Not really. The book of Revelation, being an apocalyptic work, is not about what it appears to be about. Like all apocalyptic works, it uses a code to hide its true message so that the enemy won’t understand what you’re writing. In this case, the code is “end of the world” type writings which seem to project the events of the book far into the future, the “message” is about the plight of Christians in the AD 90s after the Beast, Nero, and during the reign of his “resurrection,” Dominitian (also known as Nero Revidicus – Nero Reborn), and the “enemy” is the Roman Empire.
Well, Kimstu, since she was talking about the reasons people had for believing the world was going to end at a particular date, I think it is a little different.
Also, I did not say that the Euro was mentioned in the Bible. Maybe you missed the part when I said that there are certain things that need to happen and I think that the Euro will help egg it on.
One thing leads to another. I think the European Union is a step closer to the events that will bring on the end.
Do you, Kimsu, see the difference in saying “the world is going to end tomorrow” and saying “I think the EU is a step closer to the events that will lead to the end”? I did not say that the world is going to end due to the EU.
Sdrawkcab, we are given more then one book in the Bible, like Daniel, that gives us an idea of what the end time will be like.
Yes, there are many messages in the Bible that are put in riddles so the enemy will not understand, but it also says, in the Bible, that thoses who are seeking the truth and have faith in God, will understand.
The events in Revelation were hidden at one time----for example, people didn’t understand how all the world could witness one event at the same time, but now, we can totally see how that is possible.
I think it is pretty obvious that the enemy will not understand what God does not want him to understand. It is pretty obvious right here on this board.
**Honey, why in the world are you even here at the Straight Dope? Do you have even the slightest inkling of what this message board is about, of why the rest of us are here? Do you comprehend, at all, how insulting you are, when you tell me that I can’t trust in Google and the Bible at the same time? You are saying that Science and Learning and Knowledge and Reason are useless, that we should place our trust only in the Bible. Do you realize how–I’m struggling for a word here…backward… that sounds?
**Um, which Bible, dear? The KJV? The NIV? The Revised Standard? The Living Bible?
Apparently you haven’t noticed that different groups have different interpretations of even the same Bible. Which group are we supposed to follow? “Your” group, I suppose… :rolleyes:
Incredible though it sounds, you are actually trying to tell us, here on a message board devoted to the Fight Against Ignorance–a message board the vast majority of whose members are here solely because they like to think that they’re advancing the cause of Reason–you are telling all of us Googling Fools that Faith is all we need, that we don’t need Reason. The Bible, not Google. You take my breath away, you really do.
Does this attitude carry through in your day-to-day life? When your car breaks down in the middle of the intersection, do you say, “God wanted my car to break down here”, or do you say, “The starter went bad”? When you get the flu, is it because God wanted you to have the flu, or is it because there’s a virus parasitizing your body?
Question: How do you feel about the people who carry out archaeological digs in Biblical cities like Jericho? Would you tell them also, “Don’t bother with Reason and ‘scientific proof’–just read your Bible”?
I realize that you’re addressing CJ here, but allow me to say on her behalf how amazingly condescending this sounds. You are so convinced that only your particular viewpoint is correct, and you refuse even to admit the possibility that (a) you could be wrong and (b) CJ could be right. Your mind is completely closed to any concepts that aren’t Fundamentalist Christian Premillenialism.
Here in this forum called “Great Debates”, you are quite clearly not here to debate–you are only here to witness. Well, more power to you, I guess. It is the correct forum for witnessing.
<< sigh >>
So everybody who doesn’t agree with you here, who doesn’t “get” your point, is having their vision clouded by Satan?
Right.
<< sigh >>
And I’m sure nothing in Jehovah’s Witness theology contradics scripture when read with JW eyes. And nothing in Mormon theology contradicts scripture when read with Mormon eyes. Etc. What’s your point?
Ok, so I have another question. If the bread turns instantaneously to the “body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ” at the speaking of the words “This is my body” at the consecration of the mass, as stated here (about 1/3 of the way down the page), at what time does it change back into bread?
Is it blasphemous to digest the body, blood, soul, and divinity, then go to the bathroom later on? Surely destroying the full divinity of Christ and turning it into excrement can’t be a good thing. And if it changes back into bread before you eat it, what’s the point? You’re still eating just plain bread.
