# How long to wait for Jesus would be too long?



## atlashunter (Jun 9, 2018)

Saw a comment from someone the other day, “Jesus is coming soon”. Christians have been saying that for two thousand years. Is there some length of time at which point a Christian should say “maybe we were wrong”?


----------



## tell sackett (Jun 9, 2018)

No


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2018)

It’s not like we are just standing in line waiting...........we made reservations.............. we will keep hunting, fishing, vacationing and everything else that makes us happy until our name is called.


----------



## Israel (Jun 10, 2018)

The Lord always comes...
In a moment...in the twinkling of an eye.
None can stop it...but one can believe it.


----------



## Havana Dude (Jun 10, 2018)

It will better if we are are wrong, than if you are wrong.


----------



## ky55 (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Saw a comment from someone the other day, “Jesus is coming soon”. Christians have been saying that for two thousand years. Is there some length of time at which point a Christian should say “maybe we were wrong”?



There’s an option for the ones who get tired of waiting around:

http://www.preterist.org/about-us/what-is-preterist-view/

And they have scripture to support it. 


*


----------



## bullethead (Jun 10, 2018)

Havana Dude said:


> It will better if we are are wrong, than if you are wrong.


This quote needs to be on the other thread.

But, Havanna Dude, can you explain that line of thought further?

We both may be wrong we each may have spent our entire lives not doing the right things to ensure a quality afterlife with a diety that exists and is not the god you worship.

You better start covering more bases.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

ky55 said:


> There’s an option for the ones who get tired of waiting around:
> 
> http://www.preterist.org/about-us/what-is-preterist-view/
> 
> ...



Wouldn’t surprise me if they were in the majority in another couple thousand years.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

ky55 said:


> There’s an option for the ones who get tired of waiting around:
> 
> http://www.preterist.org/about-us/what-is-preterist-view/
> 
> ...


Everyone has a scripture to support their views. Even atheist will throw one out their to prove their point

I don’t know anything about these folks other than they’re admitting they’re looking at it differently. But for the most part, waiting doesn’t affect our way of life. It’s not a bummer to see the sunrise every morning.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Everyone has a scripture to support their views. Even atheist will throw one out their to prove their point
> 
> I don’t know anything about these folks other than they’re admitting they’re looking at it differently. But for the most part, waiting doesn’t affect our way of life. It’s not a bummer to see the sunrise every morning.



I wasn’t suggesting that. The claim he is coming soon is an expectation. What is that expectation based on? If I ask most that they will point to the Bible. So when “soon” turns into a couple thousand years hasn’t “soon” already expired? If you’re expecting a visitor to your house “soon” (acknowledging you’ve got plenty to keep you busy in the interim) and two thousand years later you’re still saying they will be there soon, well if that doesn’t indicate you might be mistaken what length of time would? Had Jesus lived 5,000 years ago, or 10,000, or 25,000 and all that time believers were saying “any day now” maybe it might be time to revisit the original premise?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Everyone has a scripture to support their views. Even atheist will throw one out their to prove their point
> 
> I don’t know anything about these folks other than they’re admitting they’re looking at it differently. But for the most part, waiting doesn’t affect our way of life. It’s not a bummer to see the sunrise every morning.


It's not so much about a quick death to get to see Jesus but WHEN is Jesus going to show up back on earth like promised?
It's been almost 2000 years. How much longer until he shows?


----------



## ky55 (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Everyone has a scripture to support their views. Even atheist will throw one out their to prove their point



That’s the convenient ambiguity of the “Inspired Word”.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> I wasn’t suggesting that. The claim he is coming soon is an expectation. What is that expectation based on? If I ask most that they will point to the Bible. So when “soon” turns into a couple thousand years hasn’t “soon” already expired? If you’re expecting a visitor to your house “soon” (acknowledging you’ve got plenty to keep you busy in the interim) and two thousand years later you’re still saying they will be there soon, well if that doesn’t indicate you might be mistaken what length of time would? Had Jesus lived 5,000 years ago, or 10,000, or 25,000 and all that time believers were saying “any day now” maybe it might be time to revisit the original premise?


 If you look at with just that.....you have a point. But for us, a day for the Lord is like a thousand years. When people say we are living in the last days it’s an indication of how corrupt they believe we have become. It’s not saying it’s close to 6,000 years. There’s signs of prophecy that we believe in that tell us about the last days. And just because we think we are seeing some of those signs is still no indication to try to time stamp anything.


bullethead said:


> It's not so much about a quick death to get to see Jesus but WHEN is Jesus going to show up back on earth like promised?
> It's been almost 2000 years. How much longer until he shows?


 we don’t know. I’m not being a jerk by saying this but it’s the reality of it, we just keep living our lives until our name is called through death or his actual coming.


ky55 said:


> That’s the convenient ambiguity of the “Inspired Word”.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

“a day for the lord is like a thousand years” I knew that one was coming. For an eternal being wouldn’t it also be like a million years or a billion years?

Riddle me this... If the first coming took centuries from prophecy to fulfillment why would the second coming take multiple thousands of years? What exactly is the wait for?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> “a day for the lord is like a thousand years” I knew that one was coming. For an eternal being wouldn’t it also be like a million years or a billion years?
> 
> Riddle me this... If the first coming took centuries from prophecy to fulfillment why would the second coming take multiple thousands of years? What exactly is the wait for?


We didn’t make the plans.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> We didn’t make the plans.



Another way of saying “I don’t know”.  A tip of the hat for your honesty. But the question remains. If a prediction is made that some event is coming soon shouldn’t each passing year, century, millennia that it doesn’t happen give more credence to the possibility the prediction was false?


----------



## hummerpoo (Jun 10, 2018)

I have not known anyone who waited much more than 100 years.

Which fits nicely with this "doodle" — for which I thank my brother Israel, who posted it some time ago.


----------



## Jack Ryan (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Saw a comment from someone the other day, “Jesus is coming soon”. Christians have been saying that for two thousand years. Is there some length of time at which point a Christian should say “maybe we were wrong”?


What is your "other" option?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

Jack Ryan said:


> What is your "other" option?



Other option to what? Acknowledging a prophecy is false?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Another way of saying “I don’t know”.  A tip of the hat for your honesty. But the question remains. If a prediction is made that some event is coming soon shouldn’t each passing year, century, millennia that it doesn’t happen give more credence to the possibility the prediction was false?


If the prediction says within an “X” number of years or after a certain event or before the end of “X” then yes. 

If I’m promised a certain inheritance from my parents and after their death I didn’t get it, that makes that a false promise.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 10, 2018)

Just thinking out loud here -
A Christian today hasn't felt/experienced/actually "waited" for 2000 years.
They've only physically/mentally experienced "waiting" for a certain number of years but within their lifetime.
As humans, if we can envision things happening within our lifetime then "waiting" seems much more acceptable/not as long/doesn't ring the warning bell.
Sure they may" know" its been 2000 years but that's just a tidbit of information that sits way in the cheap seats and doesn't really come in to play.
Its viewed in context of within their life not 2000 years.
So basically the timer gets reset with every generation.
And that may not make a lick of sense but I know what I meant


----------



## bullethead (Jun 10, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Just thinking out loud here -
> A Christian today hasn't felt/experienced/actually "waited" for 2000 years.
> They've only physically/mentally experienced "waiting" for a certain number of years but within their lifetime.
> As humans, if we can envision things happening within our lifetime then "waiting" seems much more acceptable/not as long/doesn't ring the warning bell.
> ...


Matthew 24:1-34 would have us believe that it would happen within that generation.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> If the prediction says within an “X” number of years or after a certain event or before the end of “X” then yes.
> 
> If I’m promised a certain inheritance from my parents and after their death I didn’t get it, that makes that a false promise.


The only thing that complicates that ^ is the use of the word "soon". (Jesus is coming soon).
You can get a bazillion answers about what "soon" means but soon is not "whenever".


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 10, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Matthew 24:1-34 would have us believe that it would happen within that generation.


That's a whole other debate but yeah it does have the "soon" argument going for it


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> If the prediction says within an “X” number of years or after a certain event or before the end of “X” then yes.



Matthew 24
34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Matthew 24
> 34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.


That's pretty specific -


> 34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away


Ahhh yes, theres something we can make mean whatever we want to  


> until all these things have happened


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Matthew 24
> 34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.


Back on up a few scriptures and explain it rather pick a scripture.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

Revelation 1
3 Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.

^This indicates the time is near in the context of those who hear and receive the message.

Revelation 22
6 The angel said to me, “These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God who inspires the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place.”

^John is told these events are to take place soon.


7 “Look, I am coming soon! Blessedis the one who keeps the words of the prophecy written in this scroll.”

^John is told Jesus is coming soon.


10 Then he told me, “Do not seal upthe words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near.

^John is told he must not delay in getting this message out because these events will be happening soon. This conveys a sense of urgency for his generation.


12 “Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done.

^Once again reiterated he is coming soon. Get ready!

20 He who testifies to these thingssays, “Yes, I am coming soon.”
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.

^And again! I’m coming soon! I think he was trying to get the point across that he was returning soon. This was the message to John and his generation. Now John and all of his brethren are long since dead. This prophecy remains unfulfilled. So what was the urgency of getting the message to them? Where’s the beef?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Back on up a few scriptures and explain it rather pick a scripture.


Matthew 24:1-33 set up 34 quite nicely


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Back on up a few scriptures and explain it rather pick a scripture.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> The only thing that complicates that ^ is the use of the word "soon". (Jesus is coming soon).
> You can get a bazillion answers about what "soon" means but soon is not "whenever".


Complicates it for who??  

Here’s the thing that most atheist don’t understand about a lot of Christians, for us its really simple.......you either believe it or you don’t.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Matthew 24:1-33 set up 34 quite nicely





atlashunter said:


>


No atlas,.............get it in context. Y’all quoted Matthew. Explain it. I’m not doing your work for you. 

Tell us about the prophecy of Daniel, the tribulation period , the rise of the anti-Christ, the two witnesses dead in the streets......etc. and tell us when those have already happened.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Complicates it for who??
> 
> Here’s the thing that most atheist don’t understand about a lot of Christians, for us its really simple.......you either believe it or you don’t.



Then why is the Bible full of letters to Christians urging them to be patient and assuring them the second coming would be soon?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> No atlas,.............get it in context. Y’all quoted Matthew. Explain it. I’m not doing your work for you.
> 
> Tell us about the prophecy of Daniel, the tribulation period , the rise of the anti-Christ, the two witnesses dead in the streets......etc. and tell us when those have already happened.



I’m not aware that those have happened. But then I’m not equipped with special Holy Spirit reading glasses like believers are. Maybe you could help me out with what this verse is referring to.

2 “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another;every one will be thrown down.”


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Then why is the Bible full of letters to Christians urging them to be patient and assuring them the second coming would be soon?


Cause it coming. You can probably tell us as good as any on how long you wait before you decide when it’s been long enough.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Revelation 1
> 3 Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.
> 
> ^This indicates the time is near in the context of those who hear and receive the message.
> ...




Look at that.  Atlas has become a preterist.   Before you know it, Hobbs will be in here, double teaming with him, and yelling '70AD, 70AD'


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Cause it coming. You can probably tell us as good as any on how long you wait before you decide when it’s been long enough.



*Hebrews 10:25* Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another - and all the more as you see the day approaching.

*Hebrews 10:37* For in just a very little while, "He who is coming will come and will not delay.

2,000 years might be a “very little while” to an eternal deity but not to mortals living in antiquity. Turns out there was a delay. A delay of 2,000 years and counting. If early Christians were already discouraged back then imagine if you had told them 2,000 years from now his coming still will have not happened.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Complicates it for who??
> 
> Here’s the thing that most atheist don’t understand about a lot of Christians, for us its really simple.......you either believe it or you don’t.





> Complicates it for who??


Whoever uses this as their reasoning -


> If the prediction says within an “X” number of years or after a certain event or before the end of “X” then yes.


Because "soon" describes the duration of a period of time just like X number of years or after a certain event.
While not a specific period of time it denotes sooner not later. Close not far. Shorter not longer......
But yes I guess it would depend on whether one sees the complication or not.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> No atlas,.............get it in context. Y’all quoted Matthew. Explain it. I’m not doing your work for you.
> 
> Tell us about the prophecy of Daniel, the tribulation period , the rise of the anti-Christ, the two witnesses dead in the streets......etc. and tell us when those have already happened.


All that was to happen within that generation of people.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> I’m not aware that those have happened. But then I’m not equipped with special Holy Spirit reading glasses like believers are. Maybe you could help me out with what this verse is referring to.
> 
> 2 “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another;every one will be thrown down.”


Lol it doesn’t take Holy Spirit  reading glasses 

I’m not an expert by all means but it’s got a lot to do with the destruction of the temple that the disciples thought was the end. Jesus told them the end was not yet. 

Wasn’t the Jews Gods chosen people? We’re they not promised restoration? Israel - May 14, 1948 means what?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

bullethead said:


> All that was to happen within that generation of people.


That hasn’t  taken place yet........


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 10, 2018)

bullethead said:


> All that was to happen within that generation of people.


That's what I meant by this -
Ahhh yes, theres something we can make mean whatever we want to -
"until all these things have happened"
The argument to "this generation" is -


> and tell us when those have already happened.


Hobbs can tell you exactly when they happened. And he will be met with "No that's inaccurate.. this didn't happen yet".
So if "it" didn't happen yet neither did the generation they are talking about.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Whoever uses this as their reasoning -But yes I guess it would depend on whether one sees the complication or not.


