The Second Coming

[Ted]

One of the issues we have never addressed is the second coming of the Christ. Nor have we addressed the issues of the history behind that particular statement of faith. As a statement of faith it cannot be proven or disproved but it does deserve a spot in discussion.

Shalom

Ted

[Bryn Mawr]

Ted wrote: One of the issues we have never addressed is the second coming of the Christ. Nor have we addressed the issues of the history behind that particular statement of faith. As a statement of faith it cannot be proven or disproved but it does deserve a spot in discussion.

Shalom

Ted


I thought the specified time had come and gone long ago?

"Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who shall not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom" (Matthew 16:28)

[Ted]

sixyearsleft:-6

Not so ffast. I will get there but not yet. LOL

Shalom

Ted:-6

[Ted]

Bryn Mawr:-6

Well apparently Jesus was wrong on that one. Actually the "day of the Lord" has been expected from before the time of Jesus. The people of his day including his own disciples expected it withing a very short time. Here we are at 2000 years and still counting.

http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/y2k/bible_ca.htm

220 Dates for the End of the world!!! Date Setters!

You might indeed find this an interesting site. An interesting read.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[Rain]

I hesitate to get involved in these discussions, especially since I'm new here, but since this peeked my interest I'd like to share.

As for the second coming, that's already happened. It was prophesied that Jesus would sit at the right hand of God until he placed his enemies at his feet. Ps.110:1.

The first thing Jesus did when he came in to power was to kick out Satan and his demons from heaven forever. They could no longer go back and forth. This enraged Satan and it's been "Woe for the earth" (Rev. 12:12) ever since. This took place in 1914. We can figure this date by using Bible chronology and by what took place in 1914. WWI. Never had the entire world been at war. It was so horrendous and unheard of that they even named it a World War.

As for Matt. 16:28, Jesus took Peter, James, and John up into the mountain and was transfigured. A foregleam of his coming in to Kingdom Power. So we can see that his words were right on the mark. Peter, James and John were Not dead, and they saw the forgleam of Jesus coming in to power.

As for the "day of the Lord", this is something completely different from the second coming. "The day of the Lord" is God's war at Armageddon to destroy all evil from the earth.

As for your "six years left", are you alluding to the Mayan calender?

http://www.crawford2000.co.uk/maya.htm

hoping the link works

[Ted]

Rain:-6

Welcome. Good to have you aboard.

There is a great group here but be advised they all speak their minds clearly and concisely. Many times one simply has to agree to disagree.

The only comment I care to make at the moment is concerning your interpretation of sacred scripture. The Bible is a book composed of many smaller works of writing. It is composed of myth, legend, folk tale, poetry, short story, fiction and very little history.

It was not a book written to be taken literally. It is mostly midrash or if you wish a more modern term parable. Midrash was an ancient style of both writing and interpreting sacred scripture and it made a great deal of use of metaphor. It is not and never was intended to be read literally or to be an history book. It is primarily and religious book and must be taken as such.

Without an understanding of the history, culture, language, fund of knowledge, belief systems and their conceptualization ability it is clearly impossible to interpret what the writers intended. If one does not study these one is in fact reading the Bible blindly.

To add to that when the canon of scripture, NT at this point, was put together there were many copies of of each of the "books". And there were many differences among these copies; 400 000+ variants. Thus we do not even have exact copies of the autographs and without further discoveries can expect to get no closer than we are today.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[koan]

Ted wrote: One of the issues we have never addressed is the second coming of the Christ. Nor have we addressed the issues of the history behind that particular statement of faith. As a statement of faith it cannot be proven or disproved but it does deserve a spot in discussion.

Shalom

Ted


perhaps spot is the second coming.



I'd be afraid to say it if I was Jesus, because false gods are supposed to arrive first.

Perhaps spot is the antichrist and he's trying to trick us.

If I'm Christ, I'll wait until the fakers are exposed first before I tell y'all.

[Ted]

koan:-6

Have you ever read the "Left Behind" series? LOL

Not good. LOL

Shalom

Ted:-6

[koan]

I haven't. Who wrote it? I'm assuming it would be a hoot.

[Ted]

koan:-6

Now you have me at a loss for words. I do know who wrote it but it won't come to the top at the moment.

You might find it a hoot. I have never read it and don't think I can be bothered. It's another one of those fundy interpretations of "Revelation" which makes for a good horror story or some form of fantasy fiction. I prefer science fiction to either of those.