You can say that Catholic doctrine doesn’t allow praying to statues, but some catholics certainly do pray to statues.
There’s a big difference between saying “be careful with that picture of Jesus - it means a lot to me!” and saying “you dropped the Lord!” Again, just because official doctrine doesn’t prescribe it doesn’t mean that it isn’t done.
So?
No, I hold the Catholic church responsible for bad things done by its popes and false teachings spread to its members.
Lots of people being wrong the same way for a long time doesn’t make them not wrong.
Again, that was me, not JD.
That’s twice tonight. :mad:
That saying “well, the Bible says…” is not proof of anything, it’s not even evidence. You read into the Bible what you want to see, as do Catholics, Mormons, etc. You must look beyond the scope of the Bible, to what the Early Church believed and how the Early Church behaved, in order to place what the Bible says in context and to figure out which reading of the Bible would have been most at home in those times – had there been a Bible in AD 90.
At the time when it has been dissolved to the point of no longer being easily recognizable as bread.
The “Mr. Hankey Jesus” canard. YOu know anti-Catholics are getting desparate when they whip out this one.
You do not digest the soul and divinity of Christ, for those become one with you during the consumption in the form of Grace. The Body and Blood cease to be present when the bread and wine are no longer easily recognizable as such.
Those people are wrong, and are violating the teachings of the Church, and the Church puts great effort into being clear in its teachings so that such abuses do not occur.
And you’ve never referred to a picture of a person with the name of that person? “What’s this picture?” “That’s my dad.” “Stay away from my dad, you’ll get fingerprints on the frame!”?
You have yet to show reliable evidence of any so-called “false teachings.”
No. There are a lot of Baptists in the world, and they’re wrong about pretty much everything.
However, the reason we look to history is because those who were there in the past have a better point of view of the original nature of Christian belief. Their beliefs are clearly consistent with the development of doctrine as evidenced within the structures and official history of the Catholic Church. The Early Christians, if their beliefs lacked the refinement and polish of later codified Catholic dogmas and doctrines, were clearly proto-Catholic in their faith.
The question you have to answer why, if the Early Church’s teachings and beliefs clearly fall on the Catholic line, and reflect a Catholic understanding of Christianity and what would later become known as Scripture, should we reject the beliefs of the Catholic Church, which is far more consistent with early Christendom’s creeds and confessions than modern Protestantism, and adopt your spurious man-made notions about what Christianity is?
Nope, Daniel isn’t about the end of the world, either. It, also, is an apocalyptic work that used an “end of the world” style code to hide its true message (one of perseverence) for the protection of the Jewish people.
Ah. I see. So anyone who doesn’t by into your Rapturite hysterical fantasies isn’t seeking the truth hard enough, or doesn’t have enough faith in God, and is being led astray because they’re the enemy? Gotcha. Great. Thanks. Right back at ya.
Not for those who realized what the book was. Only people who actually think the book is about the end of the world – ie, buy into the code the early Christians used to hide the meaning of the book from the Romans – need be confused by its contents. If you recognize it for the literary form that it is, its message is crystal clear: persevere, because the bad guys will lose in the end. It is not about the end of the world. Rapturite nonsense is all that is.
Ah. Lovely. A direct attack on all of us who don’t see things the way you do. How lovely. We’re the enemies of God, huh?
No one does more damage to God on this board than you, your wife/husband (can’t tell which of you posted this) and your buddy His4Ever. If there are any enemies of God on this board, its the three of you. And funny, you’re also the ones who don’t understand Revelation, and actually think it’s about the end of the world.
Neat how all that works.
Perhaps. Or perhaps the apostles and their followers were just exceptionally dense.
It seems that Jesus found the apostles - the chosen 12 - to be at least exasperating if not downright thick-skulled.
You do realise that years from now, historians are going to highlight this post as the origin of the “Googlist Heresy”.
DDG - the new Martin Luther. 
Google has helped me many a time.
I have faith in Google…
That’s strange…I thought it was fairly obvious that Jerseydiamond was saying that if you want to talk about what the bible says, you should look to the bible, not to google. I didn’t see anything about abandoning learning or reason. So, honey, why don’t you just relax a bit? I hear decaf can taste just as good as the real thing.
