Jesus CLEARLY say that he will be with the other flock, as he is with the tribes present in Israel? Fear God, and your answer should be a yes.
But then i am told he died on the cross, miraclously rose from the dead, and went flying up to heaven, and people are still in wait of his 'second-coming' a theory which Jesus Christ himself BASHED outright.
When Jesus lay claim to the title of the Promised Messiah, one of the accusation the Jews mocked were "Where is Elijah???" They were waiting for a prophet of the past to come to down from heaven with fire chariot, but Jesus said, that he has already come and he pointed to John the Baptist.
He did rise from the dead, metaphorically speaking, it quite right to say that a person suffering the pain and suffering of the cross to come out of it alive, as 'risen from the dead'. Jesus was known to give his prophecies in parables. Infact all prophets talk in parables, but no generation understands. The Jews till TODAY wait for a messiah who would be a 'literal' king. The Muslims also wait for a Messiah, who will wage war and do all sort of 'fairy tale' sort of things, for the same reason taking words of wisdom with deep inner meaning to be literal.
And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight. Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.” (John 19:39)
First of all, the body being allowed to be taken by Jospeh is an highly questionable act of Pilate, but what follows next is even more suspicious. But LOADS of spices. And Jesus was was wraped in linen with spices on it. The Bible goes on to say that this was a custom of the Jews. It most certainly is not.
members of our group asked the Shema Israel Torah Network International Burial Society
Have Jewish burial customs changed much in 2000 years? The Bible claims that Jesus was covered with some kind of ointment [I think the Bible says 100 pounds weight of some kind of substance—seems to be quite a lot of weight]. Does that Biblical account actually fall in line with Jewish burial traditions? Because I thought I heard that it was forbidden to touch the body. Could you be so kind as to explain? Thank you
They replied...and you too can ask themHERE
Jewish Burial Law, along with the rest of TRADITIONAL JEWISH LAW has not changed in 2000 years [but more]precisely, 3500 years. You’re right: the body is not to be touched except by giving it a ritual bath called a TAHARA, standing for purity and then the body is put in the ground in the quickest most simple fashion available with only traditional BURIAL SHROUDS
It is not normall, that first Pilate lets UNKNOWN people take away a body that is SO contoversial and then, another man (nicodemus) joins the party and they put oinment on the body of Jesus. You don't need to put ointments on a person who has powers to rise from the dead do you?
They were infact wraping Jesus with linen covered with spices of healing powers.
And he said unto them, ‘Why are ye troubled? And why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I MYSELF: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.’ And when he had thus spoken, he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, ‘Have ye here any meat?’ And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them”(Luke 24:38-42)
In order to convince the Disciples that he had survived the crucifixion, Jesus asked them to realize that spirits or ghosts or apparitions are not composed of human flesh and human bones. To make his point firmly, he asked them for a piece of meat. They gave him fish and a honeycomb, and he ate in front of them while they watched.
Now that it is stated that Jesus was seen BODILY after crucifixion, ill next time round show how THEN 'Peter & James the righteous' build up the Jerusalam Church, and what saint paul did on the contrary.
#220
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
-
- Guests
Posted 09 August 2005 - 04:41 PM
'Verily I say unto you, there be some standing here which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom (Matthew 16:28)
I forgot to add this one, sorry.
This verse a christain will end up with all sort of mind boggling logic but no way answer the question atright forward. What happened? are some of the people 'from THAT generation' still alive today?...
See we must see what all of the bible says. Here Jesus talks about his coming AGAIN. And yes his disciples DID see Jesus after his metaphorical death. Jesus PROPHECISED in the Jign of Jonas, and again in the above mention verse that he will come out victorious, and be recued from the palms of death. He did. This was his second coming that MANY people witnessed in his lifetime.
Food for thought for those who seek truth.
#221
arunma
-
- Members
-
- 3,615 posts
Physics and math maniac
- Location:University of Minnesota
- Gender:Male
Posted 09 August 2005 - 08:45 PM
I forgot to add this one, sorry.
This verse a christain will end up with all sort of mind boggling logic but no way answer the question atright forward. What happened? are some of the people 'from THAT generation' still alive today?...
See we must see what all of the bible says. Here Jesus talks about his coming AGAIN. And yes his disciples DID see Jesus after his metaphorical death. Jesus PROPHECISED in the Jign of Jonas, and again in the above mention verse that he will come out victorious, and be recued from the palms of death. He did. This was his second coming that MANY people witnessed in his lifetime.
Food for thought for those who seek truth.
I'm assuming you're referring to St. Mark 9:1. Actually, someone did see the kingdom come in power. Saint John witnessed the entire Second Advent, and he recorded it in the Revelation.
#222
Nevermind
-
- Members
-
- 9,417 posts
Building consensus...
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 09 August 2005 - 11:14 PM
It's always seemed to me that this was the case.
On a slightly different issue, skeptics can never get their story straight. Some say that the Gospel is anti-semitic, but others use this to claim that our blessed Lord hated Gentiles. So which is it?
I personally think that He came to start with Israel, but this woman was that faithful that she deserved to be included.
And are you referring to me as a skeptic, arunma?
#223
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 09 August 2005 - 11:20 PM
We catholics have the same problem. People say on the one hand the catholic church is a sexist institution, and on the other hand, people say we diefy Our Lady. How is this? Easy, they're seperate skeptics, and people who disagree with you will look for what they want to find.
#224
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 August 2005 - 05:04 AM
I am well aware of Saint John seeing the entire second advent, let me show you what the Promised Messiah(as), who you people have rejected, like the Jews of their has to say about the issue . . .Saint John witnessed the entire Second Advent, and he recorded it in the Revelation
But let it be noted that Christians do not say that Jesus really came down from heaven accompanied by appointed signs; they rather say that he appeared to John as in a vision, that he might fulfil his prophecy contained in verse 28 of chapter 16 of Matthew. But I say that coming of this kind does not fulfil the prophecy. That is a very weak interpretation which only avoids with difficulty the criticism levelled against this position. This interpretation is patently untenable and wrong, so much so, that there is no need to refute it, for if Jesus had to appear to anyone in a dream or a vision, a prophecy of this kind would be ridiculous.19 In such manner Jesus had also appeared to Paul long before this. It appears that the prophecy contained in verse 28 of chapter 16 of Matthew has caused a panic among the padres and they have not been able to give it a rational meaning in accordance with their own beliefs, for it was difficult for them to say that Jesus at the time of the sacking of Jerusalem had descended from heaven in glory, and that like the lightning that lights up all heaven and is seen by everybody, all had seen him; and also it was not easy for them to ignore the statement, namely: Some of those who were standing here will not taste death till they have seen the Son of man coming in his Kingdom. Therefore, as a result of a laboured interpretation they believed in the fulfilment of the prophecy in the shape of a vision. But this is not true; righteous servants of God always appear in visions to the elect and for a vision it is not even necessary that they should appear only in a dream; nay, they can be seen even in the waking state; I myself have experienced such phenomena.
I have seen Jesus (on whom be peace) many a time in Kashf (vision in the waking state), and I have met some of the prophets, while fully awake; I have also seen our Chief, Master and Leader, the Prophet Muhammad (may peace and the blessings of God be upon him) many a time in the waking state, and I have talked to him -- in such a clear state of waking that sleep or drowsiness had nothing to do with it. I have also met some of the dead at their graves or other places, while awake; and have talked to them. I very well know that such meeting with the dead in the waking state is possible; not only can we meet, we can also talk, and even have a handshake. Between this and the ordinary state of waking there is not difference in such an experience; one realises that one is in this very world; one has the same ears, the same eyes, and the same tongue; but deeper reflection reveals a different universe. The world has no realisation of this sort of experience, for the world lives a life of indifference. This experience is a gift from heaven; it is for those who are endowed with new senses. This is a fact -- actual and true. Therefore, when Jesus appeared to John after the destruction of Jerusalem, though he was seen by the latter in the waking state, and though there may have been some talk and a hand-shake, nevertheless, the incident has nothing to do with the prophecy. Such phenomena often happen in the world; and even now, if I devote some attention to it, I can, with the grace of God, in the waking state, see Jesus or some other holy prophet. Such a meeting does not fulfil the prophecy (contained in Matthew, chapter 16, verse 28).