I'll google it and see what I can find.

Googled-Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins. No further comment. LOL

I think it is said to be in the genre of appoplectic scatology. LOL

Shalom

Ted:-6

PS In the meantime you might look for a flak jacket to wear over top of the fireproof suit you are going to need. LOL

[charles_r51]

i don't know about ted, but i read some of them. got bored when they kept saying he was a european, and not from the some other place. even him setting up in the middle east didn't help. i think he be better off in the bahamas. warm and sunny, plus the fishing is supposed to be pretty good. and who would think someone so bad would want to live in the desert anyway. if you going to rule the world, pick some nice place to rule from, not some dry, hot, dusty place. know what i mean?:-5 :-5 :wah: :wah:

[Bronwen]

Rain wrote: 1. As for the second coming, that's already happened.

2. It was prophesied that Jesus would sit at the right hand of God until he placed his enemies at his feet. Ps.110:1.

3. The first thing Jesus did when he came in to power was to kick out Satan and his demons from heaven forever. They could no longer go back and forth.

4. This enraged Satan and it's been "Woe for the earth" (Rev. 12:12) ever since. This took place in 1914. We can figure this date by using Bible chronology and by what took place in 1914. WWI.

5. Never had the entire world been at war. It was so horrendous and unheard of that they even named it a World War.

6. As for Matt. 16:28, Jesus took Peter, James, and John up into the mountain and was transfigured. A foregleam of his coming in to Kingdom Power. So we can see that his words were right on the mark. Peter, James and John were Not dead, and they saw the forgleam of Jesus coming in to power.Rain, that is quite a lot for one post - let me briefly comment.

1. If it's already happened, what are all the Christians waiting for? Also, you conveniently ignore all of the things that the Bible says have to happen BEFORE the second coming, e.g. the stars falling from the sky, and, most important, the appearance of the anti-Christ.

2. I do not see Jesus mentioned in that Psalm. It seems to refer to the Messianic Age, which will begin following the present age.

3. Where does it say that, and what are we talking about here? Jesus ascending to heaven forty days after His Resurrection? That is not the second coming.

4. You will have to explain how the 'Bible chronology' adds up to 1914. WWI was almost entirely political in nature. It had little to do with religion, certainly nothing to do with the Second Coming.

5. Actually, it was known as 'The Great War'. Only since WWII has the term WWI been commonly used.

6. Three Jews seeing a vision for a few seconds in the rarefied atmosphere of a mountain top is not the Second Coming, nor does it fulfill Jesus' prophecy that ALL the things of which He spoke would occur before all the people then living had died.

That this prophecy remains unfulfilled after nearly 2000 years is probably the greatest inconsistancy in the Christian religion. It is no wonder that well-meaning Christians have been trying to explain away the discrepancy throughout Christian history, but you have not succeeded here.

Probably the simplest and therefore the best (Occam's razor, y'know) explanation is that Jesus, as a devout Jew, was simply reflecting the prevailing attitude within Judaism at the time - that the end of the age was imminent.

Of course, it wasn't.

[charles_r51]

to rain,

the second coming you say is already occurring is step by step process with his second coming being the culmination, not the beginning. where and what jc did after he died on the cross is tradition, not fact since he himself never made claims about what happenned during the interim before he rose. your claim that satan and his forces were enraged is, again, suppositionn not fact as there iis no basis in the bible to tell us anythiong about how satan reacted, on;ly supposition. don't make something out of nothing.

the revelation is being fulfilled, but not in any manner any morrtal can presume is factual. the period of time it may require may be supposed to be years, but if you remember, a day is as a thouand years, and a thousand years is as a day in god's eye. don't presume a literal treanslation is valid, it is tradition, and dogma that putit to a specific meaning and not factual. no one knows when where what and how it will come about but rest assured it will, but in god's time, orlack of it, and will be completely satisfied in accordance with what he wants, not some preacher, evangelist, priest, theologeon, or babbler decides is right. not one single event prophesied was ever known to have occurred befor it was finished, and it was then too late to do anything about it.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4

[telaquapacky]

Look at Christ's first coming. The Jews, who were the main spokespeople for YHVH at the time, had completely wrong ideas regarding the nature and purpose of Christ's coming. They expected the Messiah would expel the Romans from Palestine and make Israel the greatest economic and spiritual nation on earth. They thought He would make manna fall from heaven as proof of His authority, as Moses did. When Jesus fed the five thousand on a hillside by the Sea of Galilee, they tried to make Him king by force. When Jesus refused to be what they wanted Him to be, they rejected and crucified Him.

