aza wood

With all dew respect to you as moderator, although i have repeated myself, if you check, you will see that it has be in response to others who have done the same.

My agreement although a simple one, must still need repeating, because i never said the bible was "crap". As a matter of fact, when asked point blank, "is the bible full of lies?" i reasoned with the answer, "No".

I admit that the main argument that i have given has been, "the bible can prove nothing". I have at the same time responded with differing views of the bible verses that have not been slammed around, not by me, but at me. The bible bangers are the prob here. The few verses that i have used, have only been in response to (in my opinion)wrongly quoted views of scriptures by others.

I will try and make your job of reading my posts more exiting, in the future. Thank you Bree. aza

NOGO

Aza
What the moderator is trying to tell you is that your arguement is rather thin.

Let me give you an example with all due respect.

Suppose I say that John Doe is a liar.
Then I quote him to show you that he is in fact a liar.

John Doe said that Afghanistan is in South America therefore he is a liar.

At this point you say that I am ridiculous because I know that John Doe is a liar yet I quote him to prove something. ?!?!?!?!

Saying something like this as a passing poke at somebody may be ok but repeating it as a central arguement does not put you in very favorable light.

If someone is trying to prove that the Bible is full of errors, contradictions and lies then that person will quote from the Bible.

You tried to show us that Don was in error and you quoted him.

Take care,
NOGO

aza wood

quote:


You have not proven that from your post.

I have to any impartial and logical observer. I know that no proof will ever be enough for believers. That goes without saying.[/quote]

???? And you will find that group where ?????

???? How could a meteor shower, a solar and lunar eclipse , be construed as the end of the world, especially if you remember that "jesus" says that when he returns he and his disciples will rule the nations???????

No. I was thinking that the bible puts the gap between "Jesus's" coming and the worlds end.

?????? If i through my knowledge can fortell what ball team will win, are you saying the teen did not really win?????

do not wish to theorize, but there are numerous possible ways that "Jesus's"coming could happen according to the bible, as credible as yours, if separate from the end of the Earth, that would be impossible if the two events had to coincide.

"Jesus' did say that, and going on to clarify which part, of the 2 or3 part question, he was referring to said ,"but the time of my coming, i just DO NOT KNOW'". Therefore if he said, he did not know, how can you accuse him of falsely prophesying what he clearly said, HE DID NOT KNOW (Mat.24:36

You make a good point, and you have as much of a chance as i do to be right, but it is not conclusive. How can you say that you have such understanding of a book that was written 6000-2000 years ago, to a culture that was so opposite to ours. Then when you factor in the several times it was translations by human minds/ hands. It just will not hold up under scrutiny.

Are you switching sides on me, Nogo? I am the one that is saying that you can not use this book to prove anything!!!!!


Hundreds of meteors fall every year.

Do a search on The Millennial Rain of Christ


?????What do you think, the odds are that those words are the accurate words of Shaul????


I do not believe that, the translation can be relied on enough to prove anything. Do you???


?????If "Jesus"did not know the time of his return,(Mat.24:36) then how would Paul know either?????

aza wood

Did JD live 2000 years ago, and has his statement, been changed several times by people who are long dead and can not be ask any questions about their quotations?

If he said that, then you are right, but you do not have "jesus's own words to prove just what he said.


Again, if you can quote him directly then again you are correct, but this is not the case here.

To say that my point is to simple and then misquote it, tells me that it has yet to be understood.


If that same person is trying to show something other than the inconsistence of the bible,("Jesus" is a false prophet) and using the bible as his only documentation, his evidence is erosions.

i have his actual words, not a 2000 year old translation of a translation.

Thanks.

NOGO

You seemed to have missed it again. I will try one point at a time so that we don't get lost in a multitude of words.

Note this sentence.
So, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

Two things are important here which you have ignored.
1) "when you see all these things"
Jesus is saying to his disciples in private that THEY WILL SEE ALL THE THINGS that he talked about. He did not say when you see some of these things or when people at some future time will see some of these things ... he said when YOU see ALL these things.

2) "this generation will not pass away until all these things take place"
Note the words "this" (not that) generation.
Also note the words "all" these things will take place before this generation will pass.

So all the things that Jesus mentioned not only must take place within a single generation but also the twelve disciples must witness all these events.

This shows as clear as can be that your interpretation that the tribulations are on-going cannot be taken seriously.

The logical conclusion is that Jesus said that he would return within the then current generation.

[ May 18, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]</p>

NOGO

This arguement is a double edged sword.
If non-believers cannot critize the Bible because we are unsure of what it actually says then believers can't use it either to support any of their beliefs.

I am willing to bet, however, that you are quite alone on this one.

By now some of the numerous scholars who study and translate ancient texts would have agreed with you. I challenge you to find one.

My guess, though, is that you believe that only the text that disagree with your beliefs cannot be trusted. The rest is ok. Right?

[ May 18, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]</p>

NOGO

Matthew 24:36 does not say "I do not know". It says this.

Matthew 24
33 so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.
34 "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
35 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.
36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.

Note verse 34.
How can anyone say "this generation will not pass away until all these things take place" if he does not know when at all???

Verse 36 says
that he does not know the exact day and hour. It does not say that he does not know at all as you make it out to be.

Since Jesus had already stated that ALL (note the all) the things that he talked about before would take place before the then generation passed
THEN
your interpretation of verse 36 must be wrong


According to you
1) the tribulations are on-going
2) Jesus had no idea of when he would return
THEN
what is the meaning of verse 34

34 "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

This verse must disappear to make you right.
Perhaps some translator inserted it inadvertantly.

"all these things" in verse 34 include the tribulations, the destruction of the temple, and Jesus' return.

[ May 18, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]</p>

NOGO

Here is another disciple who obviously got it wrong believing that the end was near back in the first century.


"Do not seal up the words of this book".
I guess this is why it is called revelations.

Compare this passage with Daniel ...


The angel tells Daniel to seal up the book until the end of time.

So John was told not to seal up the book because the end is near while Daniel was told to seal up the book until the end of time.

Yet more time passed from John to the present than from Daniel to John. What meaning can one attach to the words "things which must soon take place" in Rev 1:1?

[ May 19, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]</p>

aza wood

If you remember, you said that you where assuming that the rest of matthew chapter 24 was "jesus's" answer to a multi part question leveled at him by his disciples. Their question was (WHEN) will the destruction of the temple take place, and (WHAT) will be the sign of thy coming and of the end of the age.

In their question, the TIME of the destruction of the Temple, and the SIGN of his coming were asked about.

"JESUS" gave them what they ask him for. The TIME of the Destruction of the temple. He in fact said, very clearly, "I DO NOT KNOW WHEN I WILL BE COMING BACK!"(Mat.24:36, Mar.13:32)

You are saying the opposite of what was plainly said, and then calling him a prevaricator for saying it. Is this the kind of knowledge that your beliefs are bast on? Do all Nontheis, have this same kind of knowledge? Or is that just from NOGO?

[ May 19, 2002: Message edited by: aza wood ]</p>

aza wood

Do you know that you are saying things backwards,or does it just happen. The verse does not say, "the end of time" but says,"The time of the end". This leaves the reader with the question, "End of what"?


No. John was told, NOT "that the end was near", but that the time was at hand.
Rev 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

and that means what, taking into account that your other verses have been misquoted?.

[ May 19, 2002: Message edited by: aza wood ]</p>