J_D: *I said that there are certain things that need to happen and I think that the Euro will help egg it on. One thing leads to another. I think the European Union is a step closer to the events that will bring on the end. *
And I was just wondering what your rationale is for thinking that, if it is not in the Bible and you say that such beliefs can be justified only by the Bible.
Do you, Kimsu, see the difference in saying “the world is going to end tomorrow” and saying “I think the EU is a step closer to the events that will lead to the end”?
Sure I do: the first one is more concrete and verifiable than the second (and the second is merely an “I think” opinion rather than a flat prediction). But what I was commenting on was that neither of those is mentioned in the Bible. So I don’t see what your rationale is for accepting one while rejecting the other.
Are you here because SD is your mission in life, or something? My dear, this is just a message board, not life. I would hope you are here because it is available and something to do, and not because there is nothing on the outside world for you. Go outside, take a walk, go have coffee with a friend. There is more to life than a computer and a message board.
Do you realize how insulting people are when they tell me “well, the scientist from google says, ‘blah blah blah’, so the Bible must be wrong”, or “the guy from google says ‘all non-denominational groups are wrong’, so you are wrong”.(just an example)
No, I can’t say that I have said that.
Well, all of the above Bibles have the same meaning when I read them. Do each of them say something different when you read them?
How about the group that actually follows what the Bible says, and doesn’t try to change it. I know it is a wild concept, but it works.
No, again, you are wrong.
What I am so convinced about is that the Bible isn’t that hard to understand, (even for a not so enlightened person like me) and that the only viewpoint that is valid is that of the Bibles. The Bible is not deceiving or unclear. It is not a guessing game or a fill in the blank (where you can get all your answers on google) only the people that try to make the meaning into something other than what the Bible says are the deceivers.
The Bible is the word of God, I can’t be wrong.
Got it wrong again!
Anyone who changes the Bible to fit there needs, or only takes the Bible as partial truth, has their vision clouded. Could be Satan, or it could be google.
If we are talking about the Bible, I would think you would use the Bible.
Well, Kimstu, If a human being told me that the world was going to end tomorrow, and the Bible tells me that no one knows when the world will end, I would have to think that person is crazy and/or mislead.
If a person told me certain events have to happen (Books in the Bible, like Daniel and Revelation) before X happens, and I noticed that T has happened, I think it is reasonable to think that T might bring on U,V, and W, which will eventually lead to X
If I want to buy fruit, Kimstu, I would first need money.
I would also need to go to a store or a farm. I could walk there, I could drive there, whatever, but I must somehow get there.
After I get there, I would need to pick out the fruit that I want, wait online, and pay for it. Now I have fruit.
I couldn’t just wish for fruit and it magically appears, there are steps that must happen.
“Jesus, who said no man knows the day nor the hour”
Now, there was a man who needed a good wristwatch for Christmas.
Nope, not only was it not “fairly obvious”, but you’re totally 100% dead wrong.
The conversation ran as follows:
JD: "The problem with the old theory that the world was suppose to end in 1000 AD and in 2000, is that it was not biblical. Assumptions and people predictions don’t count no matter who they come from."
Me: "What? You really can’t remember back to Y2K, when all sorts of Fundie websites were predicting the End of the World? Based on the Bible? Do a Google search for “Y2K tribulation”.
And then JD is the one who misunderstands my point.
JD: "Yes, you can explain away the friend in the OP if she didn’t get her facts from The Bible…That is exactly the problem! people get their so called biblical facts from others people instead of reading it for themselves. They google themselves to death searching for cites, instead of reading it in the Bible. I do know what people were saying about Y2K, and you know what, I thought they were a bunch of fools. But thanks for the tip on google, but I’d rather not. I have my trusty Bible."
I wasn’t talking about looking up what the Bible says about the Rapture on Google–I was talking about looking up what other people say about the Rapture on Google.
I wasn’t talking about looking up what Google says that the Bible says about the Rapture–I was talking about looking up what Google says that other people say about the Rapture.
Props to JD for staying on task with her witnessing agenda and ignoring the sense of my post.
But hey, Joe, thanks for playing, and Carol has some nice gifts for you on your way out…
I have said all I need to say about this. You guys know the truth and will accept whatever you see fit.