The Jews wanted a warrior Messiah that would save them from the Romans. Not a suffering servant of God who would cleanse them from their sins. The self-serving misconceptions they held mentally and spiritually prepared them to reject and crucify their own Messiah.

Now look at Christ's second coming. The Evangelicals consider themselves the main spokespeople for God today. They likewise have wrong ideas regarding the nature of Christ's second coming. In the rapture, they expect to escape tribulation or any end-times test of their faith, and instead, be whisked up into heaven on a carpeted escalator without so much as messing up their blow-dried hair. Meanwhile, they think they have a mandate to politically take over America and force their religion on everyone else. The Evangelicals hold self-serving misconceptions that mentally and spiritually prepare them to join hands with the Antichrist, and crucify Christ afresh, in the person of His true believers.

[Ted]

It seems to me that hindsight is sometimes 20/20. It is very difficult to judge the ancient Jews from the perspective of the 21st cent. In fact it is a very difficult thing to do.

These ancients truly believed that the Messiah would come and expell the Romans. That was what they found themselves believing. How dare we say they were wrong. They didn't accept Jesus because they did not understand based on a multitude of factors: history, culture, etc. Obviously what they expected did not happen but can we say they were wrong in wanting justice and freedom. I don't think so.

Jesus was not crucified by those who ate with the 5 000. That story in itself is in all likelihood a parable about Jesus. Jesus was crucified because he was, to put it bluntly, a s--t disturber. He was openly opposed to the Roman imperial system and he was openly opposed to the Jewish collaborators in the temple. These collaborated with Rome to cement their power in place. They believed that he was about to lead an open revolution.

In this he had two problems. Some were calling him divine, son of God, God, God from God. Those were atributes attributed to Caesar and truly believed. It was considered high treason to refer to anyone other than Caesar as son of God etc. It was also high treason to lead a rebellion. That is the history.

To refer to Jesus as any of those things is a matter of faith and not history. I see nothing wrong with that. I can accept those designations of Jesus because I recognize that the only way we can talk about the divine is through metaphor. We lack entirely the language to adequatly describe or define the divine. It is beyond us.

As far as the book of "Revelation" goes it is nothing more than John or whomever wrote "Revelation" writing to the churches and commenting on the then existing Roman Empire and what he saw as evil. It is not a reference to some time in the distant future at all. It is purely a reference to the evilness of the Roman empire.

Anderson, Borg, Spong, Crossan and a whole host of others.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[charles_r51]

it's not just evangelicals who hold to the rapture position. so to do most protestant denominations, whether pre-, mid, or post-tribulation, they all presume to know what god intends. the tribulation will come as a thief in the night, but not when anyone will see it in time to save themselves the trouble of going through it. those who will be taken will suffer death, not be whisked up in acloud, or spaceship, or by going poof. besides that, the idea of the rapture was only put forth in the mid- to late 1800's by a british minister and was based on a single phrase taken out of context. then, again in the 1800's the millerite disappointment occurred when those who had sold everything they owned went into the wilderness to await the second coming, and were disappointed, not once but twice. the members then split and became the two churches known as seventh day adventists and jehovah witnesses. they are still waiting. as for who or what timeline is used, only god knows what he intends, for even jc admitted he did not know the plan. as for the israelits, they must still await their messiah, and have tried to proclaim him a number of times in the last 2000 years. all to no avail.that is not to say one will not come for them, but for christianity to lay claim to what was, is, and will be a series of events for the fulfilment of the jewish concept of a messiah, regardless of his nature, only god will decide and nothing that man proclaims will do any good. and it will definitly be his will, not man's, that will be accomplished. while i see certain developments and say they are the fulfilling of the prophesied events, they are my interpretations and only i can decide if i'm right. maybe i am, and maybe i'm not. i don't worry about whether i'm either, i just watch, wait, and wonder if i am seeing it come to pass even as things occur which i think fulfill the steps toward the final day of what some like to call the day of the lord, and others call the tribulation, and still others the end of the world. as for me- what difference does it make?:-4 :-4

[Bronwen]

charles_r51 wrote: it's not just evangelicals who hold to the rapture position. so to do most protestant denominations, whether pre-, mid, or post-tribulation, they all presume to know what god intends. Chuckster, you are incorrect here. It IS in fact just the outer fringes of Protestantism, whether you call them evangelicals, fundamentalists, sects and cults, or otherwise, who 'hold to the rapture position'.

