The Return of the Divine Mother

[Rose]

Hello Rose

Starting with the Book of Revelation is not the best place to begin to understand the Bible. Revelation is not for beginners and while I do not consider myself a beginner, I do not claim to know all about the fulfilment of the prophecies and symbolism in Revelation. I am still working at it. I have faith that the symbolism used means something and that it is God's truth. My belief in this has come from understanding the parts of the Bible, I have seen come to pass and accept as true.

If you see the Bible lacking coherency that is a problem you have to resolve. Just because you have not been able to reslove this up to now, does not mean that the Bible does not have a coherent message. I have found a lot of coherency and that is a contributory factor to why I believe the whole of the Bible. There are parts I do not fully understand. I do not let this negate everything else I understand to be true. This is why, I look for coherency in the difficult passages to understand. The Bible has enough coherency to assure me that this is a divinely inspired book; the coherent message penned over thousands of years could not have been the work of fiction by men.

I'm sorry David, but making an incoherent book coherent is not my job...all I would be doing is creating one more personal religion. My job is to search out the truth and use my intelligence to discern facts from fiction.

The story that is in the Bible has an ending. I see this ending as when Christ hands back a restored kingdom/earth to God. Beyond that time, we have no idea what God has in store, the Bible does not tell us. The period after the Bible record has finished is of eternal life in the kingdom which is upon this earth. This is God's promise and unless you can prove God is a liar (His Word to me proves true) this is a message of hope to mankind. Without God, we have no sure foundation for hope. If you believe in Evolution in which there is no God, what hope have you for yourself in the future. The hope of eternal life and the assurance of eternal life is based on the firm foundation that Jesus was raised from the dead. Without this belief, then any hope of a future life is wishful thinking by man. A person can have no hope of a future life and that is OK; hope is a personal matter.

If God can lie (and He has no reason to lie and it is not in His nature) then I would not trust God. I have to disbelieve some of the myths created by man's interpretation of God's word because they make God to be a liar and that is not the case. It behooves us to search out truth, and if we cannot find it straightaway, we should hold things in abeyance until we can. Putting all the terrible acts of war to one side, can you not attribute one good thing towards God? If you can find one, this is reason to find another and build from there. Jesus said; it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.. It is not God's good pleasure to punish men for their evil ways, but God has to be true to His word and will punish in accordance with what He has said He would do. If God did not punish evil people in this world, and it the evil people are not separated out before God's kingdom is established, I would be very worried for the future that God is promising. Evil does not feature in the kingdom that will exist after Christ hands over his kingdom. God has punished people in the past and we read the recorded accounts of the times He did. At present (and man blames God for not intervening) God is longsuffering and not punishing man. The day is coming when God will punish man again and God will punish man in a big way. The day is also coming when He will save those who want to be saved. It is a matter of whose side you want to be on when that happens.

I don't need to prove God is a liar, because I have shown that the Bible is a book written from the minds of Bronze Age men, so instead of being a liar God is a myth. The Bible is so full of male-bias, errors and contradictions, and is such a perfect reflection of the beliefs and customs of ancient man that it leaves no doubt in my mind where the ideas it portrays came from.

The big picture is that God will restore the earth to as it was before the fall of Adam and Eve. Life (eternal) will continue on this earth. The new age will have none of the evil of this present world. In that time to come, there will no cause to consider God anything other than good, of whom Jesus said; "there is only One who is good" Therefore, the severity of God as seen in the punishement brought about by God must be got into perspective. These horrible events serve as a lessons. More good can come from people learning the lessons of other people. If people choose not to learn the lesson and continue in their evil ways, it is not God who is to blame. You can only blame God for giving men and women free choice. Thank God for your "free choice". God has given you the choice to reject Him. God is big enough to take rejection. God has control.

