|
Post by Rodney Farber on Jun 27, 2018 20:36:32 GMT
The second coming of Christ.
The Old Testament, written some three thousand years ago by “God”, tells us that we should consume neither pork nor shellfish nor rabbits nor certain combinations of food. There are lots of rules that God established. God’s word should be cast in stone which is why I question the authorship.
Let’s face it: scallops wrapped in bacon sure are tasty, so let’s find a way to do it.
Then along comes the New Testament where “Jesus” tells us it’s OK to do these things. I personally think that’s double-talking gibberish established by those who want to pick and choose those passages in the Bible to which they obey. For all I know, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John sold bacon cheeseburgers.
But this thread is about the second coming of Christ. If Christ gave us the authority to change some of God’s rules once, how do we know whether Jesus will change them again when he comes a second time. Maybe he will give us permission to masturbate or commit adultery or worship another God (like Charles Taze Russel). I know I should remember the Sabbath day, but my Alzheimer’s kicks in on the weekend so I just go to the beach. If God’s rules keep changing, when will he make up his mind? And why should we believe that there will not be a third coming of Christ.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 27, 2018 22:01:13 GMT
I was taught that Jesus is the son of God, but also one in the same. And God's plan was to have his son sacrifice himself so that we could go to heaven. As of right now, that's what the Bible tells us. What his plan is post apocalypse, I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Why do you believe all this stuff?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jun 27, 2018 23:10:08 GMT
Never gets old...Or does it?
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jun 28, 2018 3:24:18 GMT
Jesus... This shit again? Yes, dumbass, things change. Some things that were important before an event are no longer important after the event happens. Is this really that hard of a concept for you to grasp? And, yes.... because apparently you are this fcking stupid.... If God exists and there is a second coming... the rules that apply now might not be relevant in a world that has been destroyed in Armageddon and rebuilt into a "New Earth"... It's kinda what "New" means.... You know the word that you've been ignoring for the last 70 times you complained about this same topic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2018 12:10:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jun 28, 2018 12:11:59 GMT
I think gnostics would identify with this but from what I know a lot spiritual Hindus, Buddhists, atheists and even many Christians like this book. Have you read it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2018 12:20:08 GMT
I think gnostics would identify with this but from what I know a lot spiritual Hindus, Buddhists, atheists and even many Christians like this book. Have you read it? I do have it but i have not read it yet.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jun 28, 2018 12:26:52 GMT
I think gnostics would identify with this but from what I know a lot spiritual Hindus, Buddhists, atheists and even many Christians like this book. Have you read it? I do have it but i have not read it yet. Even I had access to it but I never read it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2018 12:52:22 GMT
There is no second, third, fourth, fifth or infinity coming of Christ. Christ IS NOT the savior, was not the savior and will never be the savior, so get over yourselves please. He was a teacher and savior of himself and the same goes for all of us. Stop expecting others to take on your burden of suffering for you, that is your OWN journey. You do know that Jesus never actually existed right ?
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jun 28, 2018 13:12:38 GMT
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jun 28, 2018 13:16:51 GMT
Let’s face it: scallops wrapped in bacon sure are tasty, so let’s find a way to do it. Said the talking snake to the lass.
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jun 28, 2018 13:18:13 GMT
The Old Testament is basically about stuff you shouldn't do. And justifications for why certain people should be in charge of the rules.
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jun 28, 2018 13:20:35 GMT
You do know that Jesus never actually existed right ? And you have proof that he didn't exist, compared to any lack of proof that he did exist?
The default position should be nonexistence until there is reasonable evidence to the contrary. Unless you're three years old and worried about that scary monster hiding under your bed.