Mainline Protestants, as well as Anglicans, Roman Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox, realize that Revelation was a book of LITERATURE, not prophecy, written as a book of encouragement for the persecuted Christians of the author's own time. While much of his symbolism seems obscure today, there's little doubt that his intended audience knew exactly what he was referring to.

None of your or the other preceding posts addresses the main issue: Jesus promised that ALL the things He predicted would occur before all the people then living had died. Jesus said NOTHING about two thousand years in the future, nor did any other Biblical author, OT or NT.

[telaquapacky]

charles_r51 wrote: while i see certain developments and say they are the fulfilling of the prophesied events, they are my interpretations and only i can decide if i'm right. maybe i am, and maybe i'm not. i don't worry about whether i'm either, i just watch, wait, and wonder if i am seeing it come to pass even as things occur which i think fulfill the steps toward the final day of what some like to call the day of the lord, and others call the tribulation, and still others the end of the world. as for me- what difference does it make?:-4 :-4 :DPoint well taken, Charles. But I think it does make a difference. To Ted, I wasn’t meaning to judge the Jews, or the evangelicals, for that matter, for having misconceptions about prophecy. But I believe they have arrived at those conclusions by trusting in themselves and seeking worldly power. Hindsight is indeed 20/20, and so it behooves us to learn from our mistakes lest we repeat them.

I believe in something called “present truth.” If you lived and died before Jesus came, and you believed in the Messiah coming and defeating the Romans for you, not only would that not spoil your personal relationship with God, but, essentially you’d be right- because eventually Messiah will defeat all God’s enemies. But if you lived when the events were happening, and you were not persuaded against the “Militant Messiah” theory by the gentle words of the Teacher from Galilee, you were at risk of being duped out of your salvation. Even the disciples had to be persuaded (sadly, Judas was not persuaded). The “Suffering Servant” theory, then became present truth at the time of Jesus’ first advent- something you needed to learn to be ready for the unfolding of prophecy.

The most intellectually powerful of all created beings is pulling out all stops to deceive everyone he can so they will be blinded and lost. This is what we’re up against. In our own smarts or strength we not up to the challenge.

I’m not one who believes that the purpose of prophecy is to tell us what is going to happen in the future, and Charles, you’re right that it certainly doesn’t give us newspaper-clear details- but I don’t think that’s what prophecy is for. I believe that the purpose of prophecy is to call us to a worshipful and obedient relationship with God. Obedience is powered by the Holy Spirit. The more we submit to that power, the more the Holy Spirit is able to do in and for us. The more the Holy Spirit dwells in us, the more He is able to reveal to us about the mysteries of His word. When you look at prophecy in that state of mind, you might not know everything, but you are in a better position to evade being deceived- not because you’re a smart fellow, but because the One in you is greater than the one who is in the world.

Jesus promised that the Spirit would teach us all things. As you cooperate with Him, He’ll teach you what you really need to know now, and that will make a difference. Don’t trust in your own understanding. I believe we are to concentrate on obedience to God’s word and relationship with Him, and those other things will be revealed.

[Ted]

Tel:-6

I have lived most of my life prayerfully and in a lot of meditation to say nothing of scripture reading and following the admonistion to "study to show theyself approved". I have been led by the Holy Spirit to my present position. It has absolutely nothing to do with trusting in myself or the desire for power, in fact that is a laugh. Would you have me deny my calling? Would you have me ignore the guidance of the Holy Spirit?

That the intellectual powers are trying to deceive everyone is another patently untrue statement. That is pure nonsense. It is just another conspiracy theory.

You are correct that prophecy was meant to call the people back to God. The prophets were speaking to the people of their own day and not some day hundreds or thousands of years ahead.

You are also correct that John's Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would continue to lead us into all truth. I have been following the guidance of the Holy Spirit but you seem to have a problem with that. Perhaps I am supposed to think as you do?

In the above mentioned assertions you are wrong.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[telaquapacky]

Ted, I'm surprised. I wasn't talking about you at all. I wasn't even talking about any human intelligentsia- in the "deceiver" clause I was talking about Satan. Anyone else who applies the "most intelligent created being" to themselves has a very high opinion of themselves.

