DeyDurkie5;758588 wrote:I'm not trying to doubt it, that was a serious question...

Honestly, I have no idea. Why didn't he come at the very start? Why didn't he wait and come now, when we have email? Who knows?

Hell, maybe he just blind-folded himself and pointed at the timeline.

Y-Town Steelhound;758612 wrote:Not at all, and as an example I would like to take a passage (ironically) from the musical Jesus Christ Superstar.

"If you'd come today you could've reached the whole nation. Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication."

Thoughts?

I think that he's probably got a better scope of what would be the best time. I also think it's completely okay to wonder why, and I've learned to be content with not knowing every answer. In fact, I'd probably question a being's "godness" if I could understand everything about it or why it acts in the way it does.

jmog;758659 wrote:Actually he "had" to come when he did as the general time period was prophesied by Daniel over 400 years earlier. Now could have Daniel prophesied a much longer time frame? Sure but what does it really matter if he came 2000 years ago or 20 years ago.

Jesus could go on live TV today perform a miracle and doubters just like those on this thread still would not believe. So your assertion that everyone would believe is naive at best.

Jesus could have come today, in which case, the prophets simply would have foretold a different timeframe. Wouldn't be all that difficult, you know?

Y-Town Steelhound;758676 wrote:I think you can challenge the mind without compromising your faith. I certainly respect others' beliefs and at the very least I find the bible and religion in general to be a good moral compass for life/mechanism for coping with the fear of death.

Eh, I don't really care about death. Suppose I just become worm food at the end, I'd still do what I could to live in the way I am convinced I was meant to live. This is, it would seem, the view of many people in the Old Testament, who wouldn't have really believed in afterlife anyway.

His name was William Branham.

riders1;758902 wrote:His name was William Branham.

Sweet. Branham was the father of the modern-day "faith healing" movement. What of him?

Prophet.

riders1;758956 wrote:Prophet.

Haha! Um, based on what?

God's word, not your thinking, believe it or not. Search it out before you laugh like the rest of the scorners of God's word, time is running short as we are in the endtime!

riders1;759157 wrote:God's word, not your thinking, believe it or not. Search it out before you laugh like the rest of the scorners of God's word, time is running short as we are in the endtime!

Ohhhhh...it's all so clear to me now...you are one of "those."

Sure there are prophets...David Koresh, Warren Jeffs, and my absolute FAVORITE "Prophet Peter Popoff."

If only you'd send in $25 you'll get a blessing too...

Or, just:

"Call 800-482-5813 or submit the form below to get Your Miracle Spring Water and Debt Cancellationg Kit." -- straight from the website, copy and pasted...no lie. That's why he's my favorite!!!

OSH;759252 wrote:Ohhhhh...it's all so clear to me now...you are one of "those."

Sure there are prophets...David Koresh, Warren Jeffs, and my absolute FAVORITE "Prophet Peter Popoff."

If only you'd send in $25 you'll get a blessing too...

Or, just:

"Call 800-482-5813 or submit the form below to get Your Miracle Spring Water and Debt Cancellationg Kit." -- straight from the website, copy and pasted...no lie. That's why he's my favorite!!!

You mean to tell me that the Miracle Spring Water & Debt Canceling kit doesn't work? OMFG, not again!!!!

Bigred1995;759475 wrote:You mean to tell me that the Miracle Spring Water & Debt Canceling kit doesn't work? OMFG, not again!!!!

Wait, wait, wait...make sure you spell it right: it's a "debt cancellationg kit!"

riders1;759157 wrote:God's word, not your thinking, believe it or not. Search it out before you laugh like the rest of the scorners of God's word, time is running short as we are in the endtime!

Ah, I see. You're insane. Makes sense now.

The Left Behind series: making utter delusion fun and cool, if poorly written.

I get the idea people get all hard about the "end of days" being upon us because in their mind, if it's supposed to happen sometime according to their religion, it might as well happen during their life, so they can say something exciting happened to their lives. Like the olden-time Vikings never experienced Ragnarok, you'll never see Revelations. Both provide entertaining reading, but are as grounded in reality as The Hobbit.