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jun 28, 2018 13:29:36 GMT
If Christ gave us the authority to change some of God’s rules once, how do we know whether Jesus will change them again when he comes a second time. Probably more interesting, and more relevant to day-to-day life, is the issue of religious authorities admitting that their past positions were wrong. Like American Southern Christians (especially Southern Baptists) and Mormons on slavery. Like the Church of Rome on Jews. Or on the use of torture--by the Church, no less. If they can get such fundamental things so wildly wrong, why should anyone believe them on anything else?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jun 28, 2018 13:33:20 GMT
If Christ gave us the authority to change some of God’s rules once, how do we know whether Jesus will change them again when he comes a second time. Probably more interesting, and more relevant to day-to-day life, is the issue of religious authorities admitting that their past positions were wrong. Like American Southern Christians (especially Southern Baptists) and Mormons on slavery. Like the Church of Rome on Jews. Or on the use of torture--by the Church, no less. If they can get such fundamental things so wildly wrong, why should anyone believe them on anything else? That's not really a mystery. It depends on what they were basing their positions on in the first place. It is a good thing for religions to admit mistakes and it's always been odd that they are derided for it. A better religion is an open minded one.
|
|
|
Post by mrellaguru on Jun 28, 2018 17:19:00 GMT
"But this thread is about the second coming of Christ. If Christ gave us the authority to change some of God’s rules once, how do we know whether Jesus will change them again when he comes a second time."
Um, the second coming of Christ is supposed to be judgment day and the end of the world. At least have some idea about Christian theology before talking about it.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 28, 2018 22:03:26 GMT
Probably more interesting, and more relevant to day-to-day life, is the issue of religious authorities admitting that their past positions were wrong. Like American Southern Christians (especially Southern Baptists) and Mormons on slavery. Like the Church of Rome on Jews. Or on the use of torture--by the Church, no less. If they can get such fundamental things so wildly wrong, why should anyone believe them on anything else? That's not really a mystery. It depends on what they were basing their positions on in the first place. It is a good thing for religions to admit mistakes and it's always been odd that they are derided for it. A better religion is an open minded one. I agree. I am not generally an advocate for the 'slippery slope' argument, butt sometimes it has its uses. The main feature, however, of the Church's change of views over time is in admitting the logical fallacy of 'an objective morality'. Those who argue for it in the case of the Christian religion therefore have absolutely no case at all.
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jun 29, 2018 1:32:08 GMT
The default position should be nonexistence until there is reasonable evidence to the contrary. Unless you're three years old and worried about that scary monster hiding under your bed. Let's put it this way, there is no proof, apart from what the bible tells us. If one is to believe in the bible and what the church has manipulated and bastardized around the writings or teachings of Christ, things err more on the side of a man called Jesus existing, rather than not having existing. And why would one believe in the Bible?
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jun 29, 2018 2:26:08 GMT
And why would one believe in the Bible? People will believe in whatever they want too, no-one else has any control of what another chooses to believe in. If someone chooses to believe in the bible, I'd say it's because they are attempting to find some understanding of reasoning for their being and way out of the suffering of human existence. I would also say that the belief in whatever religion, would be largely based on fear surrounding what has been conditioned onto them. If they don't want to burn in hell, then the alternative is to go to heaven. It seems like the better alternative. Heaven and Hell are really one and the same. When one is entrapped, angels can become demons and demons can become angels, but being both one and the same. I think you misunderstood what I was asking. I was not asking why people tend to believe in the Bible. I was asking what is the rational basis for believing in the Bible. Your earlier comment was laying out a basis in logical reasoning for why to believe that Jesus really existed; you based it on the documentary evidence of the Bible. I asked in response why the Bible should be taken as valid evidence.
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jun 29, 2018 10:39:14 GMT
I think you misunderstood what I was asking. I was not asking why people tend to believe in the Bible. I was asking what is the rational basis for believing in the Bible. Your earlier comment was laying out a basis in logical reasoning for why to believe that Jesus really existed; you based it on the documentary evidence of the Bible. I asked in response why the Bible should be taken as valid evidence. Is there any rational basis for any belief?
The Bible needn't be taken as evidence, but it is still some sort of ancient historical documentation and from whence it came, we know it was a rule\law book, that was adept for the times. If one does want to acknowledge the 'once' existence of a person called Jesus, not to mention other characters, then this scripture is why they choose to believe in it. The holy and divine aspect behind the writing of it at the hand of God, is the irrational part. But then again, it would all depend on what one's notion of God is.
www.atheists.org/activism/resources/did-jesus-exist/
|
|