But the statements I made were conditional. Only you can know if you are living a life in obedience to the Holy Spirit and God's Word. I'd rather give inspiration than judgment.

[Ted]

Tel:-6

Thanks. I understand.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[charles_r51]

tel:-6

you mayhap mis-interpreted my comment what difference does it make. i should have added -to me. it makes no difference to me , not because of what others say or try to say, but what i say to myself. for me revelation is only the culmination of what began in genesis. from gaining the knowledge of good and not good, to the realization of the effects of good and not good. everything between is only a process of learning about each. whether it comes about in this world or within my own mind, it will come about as the spirit within comes to self-realization. many people look outward, but are blind to what is within them. what leads you to a specific place, goal, awareness is for you to decide and not for others to lay claim to on your behalf. they have their own to worry about. that is the biggest problem for anyone today. knowing that only they can deside what is right , or wrong, for them. we as outsiders from their spirit cannot and should not condone or condemn, only show them what we think is the right path, but they must decide for themselves whether they should accept it and follow it. so yes revelation is a step by step process- for on's self, regardless of what anyone else says, and not because of what they say. what is truth to me is just for me, and what is truth for you is just for you. at some point they may meet, and at another diverge. i can choose to belive or dis-believe as it moves me, and am not answerable to any person. what jesus said bout suffering death has one meaning to me, and another to someone else. in both cases only the interpretation matters, not the meaning. i don't believe death is the physical, but the continual process of one life to another, hence if someone is not to taste of death, that person would refrain from physical life befor the second time of the comming of what i prefer to call the spirit, and not the person which was named messiah.:-4 :-4 :-4

[charles_r51]

i beg to dis-agree. the holy spirit is not one. but any who is accepted unto the father. the deceiver is not many, but one who is to test the individual, as was told in job. there is the difference, not whether there is good or evil, but where the individual is placed for his own learning. there is not one who is condemned of the fathjer, only those who are and are not ignorant of him. all must return, and until all have returned, none can be be with him. as adam was the first to lose perfection, so did jesus first become perfected, and until all have gotten to the same state, only those who strive for it, regardless of what anyone may say, will get there. they must, however do so only by trying to take others, willing or unwilling, along with them. in the final analysis, even those who have been sentenced to hell by man's words, will return to the father since he never condemned anyone to such a place. heaven and hell are within, not some place you find. revelation is that final step which must be taken to get there. maybe it was written to describe the roman rule, but it's deepest meaning has yet to be learned. :-4 :-4 :-4 :-4

[Ted]

I think that any good literature can be read in several ways. Yes the author intended one meaning but that does not mean that we cannot deduce other meanings. That is the beauty of good literature.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[Ted]

Pinky:-6

Commission?? That is funny. LOL.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[Lulu2]

What Pinky said!

[charles_r51]

:driving: pinky

i know he won't be on ice skates. he'll be in snow shoes cuz i met him in nam and he told me it snow befdore he'd go to heaven, only he don't know he'll get there in the end anyway, in spite of what those popes say about the rest of the world going to hell. been there, done that, and all that other stuff!!;) :-4 :-4

[charles_r51]

pinky

eever wondered what 666 is when you turn it over? :-4

[charles_r51]

:driving: no offense taken.

i don't believe in himas an evil being, just one who is mis-guide, if he's real, of course. besides i can't see god not willing to accept a wayward child of his, maybe because i'm a wayward child ,too. if the worst couldn't go home. how could i?:p :-3 :-4

[Ted]

My feeling is that the concept of Satan was borrowed from the Mesopotamians and is simply a way to personify that which is evil in the world.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[telaquapacky]

To Christians posting on this thread, I have a question for you: Where did you get your understanding of the second coming of Christ? Did you get it mainly from books by authors like Hal Lindsay or Tim LaHaye? Did you get it from books by some obscure Christian author? Did you get it from the official teaching of your church? How detailed is the teaching of your church regarding the second coming?

I attended the Baptist and Presbyterian churches, consecutively, five years each, ending about forty years ago. I could not tell you what their second coming theologies were because I never heard the concept mentioned in church or Sunday school. Never. I sometimes visit my parent's Congregational church today. Same thing. It's as if the second coming doesn't exist.

I backslid for years and had nothing to do with Christianity, until a few events started to make me tentatively rethink coming back. One event was reading "The Late, Great Planet Earth," by Hal Lindsay. I did not buy the "secret rapture" concept Lindsay taught, but I became aware for the first time that the New Testament promises that Jesus will come again and the world as we know it will end.