If you know someone who practices their religion which involves offering young children as sacrifices, is this something you condone? If you do not condone their actions, what do you do? Do you ask them to stop? What if they do not listen to you and continue? What if by their practice of child sacrifice, they bring others to do the same, what do you think of that? Not only do you want that person to stop, you now have others to whom you want to say "stop". What can you do, to stop these other people sacrificing children? What is your solution to this problem? What if you have explained to them why it is wrong and evil to do this and they still continue? You have taught them it is wrong, you have pleaded with them to stop and they will not change their ways, what can you do? Is it right that you let them continue to convert more people to do the same thing and therefore kill more children? What can you do to stop them? God has instructed you not to kill, but you feel like killing all these people for the evil they are committing and you are powerless to kill them all on your own. If you cannot stop them, who can? If you know that God is there and He can do it, would you not ask God to kill them? God can kill and that takes the onus off you and you are thereby obeying the instruction "do not to kill". Whereas you are powerless to do this on your own, you might consider getting a bunch of like-minded people together and saying; "let us kill these evil people and put a stop to this". But you would all be guilty of disobeying God's instruction not to kill. What then if God says to you; "on this occassion, I permit you to kill these people and you will be guiltless, because I have instructed you to do this in order that you can have your heart's desire to put an end to this child-killing practice", would you then do as God has allowed you?

Please Rose, take the above paragraph and take time to respond to each and every question. I want to know your answers.

All the best.

David

I know for sure David, that if I knew of a religion who offered their children as sacrifices I WOULD NOT in turn slaughter all the men, women and CHILDREN like Yahweh did! How barbaric is that? If there is a god and he wants to take care of the problem of the sinful people he created, then he should do his own dirty work and not ask his creations to do the killing. On one hand the Ten Commandments decree there is to be no killing, and on the other hand Yahweh commands his people to go and slaughter men, women and children for nothing more than worshiping another god, that sounds like a pretty mixed up message to me.

Speaking of human sacrifice, the very foundation of Christianity started with human sacrifice. Couldn't the so called creator of the universe come up with a better solution than copying the rituals of pagan human sacrifice?

Take care,
Rose

[CWH]

I'm sorry David, but making an incoherent book coherent is not my job...all I would be doing is creating one more personal religion. My job is to search out the truth and use my intelligence to discern facts from fiction.

I don't need to prove God is a liar, because I have shown that the Bible is a book written from the minds of Bronze Age men, so instead of being a liar God is a myth. The Bible is so full of male-bias, errors and contradictions, and is such a perfect reflection of the beliefs and customs of ancient man that it leaves no doubt in my mind where the ideas it portrays came from.

I know for sure David, that if I knew of a religion who offered their children as sacrifices I WOULD NOT in turn slaughter all the men, women and CHILDREN like Yahweh did! How barbaric is that? If there is a god and he wants to take care of the problem of the sinful people he created, then he should do his own dirty work and not ask his creations to do the killing. On one hand the Ten Commandments decree there is to be no killing, and on the other hand Yahweh commands his people to go and slaughter men, women and children for nothing more than worshiping another god, that sounds like a pretty mixed up message to me.

Speaking of human sacrifice, the very foundation of Christianity started with human sacrifice. Couldn't the so called creator of the universe come up with a better solution than copying the rituals of pagan human sacrifice?

Take care,
Rose

It's the same with human laws isn't? On one hand human law says that it is a heinous crime to murder and manslaughter and destroy (men, women, children, civilians, soldiers, animals, properties, vegetation), on the other hand it is ok to do so in wars especially against the enemy. As long as the law allows, it is not a crime.

Then someone asked, why can't the US government do it itself by sending nuclear missiles instead of sending men to die in those wars (Vietnam war, Korean war, Iraqi war, Afghan war etc.)?

Think of these two issues:
1. It is not a crime to kill if human law allows it thus it is not a sin if God allows killing.
2. Why not the US government do it itself by sending nuclear missiles instead of sending men to fight and die there? Sending nuclear missiles would destroy everything(men, women, children, soldiers, animals, civilians, properties, vegetations, land) including good and evil men. It would also endanger friendly nations and the environment and caused international protests. Would that encourage nuclear weapons proliferation worldwide? Thus sending men to fight selectively and conventionally is a better choice.

Yet after the war, comes peace and the warring parties become friends again e.g. US and Japan and Germany after WW2, US and Vietnam. Did those men who fought those wars suffered or died in vain?....sounds insane isn't it?

Now come let's reason together as your motto says.


May God Bless our understandings.

[David M]

.