If one needs a reason, then yes.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Lol it doesn’t take Holy Spirit  reading glasses
> 
> I’m not an expert by all means but it’s got a lot to do with the destruction of the temple that the disciples thought was the end. Jesus told them the end was not yet.
> 
> Wasn’t the Jews Gods chosen people? We’re they not promised restoration? Israel - May 14, 1948 means what?



Did the generation that witnessed the destruction of the temple pass?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Did the generation that witnessed the destruction of the temple pass?


 Read Daniels prophecy.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> That's what I meant by this -
> Ahhh yes, theres something we can make mean whatever we want to -
> "until all these things have happened"
> The argument to "this generation" is -
> ...


We haven’t seen an anti-Christ set up yet


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

But y’all are doing good!! Glad to see y’all digging in the Bible !


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Just thinking out loud here -
> A Christian today hasn't felt/experienced/actually "waited" for 2000 years.
> They've only physically/mentally experienced "waiting" for a certain number of years but within their lifetime.
> As humans, if we can envision things happening within our lifetime then "waiting" seems much more acceptable/not as long/doesn't ring the warning bell.
> ...


Well you know anything is possible...........if I find out that someone reset the clock on me


----------



## bullethead (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> But y’all are doing good!! Glad to see y’all digging in the Bible !


Dug.
Been there and done that many times.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Did the generation that witnessed the destruction of the temple pass?



 Well? Did they or not?


----------



## matt79brown (Jun 10, 2018)

I'm not sure when He will return, but I wouldn't buy any green bananas.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 10, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Well? Did they or not?


What does the destruction of the temple that they were showing Jesus have to do with Daniels prophecy?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 10, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> What does the destruction of the temple that they were showing Jesus have to do with Daniels prophecy?



What does Daniel have to do with the question you're attempting to avoid answering for obvious reasons? Matthew 24:2 as you said is referring to the coming destruction of the temple which happened in 70 CE. In verse 34 he says this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened. The generation that witnessed the destruction of the temple in 70 CE has passed away but not everything he predicted has happened. It's a failed prophecy. Your avoidance of what was a very easy yes or no question tells me you understand this.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> What does Daniel have to do with the question you're attempting to avoid answering for obvious reasons? Matthew 24:2 as you said is referring to the coming destruction of the temple which happened in 70 CE. In verse 34 he says this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened. The generation that witnessed the destruction of the temple in 70 CE has passed away but not everything he predicted has happened. It's a failed prophecy. Your avoidance of what was a very easy yes or no question tells me you understand this.



Let me help you out............

In Vs 1- The Disciples are showing Jesus the buildings of the temple.

You asked for insight of verse 2 - Jesus says "see ye not all these things? Verily I say unto you, there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down" - he is talking about the buildings of the temple.

This is what I said - "_I’m not an expert by all means but it’s got a lot to do with the destruction of the temple that the disciples thought was the end. Jesus told them the end was not yet"_

And you asked this "did the generation that witnessed the destruction of the temple pass?" - and I replied with this "_What does the destruction of the temple that they were showing Jesus have to do with Daniels prophecy?"_

That temple was indeed destroyed and the foundations of it ordered to be dug up.

The disciples thought the destruction of it was the end.

They go to the mount of Olives and ask Jesus to tell them what the signs would be.

Matthew 24:15 says when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel...........

The prophecy of Daniel has some meat to the scriptures that you picked, and the discussion of your own thread wanting to know how long do you wait on Jesus.

"the abomination of desolation" is when the antichrist ends organized religion and sets himself in the temple and demands to be worshiped. Refer also to 2 Thessalonians 2 somewhere around verse 3, 4, 5 and maybe 6.

If you know anything about the Jews, the temple is sacred.

If you have studied much of the Bible at all, you know that the Jews would return to the promised land...............and I am sure that you are aware of the new temple plans.

The generation that sees all of these signs beginning in verse 4 is the generation that will not pass...........and notice it does not list the destruction of the temple they were looking at as a sign.

Look at your world events, notice the Jews heading home and plans of a new temple in the works............and that temple will be built....and think about what generation is seeing all of those signs.

Not a failed prophecy.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

I was with you right up to the bit about the "abomination of desolation". That is a much debated term as is the meaning of the prophecy in Daniel you're referring to. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abomination_of_desolation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_Seventy_Weeks

In the context of Matthew which is believed to have been written within a decade or two after the destruction of the temple it probably refers to Rome which brought desolation to the Jews in the first Jewish-Roman war.

What isn't as debatable is that he is talking about the destruction of the second temple. Let's look again.

Mark
13 As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!”

2 “Do you see all these great buildings?” replied Jesus. “Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4 “Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?”

Matthew
24 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”


What things are they referring to? The destruction of the second temple he just told them of in the previous verse. The destruction of the second temple wasn't separate from the signs of the coming end. It went together with the rest of the signs. Both in their asking the question of when would these events happen and in the answer that included the conquest of Jerusalem and desecration of holy ground following the destruction of the temple. It must have felt like the end of the world to first century Jews and we see this repeated over and over again in the early Christian writings that his return is near.

All of the signs match what they were experiencing with the Roman conquest right up to the part that says "Immediately after the distress of those days".

Matthew
29 “Immediately after the distress of those days

“‘the sun will be darkened,
    and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
    and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’[b]
30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth[c] will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.[d] 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

32 “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it[e] is near, right at the door. 34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Mark
24 “But in those days, following that distress,

“‘the sun will be darkened,
    and the moon will not give its light;
25 the stars will fall from the sky,
    and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’[c]
26 “At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. 27 And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.

28 “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 29 Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that it[d] is near, right at the door. 30 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Notice again, no mention in these passages of a reestablishment of Israel or a rebuilding of a third temple. Nor of any notable period of time between the destruction of the temple and the rest of the events.

Sorry but 2,000+ years doesn't qualify by any stretch of the imagination as "immediately after" the distress of those days. Not even by the standards of other biblical prophecies. This was all supposed to happen within a single generation. If you try to move the goalposts by saying these signs were separate from the destruction of the temple (in spite of them all being tied together in the gospels) then you have a problem with every place in the bible where the early Christians are telling each other he is coming soon.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

Didn’t say either mentioned the building of the new temple. But the temple must be built in order for the “abomination of desolation” to occur. 

If you want to rely on Wikipedia for your source, that’s fine.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Didn’t say either mentioned the building of the new temple. But the temple must be built in order for the “abomination of desolation” to occur.
> 
> If you want to rely on Wikipedia for your source, that’s fine.



Also doesn’t say that in the gospels and we know that no early Christian read it that way because they knew the temple was destroyed but still thought he was coming soon.

Wikipedia is a general reference and includes sources for the various interpretations (of which yours is only one) documented. I have yet to see any sources from you.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 11, 2018)

atheist arguing over what scripture says and exactly what it means.

Hmmm.    Reminds me of my small children arguing over which bear was going to like the porridge.  I mean if you don't believe it to be real, what difference does it make to you what it says?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> atheist arguing over what scripture says and exactly what it means.
> 
> Hmmm.    Reminds me of my small children arguing over which bear was going to like the porridge.  I mean if you don't believe it to be real, what difference does it make to you what it says?



We aren’t talking about what atheists believe we are talking about what Christians believe and particularly what the early Christians believed.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> atheist arguing over what scripture says and exactly what it means.
> 
> Hmmm.    Reminds me of my small children arguing over which bear was going to like the porridge.  I mean if you don't believe it to be real, what difference does it make to you what it says?


According to scripture, god sends bears to eat children. Read them that story at bedtime. They won't argue over bears anymore.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> That hasn’t  taken place yet........





Spotlite said:


> If one needs a reason, then yes.





NE GA Pappy said:


> atheist arguing over what scripture says and exactly what it means.
> 
> Hmmm.    Reminds me of my small children arguing over which bear was going to like the porridge.  I mean if you don't believe it to be real, what difference does it make to you what it says?


Has it occurred to you that whether Atheists believe it or not that religion/Christianity has played, does play and will play, a gigantic part in the history of the US and the world and that makes it worth talking/debating/discussing about?
It appears the Atheists here find YOUR religion/beliefs more important/put it on a higher level/consider it more worldly significant....... than you do.
I'm guessing you never considered that angle while focusing on "what do Atheists care".


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Also doesn’t say that in the gospels and we know that no early Christian read it that way because they knew the temple was destroyed but still thought he was coming soon.
> 
> Wikipedia is a general reference and includes sources for the various interpretations (of which yours is only one) documented. I have yet to see any sources from you.


Understood. I have no issue with how you get your info or establish your outcome. That is your choice of study. But I wasn't quoting scripture, only responding to your question.

Like I said, I am no expert,
My core study involves the Bible itself and other biblical sources, foremost. There are many places scripturally from the old and new testament to study about the "coming of Jesus". 

Other sources are used with the consideration that two sources "could" interpret the same way on a topic in one area, and differ a little with that topic in other areas.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Has it occurred to you that whether Atheists believe it or not that religion/Christianity has played, does play and will play, a gigantic part in the history of the US and the world and that makes it worth talking/debating/discussing about?
> It appears the Atheists here find YOUR religion/beliefs more important/put it on a higher level/consider it more worldly significant....... than you do.
> I'm guessing you never considered that angle while focusing on "what do Atheists care".



We know it does. We know it is worth discussing, that's what I have been doing.

But when it gets into "have I considered all gods" or "we went one god further" or "use the same reasoning for that one god that you dismissed the rest with" then it is no longer about how our religion affects all of us. It is more of why we are wrong and you are right.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Has it occurred to you that whether Atheists believe it or not that religion/Christianity has played, does play and will play, a gigantic part in the history of the US and the world and that makes it worth talking/debating/discussing about?
> It appears the Atheists here find YOUR religion/beliefs more important/put it on a higher level/consider it more worldly significant....... than you do.


I have an idea of where this is headed, but tell me how my believing in what I do affects you.

I almost posted something on this yesterday but thought it was off topic. 

Simply leaving it at what we believe or do not believe is not an issue for you or I if I read you correctly.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> We know it does. We know it is worth discussing, that's what I have been doing.
> 
> But when it gets into "have I considered all gods" or "we went one god further" or "use the same reasoning for that one god that you dismissed the rest with" then it is no longer about how our religion affects all of us. It is more of why we are wrong and you are right.


Think about that some more.
The impact Christianity has had and will have on history (positive and negative) is based on its beliefs.
That history past and present and future impacts THE WORLD.
We ALL live in the world.
As long as religion exists there never will be a -



> no longer about how our religion affects all of us.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> We know it does. We know it is worth discussing, that's what I have been doing.
> 
> But when it gets into "have I considered all gods" or "we went one god further" or "use the same reasoning for that one god that you dismissed the rest with" then it is no longer about how our religion affects all of us. It is more of why we are wrong and you are right.




<iframe width="560" height="315" src="



" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

You obviously don't think the God of the Muslims is real or you would worship him.  You might even have some issue with their scriptures or how they interpret and act on them.  I have issues with them AND you.  Some of the issues are the same and some are unique to the respective religions.  For me, this thread is important because it questions why you believe in your particular text.  The same criticisms can be used for any other of the popular texts.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I have an idea of where this is headed, but tell me how my believing in what I do affects you.
> 
> I almost posted something on this yesterday but thought it was off topic.
> 
> Simply leaving it at what we believe or do not believe is not an issue for you or I if I read you correctly.





> but tell me how my believing in what I do affects you.


What you personally do will probably have  little to no negative affect on my life.
However a whole bunch of "you's" put together is different. And it doesn't even have to be "you's" that does anything wrong to me. If "they" don't like "you's" they kill "me" too. 


> Simply leaving it at what we believe or do not believe is not an issue for you


Yes and No.
I support and will defend your right to believe/worship in God.
However yes I do have some issues about how your beliefs have or can affect me (see above as an example). Which I think is pretty normal. Not much different from Dem vs Repub or Conservative vs Liberal etc etc.
Would I take away your right to believe/worship in God just so I can feel safer or better or whatever?
No.
Could Christianity "go too far" with it and cause me to change that? 
Yes.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 11, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> What you personally do will probably have  little to no negative affect on my life.
> However a whole bunch of "you's" put together is different. And it doesn't even have to be "you's" that does anything wrong to me. If "they" don't like "you's" they kill "me" too.
> 
> Yes and No.
> ...



So, you don't care what we believe, as long as we don't really practice what we believe?  Did I get that right?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> We know it does. We know it is worth discussing, that's what I have been doing.
> 
> But when it gets into "have I considered all gods" or "we went one god further" or "use the same reasoning for that one god that you dismissed the rest with" then it is no longer about how our religion affects all of us. It is more of why we are wrong and you are right.


It is not about right or wrong, it is about showing you why (at least in my case) why I have serious doubt about your religion and god and my effort to get that across..and also as a way to continue conversation that may lead me to something I may have missed and will give me some insight to research and rethink.

I will freely admit that I am often perplexed at some answers, especially when a believer admits to the blatant errors ,contradictions, and history of how the text came to be but just overlook it. I am where I am because I couldn't overlook it and it intrigues me to hear why others can.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> So, you don't care what we believe, as long as we don't really practice what we believe?  Did I get that right?


No


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> So, you don't care what we believe, as long as we don't really practice what we believe?  Did I get that right?




It depends of if what you believe affects the rest of society in a negative way, which in the case of nominal Christianity I would say that it does in some respects, and there have been many examples given of when it does.  The desire of nominal Christians to want to insert Creationism in public schools is one.  The interference with stem cell research and euthanasia are others.  There are more reasons.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Think about that some more.
> The impact Christianity has had and will have on history (positive and negative) is based on its beliefs.
> That history past and present and future impacts THE WORLD.
> We ALL live in the world.
> As long as religion exists there never will be a -


I will get back to this and the others shortly, after I get back in the office this evening. This is exactly where I was going yesterday that I thought was off topic a little.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> So, you don't care what we believe, as long as we don't really practice what we believe?  Did I get that right?


No you did not.


> I support and will defend your right to believe/worship in God.


By worship I mean have and go to Church, have your own Christian schools, Christian amusement parks.....
Where I draw the line is when Christianity (or any religion) turns "we worship" into "we intend to make you believe/worship/abide by our rules".


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Can we at least find common ground in the opinion that it is better for people to believe that which is true than that which is not true?


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I will get back to this and the others shortly, after I get back in the office this evening. This is exactly where I was going yesterday that I thought was off topic a little.


Off which topic? One of our threads usually covers about 10 topics 
In the future throw it out there, if it rubs somebody the wrong way they will suggest you make a new thread and no harm, no foul.


----------



## Jack Ryan (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Other option to what? Acknowledging a prophecy is false?





atlashunter said:


> Other option to what? Acknowledging a prophecy is false?


"How long is too long to wait..."

YOU ask the question in the OP. Now you want to play dumb? Regardless how long you have to wait, yesterday, today, tomorrow; what is your other option when you decide it's too late? You've waited long enough. 

So what are you going to do different, that would be "another option". You going to ring him up on your cell and give Jesus an ear full for keeping you waiting?

You know, "What is your other option?" May be you can start waiting for Satan or Buddha or Mohamed.


----------



## j_seph (Jun 11, 2018)

bullethead said:


> We both may be wrong we each may have spent our entire lives not doing the right things to ensure a quality afterlife with a diety that exists and is not the god you worship.


Sounds like you are starting to figure out that grain of a mustard seed


----------



## BassMan31 (Jun 11, 2018)

I'm certain there will be a time when it's said "Well, he'd have done it by if he were going to. Maybe we missunderstood?"

In an hour you think not, the Son of Man will return.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Jack Ryan said:


> "How long is too long to wait..."
> 
> YOU ask the question in the OP. Now you want to play dumb? Regardless how long you have to wait, yesterday, today, tomorrow; what is your other option when you decide it's too late? You've waited long enough.
> 
> ...



Well how does one typically deal with a false prophecy other than to discard the claim that set the expectation in the first place? That’s one option. Or you can keep looking for ways to explain it away but it seems to me on a long enough time scale that option will be exhausted. The question is what should that time scale be?


----------



## BassMan31 (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Can we at least find common ground in the opinion that it is better for people to believe that which is true than that which is not true?



Of course. That's always been obvious. But whose truth are you going to choose? The one that makes the most logical sense for the time being?


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Can we at least find common ground in the opinion that it is better for people to believe that which is true than that which is not true?





atlashunter said:


> Can we at least find common ground in the opinion that it is better for people to believe that which is true than that which is not true?


This could actually make a lively debate.
For example - At one point, to our knowledge, it was "true" that the world was flat.
Probably a good thing a few folks didn't go along with that "truth".


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

BassMan31 said:


> Of course. That's always been obvious. But whose truth are you going to choose? The one that makes the most logical sense for the time being?



I don’t buy into the idea of personal truths but yes the challenge is sorting out those claims which comport with reality from those that don’t. If we are united in that ideal then why should one group or another be excluded from the pursuit of it? It seems like some folks are made uncomfortable when non believers engage in questioning having not already reached the conclusions believers have and challenging believers as to how they reached those conclusions. They would rather not be challenged in that regard and just be left alone. Well... this sub forum was created to give them the shielding they want. Why then insist on coming here and wondering why their beliefs aren’t just accepted without question? As if someone has questioned their right to believe any bit of nonsense they wish when they know nobody has done that. Really if you’re a believer and not interested in apologetics why are you wasting your time in an apologetics forum?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 11, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> What you personally do will probably have  little to no negative affect on my life.
> However a whole bunch of "you's" put together is different. And it doesn't even have to be "you's" that does anything wrong to me. If "they" don't like "you's" they kill "me" too.
> 
> Could Christianity "go too far" with it and cause me to change that?
> Yes.



this sure sounds like you don't care what I believe as long as I don't practice my beliefs.  It sounds like if I practice my beliefs, and someone(muslims) decides they don't like it and decides to attack our society, then you have an issue with me proclaiming my beliefs.  Or did I miss something?



ambush80 said:


> It depends of if what you believe affects the rest of society in a negative way, which in the case of nominal Christianity I would say that it does in some respects, and there have been many examples given of when it does.  The desire of nominal Christians to want to insert Creationism in public schools is one.  The interference with stem cell research and euthanasia are others.  There are more reasons.



So, I get to believe what I want to believe, as long as society as a whole agrees with it, and it doesn't insult someone elses values?    Again, it sure sounds like you are saying I can believe what I want, as long as I don't practice my beliefs, because someone might be offended, or society may not agree with my beliefs.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> this sure sounds like you don't care what I believe as long as I don't practice my beliefs.  It sounds like if I practice my beliefs, and someone(muslims) decides they don't like it and decides to attack our society, then you have an issue with me proclaiming my beliefs.  Or did I miss something?
> 
> 
> 
> So, I get to believe what I want to believe, as long as society as a whole agrees with it, and it doesn't insult someone elses values?    Again, it sure sounds like you are saying I can believe what I want, as long as I don't practice my beliefs, because someone might be offended, or society may not agree with my beliefs.



As was stated above in the example of the flat Earth, society had some beliefs in the past that were absolutely wrong.  There's a better way to determine what the truth is other than societal approval and that's evidence and looking for evidence is fueled by skeptical inquiry.  So, no.  It's got nothing to do with who's insulted.  As Ben Shapiro is fond of saying "The truth doesn't care about your feelings".  If your beliefs lead to behaviors that prohibit flourishing or increase suffering then they're bad.


----------



## BassMan31 (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> I don’t buy into the idea of personal truths but yes the challenge is sorting out those claims which comport with reality from those that don’t. If we are united in that ideal then why should one group or another be excluded from the pursuit of it? It seems like some folks are made uncomfortable when non believers engage in questioning having not already reached the conclusions believers have and challenging believers as to how they reached those conclusions. They would rather not be challenged in that regard and just be left alone. Well... this sub forum was created to give them the shielding they want. Why then insist on coming here and wondering why their beliefs aren’t just accepted without question? As if someone has questioned their right to believe any bit of nonsense they wish when they know nobody has done that. Really if you’re a believer and not interested in apologetics why are you wasting your time in an apologetics forum?



I don't buy into personal truths either, but there is more than one "version" floating around and only one can be true, in this case.

It's only uncomfortable for some in the sense that their faith is extremely close to their hearts and personal. Someone questioning that faith's validity, specifically in a way that demeans (you haven't done this) is unsettling for many. It's a completely understandable thing. That being said, some people of faith recognize this fact and seek discourse that will help their feelings leave the sleeves. But that's all mostly my opinion.

The post I replied to is a non-starter only because it's obvious that people want others to know the truth. It seems to be something intrinsic in the human spirit. It's deciding which version of truth will be decided upon that has caused, and will continue to cause all the trouble.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> this sure sounds like you don't care what I believe as long as I don't practice my beliefs.  It sounds like if I practice my beliefs, and someone(muslims) decides they don't like it and decides to attack our society, then you have an issue with me proclaiming my beliefs.  Or did I miss something?


Did my posts after this one answer your question?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 11, 2018)

j_seph said:


> Sounds like you are starting to figure out that grain of a mustard seed


I figured that out in grade school.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

> The impact Christianity has had and will have on history (positive and negative) is based on its beliefs.
> That history past and present and future impacts THE WORLD.
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I have issues with them AND you.  For me, this thread is important because it questions why you believe in your particular text.


Well.....I have no reason cause you harm, I dont have a reason to legislate to restrict you from doing what you want. I support removing restrictions that  prevent you. I believe you have issues though. I just don’t believe you understand what they are.

My belief has absolutely nothing to do with you personally. I believe what I do because I have a hope for the promise of something better than rotting in the grave and what I feel is a personal walk in that. If it don’t come to pass, I won’t ever know about it. I’m not in this for the purpose of making your life miserable. How does that affect you? Not in a negative way, but I could care less about your reasons for your disbelief.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> What you personally do will probably have  little to no negative affect on my life.
> However a whole bunch of "you's" put together is different. And it doesn't even have to be "you's" that does anything wrong to me. If "they" don't like "you's" they kill "me" too.
> 
> Yes and No.
> ...


Christianity as labeled, can go too far for me also Walt. I’m not a subscriber to organized religion. Matter of fact, there’s tons of us that are not. At the same time, I’m with you on protecting your rights. And yes, Athiesm could go too far for me and make me change my outlook on that. An example of that would be pushing legislation that restricts pastors on what they preach.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 11, 2018)

So you are saying that it is easier to believe if you don't have to think about it?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Off which topic? One of our threads usually covers about 10 topics
> .


Yup sometimes they can certainly multi task


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 11, 2018)

> Labeling is part of the issue. "Christianity". Everything that is labeled  Christianity does not follow the teachings of Jesus. By definition, the Jews are not Christianity, they are a religion. Our country was partially founded on freedom of religion. Christians are just one group, and were not the only folks that did not drink on Sundays, or rested. Even the muslims, another religion, not Christian, forbid alcohol. All of us have a right to practice our religion. I don't know who brought the blue laws in, but they not only affected you, they affected a lot of us. I had to buy on Saturday too.


All true.
Doesn't matter.
Christianity is a group. As a group it wields power and influence. As a group, throughout history Christianity has used that power and influence through politics, law  etc to conform society to its beliefs.
That YOU personally (and a lot of others) wouldn't do it/don't agree/dont think its Christian like, while nice, doesn't amount to squat.
What matters is what the group Christianity does.
You are a Christian.
Christianity is a powerful, influential, wealthy group who uses it to advance their beliefs.
When we say Christianity we are talking about the group, not the individual.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

bullethead said:


> So you are saying that it is easier to believe if you don't have to think about it?


 I study continuously and stay with what I feel is right. Basically the same as you do. My reasons are not geared to causing any negative impacts on non believers.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Yup sometimes they can certainly multi task


We are either all smart and can handle multiple topics or we all cant pay attention to one thing for more than 5 minutes


----------



## bullethead (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I study continuously and stay with what I feel is right. Basically the same as you do. My reasons are not geared to causing any negative impacts on non believers.





> Showing us is fine. But elevating it to a level that believers are intellectually challenged changes the ball game. Google can find info to dismiss or confirm every scripture in the Bible. We are faith based, and nothing else.



That is why I asked...


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> All true.
> Doesn't matter.
> Christianity is a group. As a group it wields power and influence. As a group, throughout history Christianity has used that power and influence through politics, law  etc to conform society to its beliefs.
> That YOU personally (and a lot of others) wouldn't do it/don't agree/dont think its Christian like, while nice, doesn't amount to squat.
> ...


I follow you, but doing this assumes that all non Christians are atheist.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 11, 2018)

ky55 said:


> There’s an option for the ones who get tired of waiting around:
> 
> http://www.preterist.org/about-us/what-is-preterist-view/
> 
> ...


 wow this philosophy is.......different! Kind of like a "Shrodingers Cat" Jesus - simultaneously returned but not returned at the same time.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> All true.
> Doesn't matter.
> Christianity is a group. As a group it wields power and influence. As a group, throughout history Christianity has used that power and influence through politics, law  etc to conform society to its beliefs.
> That YOU personally (and a lot of others) wouldn't do it/don't agree/dont think its Christian like, while nice, doesn't amount to squat.
> ...



Reminds me of a documentary I watched some time ago about the Black Plague that swept through Europe. It was carried by rats. One thing they mentioned that I had never heard before was that cats would have helped control the rodent population but at that time cats were thought to be of the devil. Don’t know how much of a factor that really was but it was interesting to consider and it brings home the point that it’s really impossible to measure all the ways holding untrue beliefs, regardless of the reason, can cause harm. It doesn’t require malicious intent.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> it’s really impossible to measure all the ways holding untrue beliefs, regardless of the reason, can cause harm. It doesn’t require malicious intent.


Yea we all agree there. What we don’t agree on is who’s determining what is true, and for whom.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Yea we all agree there. What we don’t agree on is who’s determining what is true, and for whom.



Nothing is perfect but if we compare methodologies there is one that stands out far superior to the rest and it’s not divine revelation. But the first step is being open to the possibility we could be wrong. I don’t see that in most religious people.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Nothing is perfect but if we compare methodologies there is one that stands out far superior to the rest and it’s not divine revelation. But the first step is being open to the possibility we could be wrong. I don’t see that in most religious people.


Believers study to prove their beliefs. If they run into something they’ll research it. It’s not like someone showed us a scripture and we said yup, I believe that. We live it and it works for us. That’s the hurdle you’re running into.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Believers study to prove their beliefs. If they run into something they’ll research it. It’s not like someone showed us a scripture and we said yup, I believe that. We live it and it works for us. That’s the hurdle you’re running into.