I visited Presbyterian churches on occasion (At a time when I was still tentatively seeking and had not yet committed my life to Christ), and if I ever brought up the topic of Christ's second coming, most of the people I talked to felt they knew next to nothing about it, and cared even less.

When I came back to God in earnest and pledged my life to Christ, I joined a church that has a very detailed theology about the second coming (very different from Lindsay, LaHaye, et al)

[Ted]

Tel:-6

Since Jesus basically told us that no one knows when the second coming will be not even himself and that basically we ought not to worry about it, I give it very little thought. All one needs is a complete trust in God. Let tomorrow look after itself.

The theologies of the second coming are purely matters of faith and cannot be proven or disproven.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[Ted]

The concept of the second coming was developed by the early Christians as a matter of justice for the martyrs. These wonderful people were being killed for their beliefs and surely a just God will ultimately vindicate them.

It was conceived as the great divine clearnup of the world that was in such a mess and sinful; that God would not have allowed these good men to perish without some form of justice in the end.

It is an interpretation that says God didn't do it right the first time, at creation, and messed up again the second time with the advent of Jesus so now we think that God himself is going to come doen and do it right this time. That is somewhat shoddy theology.

This could be seen to take us back to the story of Adam and Eve with its assertions about eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Theologians today now disclaim any belief in original sin. This whole concept is to say that God messed up and got it wrong. However the whole story of creation in the OT is basically midrash or if you will parable. Some of these stories were borrowed from the Mesopotamians.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[telaquapacky]

Ted wrote: It is an interpretation that says God didn't do it right the first time, at creation, and messed up again the second time with the advent of Jesus so now we think that God himself is going to come doen and do it right this time. That is somewhat shoddy theology.

Theologians today now disclaim any belief in original sin. This whole concept is to say that God messed up and got it wrong. You are saying that anyone who believes in the first advent or the second advent or the concept of original sin (remember, that differs drastically depending on whom you ask) holds a shoddy theology that says God made mistakes in creation that He had to redo. That would be shoddy theology- and I have never heard anyone put forth any such theology. Everyone I have heard who holds those concepts believes in a perfect, omniscient, trustworthy, never-failing God.

You might be surprised to learn that it is possible, using proper exegesis and the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to discover a throrough and consistent Biblical theology that unifies all God's actions and man's unwitting responses throughout history into one divine plan of salvation that is perfect and will triumph to God's glory. The second coming of Christ is a pivotal event in the plan of salvation, amply revealed in the Holy Word, and has merited the prayerful and conscientious study of believers in every age.

[charles_r51]

ted

when i said i didn't believe in satan as an evil being, i didn't mean that evil doesn't exist. what i meant was that anyone who has to live in a physical form has done that which is evil. note the spelling is exactly opposite front to back. no matter what anyone believes, anyone who is going to live, has, and will in the future do, commit some evil act, whether knowingly or not. the sole purpose of life is to learn about one's self, and to grow, both intellectually and spiritually. any mistake is a much more potent tool tolearn what one did wrong, and thus be able to avoid the same mistake, but sometimes it takes more than one try to learn the lesson. hence satan has much to learn, as do all who seek to regain the joy of being one with the father. he just may have to learn a bit more than most.:-4 :-4 :-4

[charles_r51]

:guitarist telequapacky

god made no mistakes, though he did make some rather funny creations,the spirits he made in his image, that is, us, made many along the path he set us on. only a true understanding of the reason eden was lost to his children will allow us to return. all it takes is knowledge, and the willingmness to gain it through a learning process which requires many lifetimes to achieve. anyone and everyone who lost the right to eden will, eventually, regain it.:-4 :-4 :-4

[Ted]

Tel:-6

While I do not believe in Satan as an entity I do not deny there is a power of evil in the world. Nor do I deny that all living human do and will make mistakes.

However, I think that we must rethink our view of this concept os sin or error or mistakes. We are not born with original sin. This was Augustine's view and many theologians today regard the whole idea of original sin as wrong.

Augustine had some wierd notions about sex and sexuality. This whole idea that we are born in sin is a reference to the sexual act that created us.

We are imperfect. We do make mistakes. It is time that we as humans admitted that we are imperfect and accept ourselves as imperfect just as God has done already. Own up to our mistakes. Right them in some way or another and get on with life.