Goodbye.
I agree, props to her for ignoring your hijack. What other people say about Y2k and the rapture is completely irrelevant to what she was talking about - which is that so-called facts about the bible that do not come from the bible are not facts. When somebody says that X is here, therefore according to the bible, the end will be in 7 days, this is, quite simply, b.s.
What google tells you about y2k or the rapture has nothing to do with your conversation with her.
(oh, and by the way, that “thanks for playing… we have some lovely parting gifts…” bit is really played out. That joke was old when the dead sea was still sick. It’s not clever anymore.)
J_D: If a person told me certain events have to happen (Books in the Bible, like Daniel and Revelation) before X happens, and I noticed that T has happened, I think it is reasonable to think that T might bring on U,V, and W, which will eventually lead to X
I think I see: the relevance of the Euro is just a guess of your own, you aren’t claiming Biblical support for it. Fine, but by that token, couldn’t anything be “guessed” to be a sign of impending end times? Is there any current development that you would consider to be “reasonable” evidence against the hypothesis of impending end times? How do you decide between the pros and the cons?
What an obscenely arrogant post. You do your religion a massive discredit.
Oh, yeah? Well, this just in–neither is the “switch to decaf” bit. :rolleyes:
Well, if there was a hijack, she was the one who perpetrated it, and if there was irrelevancy, she was the one who was being irrelevant.
From the OP (remember the OP?):
- Besides asking whether the Euro and dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible, the OP was also asking specifically about people’s theories of the Rapture and the Second Coming–not what the Bible said about the Rapture, but what his friend’s church said about the Rapture. Which I was addressing by using cites looked up on Google to show that many other people have had, and still do have, many other theories about the Rapture and the Second Coming. Not a hijack, in other words.
Yup. Sure do.
** Isaiah 7:14**
http://www.biblepacesetter.org/School/trans/comi7-14.html
King James version.
New International Version.
Revised Standard Version.
New Revised Standard Version.
Good News Bible.
Living Bible.
Psalm 22:16
http://ssocial.wits.ac.za/dannyza/anti/psa22.16.htm
Douay-Rheims refers to a Catholic Bible translation from 1899. Stone Tanach is a modern translation of Jewish scriptures. JPS 1917 refers to a 1917 edition of Jewish scriptures.
And AV/KJV of course means the Authorized Version from 1611, the King James Version.
So the Bible translation you use, and what it says, depends on who you are, and the time and place where you live.
**All of the groups who use the Bible–the Catholics, the Protestants, the Jews–actually follow the Bible, and none of them tries to change it. If there are groups that use the Bible, but don’t follow it, and keep trying to change it, I’d be interested in hearing about them.
I’d also wonder what they thought they were doing, because there doesn’t seem to be much point in having a Holy Book in your religion if you’re not going to follow it, and if you’re just going to keep editing it.
So answer my question, JD: “Apparently you haven’t noticed that different groups have different interpretations of even the same Bible. Which group are we supposed to follow?”
I repeat, which viewpoint of which Bible? Was Jesus born to a virgin, or just to a young woman? Were the hands pierced, or were they shriveled, or eaten by lions? If the hands weren’t pierced, then the passage doesn’t seem to point to the Crucifixion, does it?
** Which Bible? If your belief is based on the KJV, then according to the RSV, your belief that Jesus was born to a virgin is wrong. If your belief is based on the NIV, then according to the Douay Rheims Bible, your belief that Psalm 22:16 confirms the Crucifixion is wrong. So are you sure you’ve got the right translation, to keep you from being wrong? How do you know it’s the right translation?
No, the Bible is not purposely deceiving, but since we don’t read Hebrew or Greek, it has to be translated for us by other people. And people have to make decisions regarding difficult translations. Not all words in Hebrew or Greek are easily translateable, and the different translators don’t always agree on what a word means. So, we have faith that God gave the Scriptures, right? And we have faith that God will protect His holy word, right? And we have faith that God directed the hearts and minds of the translators, right? So all these different translations must be God-inspired, right? So there must be some reason for the difference in translations, right?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
…Right?
And, BTW, please do keep up with the patronizing “get a life” and “Google can’t help you, only Jesus can help you” remarks, I enjoy hearing those. :rolleyes: