Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   'Some still living' disproves literal truth of the bible
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 128 of 479 (558242)
04-30-2010 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by ICANT
10-14-2009 2:33 AM


Re: Circular Reasoning
Nope.. not entirely.
There is this little factor of 'collaborating evidence'. The one thing about encyclopedias is they provide their sources. .. and it is the original source that matters, not the summation by the encylopedia.
It is a matter of primary vs secondary vs Tertiary sources. An encylopedia would be far down the food chain, while primary and secondary sources would be given higher

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by ICANT, posted 10-14-2009 2:33 AM ICANT has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 249 of 479 (562594)
05-31-2010 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by jaywill
05-14-2010 10:41 AM


Re: Sure not the Transfiguration
It seems to me that to interpret one set of lines to mean what you want, you have to keep on jumping all over the place to find phrases to justify it. IMO, that is trying to find a decoder ring to figure out a puzzle, rather than just doing a straight reading of the text. If you read Matthew as a whole, you do not get it to be a prediction for 2000, 3000, or 4000 years in the future.
For you to justify your interpretation, you have to bring in a whole bunch of non contextual quotes from all over the place. If things have to be complicated to justify the interpretation, that interpretation is probably wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by jaywill, posted 05-14-2010 10:41 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by jaywill, posted 05-31-2010 11:35 AM ramoss has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 252 of 479 (562607)
05-31-2010 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 251 by jaywill
05-31-2010 11:35 AM


Re: Sure not the Transfiguration
And??.. If you look at the writings of Peter, in context of what is the writer of the Gospel of Peter is talking about and in Paul's letter in context of the letter of Paul , it does not make your case. The Gospel of John is so corrupted by so many people having their finger in the pie it would be difficult to figure out what the original author had verses what has modified later.
If you read Matthew, in context with Mathew, it specifically falsifies you claim. The requirement to turn the book of Mathew into a giant puzzle with little out of context quotes from other authors insures you are not understanding what the author of the Gospel of Matthew was saying. For what the author fo the Gospel of Matthew is says, you can't look at the any other gospel or letter. You have to look at the Gospel of Matthew. What is that author saying? You have to look at when it is written, where it was written, and who the audience was.
The need to skip to every other place in the bible, and ignore those issues is to insure your reading your prejudices INTO the text, rather than reading from the text.
Theology by sound bits is not sound theology.
Edited by ramoss, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by jaywill, posted 05-31-2010 11:35 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 253 by jaywill, posted 05-31-2010 12:41 PM ramoss has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 277 of 479 (563114)
06-03-2010 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by jaywill
06-03-2010 9:24 AM


quote:
According to your supplied definition of generation - THIS generation means this group of His contemporaries.
If one of the people in the crowd had died in 24 hours would "THIS generation" still exist? I say yes.
If someone was born in the next 48 hours would she be a part of "THIS generation". I say yes.
Are you of the same generation as Lincoln? The answer is obviously 'No' since there is no one alive when Lincoln was alive when you were born.
Generally speaking, if someone is born 20 years or more from another person, they are considered in 'a different generation'

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by jaywill, posted 06-03-2010 9:24 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by jaywill, posted 06-03-2010 2:05 PM ramoss has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 279 of 479 (563158)
06-03-2010 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 278 by jaywill
06-03-2010 2:05 PM


quote:
That is different Ramoss. Lincoln did not resurrect from the dead like Jesus.
That is totally not relevant to what a 'generation' is. As a matter of fact, that is one big red herring.
quote:
For argument's sake I adopted the position that "this generation" was meant to be the comtemporaries of Jesus.
Now if you believe that Jesus is dead then the case of Lincoln would be similar. If you believe as Jesus taught and affirmed that He is "the resurrection and the life" then I am a contemporary of Jesus in the year 2010 AD.
The western world adopted a view of history the birth of Jesus and forward, were the years of our Lord, meaning we live in the years of the resurrected and exalted Christ Jesus, Lord - Anno Domini or Year of our Lord referring to the year of Christ’s birth.
And for the sake of the argument, every one of the people who were contemporary with Jesus is now dead. Jesus himself 'Tasted death', if you accept the bible. Therefore, the entire passage is a failed prediction.
The only way you are attempting to 'prove the literal truth' of that is so distorting language as to bend it out of shape and massacre it. And the fact the western world was under the domination of the Catholic Church so long that it adopted their dating system is relevant to the meaning of 'this generation'. That is a massive red herring.
If you have to do 'Theology by jigsaw puzzle' to justify your beliefs there is something seriously wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by jaywill, posted 06-03-2010 2:05 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by jaywill, posted 06-03-2010 5:59 PM ramoss has not replied
 Message 281 by jaywill, posted 06-03-2010 6:13 PM ramoss has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 282 of 479 (563208)
06-03-2010 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by jaywill
06-03-2010 6:13 PM