If you know someone who practices their religion which involves offering young children as sacrifices, is this something you condone? If you do not condone their actions, what do you do? Do you ask them to stop? What if they do not listen to you and continue? What if by their practice of child sacrifice, they bring others to do the same, what do you think of that? Not only do you want that person to stop, you now have others to whom you want to say "stop". What can you do, to stop these other people sacrificing children? What is your solution to this problem? What if you have explained to them why it is wrong and evil to do this and they still continue? You have taught them it is wrong, you have pleaded with them to stop and they will not change their ways, what can you do? Is it right that you let them continue to convert more people to do the same thing and therefore kill more children? What can you do to stop them? God has instructed you not to kill, but you feel like killing all these people for the evil they are committing and you are powerless to kill them all on your own. If you cannot stop them, who can? If you know that God is there and He can do it, would you not ask God to kill them? God can kill and that takes the onus off you and you are thereby obeying the instruction "do not to kill". Whereas you are powerless to do this on your own, you might consider getting a bunch of like-minded people together and saying; "let us kill these evil people and put a stop to this". But you would all be guilty of disobeying God's instruction not to kill. What then if God says to you; "on this occassion, I permit you to kill these people and you will be guiltless, because I have instructed you to do this in order that you can have your heart's desire to put an end to this child-killing practice", would you then do as God has allowed you?

I know for sure David, that if I knew of a religion who offered their children as sacrifices I WOULD NOT in turn slaughter all the men, women and CHILDREN like Yahweh did! How barbaric is that? If there is a god and he wants to take care of the problem of the sinful people he created, then he should do his own dirty work and not ask his creations to do the killing. On one hand the Ten Commandments decree there is to be no killing, and on the other hand Yahweh commands his people to go and slaughter men, women and children for nothing more than worshiping another god, that sounds like a pretty mixed up message to me.

Take care,
Rose

Hello Rose

Please forget about what God has done or not done in the past or how you think God should act in the future. I would like to know your answers to the simple plain questions given in the paragraph quoted. I am not looking for deep answers. I just want simple honest answers that do not require any thought and will take up one or two minutes at the most. in most cases a "yes" or no "answer" is all that is required.

Regards

David

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Good morning Richard

Thanks for the links, I have read your post and some of the replies.

I think we have much to carry on discussing and we can look at fulfilment of prophecies which fall into 4 periods;

1. From Creation to the first coming of Jesus
2. Between Jesus’s birth and AD70
3. Post AD70 to now
4. From now until when Jesus hands back the restored kingdom to God

Maybe we identify all the prophecies that fall into those four time periods. We should end up having a more meaningful discussion displaying less antagonism.

I have read your article and the discussion you were having at that time and that is the type of discussion we need to get back. I do not propose we continue discussing these things in this thread and maybe there are threads that can be continued.

Here are some of the subjects we can think about.

1. Promises to Abraham which are not complete.
2. When is the fulfilment of God’s promise; 'But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the LORD'?
3. When will the Jews recognize Christ and the veil removed?
4. When is the 'time of the Gentiles' fulfilled?
5. When is the period of 'Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth' to take place?
6. When will Gog and Magog come to war against Israel?
7. When will the Mount of Olives split in two?
8. When is the fulfilment of Zechariah chapter 14?
9. When was the fulfilment of Ezekiel chapter 38?
10. When is the fulfilment of Revelation chapter 21?

The list above is not extensive and is the first 10 subjects to come straight from my head as I write. All 10 items listed must fall into one of the 4 time periods.

I think there is enough here to continue discussions for a while.

All the best.

David

Hi David,

Yes, I think we have much to talk about. I think it would be very good to start with the "main and plain" things - the BIG PICTURE. It's like the jigsaw you were talking about. The list of questions you posed have no answers until we establish the "Big Picuture." They are like the pieces of blue sky with wisps of clouds - we'd never finish the puzzle if we started with them. The Big Picutre is super plain and obvious. John the Baptist fulfilled the prophecies about the Elijah who was to come before Messiah AND the great and notable day of the Lord. There are no "two comings of Elijah"! Peter plainly stated that Pentecost fulfilled Joel's prophecy and he connected it to the "day of the Lord" which happened in 70 AD. This is confirmed again by Christ who predicted the destruction of the Temple saying it would happen in the first century (and history confirms). This is the Big Picture of the Bible - the coming of Christ and the judgment of Jerusalem.

Do you see the difference with the bits and pieces that you present? They are notable for their ambiguity. They do not have clear and unambiguous verses confirming them, whereas the Preterist position is confirmed my hundreds of mutually confirming verses interpreted in their plain and obvious sense.

But I will answer your questions here so you have an idea where I am coming from. Then we can choose a title and topic for the new thread where we can explore these issues.

1. Promises to Abraham which are not complete.
The Bible plainly states that ALL the prophecies given to Abraham have been fulfilled.