So, what actually happened was that Jesus knew that he would be saved from the Cross and would migrate to another land, that God would neither let him die nor would take him away from this world, so long as he had not seen the destruction of the Jews with his own eyes, and that he would not die so long as the fruits of the Kingdom, which the spiritually eminent are given by heaven, were not realised. Jesus made this prophecy so that he might give an assurance to the disciples that, presently they would see the signs that those who had raised the sword against him would be killed with the sword during his own life-time and in his very presence. If, therefore, evidence is of any value there is for Christians no evidence greater than this: that Jesus with his own tongue makes the prophecy that some of them would still be alive when he would come again.
It should be noticed that the gospels contain two kinds of prophecies about the coming of Jesus: (1) The promise of his coming in the latter days; his coming is of a spiritual character, and resembles the second coming of the prophet Elijah, in the time of Jesus. So, like Elijah, he has already appeared in this age; and it is I, the writer; a servant of humanity, who has come as the Promised Messiah, in the name of Jesus (on whom be peace). Jesus has given the news of my coming in the gospels. Blessed is he who, out of respect for Jesus, ponders with honesty and truth over my coming, and thus saves himself from stumbling. (2) The other kind of prophecies regarding the second coming of Jesus mentioned in the gospels have, in reality, been mentioned as evidence of the life which, by the grace of God, remained intact during the experience of the Cross; God saved His eminent servant from death on the Cross, as the prophecy just now mentioned implies -- Christians are in error in mixing up these two contexts: because of this, they are confused and have to face many difficulties. In short, the verse in chapter 16 of Matthew is a very important piece of evidence in support of Jesus' escape from the Cross.
I am sure, MAJORITY of people will not be satisfied that since saint John had visions of Jesus that actually fullfils the second coming??? and if that indeed is the case, then how come i see in each and every church people waiting for the 'second coming' of Christ untill today???
As the Promised Messiah(as) said, this arguement is so weak it don't need refutation.
#225
Nevermind
-
- Members
-
- 9,417 posts
Building consensus...
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 10 August 2005 - 05:11 AM
You're honestly making no sense to me.
1. Who was that big clump of text written by that makes their word the be-all-end-all of visionary beliefs, or at least worth more than Saint John?
2. I'm not sure what your argument there was, but from what I can discern, each and every Christian church awaits for the second coming because that is what they believe. They believe Jesus was taken to Heaven with God and they believe He will come back to signify the end of days. Where's the big "oh no" in that?
Harry-Hermione, you are completely misconstruing the entire point Jesus came down, died, came back to life, then went to Heaven. He was the Son of God, yeah, but He also WAS God. He came down to use Himself to form a new covenant between Himself and humankind. He didn't just come to say "look at me I'm the Messiah" then go and leave everyone. He came down to give everyone a second chance. He came down, preached, then sacrificed Himself, redeemed our sins, formed a new covenant, then left to Heaven to let humankind live out their life under this newly formed covenant.
THAT is the point of His "second coming". He gave us another chance to live out our lives and escape from sin, and then He will come back, after having given us that second chance, to see if we lived up to what He meant for us. That is the whole idea behind the second coming.
And also, stop being so damn patronising...
1. Who was that big clump of text written by that makes their word the be-all-end-all of visionary beliefs, or at least worth more than Saint John?
2. I'm not sure what your argument there was, but from what I can discern, each and every Christian church awaits for the second coming because that is what they believe. They believe Jesus was taken to Heaven with God and they believe He will come back to signify the end of days. Where's the big "oh no" in that?
Harry-Hermione, you are completely misconstruing the entire point Jesus came down, died, came back to life, then went to Heaven. He was the Son of God, yeah, but He also WAS God. He came down to use Himself to form a new covenant between Himself and humankind. He didn't just come to say "look at me I'm the Messiah" then go and leave everyone. He came down to give everyone a second chance. He came down, preached, then sacrificed Himself, redeemed our sins, formed a new covenant, then left to Heaven to let humankind live out their life under this newly formed covenant.
