Christianity and the End Times

quote:

---

Only when it is something that is definitely going to happen, which isn't the case with the if-then example you gave.

---

Jeremiah doesn’t make any such distinction. There is a prophecy that God will do something, but He changes his mind because of people’s actions in between the prophecy and the intended fulfilment. That is it.

Then he wouldn't have bothered to give that long list of good reasons why the "scholars" should be discredited. He merely used the term "leftist" as an apt adjective. I'd never thought of theologians as leftist but it is indeed very apt as he used it. The label wasn't necessary to discredit them, the list of their follies does that. The label just summed them up.And of course it's interesting that we are writing on a website that regularly labels and trashes the right wing, Trump supporters, second amendment supporters, the biblical worldview (we're all "haters" etc) but you are having a meltdown about the rare expression of the opposite viewpoint, to such an extent that the list of abuses of scholarship I was trying to highlight is completely eclipsed by your complaint. I guess he wasn't writing with you in mind since he didn't need to demonstrate it to me, I got it immediately. If you wanted to argue that he didn't even attempt to demonstrate the truth of his list of abuses of scholarship perhaps I would have tried to dig up some examples for you, but maybe you aren't objecting to that since it is pretty well known.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Jeremiah wouldn't have felt any need to point out the distinction since he was writing to people who understand how to read the Bible.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Jeremiah wouldn't have felt any need to point out the distinction since he was writing to people who understand how to read the Bible.

---

I don’t think that making things up to pretend that Faith is right is really the way that the Bible is meant to be read.

Nor do I.

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.

Yes you do. You invented a distinction - one which is absurdly only visible after the fact to pretend that Jeremiah wasn’t talking about prophecy. And that - according to you - is the way to read the Bible.You’re not stupid. You have to know you’re just making silly excuses to try to deny what Jeremiah said.

Yeah, sorry I tend to like the sites like Jihad Watch that tell the truth more than the leftist propaganda sites. Why not? He's embraced all the doctrinally antichristian religions of the world including atheism. I wouldn't put anything past this Pope.

I know he wasn't talking about prophecy. He was talking like a parent to an unruly child saying I'm going to punish you if you don't straighten up.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yes jar I know, and so does everybody who has read that part of the Bible. The first part is a general outline of the creation, the second gives more detail particularly about the creation of humanity.

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.

quote:

---

Yeah, sorry I tend to like the sites like Jihad Watch that tell the truth more than the leftist propaganda sites.

---

That’s really funny coming from someone that believes InfoWars.

quote:

---

Why not? He's embraced all the doctrinally antichristian religions of the world including atheism. I wouldn't put anything past this Pope

---

Because he hasn’t embraced any other religion to the extent of denying basic Christian doctrine and because there is no way such a move could fail to cause a split in the Catholic Church (they had a split over Masses in local languages instead of Latin!) - with the Pope in a very small minority this time.What would be the point in making a declaration that would basically cost him his position ?

And you just go on and on rejecting the Bible.Still that was one of my points in this thread, so thanks for providing such clear evidence.

If you believe there was that much time between the writing of the different accounts you are doing worse than apologetics, you are believing the usual ridiculous lies of the "scholars." Who probably gave you this crazy notion about the differences between the texts too. What is this bizarre attitude you have that the people who have read the Bible for millennia, not to mention generations of scribes who meticulously copied it and generations of priests and rabbis who studied it, wouldn't have noticed the things you pat yourself on the back for noticing? You're talking about a writing the Jews heard read to them year after year after year and you think somehow only you can see things that escaped their notice?

Granted, except that we seek to know the character in the books.We have been down this rabbit trail before. I will say that God and/or Jesus is knowable and you will ask me how would I ever be able to tell.I fully understand jars approach to reporting only what is written rather than what anyone wants it to say. The main reason that I find this of limited value as teaching is that jar always approaches the stories as just stories rather than the possibility that the character within the stories (OK...for the sake of argument, characters) can become personal and known---even to a limited degree. I agree to an extent, Faith. I have previously brought up the idea that I have never before seen the idea that the snake told the truth while God lied.As for the possibility that God can and does change His mind, would that not also mean that any and all end times prophecy (which my side sees, anyway) could theoretically never happen due to God changing His mind? And if so, what does the Creator expect from us?