I would personally ascribe to a future judgment and if that is the question it wouldn't surprise me if we are very near (nor would it surprise me if we are very far from it, simply because of the complexity in my mind of the Christian position.) When the bible talks about future judgment and a 'new heaven and earth' I am pretty much a literalist. Now if we can be absolute in our definition of what that is we could take my literalism and combine it with that definition and have the answer. God is going to judge this world, meaning us as individuals. It is a moral judgment, meaning an objective, impartial and just accounting between the wicked and the righteous. God has set the standards and rules of engagement in the bible for said judgment. That is why the death of Jesus and His resurrection are so vital, the forgiveness of the penalty of judgment through the mercy provided in Christ. If God was going to tolerate evil forever Jesus would have been unnecessary. God is patient, but perfect in wisdom and judgment and will not tolerate evil forever. There will be a future time to exercise both justice and mercy appropriately. As far as the end of the world; I like interpreting the signs of the times, but I don't believe I should be listened to on the subject.
Here's another quote from Wright that I copied out of the book, Surprised by Hope, when I read it earlier this summer: When Paul speaks of “meeting” the Lord “in the air,” the point is precisely not – as in the popular rapture theology – that the saved believers would then stay up in the air somewhere, away from earth. The point is that, having gone out to meet their returning Lord, they will royally escort him into his domain, that is, back to the place they have come from. Even when we realized that this is highly charged metaphor, not literal description, the meaning is the same as in the parallel in Phil 3:20. Being citizens of heaven, as the Philippians would know, doesn’t mean that one is expecting to go back to the mother city but rather means that one is expecting the emperor to come from the mother city to give the colony its full dignity, to rescue it if need be, to subdue local enemies and put everything to rights. In regard to I Thess. 4: Refers to reality that Jesus will be personally present, the dead will be raised and the living Christians will be transformed. That is pretty much what the rest of the NT says as well. Note, though, something else of great significance about the whole Christian theology of resurrection, ascension, second coming and hope. This theology was born out of confrontation with the political authorities, out of the conviction that Jesus was already the true Lord of this world who would one day be manifested as such. The rapture theology avoids this confrontation because it suggests that Christians will miraculously be removed from this wicked world. Perhaps that is why such theology is often Gnostic in its tendency toward a private dualistic spirituality and toward a political laissez-faire quietism. And perhaps that is partly why such theology, with its dreams of Armageddon, has quietly supported the political status quo in a way Paul would never have done.
MadMax as far as our side discussion goes, I agree with you. I don't know if the end will come or not. What I'm saying is I can't say with any certainty that the Mayans and other signs are dead wrong. The Mayan stuff can't be disproven. Can't be confirmed as far as the date either. There are other prophets that hit on a close time. I have to keep my mind open about those things until proven wrong. As for the vote, I'm with you. I would have voted "No flippin' clue" if I could have as well.
I agree. how I see it also includes, that if 'the raised from the dead' is called 'rapture' I'm not bothered, the "changed in the twinkling of an eye" can also be called 'rapture' without any objection from me. the theology associated with the 'escape' the world mentality', any of the 'we're getting out of here- so to heck with changing this world stuff' is totally apalling to me. Personally I am thoroughly camped in the concept of serving Jesus faithfully, loving my neighbor, serving in THIS WORLD in real and practical ways until I die. Love demands action, service, sacrifice, at least God loves does that to a person. I just don't think redeeming this world necessary has alot of context apart from the human heart. People need to be reconciled to God's heart; His kingdom is spiritual, one of love, righteousness and truth. I love the environment, the earth God created and the habitat for humanity program, but it is not the burning love I feel for the hearts and lives of people. I am a supporter of many initiatives that make people's lives better on earth, but only to the extent that God's love frames the motivation and the mission. I would hope what I do, is for Him, through Him and from Him.
I just think it is silly to listen to people far in the past who had very little concept of today. Why would they have more knowledge on the subject.....heck...ANY subject than we do? DD
I just have one small complaint about the "thief in the night" concept that so many believe. When I read the verse in context, it sounds like it will only surprise those who live "in darkness" - not those who are following God's Word and paying attention to the signs of the times. 1 Thessalonians 5 5:1 Now on the topic of times and seasons, brothers and sisters, you have no need for anything to be written to you. 5:2 For you know quite well that the day of the Lord will come in the same way as a thief in the night. 5:3 Now when they are saying, “There is peace and security,” then sudden destruction comes on them, like labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will surely not escape. 5:4 But you, brothers and sisters, are not in the darkness for the day to overtake you like a thief would. 5:5 For you all are sons of the light and sons of the day. We are not of the night nor of the darkness. 5:6 So then we must not sleep as the rest, but must stay alert and sober. 5:7 For those who sleep, sleep at night and those who get drunk are drunk at night. 5:8 But since we are of the day, we must stay sober by putting on the breastplate of faith and love and as a helmet our hope for salvation. 5:9 For God did not destine us for wrath but for gaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. 5:10 He died for us so that whether we are alert or asleep we will come to life together with him. 5:11 Therefore encourage one another and build up each other, just as you are in fact doing.