2. When is the fulfilment of God’s promise; 'But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the LORD'?
That's open to debate.

3. When will the Jews recognize Christ and the veil removed?
Many Jews recognized Christ as Messiah in the first century. Indeed, all the Apostles were Jews. There is no promise that the nation as a whole would ever believe in Jesus.

4. When is the 'time of the Gentiles' fulfilled?
That term is not well defined. It's only used once in the Bible, so it would be foolish to use it in the foundation of any esachatological theory. We must begin with the main and plain things and interpret the obscure things in light of them.

5. When is the period of 'Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth' to take place?
That phrase is from a prayer. It is not a prophecy that there would be a time on this physical earth when it would be manifested.

6. When will Gog and Magog come to war against Israel?
That prophecy is extremely problematic. The Bible does not give enough information to determine its meaning with any certainty.

7. When will the Mount of Olives split in two?
That's probably figurative, like all of Zec 14.

8. When is the fulfilment of Zechariah chapter 14?
We know it can't be literal because it speaks of "all they that sacrifice" (Zec 14:21) and there is no way that God will be re-instituting OT style animal sacrifices.

9. When was the fulfilment of Ezekiel chapter 38?
That's a repeat of question #6 above.

10. When is the fulfilment of Revelation chapter 21?
It already happened. The New Jerusalem is the Church, as it is written:

Hebrews 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

I hope that helps you understand where I am coming from. Let me know what you think would be a good title and topic for the new thread and I will start it (or you could start it yourself).

Great chatting!

Richard

[Rose]

Hello Rose

Originally Posted by Rose

.

If you know someone who practices their religion which involves offering young children as sacrifices, is this something you condone? If you do not condone their actions, what do you do? Do you ask them to stop? What if they do not listen to you and continue? What if by their practice of child sacrifice, they bring others to do the same, what do you think of that? Not only do you want that person to stop, you now have others to whom you want to say "stop". What can you do, to stop these other people sacrificing children? What is your solution to this problem? What if you have explained to them why it is wrong and evil to do this and they still continue? You have taught them it is wrong, you have pleaded with them to stop and they will not change their ways, what can you do? Is it right that you let them continue to convert more people to do the same thing and therefore kill more children? What can you do to stop them? God has instructed you not to kill, but you feel like killing all these people for the evil they are committing and you are powerless to kill them all on your own. If you cannot stop them, who can? If you know that God is there and He can do it, would you not ask God to kill them? God can kill and that takes the onus off you and you are thereby obeying the instruction "do not to kill". Whereas you are powerless to do this on your own, you might consider getting a bunch of like-minded people together and saying; "let us kill these evil people and put a stop to this". But you would all be guilty of disobeying God's instruction not to kill. What then if God says to you; "on this occassion, I permit you to kill these people and you will be guiltless, because I have instructed you to do this in order that you can have your heart's desire to put an end to this child-killing practice", would you then do as God has allowed you?

I know for sure David, that if I knew of a religion who offered their children as sacrifices I WOULD NOT in turn slaughter all the men, women and CHILDREN like Yahweh did! How barbaric is that? If there is a god and he wants to take care of the problem of the sinful people he created, then he should do his own dirty work and not ask his creations to do the killing. On one hand the Ten Commandments decree there is to be no killing, and on the other hand Yahweh commands his people to go and slaughter men, women and children for nothing more than worshiping another god, that sounds like a pretty mixed up message to me.

Take care,
Rose

Please forget about what God has done or not done in the past or how you think God should act in the future. I would like to know your answers to the simple plain questions given in the paragraph quoted. I am not looking for deep answers. I just want simple honest answers that do not require any thought and will take up one or two minutes at the most. in most cases a "yes" or no "answer" is all that is required.

Regards

David

Hi David,

I pretty much summed up all your questions into my one answer, but I can go over it again. If I had the power that is attributed to God and I knew there were people sacrificing their children, I would first take the men who were responsible for propagating the belief that a god named Molech, requires human sacrifice and teach them that their beliefs are wrong. I most certainly WOULD NOT command other people to go and slaughter all the men, women and children as a solution!

The pathetic thing is that with all the killing that Yahweh ordered in the Bible, nothing changed! People still continued to worship other gods and people still continued to do bad things. Also, why was God ordering people to do stuff he should have been taking care of himself, if you believe God created humans then he should have taken the responsibility instead of commanding other humans to do his corrective work. And why didn't God learn from the fact that even when he wiped out all humans with a flood, nothing changed. Killing people is a barbaric, primitive way to solve problems, which is why it is so obvious that the god of the Bible is a primitive tribal war god made up from the minds of men.