quote:
Can you find any indication in the discourse of Christ concerning His second coming that hints that He might delay His coming?
In the parable of the ten virgins He used the word delayed.
"And while the bridegroom [meaning Jesus] DELAYED, they [ten virgins] all became droqwsy and slept." (Matt. 25:5)
In other words, 'This generation' does not mean 'this generation' because of vague symbolism you wish to interpret in a way that has nothing to do with the passages talking about 'This generation'.
Obviously, you want to read into the parable, rather than take from the parable. It has nothing to do with 'this generation' or not. You are stretching one word.. 'tarried' in the KJV, and boost up it's importance so much you are missing the meaning of the entire parable.
That is jig saw puzzle theology, and you miss the picture for trying to figure out a cryptograph that isn't there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by jaywill, posted 06-03-2010 6:13 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by jaywill, posted 06-04-2010 2:48 AM ramoss has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 288 of 479 (563288)
06-04-2010 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 285 by jaywill
06-04-2010 2:48 AM


What translation are you using??
Now, you are using single WORDS in a disconnected sentence, all translated from the original, and you are not making your case at all. It is one giant red herring.
Every case you mention , does not say that 'This generation' is more than the people present, and it is not making your case at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 285 by jaywill, posted 06-04-2010 2:48 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by jaywill, posted 06-05-2010 7:01 AM ramoss has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 297 of 479 (563518)
06-05-2010 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 292 by jaywill
06-04-2010 9:23 PM


quote:
Matthew 25:1-13, the parable of the ten virgins, is right in the middle of Christ's prophecies and teachings about preparation for His second coming. So it is certainly not out of context.
Except of course, the topic at hand was 'the meaning of this generation', and has nothing to do with the parable about the virgins. Focus!!!!
quote:
Now you are saying what I have been saying. The word "delayed" is opened ended. As you say "one second to thousands of years".
That still does not address the meaning of ' THIS GENERATION You are clutching at straws here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by jaywill, posted 06-04-2010 9:23 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by jaywill, posted 06-05-2010 4:41 PM ramoss has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 298 of 479 (563520)
06-05-2010 1:48 PM
Reply to: Message 296 by jaywill
06-05-2010 7:49 AM


I am trying to see what anything you wrote has anything to do with the subject at hand. I see a whole bunch of discombobulated phrases that do not address the central theme of what 'This generation' could possibly mean.
You are jumping all over the place, but not addressing this issue.
It seems to me that the one point that I am finding is the fact that so many very religious Christians spend so much time explaining why the words in the bible do not mean what the words in the bible says.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by jaywill, posted 06-05-2010 7:49 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by jaywill, posted 06-05-2010 4:51 PM ramoss has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 314 of 479 (563798)
06-06-2010 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 310 by jaywill
06-06-2010 1:51 PM


Re: Waiting and wading
quote:
Your ignorance of the fact that "generation" in verse 34 is defined by moral and spiritual condition of the leaders of Israel rather then the chronology and life span, is why you regard Matt. 24:34 as a failed prophecy.
It is your claim that 'this generation' is define by moral and spiritual condition. You are trying to rationalize your belief system, but you are unable to use the context of matthew 24 to make that point. Using out of context phrases from all over the place that have nothing to do with the context of Matt 24:34 does not make for a coherent or logical argument.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 310 by jaywill, posted 06-06-2010 1:51 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 315 by jaywill, posted 06-06-2010 10:03 PM ramoss has not replied
 Message 316 by jaywill, posted 06-06-2010 10:03 PM ramoss has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 342 of 479 (563973)
06-07-2010 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 336 by jaywill
06-07-2010 11:58 AM


Re: Moral generation vs Chronological generation
Well, that is hardly 'proof' at all. ... I dont' see who it addresses the concept of 'moral generation' at all.
As for Jesus being the 'Jewish Messiah', the Jewish faith did not recognize him because he did not do that things that were required. It is only after those things are accomplished will someone be acknowledged as the Jewish Messiah.
There is the little thing as making a new King over Israel, from the 'seed of david' (unbroken male line from David.. no women or adopted children need apply), the torah being the center of all religious worship in the world, a 1000 years of no wars anyplace, and things like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 336 by jaywill, posted 06-07-2010 11:58 AM jaywill has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 422 of 479 (567929)
07-03-2010 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 407 by jaywill
06-14-2010 10:59 AM


A 'prophecy' that is extended indefinitely to the future is a failed prophecy...
What do you think is a reasonable time period.??

This message is a reply to:
 Message 407 by jaywill, posted 06-14-2010 10:59 AM jaywill has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024