Most begin that task with the presumption that the Bible is inerrant. They are not open to the possibility that the Bible might contain mistakes or untruths.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Most begin that task with the presumption that the Bible is inerrant. They are not open to the possibility that the Bible might contain mistakes or untruths.


Most begin not knowing anything about the Bible. One thing you can’t force on a person is what to believe. He has to decide for himself if he does or doesn’t.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 11, 2018)

Jesus ain't coming back again. He did it when He said He would,  in the first century.

Relax!  He came in AD 70. The end is further away every day.  Enjoy your Christian relationship with our Lord in His finished work to bring salvation.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Most begin not knowing anything about the Bible. One thing you can’t force on a person is what to believe. He has to decide for himself if he does or doesn’t.



Sure you can. You just indoctrinate them to believe when they are young before they have developed their critical thinking ability.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 11, 2018)

told ya Hobbs would be in here sooner or later


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Most begin not knowing anything about the Bible. One thing you can’t force on a person is what to believe. He has to decide for himself if he does or doesn’t.



Notice you didn’t deny that they carry the presumption that the Bible is inerrant. There is nothing that will convince them otherwise. Their mind is completely closed to the possibility. We see it all the time. Just like the young earth creationists who start with the presumption the earth is 6,000 years old. They don’t reserve judgment and let the facts lead them to their conclusion. They begin with the conclusion and ignore any facts that don’t comport with that conclusion.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> told ya Hobbs would be in here sooner or later



It’s your fault. You triggered his search for preterism.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Notice you didn’t deny that they carry the presumption that the Bible is inerrant.


 Let me clarify, most don’t “anything” about the Bible to presume anything. Some say “I thought the Bible was false”


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> It’s your fault. You triggered his search for preterism.




nope... he was immersed in that belief for a long long time


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> told ya Hobbs would be in here sooner or later


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> nope... he was immersed in that belief for a long long time


Probably indoctrinated


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> nope... he was immersed in that belief for a long long time



I meant his key word search.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Let me clarify, most don’t “anything” about the Bible to presume anything. Some say “I thought the Bible was false”



Bet we could conduct a poll on the Christian forum and most would say it’s inerrant. How many of them would acknowledge they were wrong if shown an error in the Bible?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Bet we could conduct a poll on the Christian forum and most would say it’s inerrant. How many of them would acknowledge they were wrong if shown an error in the Bible?


I’m taking about new folks knowing nothing. They gave it the same look over as you did. Once you do that, yes it’s either inerrant, or you didn’t believe it.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I’m taking about new folks knowing nothing. They gave it the same look over as you did. Once you do that, yes it’s either inerrant, or you didn’t believe it.



That’s simply not true. Most believers were taught to believe from early childhood. Like you were. And by the way, being open to the possibility you’re wrong is not a one time shot and then case closed kind of deal. At least it shouldn’t be for anyone that cares about the truth of their views. If critical thinking were so likely to get people to belief there wouldn’t be any need for childhood indoctrination and appeals to faith.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 11, 2018)

A long long time.... Wow from someone that thinks. Soon,  quickly,  at hand,  and in this generation means 2,000 years,  you certainly have me being very very old. pappy


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 11, 2018)

I look in here from time to time,  but I've taken some time off responding to get caught up on my books that keep piling up.  You can't debate constantly without taking some time to study more. 

love the thread though,  Futurism is one of the biggest errors in Christianity today.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 11, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Probably indoctrinated



If memory serves me correctly, Hobbs wasn't indoctrinated with the preterism belief.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 11, 2018)

From a Futurist perspective, what purpose would a future return serve us? Is it just to tie up loose ends? Restore perfection? Grant Israel salvation?
If one can gain eternal salvation at their physical death, why is there a need for a future return? 

To the OP, how long would we wait? Why does it matter if it has already happened or it's a million years from now?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> I look in here from time to time,  but I've taken some time off responding to get caught up on my books that keep piling up.  You can't debate constantly without taking some time to study more.
> 
> love the thread though,  Futurism is one of the biggest errors in Christianity today.



I can see why most Christians reject preterism. All kinds of problems with it. I do think it’s the most bold and creative attempt to explain the missing messiah so kudos on that I suppose.

I do have one question though. The end of Revelation depicts a new city of Jerusalem descending down from heaven and therein God dwells. It says there is no temple because there is no longer need of one. Is it the preterist position that this also has already taken place? And if so, what if Israel does rebuild the temple at some point? Would that mean the preterists were wrong?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> I can see why most Christians reject preterism. All kinds of problems with it.



Yes, all kinds of problems with it.  But Hobbs has it all figured out.  We are living in a perfect world now, just as we were promised when Christ returns


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> From a Futurist perspective, what purpose would a future return serve us? Is it just to tie up loose ends? Restore perfection? Grant Israel salvation?
> If one can gain eternal salvation at their physical death, why is there a need for a future return?



Hebrews 9:28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.




Artfuldodger said:


> To the OP, how long would we wait? Why does it matter if it has already happened or it's a million years from now?



Does it matter if the scriptures are true?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 11, 2018)

why does everyone want to drag out the 'a day is like a thousand years' scripture when we discuss the age of the earth, but not when we discuss His soon return?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Hebrews 9:28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.
> 
> Does it matter if the scriptures are true?



Then we don't gain salvation when we die a physical death but must await this return. That would make it "very" important. I wonder where the dead await? If it's like a sleep then the time is irrelevant.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> why does everyone want to drag out the 'a day is like a thousand years' scripture when we discuss the age of the earth, but not when we discuss His soon return?



Matthew 16:28 
And I tell you the truth, some standing here right now will not die before they see the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom."


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> Then we don't gain salvation when we die a physical death but must await this return. That would make it "very" important. I wonder where the dead await? If it's like a sleep then the time is irrelevant.



Don’t know.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> why does everyone want to drag out the 'a day is like a thousand years' scripture when we discuss the age of the earth, but not when we discuss His soon return?



That was one of the first things “dragged out”.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> I can see why most Christians reject preterism. All kinds of problems with it. I do think it’s the most bold and creative attempt to explain the missing messiah so kudos on that I suppose.
> 
> I do have one question though. The end of Revelation depicts a new city of Jerusalem descending down from heaven and therein God dwells. It says there is no temple because there is no longer need of one. Is it the preterist position that this also has already taken place? And if so, what if Israel does rebuild the temple at some point? Would that mean the preterists were wrong?


If they build a third temple,  it just means they've built a temple.  There's no prophecy of a third temple in scripture.

all scripture is fulfilled,  so yes the new Jerusalem has come down. The bride. 
you need to read Galatians 4:22ff to understand the covenants. 
Hagar represented The old covenant Jerusalem and was cast out of the family with her child. 
Sarah represented the New Covenant and the Jerusalem from above. 

If the New Covenant... Jerusalem from above has not come down,  there is no New covenant to produce children.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’[b] or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

If this were the current reality in Israel its hard to imagine why they would still think they needed to build a temple.

Reading the rest of chapter 21 in Revelation it’s really awe inspiring that anyone could think that is an accurate depiction of modern day Jerusalem. It leaves me at a loss for words.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 11, 2018)

In the last days, God’s work is to classify all and God will separate the righteous and the wicked personally.

The Lord Jesus once said: “*Again, the kingdom of heaven is like to a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind: Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away. So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth*” (Matthew 13:47-50).

That's not exactly how I was indoctrinated about salvation in my Baptist Sunday School upbringing. Come to think of it, maybe I was indoctrinated that way. This passage doesn't say anything about the last days.  Other passages do explain it this way as well. A sesperation of good from evil.

Maybe my indoctrination started out this way but over the years changed to me being a evil sinner in need of a Messiah to die for my evil ways. I like that version better. No need for the long wait. No need for the separation of the wicked from the just.

In other words the separation through my time became a separation of the saved from the unsaved. The Elect from the non. God's Children from the non.
Way better than the waiting on the return of Jesus and the separation based on works. When I was little, it was still the separation of the good from the bad. Now it is realized that we are all bad and in need of a Messiah. Now it is the separation of the saved from the unsaved. 
The whole concept of Christianity improved in my lifetime from works to grace.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 11, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’[b] or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”
> 
> If this were the current reality in Israel its hard to imagine why they would still think they needed to build a temple.
> 
> Reading the rest of chapter 21 in Revelation it’s really awe inspiring that anyone could think that is an accurate depiction of modern day Jerusalem. It leaves me at a loss for words.



Likewise reading Romans 11 and thinking that is fulfilled through the Church. It's just not there. I could probably be a Preterist if it wasn't for Romans 11.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 11, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> Likewise reading Romans 11 and thinking that is fulfilled through the Church. It's just not there. I could probably be a Preterist if it wasn't for Romans 11.



I’d kind of expect more fireworks based on Revelation. Reminds me of a National Geographic documentary about the Wayne Bent cult in New Mexico. Did you see that one? God told him a specific day would be the end of the world and they would be getting new bodies and so on. They really hyped it up. So when the day came at midnight they sounded a bugle. Then they all came together smiling and singing out to the gate of their compound. They let out some cheers, some hip hip hoorays, then they went back to bed and life went on.


----------



## Israel (Jun 12, 2018)

The man who wrote this:

"And we ask you, brethren, in regard to the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of our gathering together unto him,
that ye be not quickly shaken in mind, nor be troubled, neither through spirit, neither through word, neither through letters as through us, as that the day of Christ hath arrived;
let not any one deceive you in any manner, because -- if the falling away may not come first, and the man of sin be revealed -- the son of the destruction,
who is opposing and is raising himself up above all called God or worshipped, so that he in the sanctuary of God as God hath sat down, shewing himself off that he is God -- the day doth not come." 
Young's Literal Translation

Also wrote this without contradiction:

henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of the righteousness that the Lord -- the Righteous Judge -- shall give to me in that day, and not only to me, but also to all those loving his manifestation. 
YLT


he who is having my commands, and is keeping them, that one it is who is loving me, and he who is loving me shall be loved by my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.' 

YLT


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 12, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’[b] or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”
> 
> If this were the current reality in Israel its hard to imagine why they would still think they needed to build a temple.
> 
> Reading the rest of chapter 21 in Revelation it’s really awe inspiring that anyone could think that is an accurate depiction of modern day Jerusalem. It leaves me at a





atlashunter said:


> I’d kind of expect more fireworks based on Revelation. Reminds me of a National Geographic documentary about the Wayne Bent cult in New Mexico. Did you see that one? God told him a specific day would be the end of the world and they would be getting new bodies and so on. They really hyped it up. So when the day came at midnight they sounded a bugle. Then they all came together smiling and singing out to the gate of their compound. They let out some cheers, some hip hip hoorays, then they went back to bed and life went on.



I'm sure as the fire spread and the melted silver flowed out of the Temple in AD 70 those Jesus rejecting Jew's ( symbolic Ishmael -Galatians 4:22f) had seen enough fireworks.  Enduring exactly 42 months of the greatest tribulation their world had ever seen or ever would.

The apacolyptic language in Revelation is very exaggerated.  It's a style of Hebrew writing that we see in other parts of the old Testament,  such as the prophecy of the destruction of Edom.  Futurist don't reject that destruction has come and gone,  but we all know there's no literal smoke plume going up to this day as foretold,  it was symbolic and overly exaggerated.

Also,  physical Israel or Jerusalem was just a shadow or type of a better place.  A spiritual city,  a spiritual kingdom.  The bride of the New covenant,  The Church.

Hagar and Ishmael were cast out.  Ishmael being the first born did not receive an inheritance,  but lost sonship.  Those born of the old covenant,  and refused adoption into the family of the promise ( New Covenant)  perished without eternal life.  Those Jew's that adopted into the New family received the inheritance of eternal life.

Revelation 22 explains the New Covenant in its existence and how it works.  The Spirit and the Bride say come!  Come take of the water of life freely given to whosoever will.... Those that have taken are citizens of the New Jerusalem,  those that haven't are still outside the gates.

It remains this way without end.  Ephesians 3:20-21.


----------



## j_seph (Jun 12, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Sure you can. You just indoctrinate them to believe when they are young before they have developed their critical thinking ability.


So with this theory, how do so many come to believe that have never been in church, that are not young?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 12, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> I'm sure as the fire spread and the melted silver flowed out of the Temple in AD 70 those Jesus rejecting Jew's ( symbolic Ishmael -Galatians 4:22f) had seen enough fireworks.  Enduring exactly 42 months of the greatest tribulation their world had ever seen or ever would.
> 
> The apacolyptic language in Revelation is very exaggerated.  It's a style of Hebrew writing that we see in other parts of the old Testament,  such as the prophecy of the destruction of Edom.  Futurist don't reject that destruction has come and gone,  but we all know there's no literal smoke plume going up to this day as foretold,  it was symbolic and overly exaggerated.
> 
> ...




Yeah, that no more death thing has got to be explained away somehow


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 12, 2018)

j_seph said:


> So with this theory, how do so many come to believe that have never been in church, that are not young?


Lots of reasons.
The predominant one seems to be "I was a scumbag and God gave me the power to put down the bottle/needle/whatever and pick up the Bible".
And that's not a jab or an insult. If belief in a god is what it takes for them to get clean, then I hope every addict/alcoholic/whatever turns to a god(God).


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 12, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Yeah, that no more death thing has got to be explained away somehow



So,  you don't believe that through the atonement of Christ we are receiving eternal life today?  Explain to me death to someone that has eternal life.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 12, 2018)

> I wonder where the dead await? If it's like a sleep then the time is irrelevant.





> Don’t know.


Isnt there something somewhere (OT?) that describes it exactly as that?
I'm almost positive there is.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 12, 2018)

j_seph said:


> So with this theory, how do so many come to believe that have never been in church, that are not young?



Adults can be duped too. It’s just much easier with children.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 12, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Isnt there something somewhere (OT?) that describes it exactly as that?
> I'm almost positive there is.



Sheol was the abode for the dead in the old Testament.  The same place in the Greek is Hades.... Because sin was not atoned in the old Testament the dead had to await Christ' atonement to forgive their imputed sin,  that they may be raised to eternal life in the presence of God... For until that sin was atoned,  it separated them from His presence.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 12, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> Sheol was the abode for the dead in the old Testament.  The same place in the Greek is Hades.... Because sin was not atoned in the old Testament the dead had to await Christ' atonement to forgive their imputed sin,  that they may be raised to eternal life in the presence of God... For until that sin was atoned,  it separated them from His presence.


And it seems like the word "sleep" or "asleep" was literally used.
Although its possible it was a Biblical "scholar" who described it that way and that's what I read.


----------



## j_seph (Jun 12, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Lots of reasons.
> The predominant one seems to be "I was a scumbag and God gave me the power to put down the bottle/needle/whatever and pick up the Bible".
> And that's not a jab or an insult. If belief in a god is what it takes for them to get clean, then I hope every addict/alcoholic/whatever turns to a god(God).


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 12, 2018)

j_seph said:


>


I get the feeling a lot of you guys don't pay real close attention to what is actually said and jump right into defensive mode.
*Lots of reasons.*
*The predominant one* *seems to be* "I was a scumbag and......"
Lots of reasons = acknowledges this reason is only one of lots of reasons.
The predominant one seems to be = of the reasons YOU GUYS have given, this is the one we seem to hear the most.
Both of those are the exact opposite of what you claim I am guilty of.
Ya gotta pay attention.


----------



## j_seph (Jun 12, 2018)

I know several folks that started their walk with the Lord/Got religion/ whatever you want to call it. They were not addicts or anything like that. Such stuff as I am speaking of you do not see from the outside looking in. When you are on the inside it is an entirely different scenario. What I love is when someone gets saved and that wasn't even what they were coming to find to begin with.
My apologies if you took that as disrespect becaue I did not meant it that way.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 12, 2018)

j_seph said:


> I know several folks that started their walk with the Lord/Got religion/ whatever you want to call it. They were not addicts or anything like that. Such stuff as I am speaking of you do not see from the outside looking in. When you are on the inside it is an entirely different scenario. What I love is when someone gets saved and that wasn't even what they were coming to find to begin with.
> My apologies if you took that as disrespect becaue I did not meant it that way.





> I know several folks that started their walk with the Lord/Got religion/ whatever you want to call it. They were not addicts or anything like that.


Me too.


> Such stuff as I am speaking of you do not see from the outside looking in.


We don't live on another planet looking in.
99.9 % of the family, friends and people I know are Christians/believers/religious.
To be on the outside looking in I would have to lock myself in a room and not speak to or see anyone I know.


----------



## j_seph (Jun 12, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Me too.
> 
> 99.9 % of the family, friends and people I know are Christians/believers/religious.


You have HOPE


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 12, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Lots of reasons.
> The predominant one seems to be "I was a scumbag and God gave me the power to put down the bottle/needle/whatever and pick up the Bible".
> If belief in a god is what it takes for them to get clean, then I hope every addict/alcoholic/whatever turns to a god(God).


I bet if we dig deep enough we could blame addictions on Eve. Some women will drive you to drinking     then after they start church, we can turn around and thank God for Eve


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 12, 2018)

j_seph said:


> I know several folks that started their walk with the Lord/Got religion/ whatever you want to call it. They were not addicts or anything like that. Such stuff as I am speaking of you do not see from the outside looking in. When you are on the inside it is an entirely different scenario. What I love is when someone gets saved and that wasn't even what they were coming to find to begin with.
> My apologies if you took that as disrespect becaue I did not meant it that way.



If it don't apply let it fly.


----------



## redwards (Jun 12, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Saw a comment from someone the other day, “Jesus is coming soon”. Christians have been saying that for two thousand years. Is there some length of time at which point a Christian should say “maybe we were wrong”?



To give you my answer to the original question....

No, there is no length of time at which point a Christian should say "maybe we were wrong".
.
.
.
.
Can you answer a few questions for me?
1. From your avatar, I assume you are an avid fisherman, correct or not?
2. Do you use electronic equipment  (depth/fish finder, etc.) to help find where the fish are?
3. Do you expect to catch fish every time you go fishing?
4. Do you *actually* catch fish every time you go fishing?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 12, 2018)

redwards said:


> To give you my answer to the original question....
> 
> No, there is no length of time at which point a Christian should say "maybe we were wrong".
> .
> ...



Any other cult that made a claim that something was imminent and went 2,000 years without it happening I suspect christians would say that proves the cult is bunk.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 12, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> So,  you don't believe that through the atonement of Christ we are receiving eternal life today?  Explain to me death to someone that has eternal life.



don't you see people dropping dead all around you every day?  It plainly says there will be NO MORE death.... It also says every tear will be wiped away and there will be no night there.... lots of explaining to do, huh?


----------



## ky55 (Jun 12, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> don't you see people dropping dead all around you every day?  It plainly says there will be NO MORE death.... It also says every tear will be wiped away and there will be no night there.... lots of explaining to do, huh?



Maybe it just goes back to the ambiguity of the interpretation, or translation?
Maybe there’s “no more death” means spiritual death?



Maybe we need a secret decoder ring?

*


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 12, 2018)

ky55 said:


> Maybe it just goes back to the ambiguity of the interpretation, or translation?
> Maybe there’s “no more death” means spiritual death?
> 
> 
> ...



Exactly. Spiritual death, spiritual tears, spiritual days and nights, and a spiritual Jerusalem measured by spiritual cubits. You know it’s coming.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 12, 2018)

well,  if you believe the Bible... 

1Corinthians 15: 
There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 45And so it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.
46However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 12, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> well,  if you believe the Bible...
> 
> 1Corinthians 15:
> There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 45And so it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.
> 46However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual.



Luke 24:3
but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus.

Philippians 3:21
who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body.

I'm with you on this spiritual body thing. I mean if one can die a physical death and go to Heaven as a spirit, why return? Who needs a body to live in a spiritual world? Especially if one is already residing there. God is a spirit.

That being said, Jesus' tomb was empty. He may have been able to walk through walls but his tomb was empty. He even ate some fish. This has to be more than just to prove he was alive. He "was" alive. He was resurrected. That's what a resurrection is. He arose from a grave. His tomb was empty.

The mystery is he ascended to Heaven in the same body he arose in. We will see him return that way or they did in 70AD.
They didn't see him as a spirit in the sky. I can't explain in but it was a body. A spiritual body none the less but a body.

His tomb was empty. They put their fingers in the holes in his hands.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 12, 2018)

Romans 6:5
For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his.

Colossians 3:4 
When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory.

1 John 3:2 
Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.

Luke 24:39
Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have."

Jesus resurrected as a human man. Not as spirit. They mystery remains. When he appears, we will be like him.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 12, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> 1 John 3:2
> Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.
> 
> Luke 24:39
> ...



Hobbs will tell you that already happened in 70ad.  Funny, I don't feel like I am living in an immortal body with no disease.  Not to mention walking thru walls like Jesus did with his body.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Hobbs will tell you that already happened in 70ad.  Funny, I don't feel like I am living in an immortal body with no disease.  Not to mention walking thru walls like Jesus did with his body.



walking through walls is no big deal for a man that could walk on water.  There's no difference in His body before nor after resurrection.  It was foretold His body would see no corruption... it didn't.

It is also true that between His ascension and His appearing (coming),  that the very apostles that saw Him ascend and disappear in a cloud,  did not know how He would appear,  until He did.

For Art.... seeing isn't always done by physical eyes,  see what I mean?


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

Pappy... Just one more thought.  The promises/blessings to Abraham could never have been made in the flesh realm.  They were spiritual blessings,  of a spiritual kingdom.  Jesus being the Seed of that inheritance and the first generation Christians co-heirs.  The inheritance promised to the seed of Abraham has been established,  I know you've experienced spiritual peace,  and blessings.. This only happens because as a faithful Christian you are a spiritual being with eternal life.... Just like myself,  waiting for the day our flesh returns to the dust, that we become fully immersed in the spiritual realm.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 13, 2018)

The Bible says everyone in the world would see him when he returned from the clouds. One would think if that had happened someone might have thought it important enough to write down. I’m curious to know how someone can see something that isn’t physical. How exactly does light emit from or reflect off of the immaterial?


----------



## j_seph (Jun 13, 2018)




----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 13, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> walking through walls is no big deal for a man that could walk on water.  There's no difference in His body before nor after resurrection.



Then why did Jesus tell the disciples not to touch him, that he had not ascended to the Father yet?  Sounds like something was going on with that body


----------



## bullethead (Jun 13, 2018)

j_seph said:


>


Exactly. That IS GOD!

If you cannot explain it...


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 13, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> Luke 24:3
> but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus.
> 
> Philippians 3:21
> ...



Put their fingers in his hand wounds? At which point Jesus said "DUDE! What the heck? That hurts! Pour some salt in it why don't you?"


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 13, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> The Bible says everyone in the world would see him when he returned from the clouds. One would think if that had happened someone might have thought it important enough to write down. I’m curious to know how someone can see something that isn’t physical. How exactly does light emit from or reflect off of the immaterial?



good point! If he did already come back as advertised in a visible body, that would have been epic "front page news". And if the whole world saw him then historians from every developed civilization would have recorded it. The details might not be exact but at least many sources from different cultures would attest to the main gist of the event. So I'm guessing he did not return in any physical world-changing fashion.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 13, 2018)

oldfella1962 said:


> good point! If he did already come back as advertised in a visible body, that would have been epic "front page news". And if the whole world saw him then historians from every developed civilization would have recorded it. The details might not be exact but at least many sources from different cultures would attest to the main gist of the event. So I'm guessing he did not return in any physical world-changing fashion.


And you would think they would have dropped their own religions like a hot  'tater.......


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 13, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> And you would think they would have dropped their own religions like a hot  'tater.......



they will


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 13, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> they will


So far the odds aren't looking good for either one of you.
But yes that could change.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> For Art.... seeing isn't always done by physical eyes,  see what I mean?



True, God can see and he doesn't have physical eyes. I would think a human spirit could see, touch, enjoy, etc. It's not that I really want a resurrected physical body. I don't want the wait. Really don't see the point. Then again it's not my story. I have to believe the story line of the author. I can't re-write it because I don't want a physical resurrected body. I would be fine as a spirit. 

Moving on a bit, Romans 11:26?

"he will turn godlessness away from Jacob."
"Then Jacob's descendants will stop being evil."
"and remove all wickedness from the descendants of Jacob."

No link, but in your own words, explain how this happened in 70AD?  Did it happen only to be temporary? I would think if one stays in line with the rest of Romans 11, it can't be interpreted as non-Jewish Gentile Christians who became descendants of Israel as per Romans 9:6.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> The Bible says everyone in the world would see him when he returned from the clouds. One would think if that had happened someone might have thought it important enough to write down. I’m curious to know how someone can see something that isn’t physical. How exactly does light emit from or reflect off of the immaterial?





Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they _also_which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things

(which must shortly come to pass; )

and he sent and signified _it_ by his angel unto his servant John:

If Revelation, which is addressed to the seven churches of Asia in the first century, is about things which must shortly come to pass as it says , and those that pierced Him were to see his parousia, then how can you stretch that event past that generation of people nearly two thousand years later? 

The event (parousia)  had to take place in the first century,  which is more than obvious with the hundreds of time statements in scripture that places it at that time.

Furthermore,  when those that pierced Him, saw the events of Luke 21 coming to fruition,  they saw.. As the Roman's encompassed Jerusalem,  the Civil Wars broke out inside the city with different factions killing one another,  the starvation,  and finally the burning and destruction of the Temple... Yes,  They saw!  They saw the end of the old covenant and the consummation of the New,  they saw Jesus appear on the clouds.... Which is an idiom describing a day of judgment.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 13, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they _also_which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
> 
> Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things
> 
> ...




Good point! I can't stretch it 2,000 years. That doesn't mean it happened. But yes I do see the problem it creates. I suspect an apologist would point to another verse in the new testament that says the dead shall also be raised upon his return (of which there is also zero evidence ever happened) which might include those who killed him.

Another point that I know we've discussed before on this is that the bible says those armies surrounding Jerusalem are defeated. In 70AD the Romans were victorious.

If it is true that all of these prophecies about his return were made and fulfilled with virtually nobody even noticing then this deity is the worst communicator ever.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 13, 2018)

j_seph said:


>



You do realize that is a physical phenomenon? Right?


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Good point! I can't stretch it 2,000 years. That doesn't mean it happened. But yes I do see the problem it creates. I suspect an apologist would point to another verse in the new testament that says the dead shall also be raised upon his return (of which there is also zero evidence ever happened) which might include those who killed him.
> 
> Another point that I know we've discussed before on this is that the bible says those armies surrounding Jerusalem are defeated. In 70AD the Romans were victorious.
> 
> If it is true that all of these prophecies about his return were made and fulfilled with virtually nobody even noticing then this deity is the worst communicator ever.




The dead ones being raised and in what manner is a much debated event even among preterist.  I think what we can agree on that keeps us from getting too deep into the nature of the resurrection is that it would take place at the end of the aion  ( world per kjv)  ( age per nkjv).