One might discuss for a long time the purpose for which we are here on earth.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[telaquapacky]

charles_r51 wrote: :guitarist telequapacky

god made no mistakes, though he did make some rather funny creations,the spirits he made in his image, that is, us, made many along the path he set us on. only a true understanding of the reason eden was lost to his children will allow us to return. all it takes is knowledge, and the willingmness to gain it through a learning process which requires many lifetimes to achieve. anyone and everyone who lost the right to eden will, eventually, regain it.:-4 :-4 :-4Hi, Charles! I think understanding and learning are all well and good, but I believe that people need more than merely to be educated- we need to be saved. Jeremiah wrote in Jeremiah 13:23, "Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Neither can you do good who are accustomed to doing evil." Like Jesus told Nicodemus in John Chapter 3, we need to be reborn from above through the Holy Spirit. Jesus has to live in and thorough us in a supernatural way. Merely knowing what we are supposed to do doesn't make it happen, because we are not capable of living righteous lives in our own strength. Even if we could by our grit and willpower do what's right, it wouldn't count, because salvation is not by behavior modification. The saved person does behave differently than they did before- yes- but that change comes from God's power, not by their own effort. God accepts us as we are, but He loves us too much to allow us to stay that way.

I believe the purpose of education is to get to know Jesus better. The closer we come to Jesus, the more we learn about what righteousnes really is, and the more we see our own spiritual poverty. Then we try to act like Him, and we fail, because we have a fallen nature. Then we are left with a choice: either to bury ourselves in denial about our true condition and create an alternative "Jesus" and an elaborate religious structure for ourselves that requires no change on our part, no submission to God's will for us; or we may fall at the feet of the only One who can help us and submit to His cleansing- the Real Jesus. Only He can transform us. But it's a humbling experience. He makes sure that happens in a way that we know it's Him doing it, so we won't be proud or look down upon others.

[OpenMind]

So it is stated that God makes no mistakes. I am certainly not in a position to determine the truth of this anymore than anyone can confirm the existence of God.

But these things stand out in the OT concerning God's mind and His creation.

Chapter 6 of Genesis introduces the sons of God. In the first four verses, it is established that these sons of God took any daughter of man that they chose. That man's life will be restricted to 120 years. Further, the offspring of the unions between the sons of God and the daughters of men were giants and 'men of renown'.

Verse 5 continues by showing that man pursues evil thoughts. I can only conclude from the fact that verse 5 follows on from verses 1 to 4 that this has something to do with the fact that the sons of God married the daughters of men and had 'mighty' offspring.

It is almost as if God allowed His sons to run amok amongst the people He had created and do as they will. As a result of this, man's every desire was evil. After having had their daughters taken at will, I am not surprised. On the other hand, maybe it was an honour to have your daughter taken by the sons of God. I would have thought it to be the case.

Nonetheless, God decides to destroy man. "And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth: both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air: for it repenteth me that I have made them." [KJV; Genesis Ch.6, V.7]

If this is not an indication that God had made a mistake, then we have His privations after the flood, "...I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite anymore every thing living, as I have done. While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease." [KJV; Genesis Ch. 9, Vv. 21 & 22]

I leave it for you to discuss amongst yourselves if it is of interest to you.

[Ted]

OpenMind:-6

Actually the story is complete myth or parable if you will. The question that should be asked is not "Did this really happen?" but "what did it mean to the writer and does it have any application to today"?

Shalom

Ted:-6

[OpenMind]

Ted wrote: OpenMind:-6



Actually the story is complete myth or parable if you will. The question that should be asked is not "Did this really happen?" but "what did it mean to the writer and does it have any application to today"?



Shalom

Ted:-6


Ted.

How do you know that this is a complete myth or parable. I am aware that the time of a great flood that is likely to be the one spoken off in Genesis has been dated to about the time that Adam was alive. I am also aware that while evidence has been found concerning Adam existence, nothing has been found to confirm the existence of Noah.

[Ted]

OpenMind:-6

Scholarly reseearch into the writing of ancient sacred scrolls shows that the creation stories were borrowed from the Mesopotamians just as was the concept of satan and as far as Noah goes there has never been scientific confirmation of any world wide flood of the kind.

It is inconsistent with the scientific findings.

I would also say that common sense will dictate that it is pure myth.