All the best,
Rose

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hello Rose

Trying to get all the pieces of the Bible to fit together and make sense is precisely how I got to where I am today. I began an intense study of Revelation which lead me into the Old Testament for understanding, which then opened up a can of worms trying to reconcile all the errors, contradictions and male bias I found.

Starting with the Book of Revelation is not the best place to begin to understand the Bible. Revelation is not for beginners and while I do not consider myself a beginner, I do not claim to know all about the fulfilment of the prophecies and symbolism in Revelation. I am still working at it. I have faith that the symbolism used means something and that it is God's truth. My belief in this has come from understanding the parts of the Bible, I have seen come to pass and accept as true.

I think it is important to note that Rose was a Christian for 30 years and had read the Bible thoroughly before she began her intense study of Revelation in particular. She was not in any way a "beginner."

I interacted with her every day over a two year period as she analyzed the book, comparing Scripture with Scripture and believing that the Bible was perfectly coherent and only needed to be studied to be understood. She made a trememdous amount of progress and discovered many connections (especially with the OT and Christ's prophecies in the Olivet Discourse) that confirmed her understanding. But the study was so intense, that she could not deny she also began seeing inconsistencies that proved the Bible was not perfectly coherent. Her last big project was an attempt to harmonize the accounts of the anointing of Christ at Bethany. She worked intensely and refused to give up looking for harmony until it became apparent there was none.

It would be a fascinating study to compare how we agree and differ as to what constitutes evidence of the Bible. When I was a Christian, I was convinced that the strongest of all proofs (by far) was the prophetic flow from the OT to the NT and the fulfillment of the integrated prophetic complex of Daniel, Revelation, and the Olivet Discourse in 70 AD. Ironically, the vast majority of Chistians reject those prophecies as fulfilled because that would contradict the Futurist eschatalogy in which they were indoctrinated. Ironically, it is usually the atheists that deny the fulfillment of prophecies!

If you see the Bible lacking coherency that is a problem you have to resolve. Just because you have not been able to reslove this up to now, does not mean that the Bible does not have a coherent message. I have found a lot of coherency and that is a contributory factor to why I believe the whole of the Bible. There are parts I do not fully understand. I do not let this negate everything else I understand to be true. This is why, I look for coherency in the difficult passages to understand. The Bible has enough coherency to assure me that this is a divinely inspired book; the coherent message penned over thousands of years could not have been the work of fiction by men.

There is an error in your method. How would you ever find out if the Koran had an error if you used your method? Every argument made against it could be countered by saying "If you see the Koran lacking coherency that is a problem you have to resolve. Just because you have not been able to reslove this up to now, does not mean that the Koran does not have a coherent message. I have found a lot of coherency and that is a contributory factor to why I believe the whole of the Koran. There are parts I do not fully understand. I do not let this negate everything else I understand to be true. This is why, I look for coherency in the difficult passages to understand. The Koran has enough coherency to assure me that this is a divinely inspired book; the coherent message penned over thousands of years could not have been the work of fiction by men."

It seems to me that you are using a double-standard to protect your dogma that the Bible is trustworthy. Double-standards are the arch-enemy of truth and should be avoided at all costs. They make it impossible to discover the truth.

[David M]

I think it is important to note that Rose was a Christian for 30 years and had read the Bible thoroughly before she began her intense study of Revelation in particular. She was not in any way a "beginner."

I interacted with her every day over a two year period as she analyzed the book, comparing Scripture with Scripture and believing that the Bible was perfectly coherent and only needed to be studied to be understood. She made a trememdous amount of progress and discovered many connections (especially with the OT and Christ's prophecies in the Olivet Discourse) that confirmed her understanding. But the study was so intense, that she could not deny she also began seeing inconsistencies that proved the Bible was not perfectly coherent. Her last big project was an attempt to harmonize the accounts of the anointing of Christ at Bethany. She worked intensely and refused to give up looking for harmony until it became apparent there was none.

