Christianity and the End Times

Would that be so bad? No Phat, you don't.You take those pieces parts that YOU think work for what YOU want but already throw all the rest of the Bible (like the God of Genesis 1) away.

Not so much wrong as simply not honest even with themselves. Delusional might be more apt than wrong. (maybe even that is inaccurate and frightened might be the best description. They do not want their base challenged, it's scary and really unpleasant to face that and so simply refuse to consider throwing the dogma away.) What does "alive" even mean when talking about something supernatural? When you say stuff like "alive today" are you not imposing material and evidential characteristics to a non-material, non evidential concept? As you point out, my position is supported by what is actually written in the Bible stories not by the creations of the apologists. Ignorance is very often wide spread.Yes; most likely both. Then actually read the Bible Phat. It really is that simple. Then read what has been written over the last couple thousand years. Nothing I present is New.Edited by jar, : revise first answer towards frightened more than delusional

Not quite true Faith as you would admit if you had even a smidgen of honesty. What I do is point to what the Bible actually says and do not try to "interpret" anything.I have never doubted the apologists believe what they claim but that has nothing to do with whether or not they are being honest.

No Faith that is not true. I simply report what is written. I do not interpret it or make up shit to explain away the factual errors, contradictions, variations in accounts, editing and absurdities. Yet the fact remains that there is more than one creation story in the Bible and more than one flood story. Those are simply facts Faith and cannot be disputed by any honest person.Edited by jar, : there is an "e" in one

That is simply the false dishonest dogma of your cult Faith and not what is actually written in the Bible.There is the creation myth found in Genesis 1 and the creation account found in Genesis 2&3. The order of creation, methods of creation, and even the descriptions of the creator are different in each of the stories.

quote:

---

Genesis 1:
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

​

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

​

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

​

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

---

quote:

---

Genesis 2
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

​

8 And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.

​

9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

​

10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.

​

11 The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;

​

12 And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.

​

13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.

​

14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates.

​

15 And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

​

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

​

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

​

18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

​

19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

​

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

​

21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

​

22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

​

23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

---

In Genesis 1 the God character creates man & woman at the same time by an act of will alone while in the Genesis 2 fable God creates man first from mud and then clones woman later. In Genesis 1 the God character gives the fruit of all trees as food while in Genesis 2 one tree is said not to be eaten from. In Genesis 1 the God character is sure while in Genesis 2 the God character is ignorant and learns by trial and error. In Genesis 1 there is NO interaction between the God character and the creation while in Genesis 2 there is direct contact and interaction between the creator and creation.Those are not interpretations Faith; it is what is actually written in the two stories.

Yet Genesis 1 was written long, long, long after hye much earlier story found in Genesis 2&3 and the description of the God character in the two stories, the order and method of creation are still different and mutually exclusive.What you present is apologetics; an attempt to explain away the contradictions between the two accounts. What I present is what is actually written.

Yet the fact remains that I post what is actually written while you can only present the dogma of your Cult.

Again, that is simply misrepresenting my position.First, I do not say that the characters cannot be known since in many cases there are descriptions of the character just as I can know Hank Morgan (Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court) or Ishmael (only surviving crewman of the Pequod).That should have been clear since I have discussed the character of the God in Genesis 1 versus 2&3 versus the God of Exodus versus the God who wrestles with Jacob with you many times for over a decade now.The issue is that the descriptions are not consistent and in many cases are mutually exclusive so it is necessary to synthesize a God WE create if there is any hope of creating a uniform character.

I don't doubt that you believe that nonsense but where is the evidence we would do that?

Except in Lake Wobegon.Edited by jar, : No reason given.

Would you like to try to 'splain that Lucy?

According to Calvin and Calvinism it also will make absolutely no difference in your eternal life. Regardless of what you do if you are predestined to go to hell you will go to hell. That is the reason the God Calvin created and marketed is so utterly evil and despicable; worthy of nothing but scorn not approbation.

Actually Phat, your quote simply is another example of false prophesy and self-created fulfillment. Stop just searching for passages that you think MIGHT support your position. Go back and read John 17 in context. That means reading John 16 and John 15 and John 18 and John 19 ...What you post is a great example of John the revisionist, of John the creator of a new mythos; of John creating a new Jesus.First, the passage you quote takes place even before Jesus is arrested.At that time, no disciple had been lost.There is no evidence that Jesus protected any disciple.There is no evidence that any disciple died to fulfill some prophesy. How?

Classic example of the John word salad marketing; sounds great but is utter nonsense.If someone who has never even heard of Jesus feeds the hungry, clothes the naked, heals the sick, shelters the homeless, protects the weak, comforts the sorrowful, teaches the children are the hungry not fed, the naked not clothed, the sick not healed, the homeless not sheltered, the weak not protected, the sorrowful not comforted or the children not taught?John markets a great easy to sell product but what does it even mean?How do you remain in communion with Jesus?What does that even mean?And what I post is what is actually written in John, not interpretation.The passage you quoted takes place even before Jesus is arrested.At that time, no disciple had been lost.There is no evidence that Jesus protected any disciple.There is no evidence that any disciple died to fulfill some prophesy.Those are not interpretations but rather facts based on what was actually written in those parts of John.

How Phat? How does a supernatural creature exist in this current realm and how could anyone tell? Correct, a belief does not require any evidence, but what you suggest goes beyond belief. You suggest others should strive for some communion with Jesus.How?