Is Jesus about to return?

Húrin · 16-05-2008 12:00am #1

I'm not normally much of a millenialist, but given the news lately, I am wondering. Wikipedia:

In the news

A series of bomb blasts in Jaipur, India, kills at least 80 people.

An earthquake (epicenter shown on map) measuring 7.9 Mw strikes Sichuan, China, with over 19,000 people reported dead.

Sudan cuts diplomatic relations with Chad, blaming it for helping rebels from Darfur to launch an attack on Sudan's capital, Khartoum.

An international relief operation begins after Cyclone Nargis strikes Burma, with at least 100,000 people reported killed or missing. The Burmese military regime conducts a constitutional referendum days after the cyclone's strike.

A tornado outbreak in Oklahoma and Missouri, United States, kills at least 25 people.

Skirmishes between supporters of Lebanon's government and the opposition erupt in Beirut.

In the longer term the world is undergoing a catastrophic and anthropogenic ecological disaster. (Revelation 11:18)

Mena · 16-05-2008 12:03am

Seriously, all I see is a couple of natural disasters, some political handbag throwing and a few terrorists doing what they always do (probably in the name of religion).

Nothing to get overly excited about.

amacachi · 16-05-2008 12:07am

You could post most of that at any point in time, usually there won't be two such large scale natural disasters so close together, but coincidences do happen.

Run_to_da_hills · 16-05-2008 12:38am

The great tribulation and the mark of the beast ie the RFID microchip implant comes first before Christ returns.

Sangre · 16-05-2008 12:43am

Húrin wrote: »

A series of bomb blasts in Jaipur, India, kills at least 80 people.

Sudan cuts diplomatic relations with Chad, blaming it for helping rebels from Darfur to launch an attack on Sudan's capital, Khartoum.

Skirmishes between supporters of Lebanon's government and the opposition erupt in Beirut.

what about free will though?

Húrin · 16-05-2008 12:43am

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The great tribulation and the mark of the beast ie the RFID microchip implant comes first before Christ returns.

PPerhaps they are happening and we have not noticed.

Ekancone · 16-05-2008 9:18am

Húrin wrote: »

In the longer term the world is undergoing a catastrophic and anthropogenic ecological disaster. (Revelation 11:18)

What? Those words weren''t around when that book was written, surely?

all the stars · 16-05-2008 9:26am

I dont think he is.... (granted im not a big believer anyawy) but i think even if Jesus did come again... everyone would not believe it, you have to look around, there are lots of peopole out here claiming to be the new messiah, like in the U.S they have lots of that.

So If he did come back, how would anybody know? How would you know that it was him and not just another one of the false ones ? (that actually is a sincere question)

AtomicHorror · 16-05-2008 9:28am

Without wanting to pretend to know the mind of God, I'm just gonna throw my hat into the ring and say: Yes.

I, for one, welcome the second coming of the Son of the Almighty*.

*Please ignore my posts in the creationism thread

AtomicHorror · 16-05-2008 9:29am

all the stars wrote: »

How would you know that it was him and not just another one of the false ones ? (that actually is a sincere question)

I know! We'll use Science to identify him!

PDN · 16-05-2008 9:33am

all the stars wrote: »

I dont think he is.... (granted im not a big believer anyawy) but i think even if Jesus did come again... everyone would not believe it, you have to look around, there are lots of peopole out here claiming to be the new messiah, like in the U.S they have lots of that.

So If he did come back, how would anybody know? How would you know that it was him and not just another one of the false ones ? (that actually is a sincere question)

Probably a few little clues will give the game away. Things like every eye seeing Him coming in glory, the dead being raised from their graves etc.

Zombrex · 16-05-2008 9:42am

Húrin wrote: »

PPerhaps they are happening and we have not noticed.

I think you would notice if you had a RFID tag embedded in your hand (of course RFID tags don't have 666 on them, barcodes, or in fact marks of any kind, but that doesn't seem to bother RTDHs much)

Tim Robbins · 16-05-2008 9:42am

Húrin wrote: »

I'm not normally much of a millenialist, but given the news lately, I am wondering. Wikipedia:

In the news

A series of bomb blasts in Jaipur, India, kills at least 80 people.

An earthquake (epicenter shown on map) measuring 7.9 Mw strikes Sichuan, China, with over 19,000 people reported dead.

Sudan cuts diplomatic relations with Chad, blaming it for helping rebels from Darfur to launch an attack on Sudan's capital, Khartoum.

An international relief operation begins after Cyclone Nargis strikes Burma, with at least 100,000 people reported killed or missing. The Burmese military regime conducts a constitutional referendum days after the cyclone's strike.

A tornado outbreak in Oklahoma and Missouri, United States, kills at least 25 people.

Skirmishes between supporters of Lebanon's government and the opposition erupt in Beirut.

In the longer term the world is undergoing a catastrophic and anthropogenic ecological disaster. (Revelation 11:18)

Revelation 11:18 according to:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/rev/11.html

11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

Can't see anything about climate change there? But sure haven't we had 30 ice ages in the last 3 million years anyway?