It would be a fascinating study to compare how we agree and differ as to what constitutes evidence of the Bible. When I was a Christian, I was convinced that the strongest of all proofs (by far) was the prophetic flow from the OT to the NT and the fulfillment of the integrated prophetic complex of Daniel, Revelation, and the Olivet Discourse in 70 AD. Ironically, the vast majority of Chistians reject those prophecies as fulfilled because that would contradict the Futurist eschatalogy in which they were indoctrinated. Ironically, it is usually the atheists that deny the fulfillment of prophecies!


There is an error in your method. How would you ever find out if the Koran had an error if you used your method? Every argument made against it could be countered by saying "If you see the Koran lacking coherency that is a problem you have to resolve. Just because you have not been able to reslove this up to now, does not mean that the Koran does not have a coherent message. I have found a lot of coherency and that is a contributory factor to why I believe the whole of the Koran. There are parts I do not fully understand. I do not let this negate everything else I understand to be true. This is why, I look for coherency in the difficult passages to understand. The Koran has enough coherency to assure me that this is a divinely inspired book; the coherent message penned over thousands of years could not have been the work of fiction by men."

It seems to me that you are using a double-standard to protect your dogma that the Bible is trustworthy. Double-standards are the arch-enemy of truth and should be avoided at all costs. They make it impossible to discover the truth.

Thanks for explaining the history of Rose's faith. How easily we misconstrue what the writer intends us to understand. This is our common problem which is why we are reasoning together to understand one another's beliefs.

I would not throw out all the consistencies of the Bible, just because there are some inconsistences to be resolved. If there is enough consistency in the Bible to believe it to be true, that must override the apparent inconsistencies by which one is prepared to reject the whole of the Bible and reject God in the process. Thanks for sharing your history which gives me a clearer understanding of your stance on these issues.

You are right to reject many of the doctrines taught by Christianity, but to me you appear to be holding on to some of the false doctrines you were taught. Why support the Trinity when the Bible teaches God is ONE? If you claim to have rejected Christianity, you should reject the Christian doctrine of the Trinity which was introduced centuries after the Bible was written. I expect you to use your own intellect and reason and not follow the false reasoning of others that lead you to believe it. It is difficult for you to shake that false reasoning off. I suggest you start off with a fresh approach and take on board the thoughts I have presented and at least consider them as a possibility till you have fully reasoned the matter out starting all over again without any preconceptions.

That would be a lengthy study to compare relative amounts of consistency and inconsistency in the Bible and with the relative amounts of consistency and inconsistency in the Koran. If such an exercise proved the Bible is more consistent of the two, is this reason enough to take the Bible as the more authorative book?
While I have not found enough inconsistency to make me give up believing, I shall continue to believe what I do until I am shown strong irrefutable evidence to make me change my mind. None so far has been forthcoming. Merely asserting one's evidence is irrefutable does not add anything to the real argument. While we refute each other's evidence, we hold our ground and our beliefs.

Let's carry on reasoning.


David

[David M]

Hi David,

I pretty much summed up all your questions into my one answer, but I can go over it again. If I had the power that is attributed to God and I knew there were people sacrificing their children, I would first take the men who were responsible for propagating the belief that a god named Molech, requires human sacrifice and teach them that their beliefs are wrong. I most certainly WOULD NOT command other people to go and slaughter all the men, women and children as a solution!

The pathetic thing is that with all the killing that Yahweh ordered in the Bible, nothing changed! People still continued to worship other gods and people still continued to do bad things. Also, why was God ordering people to do stuff he should have been taking care of himself, if you believe God created humans then he should have taken the responsibility instead of commanding other humans to do his corrective work. And why didn't God learn from the fact that even when he wiped out all humans with a flood, nothing changed. Killing people is a barbaric, primitive way to solve problems, which is why it is so obvious that the god of the Bible is a primitive tribal war god made up from the minds of men.

All the best,
Rose

Hello Rose
How do you manage the quotes within quotes to so many levels? I am not sure what the multiquote button does, it does not make any difference in my IE8 browser which does strange things of late with my wireless router.

That aside, I do not want your summary. You are avoiding answering my questions. Please go through them and answer them one by one. There is the question of what do you do if you teaching is rejected. You think you can teach and people will readily accept what you say. This forum should tell you that you are on to a non-starter; it is not going to happen.

Here is the paragraph again with my questions.

