Chili

The bottom line is that "this generation" is built on the blank slate as is each generation built on the blank slate (TOK they called it) which will therefore be this generation that cannot come to pass (as in expire) until the gate of heaven is opened, shall we say, so that our temporal life can be transformed into eternal life.

The simple truth here is that one cannot become eternal and remain temporal for it is in dying to this flat earth that we created as if with our own hands that we are born into the reign of God.

makerowner

Could someone translate this for me? I can't make heads or tails of it.

Toto

No, no one can translate.

Chili

Is it too simple maybe?

Dogfish

That must be it - you're far too advanced for our godless little brain, not having them all puffed up with the glory of god, to grasp the simplicity of his message.

Or, maybe.....

Chili

Would that be advanced in godlessness? since you claim to have a godless little brain wherein you still recognize God?

Timetospend

If I understand you, and if I interpret the Bible literally(given that this is Bible criticism/history section), I might both agree and disagree with parts of your statement.

Certainly, I would argue that Jesus was both temporal and eternal, at least after his resurrection. While eternity past would force some agreement with your statement, it is less obvious that eternity future would necessarily have to comply.

Some would suggest that the rapture would be a way around your first paragraph. Baring that, each generation, or rather each person in that generation, must be able to perceive in order to be able to know (WOK, they call it). Agreed, ultimate knowing can come only after the grave, i.e. after this generation.

Not sure if this is along the lines that you were thinking, but since you did not seem to be getting serious response, I thought that I would attempt one.

Thanks,

C_Mucius_Scaevola

You're not supposed to understand it, you're supposed to hold it in your mind while you meditate. Like a mantra or something.

Or something.

C_M_S

mg01

Much Eastern religious philosophy, Buddhism in particular, would disagree with you on this point. This same alternative can also be drawn from the sayings of Jesus, and that the orthodox tradition was built on a literal interpretation of what was intended as alegorical reference to the very thing you are contending against.

Dogfish

Wrong. I recognize the infantile CONCEPT of the god you refer to, but that's a different thing.

You can go back to your incomprehensible babble now.