Heretic;759699 wrote:Ah, I see. You're insane. Makes sense now.

The Left Behind series: making utter delusion fun and cool, if poorly written.

I get the idea people get all hard about the "end of days" being upon us because in their mind, if it's supposed to happen sometime according to their religion, it might as well happen during their life, so they can say something exciting happened to their lives. Like the olden-time Vikings never experienced Ragnarok, you'll never see Revelations. Both provide entertaining reading, but are as grounded in reality as The Hobbit.

I love factless based opinion, your rant is no better and no more valid than his.

Exactly. Only Heretic's is more fun!

Thread Bomber;759746 wrote:Exactly. Only Heretic's is more fun!

Indeed. Which is the goal. Especially since most religion-based talk is factless opinion, unless one has legit proof that people were talked to by a burning bush, meticulously rounded up two of every animal for a boat ride and all of the other far out things that are considered "the truth".

Heretic;759699 wrote: but are as grounded in reality as The Hobbit.

Wait.... What?!?

FatHobbit;759755 wrote:Wait.... What?!?

I know. Me saying Middle-Earth isn't real is just more factless based opinion. I apologize for this inconvenience.

Wait until you see California drop into the ocean and see if you are still laughing then.

Heretic;759699 wrote:Ah, I see. You're insane. Makes sense now.

The Left Behind series: making utter delusion fun and cool, if poorly written.

I get the idea people get all hard about the "end of days" being upon us because in their mind, if it's supposed to happen sometime according to their religion, it might as well happen during their life, so they can say something exciting happened to their lives. Like the olden-time Vikings never experienced Ragnarok, you'll never see Revelations. Both provide entertaining reading, but are as grounded in reality as The Hobbit.

Oh, c'mon now! If you are going to start cracking jokes, at least get it right!

It's the book of Revelation. I guess one can say the whole book is comprised of revelations.

Heretic;759748 wrote:Indeed. Which is the goal. Especially since most religion-based talk is factless opinion, unless one has legit proof that people were talked to by a burning bush, meticulously rounded up two of every animal for a boat ride and all of the other far out things that are considered "the truth".

Noah didn't have to round up any animals the animals came to him and the burning bush appeared to Moses 1000's of years ago, what kind of proof do you want? eyewitness? Moses to tell you? The actual bush that was engulfed in flames? smh

Skyhook79;759804 wrote:Noah didn't have to round up any animals the animals came to him and the burning bush appeared to Moses 1000's of years ago, what kind of proof do you want? eyewitness? Moses to tell you? The actual bush that was engulfed in flames? smh

Well, that would work better than factless opinions (ie: a book that's essentially a historic account of the times combined with fairy tales UNLESS you already have the faith-based belief that it is word-for-word real). The latter part probably is a big part of the arguing between christians and non-believers. The former looks at their text as an absolute word-for-word truth...as someone in the latter group, I'd compare it to something like The Iliad. As in that I can believe in the Trojan War and that some warriors were so elite that their names have lived on in legends. All the parts about one deity or another personally taking a hand in the proceedings...not so plausible.

Skyhook79;759804 wrote:Noah didn't have to round up any animals the animals came to him and the burning bush appeared to Moses 1000's of years ago, what kind of proof do you want? eyewitness? Moses to tell you? The actual bush that was engulfed in flames? smh

you honestly believe that noah got 2 of every animal and brought them into a huge arc?

riders1;759789 wrote:Wait until you see California drop into the ocean and see if you are still laughing then.

if california is going to drop into the ocean it would've done it by now, it's not some "god" one day deciding to break it off....you are a lunatic

riders1;759157 wrote:God's word, not your thinking, believe it or not. Search it out before you laugh like the rest of the scorners of God's word, time is running short as we are in the endtime!

Show me, if you will, where God's Word claims that Branham. My Bible doesn't mention him once.

I don't scorn God's Word at all. I hold it with a great level of humility, which means I try incredibly hard not to read my own preconceptions into it (which, to be fair, is impossible at which to be perfect).