If you know someone who practices their religion which involves offering young children as sacrifices, is this something you condone? If you do not condone their actions, what do you do? Do you ask them to stop? What if they do not listen to you and continue? What if by their practice of child sacrifice, they bring others to do the same, what do you think of that? Not only do you want that person to stop, you now have others to whom you want to say "stop". What can you do, to stop these other people sacrificing children? What is your solution to this problem? What if you have explained to them why it is wrong and evil to do this and they still continue? You have taught them it is wrong, you have pleaded with them to stop and they will not change their ways, what can you do? Is it right that you let them continue to convert more people to do the same thing and therefore kill more children? What can you do to stop them? God has instructed you not to kill, but you feel like killing all these people for the evil they are committing and you are powerless to kill them all on your own. If you cannot stop them, who can? If you know that God is there and He can do it, would you not ask God to kill them? God can kill and that takes the onus off you and you are thereby obeying the instruction "do not to kill". Whereas you are powerless to do this on your own, you might consider getting a bunch of like-minded people together and saying; "let us kill these evil people and put a stop to this". But you would all be guilty of disobeying God's instruction not to kill. What then if God says to you; "on this occassion, I permit you to kill these people and you will be guiltless, because I have instructed you to do this in order that you can have your heart's desire to put an end to this child-killing practice", would you then do as God has allowed you?

I look forward to each and every answer to the questions.


All the best.

David

[David M]

Hello Richard

Hi David,

Yes, I think we have much to talk about. I think it would be very good to start with the "main and plain" things - the BIG PICTURE. It's like the jigsaw you were talking about. The list of questions you posed have no answers until we establish the "Big Picuture." They are like the pieces of blue sky with wisps of clouds - we'd never finish the puzzle if we started with them. The Big Picutre is super plain and obvious. John the Baptist fulfilled the prophecies about the Elijah who was to come before Messiah AND the great and notable day of the Lord. There are no "two comings of Elijah"! Peter plainly stated that Pentecost fulfilled Joel's prophecy and he connected it to the "day of the Lord" which happened in 70 AD. This is confirmed again by Christ who predicted the destruction of the Temple saying it would happen in the first century (and history confirms). This is the Big Picture of the Bible - the coming of Christ and the judgment of Jerusalem.

Do you see the difference with the bits and pieces that you present? They are notable for their ambiguity. They do not have clear and unambiguous verses confirming them, whereas the Preterist position is confirmed my hundreds of mutually confirming verses interpreted in their plain and obvious sense.

But I will answer your questions here so you have an idea where I am coming from. Then we can choose a title and topic for the new thread where we can explore these issues.

1. Promises to Abraham which are not complete.
The Bible plainly states that ALL the prophecies given to Abraham have been fulfilled.

2. When is the fulfilment of God’s promise; 'But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the LORD'?
That's open to debate.

3. When will the Jews recognize Christ and the veil removed?
Many Jews recognized Christ as Messiah in the first century. Indeed, all the Apostles were Jews. There is no promise that the nation as a whole would ever believe in Jesus.

4. When is the 'time of the Gentiles' fulfilled?
That term is not well defined. It's only used once in the Bible, so it would be foolish to use it in the foundation of any esachatological theory. We must begin with the main and plain things and interpret the obscure things in light of them.

5. When is the period of 'Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth' to take place?
That phrase is from a prayer. It is not a prophecy that there would be a time on this physical earth when it would be manifested.

6. When will Gog and Magog come to war against Israel?
That prophecy is extremely problematic. The Bible does not give enough information to determine its meaning with any certainty.

7. When will the Mount of Olives split in two?
That's probably figurative, like all of Zec 14.

8. When is the fulfilment of Zechariah chapter 14?
We know it can't be literal because it speaks of "all they that sacrifice" (Zec 14:21) and there is no way that God will be re-instituting OT style animal sacrifices.

9. When was the fulfilment of Ezekiel chapter 38?
That's a repeat of question #6 above.

10. When is the fulfilment of Revelation chapter 21?
It already happened. The New Jerusalem is the Church, as it is written:

Hebrews 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

I hope that helps you understand where I am coming from. Let me know what you think would be a good title and topic for the new thread and I will start it (or you could start it yourself).

Great chatting!

Richard

Hello Richard
In your usual style, you have responded to everything I have listed and as I said it was not the purpose to use that list in this thread. I will gladly take each one as a separate subject in a separate thread. You have given me an indication from where you are starting with each item in the list and I thank you for that.

You must stop this habit of saying the Bible plainly states. I will try to prevent myself saying anything similar.

1. Promises to Abraham which are not complete.
The Bible plainly states that ALL the prophecies given to Abraham have been fulfilled.