If at Luke 21all things written was fulfilled,  and we know resurrection of the dead was prophesied  in Daniel and other places of the old Testament,  then by default the resurrection happened at the the time of the destruction of the Temple.

Luke 21:20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 13, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> The Bible says everyone in the world would see him when he returned from the clouds





WaltL1 said:


> And you would think they would have dropped their own religions like a hot  'tater.......


I`m going to agree here.


----------



## Israel (Jun 13, 2018)

hummerpoo said:


> I have not known anyone who waited much more than 100 years.



How rare for a man to understand. And what an unusual understanding that man has.

One lifetime to trust the Lord. That's all. A thing of no burden nor grief...to be done simply over one life time. How odd that man may wonder if he should trust the only One who has never lied.


----------



## BassMan31 (Jun 13, 2018)

hummerpoo said:


> I have not known anyone who waited much more than 100 years.



Prexactly. The age curve is inverse, exponentially decreasing, and brutal. It'd be a daunting thing to know I had to live to be 1,000, or so.  It would not be enjoyed.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 13, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> and finally the burning and destruction of the Temple... Yes,  They saw!  They saw the end of the old covenant and the consummation of the New,  they saw Jesus appear on the clouds....


 
Did we get left out?

 1 Thess. 4:16&17 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
  17Then _we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord._

There is a difference in ascending and descending.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> True, God can see and he doesn't have physical eyes. I would think a human spirit could see, touch, enjoy, etc. It's not that I really want a resurrected physical body. I don't want the wait. Really don't see the point. Then again it's not my story. I have to believe the story line of the author. I can't re-write it because I don't want a physical resurrected body. I would be fine as a spirit.
> 
> Moving on a bit, Romans 11:26?
> 
> ...



Israel had turned wicked, but remember,  not all of Israel were Israel. The Gospel had separated some of the good from the wicked, the Gentiles receiving the Holy Spirit caused jealousy and also drew more of the sheep out.  When the full number of Gentiles had come in,  Israel would be saved through judgment... AD70 was the harvesting of the wheat (All Israel) and the burning of the chaff ( the wicked).  

So all Israel was saved through judgment... make sense?


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Did we get left out?
> 
> 1 Thess. 4:16&17 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
> 17Then _we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord._
> ...



We as in you and I?  That isn't written to us,  we're reading a letter written from Paul to the church in Thessaloniki.  So when Paul says we,  he is including them and himself.

We,  you and I , were never part of that letter.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Then why did Jesus tell the disciples not to touch him, that he had not ascended to the Father yet?  Sounds like something was going on with that body


Pappy,  I think if you go back on that reading you will see Jesus told Mary not to touch him.  other versions better interpret that as Jesus saying,  do not cling to Him... Not because His body had changed,  but His time until ascension was limited... basically He was saying let me go I have yet to finish here.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 13, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> We as in you and I?  That isn't written to us,  we're reading a letter written from Paul to the church in Thessaloniki.  So when Paul says we,  he is including them and himself.
> 
> We,  you and I , were never part of that letter.


So it’s just for that church?


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> So it’s just for that church?


It was just to that church.  Paul wasn't a member there but included himself.

Paul wasn't one of the ones that remained alive,  but some in that church did. That's my point.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 13, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Did we get left out?
> 
> 1 Thess. 4:16&17 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
> 17Then _we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord._
> ...



^If this happened why is there no record of it and how did the church survive beyond the first century? Shouldn’t someone have noticed the massive disappearance of Christians? Why were there still Christians after 70AD waiting to be swept up in the clouds to meet Jesus if it had already happened?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 13, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> ^If this happened why is there no record of it and how did the church survive beyond the first century? Shouldn’t someone have noticed the massive disappearance of Christians? Why were there still Christians after 70AD waiting to be swept up in the clouds to meet Jesus if it had already happened?


Yup, that's what I`m looking at, too. Who`d ever thunk we would agree on something Biblically.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> ^If this happened why is there no record of it and how did the church survive beyond the first century? Shouldn’t someone have noticed the massive disappearance of Christians? Why were there still Christians after 70AD waiting to be swept up in the clouds to meet Jesus if it had already happened?


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

Because this is a resurrection text,  not the rapture many today think.  the rapture theory was invented in the 1800's along with dispensatiionalism and Zionist Christians.

The gathering together was just that.  Gathering together in one body... The dead and living gathered together in the air ( spirit when studied and interpreted from the Greek) 

It is the resurrection and consummation of the New Covenant. Not a disappearing act.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 13, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> Because this is a resurrection text,  not the rapture many today think.  the rapture theory was invented in the 1800's along with dispensatiionalism and Zionist Christians.
> 
> The gathering together was just that.  Gathering together in one body... The dead and living gathered together in the air ( spirit when studied and interpreted from the Greek)
> 
> It is the resurrection and consummation of the New Covenant. Not a disappearing act.



The scripture has been translated to air. There are other words that are translated into spirit. Is the Greek word the same in both? How are there clouds in the spirit? And how does one get swept “up” in a dimension that is immaterial? And why didn’t the early christian church notice this had happened? 

You basically have to take the bulk of these prophecies and render them metaphorical rather than literal in order to say they happened. This removes them from being falsifiable or verifiable which is rather convenient. It also takes a level of credulity that very few Christians can muster and that’s saying something.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 13, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> It was just to that church.  Paul wasn't a member there but included himself.
> 
> Paul wasn't one of the ones that remained alive,  but some in that church did. That's my point.


Who was he preaching to in Corinthians?


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> The scripture has been translated to air. There are other words that are translated into spirit. Is the Greek word the same in both? How are there clouds in the spirit? And how does one get swept “up” in a dimension that is immaterial? And why didn’t the early christian church notice this had happened?
> 
> You basically have to take the bulk of these prophecies and render them metaphorical rather than literal in order to say they happened. This removes them from being falsifiable or verifiable which is rather convenient. It also takes a level of credulity that very few Christians can muster and that’s saying something.



More work goes into explaining this text than I feel is wanted by you... If I'm wrong and you want it all,  I've got a few days.

But the word for air here is not upper atmospheric air where the clouds are,  but the air that is around us,  the air we breathe, sometimes thought of and the spiritual realm

http://biblehub.com/greek/109.htm

Why did the early church miss this event happening? I don't believe they did,  but we have no records of the earliest church from Ad70 to years later.  Scholars call it the time of the hiatus.  Then our first records come to us through the Catholic Church with teachings most protestant churches reject... So,  not only do we have a gap,  we then have a cultural difference and a merged church of Christians and Pagans controlling all history.

On your last point... The entire New Covenant is a spiritual covenant with the old covenant serving as a physical shadow of the spiritual reality,  so to say preterist are forcing metaphorical interpretation of the texts is kind of correct,  but it's also interpreting the texts for the way they were supposed to be. IMHO.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 13, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Who was he preaching to in Corinthians?


The church in Corinth.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 13, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> The church in Corinth.



Are they part of the church Thessaloniki?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 14, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> You do realize that is a physical phenomenon? Right?



a little off-topic but I lived in Fairbanks Alaska for 18 months and saw the northern lights countless times. Fairbanks is very clear & dry in the winter, so almost every night (I worked the night shift for quite a while) I saw them, often several times in one shift. I would imagine a few thousand years ago 
people with no scientific knowledge would have thought they were supernatural in nature, inspiring and influencing their religions in a major way.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 14, 2018)

oldfella1962 said:


> a little off-topic but I lived in Fairbanks Alaska for 18 months and saw the northern lights countless times. Fairbanks is very clear & dry in the winter, so almost every night (I worked the night shift for quite a while) I saw them, often several times in one shift. I would imagine a few thousand years ago
> people with no scientific knowledge would have thought they were supernatural in nature, inspiring and influencing their religions in a major way.


Just like rainbows. Back then it was determined a rainbow was a sign from God of a covenant with the earth.
Not sure that would be accepted so readily these days.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 14, 2018)

oldfella1962 said:


> a little off-topic but I lived in Fairbanks Alaska for 18 months and saw the northern lights countless times. Fairbanks is very clear & dry in the winter, so almost every night (I worked the night shift for quite a while) I saw them, often several times in one shift. I would imagine a few thousand years ago
> people with no scientific knowledge would have thought they were supernatural in nature, inspiring and influencing their religions in a major way.



Never seen them but I’ve thought the same. Would be easy to think it was magical if you didn’t have any other explanation.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 14, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Never seen them but I’ve thought the same. Would be easy to think it was magical if you didn’t have any other explanation.



Or if one were in a chemically induced altered state one might feel as if they could orchestrate the lights with a wave of a hand.  There was a guy on here that said his congregation rebuked a hurricane and diverted it away from their church (oddly, he didn't say what it destroyed instead).


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 14, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> we're reading a letter written from Paul to the church in Thessaloniki.
> We,  you and I , were never part of that letter.





Spotlite said:


> So it’s just for that church?





hobbs27 said:


> It was just to that church.





Spotlite said:


> Who was he preaching to in Corinthians?





hobbs27 said:


> The church in Corinth.





Spotlite said:


> Are they part of the church Thessaloniki?


hobbs.................?


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 14, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> hobbs.................?


You know they were two separate churches  with some different problems.  What direct question are you leading up to?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 14, 2018)

For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven....... 




hobbs27 said:


> You know they were two separate churches  with some different problems.  What direct question are you leading up to?



Did they get to see this too since they were around that time?


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 14, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven.......
> 
> 
> 
> ...


yes


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 14, 2018)

http://fullpreterism.com/the-abcs-o...st-hermeneutics-and-logic-speak-more-clearly/


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 14, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> yes


Ok. Just seems as if they recorded him ascending into heaven after the resurrection, they would have recorded the "last trump" and his return.  

So...............what`s next since he`s already come?


----------



## brian lancaster (Jun 14, 2018)

Whether he comes soon or not he is coming and there’s one can guarantee that you are gonna meet eternity through his coming or death one cause I know of none that’s lived in earth forever yet


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 14, 2018)

None of the scriptures are written post AD 70....I know many will argue that,  but I've went back and forth on this point with a whole room full of Jehovah witnesses,  and through debating them I am more than certain they were written pre AD 70.

So,  what now?  Ephesians 3:20-21 says there is no end.
and Revelation 22 :14-17 lays it out.  This is after His appearing and exactly what we do today,  to the T.

14 Blessed _are_ those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. 15 But outside _are_ dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.
16 “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star.”
17 And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.

When you are born from above,  you become a child of God and a citizen of His kingdom... Before that you were a sinner,  but the Spirit and the Bride drew you in to take of His salvation... Whosoever will.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 14, 2018)

Must be nice to be 'more than certain' about something scholars have debated for centuries.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 14, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Must be nice to be 'more than certain' about something scholars have debated for centuries.



And come to a very different conclusion.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 14, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Must be nice to be 'more than certain' about something scholars have debated for centuries.



No one really questioned the dating of the books until fairly  recent that I know of....And now that they have and the evidence is being debated,  many agree the original dates are incorrect.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 14, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> No one really questioned the dating of the books until fairly  recent that I know of....And now that they have and the evidence is being debated,  many agree the original dates are incorrect.



Many preterists perhaps.

https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1552-when-was-the-book-of-revelation-written


----------



## redwards (Jun 14, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Any other cult that made a claim that something was imminent and went 2,000 years without it happening *I suspect* christians would say that proves the cult is bunk.




Actually you have helped me quite a bit. Small Group that my wife and I attend studied some about "Subjective Living" vs. "Objective Living"; "Temporal" vs. "Eternal"; and "Living Below the Line" vs. "Living Above the Line".
As a visualization...

                            Living Above the Line
                                       Eternal
                               " Objective Living"
*------------------------------- The Line --------------------------------*
                              " Subjective Living"
                                     Temporal
                             Living Below the Line







As part of that study the group also discussed "The Four Parts of Man".
Those four parts being:
Mental​Physical​Emotional​Spiritual​The first three make up man's Soul.
Mental - Man's mind -- Man thinks​Emotional - Man's emotions -- Man feels​Physical - Man's will -- Man acts​The fourth part, the core of man is his Spirit.

When man is born on planet earth, he is born dead Spiritually-
That is; Dead = Separated from God  Gen 3:3; Romans 5:12; Eph 2:1-3;​Adam represents the entire human race; therefore, every human born on the earth died, except 2.
They are:  Enoch in Gen 5:24; and Elijah in II Kings 2:11
Then there is one who died, and was raised again, triumphant over death, Jesus Christ!
(I imagine you are familiar with all those scriptures in the Gospels, so here is only one cited: ( Luke 24:6)
You know of anyone else?

*-LIVING BELOW THE LINE-*
So, since man's Spirit is "Dead" or "Separated from God" man functions with Three parts-
Mental - Man's mind – what man thinks
a computer (as it were) to be programmed – (Prov. 23:7)​Emotional - What man feels - Emotions follow man's thoughts
Emotions -have no Intellect​-no discernment for fact or fantasy​-can't discern today or tomorrow​-can't discern past, present, or future​-feels something from what the mind thinks​-are strictly responders​Physical  -Man's will
-Man acts​-based on what he thinks and what/how he feels​So man without God to communicate with his spirit (the fourth part) can do nothing but live "Below the Line"   (Romans 8:5-8)
which results in "Subjective Living"

There are 2 words in your response that exemplify the study for me...those words: "I suspect"
"I" (the subject in your sentence)​"suspect" (the verb in your sentence) - (definition)​
Thank you!  You posted a very good example of "Subjective Living"
Which is:
Mental - Your eyes saw something and your mind interpreted it
Emotional - Your emotions kicked in
Physical - Man's will - Prompting you to reply to my original post
Result - Man's Actions: Dictated by what man thinks and what/how man feels.

So, of what benefit is:
*-LIVING ABOVE THE LINE-*

Confession to God that I (man) am totally lost and dead in my (man) own sins, and accepting Jesus Christ as my (man) Personal Savior results in a regenerated soul and my (man) 'dead' spirit is given life through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit who is in perfect communication with the will of God.
Because the regenerated man now has a living spirit, the 4 parts of man can function in a completely different way. That is:
Mental - Man's mind - man thinks on Truth
a computer (as it were) programmed by God’s WORD – (1 Cor. 2:9-16)​-We are righteous – (II Cor. 5:21)​-We are perfect – (Heb 2:6-10)​-We are seated in Heaven - (Eph 2:6)​-We died to sin – (Rom 6:2)​-We are freed from sin – (Rom 6:7)​-We have Holy Spirit living within us (Rom 8:11)​-Our sins God will remember no more (Heb 10:15-17)​Emotional – Man responds to Truth with God’s emotions
God’s Emotions –​-Peace (Phil 4:7)​-Joy   (John 15:11)​-Love  (I John 4:16)​-Fruit of the Spirit (Gal  5:22-24)​Physical  -Man's will
-Man acts on Truth by Faith​-Truth is not found in/on what I think or feel​Understanding how man functions as a believer
-Man thinks on God’s Truth (John 8:32)​-Man‘s emotions respond with God’s emotions​-Man acts by Faith on God’s Truth (John 8:31)  (Matt 7:24-27)​Which results in “Objective Living”
However, since even the regenerated man still lives in his fleshly body, he is subject to the same temptations to live “Below the Line” as the lost man. As the Apostle Paul speaks of that very well in the conflict of two natures in (Rom 7:14-25)

So as Christians, we must always focus on God’s Truth (His WORD) which will then allow us to live “Above the Line” more. In short, while on this earth there is no perfect human.

With regard to your response as a whole, which basically compares faithful believers with those who either are misguided or have some agenda they wish to fulfill,
I will simply address it through an analogy.
A buzzard can strut around all day in the woods with turkeys and call himself a turkey, but at the end of the day when he flies up to roost in that same old dead oak tree he has used time and time again, he will still be a buzzard.​​Again, I thank you for the post (and the thread really). Because you see, I had not even been on the GON Forum in quite some time. In fact I did not even know the webpage had been updated until I logged on. Even further, I cannot even remember how long it had been since the last time I even looked at the Spiritual section of the forum.
My purpose for logging on was simply to find out what people were writing about the possible expansion of hunting over bait into the Northern Zone (of which I am not in favor).
However, the title of your thread was at the very top of the "Latest Posts" section of the webpage and caught my attention...
Coincidence...Nah...not a chance!
God, through a prompting of His Holy Spirit, has put fingers to a reading that someone needs, either for encouragement or for a life changing event...I have no idea which...but rest assured, God does!
Because you see, unless you or GON Moderators delete this thread, this post will remain permanently (at least as permanently as is possible) on a Temporal website in a Temporal world.

Thanks for the opportunity, and be Blessed.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 14, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Many preterists perhaps.
> 
> https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1552-when-was-the-book-of-revelation-written



My rebuttal to the above. 
https://www.ecclesia.org/truth/revelation.html


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 14, 2018)

Guess you didn’t read the link. They address the claims in yours. Anyway you are aware that your position is the minority one. Not that being in the minority proves one wrong but your arguments have yet to convince many.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 14, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Guess you didn’t read the link. They address the claims in yours. Anyway you are aware that your position is the minority one. Not that being in the minority proves one wrong but your arguments have yet to convince many.



You can't convince a closed mind. Religion and detonations have closed folks minds using authority and teaching if they believe different than the Church creed they are going to eternal torments.... But I can say,  It's a growing interpretation and I meet new to Pretorism folks online all the time. When one really grasps the scriptures in a fulfilled and accomplished manner it truly makes Christianity great again.. No pun intended .

I read enough of the link,  I've been through this over and over with JWs.. The late date is based off one comment, misunderstood,  then repeated over and over.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 14, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> Revelation 22 :14-17 lays it out.  This is after His appearing and exactly what we do today,  to the T.


Just curious, lets say we are where you say..........when did the events in Revelation 21 happen............passing away of the earth and no more sea?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 14, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> It's a growing interpretation



so is mormonism and JW's but that doesn't make it right


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 14, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Just curious, lets say we are where you say..........when did the events in Revelation 21 happen............passing away of the earth and no more sea?



Bet I have a pretty good idea what the response will be.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 14, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Bet I have a pretty good idea what the response will be.



I bet a dollar to a doughnut I know ....


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 14, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> You can't convince a closed mind


I`m not closed minded but do have a question...........

In particular, the River of Euphrates............and the new temple

I know that building a new temple is not prophecy........but Daniels prophecy needs a temple...............and something is supposed to happen to the River of Euphrates for Armageddon. 

Is it coincidence that Euphrates..................and plans of a new temple are in todays world news??


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> Bet I have a pretty good idea what the response will be.





NE GA Pappy said:


> I bet a dollar to a doughnut I know ....


If I’m thinking what y’all are thinking.......I think I know too.  

What I would really like to know is IF what he’s saying is true.......hows the “there is no end” and the “final judgment “ “the new heaven coming down” play out. 

What’s today’s people do? What happens for us? No judgement? Why would Paul need to go to Spain if the gospel had been preached in all nations? Why does 2 Thess. 2 vs 3&4 sound like what a lot of others believe Daniels prophecy was? And who was the “man of sin” that set himself up to be worshipped as God in the temple?  If that wasn’t what Daniels prophecy was, why did Paul mention anything about it? Regardless, who was it? 

I don’t want to sound like I’m shooting down his belief just because I don’t understand him.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 15, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> If I’m thinking what y’all are thinking.......I think I know too.
> 
> What I would really like to know is IF what he’s saying is true.......hows the “there is no end” and the “final judgment “ “the new heaven coming down” play out.
> 
> ...



What's today's people do?
Today's people answer to the beckoning call of the Spirit and take of the water of life freely given... To be born from above to gain eternal life, for those that do not will perish.  John 3:16

No judgment?  If you mean no destruction coming from Jesus then yes, there's no future judgment.  If you mean on an individual basis,  then No,  we are judged in this lifetime at the time we enter in the family of God and become citizens of His kingdom.

Why would Paul go to Spain if the gospel had been preached in all nations?
Matt.  24:14 claims the Gospel had to be preached in all the world.  Both Roman's 10:18 and Colossians 1:23 proclaimed it had... So we must evaluate and study what was meant by going out to all the world.  I believe it was to their known world,  maybe just the Roman Empire at the time,  or maybe just the land of Israel.  Whatever Matt.  24:14 qualifies as having to happen before the end... Roman's and colossians both certify that qualification as being met.

Those last few questions are similar so I'll group them in who was the man of sin.. aka anti Christ.
We know before the end the anti Christ comes,  well John made a strong claim about this : 1John 2:18
New Living Translation
Dear children, the last hour is here. You have heard that the Antichrist is coming, and already many such antichrists have appeared. From this we know that the last hour has come.

Above John references the sign and the sign being fulfilled in their present time.

So who was the anti Christ or man of lawlessness?
Doing a thorough study,  you will find the term is actually plural meaning there was no one individual,  but many,  and they were Christians that had been influenced by Judaizers and had turned away from Christ and went back to Judaism.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 15, 2018)

lets see...

all the world doesn't mean all the world

every creature doesn't mean all mankind

The man of predition means a lot of men

A new heaven and earth means ?????

No more seas means ????

No more death,crying,or pain means we still have death, crying and pain

no more night means ????


I don't know about you, Spotlight, but I just see a lot of twisting and turning trying to explain how all this means something other than what it says.  If Jesus had returned, then we would see the prophecies fulfilled. 

The Bible says there will be no more sin, yet I see sin everyday, and commit a few myself from time to time.  The Bible says that the Mount of Olives will be split into and a river will flood the valley and bring life to the Dead Sea.  When I was there 3 years ago, the Dead Sea was still dead.  Scripture says Satan will be bound and cast into a bottomless pit..... he still seems to be around and doing his thing now a days to me.  

While I admire that Hobbs has spent a lot of time studying and reading, I just can't agree with him on most of his interpretation of Scripture.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Just curious, lets say we are where you say..........when did the events in Revelation 21 happen............passing away of the earth and no more sea?



I read somewhere that "no more sea" was not (surprise surprise) meant to be taken literally. They meant a sea of sin or sadness or hopelessness or something. To me the bible is kind of like the whack-a-mole game trying to keep up with when a statement is symbolic/poetic license or other literary device, and when a statement is the dirt simple truth. This is why there is such debate over bible interpretation - the bible says what you want it to say for  the most part. Too much "the author said this or that but what he really meant was....." going on, which is sad considering the bible is the most important book ever written, affecting your eternal reward/punishment.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2018)

"Doing a thorough study,  you will find the term is actually plural meaning there was no one individual,  but many,  and they were Christians that had been influenced by Judaizers and had turned away from Christ and went back to Judaism." interesting.....the Jews had their city/temple destroyed and then almost two thousand years later god allowed his chosen people (used to be his chosen people back in the old testament, but now Christians are his chosen people) to almost get exterminated by Hitler. They just can't catch a break!


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 15, 2018)

oldfella1962 said:


> I read somewhere that "no more sea" was not (surprise surprise) meant to be taken literally. They meant a sea of sin or sadness or hopelessness or something. To me the bible is kind of like the whack-a-mole game trying to keep up with when a statement is symbolic/poetic license or other literary device, and when a statement is the dirt simple truth. This is why there is such debate over bible interpretation - the bible says what you want it to say for  the most part. Too much "the author said this or that but what he really meant was....." going on, which is sad considering the bible is the most important book ever written, affecting your eternal reward/punishment.



well, the sad truth is that we all have our preconceived ideas of what we want God to look like, how we want God to act, and how we think God should reward/punish people.  When the scriptures say something that that we find difficult to comprehend or that clashes with our ideas of who/what God is, then we start twisting words and explaining away things that scripture plainly states.

Take a literal 6 day creation for example.  Anyone who has studied the hebrew language much will tell you that the author of Genesis meant for his writings to be understood as the world and all the animals/plants in it and on it were created in 6 literal 24 hour days.  Every time scripture uses the word day (yom) with evening and morning, it is interpreted as a 24 hour sunset to sunset day.  Except Genesis 1-2.  There, because of the teaching of evolution, they say the Bible can't be right, so yom must mean ages or a time period of some other measure.   They even will twist Peter's message that God is not contained by our understanding for space and time, to mean that it took God 6000 years to create everything.

So, all I can tell you is to read and study the Bible on your own, and come to a conclusion where you are convinced that you understand what you belief, and stand firm in that belief.   Of course there are things there that even the most learned people argue over and can't understand, but the basics are fairly easy.

God loves us, and wants the best for us.  We can live in His presence if we accept His gift of salvation.  God wants us to treat our fellow man as we would want to be treated.  

If we could just do that, the earth would be so much better off.  The truth about scripture is this... I understand a lot more of it than I practice.  Not because I willfully want to disobey teachings, but because I am human, imperfect and sinful.  I am not where I need to be, but I am also not where I was.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> well, the sad truth is that we all have our preconceived ideas of what we want God to look like, how we want God to act, and how we think God should reward/punish people.  When the scriptures say something that that we find difficult to comprehend or that clashes with our ideas of who/what God is, then we start twisting words and explaining away things that scripture plainly states.
> 
> Take a literal 6 day creation for example.  Anyone who has studied the hebrew language much will tell you that the author of Genesis meant for his writings to be understood as the world and all the animals/plants in it and on it were created in 6 literal 24 hour days.  Every time scripture uses the word day (yom) with evening and morning, it is interpreted as a 24 hour sunset to sunset day.  Except Genesis 1-2.  There, because of the teaching of evolution, they say the Bible can't be right, so yom must mean ages or a time period of some other measure.   They even will twist Peter's message that God is not contained by our understanding for space and time, to mean that it took God 6000 years to create everything.
> 
> ...


Speaking of translations, why does Yeshua= Joshua except for one guy when Yeshua= Jesus?

And I know we are to the point where I could wish you a happy birthday and it would sound snarky or cocky to you in text, but I am sincere with this question..
How do you know what God wants?


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 15, 2018)

oldfella1962 said:


> "Doing a thorough study,  you will find the term is actually plural meaning there was no one individual,  but many,  and they were Christians that had been influenced by Judaizers and had turned away from Christ and went back to Judaism." interesting.....the Jews had their city/temple destroyed and then almost two thousand years later god allowed his chosen people (used to be his chosen people back in the old testament, but now Christians are his chosen people) to almost get exterminated by Hitler. They just can't catch a break!