Moreover, what do you define as the "end times?" According to the reading of the New Testament, people have thought they were in the end times. Heck, the Apostles thought they were in the end times (one references being alive when Jesus comes back). However, what God's Word says about it is that it will happen "like a thief in the night," and that only the Father knows when it will be.

You know something the writers of God's Word didn't know?

riders1;759789 wrote:Wait until you see California drop into the ocean and see if you are still laughing then.

Dear sweet Moses! Tell me you jest! Moreover, I'd LOVE to hear where you find THIS reference in God's Word.

Signed,
A Follower of Christ

DeyDurkie5;759822 wrote:you honestly believe that noah got 2 of every animal and brought them into a huge arc?

Maybe he shrunk them. Maybe he supernaturally defied his own laws of physics. Maybe that happened longer ago than we think, and the evolutionary process had only produced a smaller number of species. Maybe the writer didn't give notion to "all the animals" being more than just those with which he was familiar. Maybe "every" animal was not said to be literal (not that different from someone telling you that "everyone" is coming to the party, when they don't actually mean "everyone in the world"), since ancient Semitic people didn't seem as obsessive about pinpoint factual accuracy as we are. Maybe it was completely allegorical.

Any is possible. It's also possible that one I didn't mention is the most true. I don't know, and quite frankly, I don't get all that up-in-arms about the literal accuracy of the Noahic story. Doesn't really change much, regardless of how it actually happened, I don't think.

O-Trap;759829 wrote:Maybe he shrunk them. Maybe he supernaturally defied his own laws of physics. Maybe that happened longer ago than we think, and the evolutionary process had only produced a smaller number of species. Maybe the writer didn't give notion to "all the animals" being more than just those with which he was familiar. Maybe "every" animal was not said to be literal (not that different from someone telling you that "everyone" is coming to the party, when they don't actually mean "everyone in the world"), since ancient Semitic people didn't seem as obsessive about pinpoint factual accuracy as we are. Maybe it was completely allegorical.

Any is possible. It's also possible that one I didn't mention is the most true. I don't know, and quite frankly, I don't get all that up-in-arms about the literal accuracy of the Noahic story. Doesn't really change much, regardless of how it actually happened, I don't think.

can you explain how jesus healed leoparcy? I mean I don't get how someone as smart as you, honestly believes the things written in the bible.

DeyDurkie5;759836 wrote:can you explain how jesus healed leoparcy? I mean I don't get how someone as smart as you, honestly believes the things written in the bible.

No idea how he did it, which I'm okay with.

I don't carry a preconception that the physical world and that which exists in it is the end-all of what can be determined as reality. Moreover, I contend that, given the limits of the physical world, and the limitlessness of the nonphysical world (not bound by physical or natural laws), it would only make sense that the nonphysical supersedes the physical, if not authoritatively, at least as it pertains to what can be comprehended.

From there, it's mostly the result of several years of questions with a good friend of mine (rest in peace) who had the kindness and intelligence to talk through a lot of my own worldview with me.

Went from scientific naturalism, to what I suppose you could call soft atheism, to maybe agnosticism, to loose supernaturalism, to loose theism, to hard theism, to monotheism, to Judeo-Christian monotheism, to a blend of Jewish and modern-day Christian monotheism, to a more and more Christian-leaning monotheism. From there, it became more personal to me, and I was able to experience elements of what it means to be a Christian. I naturally don't use these as tools for explaining epistemology, because they are anecdotal. However, an anecdote experienced by a person can be as telling as anything, and to me, it certainly has been.

Because of all this, I rarely try to "shotgun evangelize." That is, if someone does not even believe in any sort of non-natural, non-physical reality, then I certainly don't preach to them, "Get saved or be lost." That not only strikes me as disingenuous, but also as silly. It never appealed to me, so I have a hard time understanding how it appeals to others. Not saying it doesn't, but just that I don't get it.

Moreover, I still see a lot of validity in nontheism, if given certain presupposition, which is why I continue to have a great deal of respect for those who don't adopt theism because of actually contemplating and studying the subject.

However, if those presuppositions are removed, it's been my experience that scientific naturalism becomes the more difficult worldview. That's been my experience anyway.