What about the people that are not Christians and their beliefs? The Buddhists, the Muslims, the Jews, etc..... What do their religions say on this topic? Why does it always devolve into a one sided discussion about Christianity? There are a lot more people in this world who are NOT of a belief in Christ as the son of God.....and their beliefs are no less in stature than the Christian's beliefs, I would love to hear from them..... DD
Seems like a pretty ignorant question to me - forgive me if I'm wrong. If you believe in a God and you believe that God to be the Christian one, then wouldn't you listen to the books that were divinely inspired by God in the Old Testament as well as those written about His Son who came to Earth - especially when He died for your sins so you could live with God for eternity? I know it sounds far fetched if you are totally against believing in anything up there - but if you do believe in a creator than it seems pretty obvious, no? Personally, I read the Bible since it is one of the ways I can connect with my creator.
Not if you don't believe that people 2000 or so years ago were doing anything more than guessing in a non scientific way. To me to say something was inspired by God is arrogance. I do believe in God, I do not believe in the Bible as fact or truth or being inspired by God. I think the Bible (particularly the new testement) is a bunch of stories that have been exaggerated to help the growth of a religious and political movement of that time. I no more believe in the Bible as being close to God than I do the Summarians, the Babylonians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Mayans, the Aztecs or anyone else. I think they are mythos made up by man to explain the unexplainable. Now, that being said...I like Jesus teachings....I think he was a great man..... What I want to see though is some discussion from the other religions or believers as to their views..... DD
Demographics man... Man, why are there so many discussions about the Rockets on this board? Of course it would be awesome to hear from Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, and even Mayans for that matter - but there are likely far more Christians on the board than any of those beliefs, thus a lot of the discussion will revolve around Christianity. But I agree with you, it'd be cool to hear from some others.
It always devolves into a long winded discussion about the obscurity of the Christian faith...... I would just like to hear from others......particularly the Muslims and Jews on this matter as they are here on the board too. DD
Gotcha - if you have time, would you care to explain how you came to that conclusion? It's an interesting one - I'm curious as to what you use to formulate your beliefs or ideas on God and what makes you believe Bible is exaggerated. If you don't want to do it here, you can message me through the board.
Max and I have had this discussion a lot and it has to do with the politics of the time and in particular the Nicene counsel. Christianity was basically condensed to an accepted form by Constantine, and that council, at the time there were several differing views of Christ and of the resurection etc...particularly the Gnostic followings (which were removed from the Cannonized text). Just look at the Catholic church and what they did to the Cathars in France centuries later...... I believe God gave us a free will, and burning books or text and ommitting data because it doesn't fit an agenda smacks of politics and not of free will. I am in no way saying I am right, or know the truth, I just like to gather as much information as possible and use my God given FREE WILL to decide for myself. DD
Interesting... ...to me, deleting some texts that don't fit the cannon is terrible, but it doesn't diminish the importance of the remaining books in the Bible. We can only do our best, right?
I believe the best would have been to include all texts and let the people decide for themselves, and not to only write it in Latin to where only Priests could read it. Thank GOD for Martin Luther and his committment to translating the Bible and making it accessible for everyone, or we might not even be capable of having a discussion about it. I never believe keeping people ignorant is the right approach, thus my thoughts on ommitting some......because there is serious debate in the ommitted texts about the validity of the resurection, the role of Mary Magdaline, and what Jesus was teaching. Which to me is a red flag. DD
How would you define "all texts?" There were many texts or writings that, for centuries were considered fantasy, or contained mixed fantasy and truth. And the books of the Bible were not chosen overnight by one group of people. It wasn't until late in the 4th century that the 66 "booklets" were presented as a single BOOK. So the process of canonical selection was the product of centuries of reflection and verification. This is one of those discussions that can go on forever.... I am a believer, and I still have doubts about this stuff from time to time. I have learned over the years that I will never have all the answers. No one here can find an answer to every question about the Bible, nor God, nor Jesus. I am ok with that now. Because I know in whom my faith is rooted and He has time and time again intervened in my life, I don't need all the answers any longer. But I did spend a lot of time digging for answers a few years back. There's a whole lot of facts and findings that swayed me easily to one side.
Since Jesus was part of the Jewish Messianic hullabaloo going on back then, wasn't the perousia, or rapture, supposed to happen when he died? Seems like this second coming stuff developed afterwards. Or am I confusing the two?
the only end of the world that might be happening is if a giant meteor hits earth none of this jesus stuff is going to happen.
One doesn't have to believe in the 2nd coming either.....every old civiliazation has a story about rising up from the dead....and so far....none have done it. DD