This is why I want each of the items in the list, and any other items added, to be reasoned together before making any assertions such as you have stated. Abraham has not received his inheritance, so it is clear to me that the promise has not been totally fulfilled. I am not continuing this discussion here.

Since we will be talking about the "Big Picture", the promises to Abraham are essential to understand first of all and is therefore the best place to start. The fulfillment of the promise concerning Abraham's inheritance remains future; as I understand. The time period the promises to Abraham are in force includes most of the time period from Creation to the time when Christ hands back a restored kingdom to God. That is the Big Picture I see; from The Fall to The Restored Kingdom of God here on earth. As it is, your Big Picture which you have explained above is a subset of my Bigger Picture.

Let's keep chatting in the threads


David

[CWH]

[

QUOTE=RAM;43127]I think it is important to note that Rose was a Christian for 30 years and had read the Bible thoroughly before she began her intense study of Revelation in particular. She was not in any way a "beginner."

I interacted with her every day over a two year period as she analyzed the book, comparing Scripture with Scripture and believing that the Bible was perfectly coherent and only needed to be studied to be understood. She made a trememdous amount of progress and discovered many connections (especially with the OT and Christ's prophecies in the Olivet Discourse) that confirmed her understanding. But the study was so intense, that she could not deny she also began seeing inconsistencies that proved the Bible was not perfectly coherent. Her last big project was an attempt to harmonize the accounts of the anointing of Christ at Bethany. She worked intensely and refused to give up looking for harmony until it became apparent there was none.

So am I and with many Christians here are old-timers with years of intense Bible study and we knew about the atrocities and inconsistencies of the Bible and yet we don't "evolve" into the non-theist state and the pathetic God-bashing that and Rose and you are currently in. Don't you realize that Rose and you have degrading from Futurism to Preterism to non-theism and the next step is Atheism. I would be comforted if Rose and you were to remain even as Preterists so that at least you all have some hope to look forward to. I see being non-theists or atheists is like lost souls floating aimlessly around with nothing to look forward to after death. Of course, they have lots of freedom to do whatever they think and freedom from religious dogmas but these are false freedom. The true freedom is what Jesus sad, "Seek the truth and the truth will set you free".

John 8: Jesus said, 'If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.'
33 They answered him, 'We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?'

34 Jesus replied, 'Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. 35 Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. 36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.

It would be a fascinating study to compare how we agree and differ as to what constitutes evidence of the Bible. When I was a Christian, I was convinced that the strongest of all proofs (by far) was the prophetic flow from the OT to the NT and the fulfillment of the integrated prophetic complex of Daniel, Revelation, and the Olivet Discourse in 70 AD. Ironically, the vast majority of Chistians reject those prophecies as fulfilled because that would contradict the Futurist eschatalogy in which they were indoctrinated. Ironically, it is usually the atheists that deny the fulfillment of prophecies!

I thought you said you are no more a Christian and yet you still believe in the Preterist's doctrine. You don't trust the Bible anymore but yet ironically still quoted from the Bible as if like a staunch Christian. What are you? I am saying out of concern.

There is an error in your method. How would you ever find out if the Koran had an error if you used your method? Every argument made against it could be countered by saying "If you see the Koran lacking coherency that is a problem you have to resolve. Just because you have not been able to reslove this up to now, does not mean that the Koran does not have a coherent message. I have found a lot of coherency and that is a contributory factor to why I believe the whole of the Koran. There are parts I do not fully understand. I do not let this negate everything else I understand to be true. This is why, I look for coherency in the difficult passages to understand. The Koran has enough coherency to assure me that this is a divinely inspired book; the coherent message penned over thousands of years could not have been the work of fiction by men."

If the Koran is so good and so coherent, why are you not a Muslim? I would be comforted if you are a Muslim rather than a lost non-theist floating around aimlessly with nothing to look forward to. I am not sure about your belief but to us believing Christians death carries a hope of salvation. I may sounds harsh but I am more concern about yours and Rose's souls as a concerned brother in Christ.

It seems to me that you are using a double-standard to protect your dogma that the Bible is trustworthy. Double-standards are the arch-enemy of truth and should be avoided at all costs. They make it impossible to discover the truth.

If the Bible is not trustworthy, what more about words from fallible men? Double standards are not necessary the arch enemy of the truth; it depends on situation. Killing is a heinous crime but it is not if done during war against the enemy.


May God Blessed us with the Truth.