THAT is the point of His "second coming". He gave us another chance to live out our lives and escape from sin, and then He will come back, after having given us that second chance, to see if we lived up to what He meant for us. That is the whole idea behind the second coming.
And also, stop being so damn patronising...
#226
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 August 2005 - 10:22 AM
Our teachins tell us, its not WHO says it, its WHAT'S being said that matter's. (read it without bias)Who was that big clump of text written by that makes their word the be-all-end-all of visionary beliefs, or at least worth more than Saint John?
Anyways, You right, that every Christian await the second coming of Christ. Thats what i am saying.
'Verily I say unto you, there be some standing here which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom (Matthew 16:28)
Here Jesus says, that some people will not TASTE DEATH (you know guys at the time of Jesus) untill they see the son of man's second advent. Arunma said that Saint John saw the entire second advent yeah? (in dreams, revelations etc)
This possibly cannot be the fullfillment of the prophecy. I am not saying Saint John 'din't' see such dreams or revelations, but this is not the fullfillment of the prophecy. And if indeed the prophecy is fullfilled, then why wait for the second advent, when according to you it has already happened?
In my earlier post, i quoted Luke Chapter 24 verse 38, in that Jesus is seen AFTER crucifixion, and showed himself to his dicsiples, and showed him that it is 'MYSELF'. I am saying that THIS is the fullfillment of the prophecy as 'many' did see him AGAIN, as he promised "some standing here will not taste death till they see the son of man in his kingdom'.
#227
Nevermind
-
- Members
-
- 9,417 posts
Building consensus...
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 10 August 2005 - 10:29 AM
Read my edits.
And also, what teachings teach that it's not WHO but WHAT? If you were to say something that sounded more correct than one of your teachers, does that mean that people are to turn to you rather than the ones who taught you?
And also, what teachings teach that it's not WHO but WHAT? If you were to say something that sounded more correct than one of your teachers, does that mean that people are to turn to you rather than the ones who taught you?
#228
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 August 2005 - 10:57 AM
And also, what teachings teach that it's not WHO but WHAT?
This is a saying of my beloved Prophet, Muhammad (pbuh). What he(pbuh) meant by this is, to reach truth you have to concider the 'matter' that is being invovled, not from which medium it is being communicated or who is saying. I'm sorry you disagree with it.
And on your 'edits'. You have done everything but not answer the verse at hand, and how the prophecy is being fullfilled? I alredy know why the second coming is for!
Lazurukeel, if you don't know something, i mean like we must not know everything yeah? Then its all right if you be silent on it. If you read my post (perhaps this time with mroe concentration), you will understand what im talking about is HOW is the prophecy fullfilled.
#229
Nevermind
-
- Members
-
- 9,417 posts
Building consensus...
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 10 August 2005 - 11:08 AM
Because the prophecy was that the Messiah, the Christ, would come to save humankind. That He did. He came, and He saved us. The prophecy is fulfilled. Read the prophecy, then read the damn stories. It's all there. In fact, it's one of the most important parts.
#230
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 August 2005 - 12:32 PM
Because the prophecy was that the Messiah, the Christ, would come to save humankind. That He did.
You have simply no idea what we are talking about here, do you? THE SECOND ADVENT!!!! 'That He did'. The Prophecy we are talking about here is the SECOND ADVENT. And here you go on to say, that he did. (WAKE UP!!!!)
I'll repeat myself, if you don't know what we are talking, please do not make a fool out of yourself. Im sorry, but thats what your doing mate.
#231
Guest_TanakaBros06_*
Guest_TanakaBros06_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 August 2005 - 03:54 PM
We catholics have the same problem. People say on the one hand the catholic church is a sexist institution, and on the other hand, people say we diefy Our Lady. How is this? Easy, they're seperate skeptics, and people who disagree with you will look for what they want to find.
Yeah, I've always thought that was weird too. People bashing the Church so much that they have contradictory disses.