You are right about evidence for "Adam". There has been discoveries in Aftrica to show that it was the seat of all human life. So they gave the name Adam to whatever remains of an individual they found.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[abbey]

Good morning/evening Ted, good to see you.

Shalom.

[telaquapacky]

Thank you, Openmind for such a fascinating and meaningful question!

Angels can’t bear offspring with human beings. They are another order of life. Bible writers used the term, “Sons of God,” to mean not only angels, but believers also.



Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.

Romans 8:14 because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.

Galatians 3:26 You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus



In Genesis 6:2-4 the sons of God would be the male descendents of Seth, a believing patriarch, and the daughters of men would be the female descendents of Cain, a rebel who murdered his obedient brother Abel.

That their offspring were giants might be because breaking the cycle of inbreeding might have created more genetic vitality, but this was not enough to justify the practice in the eyes of God.

The spiritual danger to the sons of God (really the believers- the descendents of Seth) in Genesis 6 is the same as the problem encountered by the Israelites when they entered Canaan. Whenever Israelites married foreign women, if those women did not convert to the true religion, they could lead their believing husbands astray into heathenism. This happened to Solomon, who was supposed to be the wisest man in the world.

1 Kings11:7-9

On a hill east of Jerusalem, Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the detestable god of Moab, and for Molech the detestable god of the Ammonites. 8 He did the same for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and offered sacrifices to their gods. 9 The LORD became angry with Solomon because his heart had turned away from the LORD, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice.

The point of the intermarriage story in Genesis 6 was that not only were the sons of Cain evil-thinking, evil-doing people, they were starting to corrupt the sons of Seth by intermarriage. The royal line of believers, from whom eventually Christ, our Savior would be born was in jeopardy of being lost to heathenism. This, along with the bloodshed and misery of the antediluvian world caused by rebellion against God necessitated emergency action- the flood. God was right. He never, ever makes a mistake.

God never repented of creating man as if He were admitting He had made a mistake. He has always regretted that men so often choose to distrust and rebel against Him. The word “repenteth” in the King James is translated from the Hebrew word, “nacham,” which means “to sigh.” If you read the account of the flood you see that it is the reverse of creation. In creation, the waters above and below were divided from one another. In the flood they broke loose and pooled together. In creation, the world began as an “abyss-“ a formless deep, and was transformed by God’s hand into an orderly place. In the flood, the order of the world was scrambled into chaos, and the world returned to an abyss, a formless deep. In creation, life emerges on the earth. In the flood, it is erased from the earth. The Biblical parallels are strong in the original language and the same words are used in reverse. This was a sad event in God’s experience with mankind. God had been pleased with everything He created, and it made him profoundly sorrowful that he had to undo creation. But had God not brought the flood, and started over with Noah and his family, the world would have become unsavable.

2 Peter 3:9

The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

God never changes. He was not willing at the time of the flood that any should perish. Reasonably, then, the flood was necessary to save the world.

About the privations after the flood, and that God would not again curse the ground- God sees the end from the beginning. Every moment of history from eternity past to eternity future He sees as clearly as He sees the present moment. He knows everything every man, woman and child on earth will ever do, millennia before they are born. He knew a flood would not again be needed. Notice that statement by God comes as He smells the aroma of Noah’s sacrifice. That sacrifice, and all that were to follow were symbols of the sacrifice of Christ. He knew that in spite of all the rebellion that would follow, there would always be a faithful remnant in every age who would trust in Him and obey Him. Like faithful Noah, they would live their lives according to the assumption that God was always right, and never ever does wrong.

1 Samuel 15:29

He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind."



This assumption, that God never makes a mistake, and that there is a perfectly righteous reason for every act God does is not merely an intellectual assumption. It is what the Bible calls “Faith.” Anyone who takes one iota less an opinion of God cannot say that they have faith.

Paul wrote in Romans 14:23 that “everything that does not come from faith is sin.”

And Moses wrote in Job 1:22 that despite all Job’s sufferings, “In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing.”

Charging God with wrongdoing, or presuming that God would make a mistake is sin. It’s an attitude of skepticism and distrust toward God, and it is the opposite of faith.

Ephesians 2:8

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—

Salvation is a gift of God which is given on one condition- faith. Anyone who persists in a distrusting, skeptical attitude toward God is not saved. This is not the same as asking God "why?" - which a lot of people of faith have done. But the end conclusion of the saved is that God's wisdom is greater than our own, even though we may not understand it.