God's chosen people escaped the temple destruction.  Those that remained were the chaff.. the wicked.  1.1 million perished there,  others were taken in bondage while the weakest that survived were left with nothing...The Jews are no longer God's chosen people " there is no longer Jew nor Greek " But those that are born from above in the new covenant are children of God.
The true Jew's ( God's chosen)  were harvested,  gathered together,  and placed in the spiritual new covenant kingdom,  that the story continues on.  Those of a little Hebrew bloodline today that many dispensationalist Christians call God's chosen,  are just as much lost and without hope as any other false religion.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> What's today's people do?
> Today's people answer to the beckoning call of the Spirit and take of the water of life freely given... To be born from above to gain eternal life, for those that do not will perish.  John 3:16
> we are judged in this lifetime at the time we enter in the family of God and become citizens of His kingdom.


The rest was important..................but this was the most important for me in trying to understand your belief.  My initial thoughts were that if one does believe that the "return of Jesus" has already been fulfilled, what is driving him to keep believing in eternal life.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2018)

oldfella1962 said:


> I read somewhere that "no more sea" was not (surprise surprise) meant to be taken literally. They meant a sea of sin or sadness or hopelessness or something. To me the bible is kind of like the whack-a-mole game trying to keep up with when a statement is symbolic/poetic license or other literary device, and when a statement is the dirt simple truth. This is why there is such debate over bible interpretation - the bible says what you want it to say for  the most part. Too much "the author said this or that but what he really meant was....." going on, which is sad considering the bible is the most important book ever written, affecting your eternal reward/punishment.


 I would think "sea of sin" would be a large amount / body of sin. And in another place it says "sea of glass" and it is not that hard to figure out that it means a large area of glass.  And I would think that "sea" would be a large body of water. 

I have read that "the sea" illustrates a collection of memory or knowledge. And "sea" is just as I said, a body of water. That is why I was asking him to clarify the text referencing "no more sea", instead of saying  "the sea was no more"  

But I do think that people tend to make the Bible say what they want it to. I guess it is normal, if not, who would need a lawyer for court day.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> lets see...
> 
> all the world doesn't mean all the world
> 
> ...


I`m lost myself, but I really wanted to know what kept driving him if the return had already happened.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Speaking of translations, why does Yeshua= Joshua except for one guy when Yeshua= Jesus?


 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshua
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_(name)


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshua
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_(name)


So even though Jesus is really Joshua, they use the Greek translation for him and the Hebrew for all others just so it makes it seem Jesus stands out more.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2018)

bullethead said:


> So even though Jesus is really Joshua, they use the Greek translation for him and the Hebrew for all others just so it makes it seem Jesus stands out more.



_"Yeshua was a common name for Yehoshua  - Joshua, in later books of the Hebrew Bible among Jews. The name corresponds to the Greek spelling lesous from, which through, the Latin lesus, comes from the English spelling Jesus"_

Correspond = to be in conformity or agreement.  

A chicken and a pigeon are two different birds but they correspond to the word = poultry.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> _"Yeshua was a common name for Yehoshua  - Joshua, in later books of the Hebrew Bible among Jews. The name corresponds to the Greek spelling lesous from, which through, the Latin lesus, comes from the English spelling Jesus"_
> 
> Correspond = to be in conformity or agreement.
> 
> A chicken and a pigeon are two different birds but they correspond to the word = poultry.


Yeah. Jesus is a Josh and all the other Josh's in the Bible are Jesus's. They correspond.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 15, 2018)

spotlite I enjoyed the conversation,  Pappy as always,  I also enjoyed your poking and prodding.  This will end my comments on here for a while, but I want to suggest a great non preterist book for you both.  If you read it,  I'll bet it will be one of your favorite Christian books in your library. 
God Bless: 

https://play.google.com/store/books...gclsrc=aw.ds&dclid=CKO5urmo1tsCFV7G4wcd75oLrQ


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 15, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Speaking of translations, why does Yeshua= Joshua except for one guy when Yeshua= Jesus?
> 
> And I know we are to the point where I could wish you a happy birthday and it would sound snarky or cocky to you in text, but I am sincere with this question..
> How do you know what God wants?



from what I understand the name translation has to do with Joshua being written pre Roman rule, and Jesus being post Roman rule translation.  Either way, Yeshua is hebrew for Salvation.

To me, it seems a little disrespectful to name a child Jesus, but the hispanic people do it all the time. I wouldn't name my son Jesus though.

Oh, and my birthday is in a couple week, so I will just accept that as an early birthday wish. lol

The way I know what God wants is thru reading and studying the Bible, and prayer.  Just like everyone else, I do the things I do because I believe what I am doing is the right thing to do.  Sometimes I will start to do something and just don't feel comfortable with it.  I call it a check.  It is like God saying ' not here, not now'  You can read about things like this in Acts 14 - 16 when Paul says the Holy Spirit would not allow him to preach in certain cities.  Not that preaching was bad, and not that teaching in that town was bad.  It just wasn't time for them to be preached to.  God had other plans.  On occasion, I will have something planned to do, and I get an uneasy feeling about it, so I change my plans. 

Now to you and others, it might be explained as just changing my mind or something.  All I can tell you is that out of the blue, I will have this uneasyness, and sense that something just isn't quite right.  I have learned to trust those feelings, and change what I am doing.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2018)

_


bullethead said:



			Speaking of translations, why does Yeshua= Joshua except for one guy when Yeshua= Jesus?

Click to expand...

_




bullethead said:


> Yeah. Jesus is a Josh and all the other Josh's in the Bible are Jesus's. They correspond.



Well..........spiritually speaking,.............they do correspond

Are you that hung up on a definition of a name?  

We could have just went straight to the Bible where his name shall be called Jesus..we call him Almighty, Beloved Son, Alpha and Omega, Bread of Life, etc.  But you wouldn't have believed me


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2018)

hobbs27 said:


> spotlite I enjoyed the conversation,  Pappy as always,  I also enjoyed your poking and prodding.  This will end my comments on here for a while, but I want to suggest a great non preterist book for you both.  If you read it,  I'll bet it will be one of your favorite Christian books in your library.
> God Bless:
> 
> https://play.google.com/store/books...gclsrc=aw.ds&dclid=CKO5urmo1tsCFV7G4wcd75oLrQ


Don't go too far away. Me and pappy will think we done got left out again


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 15, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Don't go too far away. Me and pappy will think we done got left out again



I would think a martian had gotten him.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I would think a martian had gotten him.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> from what I understand the name translation has to do with Joshua being written pre Roman rule, and Jesus being post Roman rule translation.  Either way, Yeshua is hebrew for Salvation.
> 
> To me, it seems a little disrespectful to name a child Jesus, but the hispanic people do it all the time. I wouldn't name my son Jesus though.
> 
> ...





Spotlite said:


> Well..........spiritually speaking,.............they do correspond
> 
> Are you that hung up on a definition of a name?
> 
> We could have just went straight to the Bible where his name shall be called Jesus..we call him Almighty, Beloved Son, Alpha and Omega, Bread of Life, etc.  But you wouldn't have believed me


What I am saying is that all the other Yeshua's in the Bible stick with the Joshua translation. I feel that Jesus was also Yeshua in the earliest manuscripts as all the other Yeshuas were and they were ALL  Yeshua/Joshua. None of the earliest people new him as Jesus. Much later when re-written it looks like Yeshua was translated into Joshua except for one person. It seems as though it was done purposely because ALL the others Yeshua(s)/Joshua(s) could have all been translated the same but purposely were not.

The Disciples never knew him as Jesus. They knew him as Joshua.
But that does not allow him to stand out in the stories so a purposeful translation change was made.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2018)

bullethead said:


> What I am saying is that all the other Yeshua's in the Bible stick with the Joshua translation. I feel that Jesus was also Yeshua in the earliest manuscripts as all the other Yeshuas were and they were ALL  Yeshua/Joshua. None of the earliest people new him as Jesus. Much later when re-written it looks like Yeshua was translated into Joshua except for one person. It seems as though it was done purposely because ALL the others Yeshua(s)/Joshua(s) could have all been translated the same but purposely were not.
> 
> The Disciples never knew him as Jesus. They knew him as Joshua.
> But that does not allow him to stand out in the stories so a purposeful translation change was made.


Ok I gotcha that time


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 15, 2018)

bullethead said:


> What I am saying is that all the other Yeshua's in the Bible stick with the Joshua translation. I feel that Jesus was also Yeshua in the earliest manuscripts as all the other Yeshuas were and they were ALL  Yeshua/Joshua. None of the earliest people new him as Jesus. Much later when re-written it looks like Yeshua was translated into Joshua except for one person. It seems as though it was done purposely because ALL the others Yeshua(s)/Joshua(s) could have all been translated the same but purposely were not.
> 
> The Disciples never knew him as Jesus. They knew him as Joshua.
> But that does not allow him to stand out in the stories so a purposeful translation change was made.



I am trying to think of the Joshuas listed in the New Testament.....  I know there are at least 2 with the name Jesus, one being Bar Jesus, the other Jesus, the Christ.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 16, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> lets see...
> 
> all the world doesn't mean all the world
> 
> ...



Don’t forget that when Revelation says Satan is thrown in the abyss for 1,000 years of peace that actually means 40 years during which there wasn’t peace.


----------



## j_seph (Jun 18, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> You do realize that is a physical phenomenon? Right?


a *physical phenomenon* involving electricity. electricity. a *physical phenomenon* associated with stationary or moving electrons and protons. energy. any source of usable power. 
However you see results (the lights) yet you cannot see the electricity, the electrons, and protons. I cannot see the Father the Son the Holy spirit but I can see the results from striving to live my life as a Christian.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 18, 2018)

j_seph said:


> a *physical phenomenon* involving electricity. electricity. a *physical phenomenon* associated with stationary or moving electrons and protons. energy. any source of usable power.
> However you see results (the lights) yet you cannot see the electricity, the electrons, and protons. I cannot see the Father the Son the Holy spirit but I can see the results from striving to live my life as a Christian.



What does that have to do with the second coming?


----------



## j_seph (Jun 18, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> What does that have to do with the second coming?


Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 18, 2018)

j_seph said:


> Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.



_What does that have to do with the second coming?_

The scripture says he will be visible to all. It doesn’t say you won’t be able to see him.


----------



## j_seph (Jun 18, 2018)

atlashunter said:


> _What does that have to do with the second coming?_
> 
> The scripture says he will be visible to all. It doesn’t say you won’t be able to see him.


As Christians our Hope and Faith is in Jesus, this I see is a big issue with non-believers. They lack faith, because they cannot see Gods works and no man can physically prove to them there is a God. Y'all look for evidence from man. If Jesus comes back in my lifetime then hallelujah lets go. If it is another 1,000 years then so be it. We have hope and through that we have faith, we have not seen him yet however we have evidence in our lives that his word is true. So if he said he will return, and all eyes will see him then why should we worry if it is in the next 5 minutes or the next 1000 years? I have my ticket, it is you and others that I worry about. God wishes that none shall perish, and we as Christians are here to do a job and to help lead others to Christ. Just what if he came today? How would you in all seriousness take it?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 18, 2018)

j_seph said:


> As Christians our Hope and Faith is in Jesus, this I see is a big issue with non-believers. They lack faith, because they cannot see Gods works and no man can physically prove to them there is a God. Y'all look for evidence from man. If Jesus comes back in my lifetime then hallelujah lets go. If it is another 1,000 years then so be it. We have hope and through that we have faith, we have not seen him yet however we have evidence in our lives that his word is true. So if he said he will return, and all eyes will see him then why should we worry if it is in the next 5 minutes or the next 1000 years? I have my ticket, it is you and others that I worry about. God wishes that none shall perish, and we as Christians are here to do a job and to help lead others to Christ. Just what if he came today? How would you in all seriousness take it?


About the same way you would take the arrival of Zeus.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 18, 2018)

j_seph said:


> As Christians our Hope and Faith is in Jesus, this I see is a big issue with non-believers. They lack faith, because they cannot see Gods works and no man can physically prove to them there is a God. Y'all look for evidence from man. If Jesus comes back in my lifetime then hallelujah lets go. If it is another 1,000 years then so be it. We have hope and through that we have faith, we have not seen him yet however we have evidence in our lives that his word is true. So if he said he will return, and all eyes will see him then why should we worry if it is in the next 5 minutes or the next 1000 years? I have my ticket, it is you and others that I worry about. God wishes that none shall perish, and we as Christians are here to do a job and to help lead others to Christ. Just what if he came today? How would you in all seriousness take it?



This is what happens when you pop into the middle of a conversation. You’re completely off topic. We were talking about the preterist claim that Jesus had already returned. The scriptures say he would be coming through the clouds and would be visible to all. Unless everyone on the planet suddenly grows some special eyes that means his return has to be a physical phenomenon because the light that allows us to see is a physical phenomenon.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 18, 2018)

j_seph said:


> As Christians our Hope and Faith is in Jesus, this I see is a big issue with non-believers. They lack faith, because they cannot see Gods works and no man can physically prove to them there is a God. Y'all look for evidence from man. If Jesus comes back in my lifetime then hallelujah lets go. If it is another 1,000 years then so be it. We have hope and through that we have faith, we have not seen him yet however we have evidence in our lives that his word is true. So if he said he will return, and all eyes will see him then why should we worry if it is in the next 5 minutes or the next 1000 years? I have my ticket, it is you and others that I worry about. God wishes that none shall perish, and we as Christians are here to do a job and to help lead others to Christ. Just what if he came today? How would you in all seriousness take it?



what if non-believers see "gods work" but don't credit these works to the right god? What if we see the works of a powerful spirit in every facet of nature/science/math everywhere we look but think it has nothing to do with good versus evil or any other man made concept? What if we think all living things are equal and that every human is equal? This is deserving of eternal torture? Just sayin'


----------