#232
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 10 August 2005 - 03:58 PM
People aren't contradicting themselves, though. Non-Catholics is not a legitimate catagory of skeptics.
#233
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 10 August 2005 - 05:26 PM
Thats my point. Being criticized for something by one person does not preclude being criticized for a mutually exclusive feature by some one else.
#234
arunma
-
- Members
-
- 3,615 posts
Physics and math maniac
- Location:University of Minnesota
- Gender:Male
Posted 10 August 2005 - 08:23 PM
Everyone please play nice. Lazurukeel and Harry, please cool down before you continue.
I'd comment on the topic, but I'm on my PDA and it's hard to type...but it's cool to have LA at the neighborhood park!
I'd comment on the topic, but I'm on my PDA and it's hard to type...but it's cool to have LA at the neighborhood park!
#235
arunma
-
- Members
-
- 3,615 posts
Physics and math maniac
- Location:University of Minnesota
- Gender:Male
Posted 10 August 2005 - 09:01 PM
Oh, I see the issue of Saint John's prophecy has already been dealt with.
So anyway Harry, like Lazurukeel said, your entire argument seems to center around the belief that fulfilling Jesus' prophecy (some would be alive to see the Second Advent) with the vision of Saint John is "lame" (for lack of a better term). But nonetheless, it fulfills the prophecy, because indeed Saint John saw the Second Advent, and this fulfilled the prophecy. Therefore, I don't think your counterargument has much merit.
So anyway Harry, like Lazurukeel said, your entire argument seems to center around the belief that fulfilling Jesus' prophecy (some would be alive to see the Second Advent) with the vision of Saint John is "lame" (for lack of a better term). But nonetheless, it fulfills the prophecy, because indeed Saint John saw the Second Advent, and this fulfilled the prophecy. Therefore, I don't think your counterargument has much merit.
#236
Nevermind
-
- Members
-
- 9,417 posts
Building consensus...
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 10 August 2005 - 10:20 PM
Hey I'm all cool. I'm just saying, mate, that the prophecy of the Christ is NOT the vision of St John. You keep skipping between saying the prophecy of Him coming is lame, then going back to the vision and saying how it doesn't fulfill the prophecy.
#237
arunma
-
- Members
-
- 3,615 posts
Physics and math maniac
- Location:University of Minnesota
- Gender:Male
Posted 10 August 2005 - 10:47 PM
Well Lazurukeel, apparently there are at least two different viewpoints on this. Either way, we both agree that the prophecy was fulfilled.
#238
Nevermind
-
- Members
-
- 9,417 posts
Building consensus...
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 10 August 2005 - 10:50 PM
Agreed. And if one includes the vision into the prophecy, then it simply means that the rest of the prophecy will be fulfilled.
#239
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
Guest_Harry-Hermoine_*
-
- Guests
Posted 11 August 2005 - 02:12 AM
Arunma, this is what i am talking about. If you beleive by the visions of, Saint John, the prophecy is fullfilled, then there is nothing else to wait for, unless you beleive in a 'third-coming'.
On a general note, id like to see everybodies view point regarding the issue. That is to say, Saint John seeing visions of the second advent fulfill the prophecy of Jesus (of his second advent)?
"There shall be SOME who woudnt taste death ...." Had it ONLY been John who was to witness these visions, then he would be mentioned in particular. Does not rising from the dead, and coming out alive (metapohircally speaking) fullfill the second coming, a scene witnessed by SOME of his disciples?? (verses quoted earlier)
On a general note, id like to see everybodies view point regarding the issue. That is to say, Saint John seeing visions of the second advent fulfill the prophecy of Jesus (of his second advent)?
"There shall be SOME who woudnt taste death ...." Had it ONLY been John who was to witness these visions, then he would be mentioned in particular. Does not rising from the dead, and coming out alive (metapohircally speaking) fullfill the second coming, a scene witnessed by SOME of his disciples?? (verses quoted earlier)
#240
Nevermind
-
- Members
-
- 9,417 posts
Building consensus...
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 11 August 2005 - 03:18 AM
I dunno about arunma, but to me the vision IS the prophecy of His second advent.