Zombrex · 16-05-2008 9:45am

Húrin wrote: »

I'm not normally much of a millenialist, but given the news lately, I am wondering. Wikipedia:

In the news

A series of bomb blasts in Jaipur, India, kills at least 80 people.

An earthquake (epicenter shown on map) measuring 7.9 Mw strikes Sichuan, China, with over 19,000 people reported dead.

Sudan cuts diplomatic relations with Chad, blaming it for helping rebels from Darfur to launch an attack on Sudan's capital, Khartoum.

An international relief operation begins after Cyclone Nargis strikes Burma, with at least 100,000 people reported killed or missing. The Burmese military regime conducts a constitutional referendum days after the cyclone's strike.

A tornado outbreak in Oklahoma and Missouri, United States, kills at least 25 people.

Skirmishes between supporters of Lebanon's government and the opposition erupt in Beirut.

In the longer term the world is undergoing a catastrophic and anthropogenic ecological disaster. (Revelation 11:18)

This doesn't seem much different to every other of the 1970+ years Christians have been believing the Second Coming is just around the corner

PDN · 16-05-2008 9:48am

daithifleming wrote: »

What? Those words weren''t around when that book was written, surely?

That's not really a relevant point. The existence of a particular word is not necessary for a concept to be discussed.

Incidentally, the words you chose to pick on (anthropogenic and ecological) are simply compound words created from Greek words that certainly were around and indeed are in the New Testament Greek text.

anthropos = man
genic = having origin in
anthropogenic = those objects and phenomena that have their origins in the activities of humans

oikia = house (hence environment)
logos = word
ecological = words about (or study of) the environment

Indeed, out of the OP you managed to pick out two of the words that would be instantly recognisable and understood by a First Century reader of the New Testament.

FX Meister · 16-05-2008 9:50am

no, jesus isnt coming. And you're post makes you sound a little crazy

PDN · 16-05-2008 9:54am

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Revelation 11:18 according to:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/rev/11.html

11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

Can't see anything about climate change there? But sure haven't we had 30 ice ages in the last 3 million years anyway?

Tim, can I recommend biblegateway.com if you wish to link to texts of scripture? It contains hundreds of translations, including many English translations or the original Greek.

The skeptics annotated bible is a propaganda work (and a pretty theological inept one at that). To refer to it in this forum would be the equivalent of a Creationist logging onto a scientific board and continually linking to his sources through Ken Hamm's website.

I think the OP is referring to "those who destroy the earth" and applying it to climate change - a fair point IMHO.

Ekancone · 16-05-2008 9:55am

PDN wrote: »

That's not really a relevant point. The existence of a particular word is not necessary for a concept to be discussed.

Incidentally, the words you chose to pick on (anthropogenic and ecological) are simply compound words created from Greek words that certainly were around and indeed are in the New Testament Greek text.

anthropos = man
genic = having origin in
anthropogenic = those objects and phenomena that have their origins in the activities of humans

oikia = house (hence environment)
logos = word
ecological = words about (or study of) the environment

Indeed, out of the OP you managed to pick out two of the words that would be instantly recognisable and understood by a First Century reader of the New Testament.

I get that, but he seemed to be quoting verbatim from the book itself, is such use of linguistic engineering allowed?

TheBigEvil · 16-05-2008 9:57am

FX Meister wrote: »

no, jesus isnt coming. And you're post makes you sound a little crazy

Just a little crazy??

These are just natural disasters, there have been a lot worse in years gone by. So you've nothing to worry about. Jesus aint coming anytime soon

PDN · 16-05-2008 10:04am

daithifleming wrote: »

I get that, but he seemed to be quoting verbatim from the book itself, is such use of linguistic engineering allowed?

No, he does not appear to be quoting verbatim. In biblical studies, as in other academic fields, you insert words in quotation marks if you are quoting them verbatim. If you are just referring to concepts contained in a text then you still reference your source with a footnote or in brackets, but no quotation marks.

This convention, which should be familiar to anyone who has ever written an essay, is also commonly observed when Christians discuss the Bible in non-academic books, magazines or internet message boards.

No linguistic engineering - just standard English usage.

Tim Robbins · 16-05-2008 10:09am

PDN wrote: »

Tim, can I recommend biblegateway.com if you wish to link to texts of scripture? It contains hundreds of translations, including many English translations or the original Greek.

The skeptics annotated bible is a propaganda work (and a pretty theological inept one at that). To refer to it in this forum would be the equivalent of a Creationist logging onto a scientific board and continually linking to his sources through Ken Hamm's website.

I think the OP is referring to "those who destroy the earth" and applying it to climate change - a fair point IMHO.

Once again another sloppy argument by analogy. If were really interested in truth why deliberately distort it. I go to Bible gateway, I look of Revelation 11:18 and I get the exact same.

18And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=revelation%2011:18;&version=9;

This isn't an issue about the skepticsannotatedbible, it's that my quote was KJV.

More to the point, there seems to be no reference to climate change in any translation.

Ekancone · 16-05-2008 10:18am

PDN wrote: »

No, he does not appear to be quoting verbatim. In biblical studies, as in other academic fields, you insert words in quotation marks if you are quoting them verbatim. If you are just referring to concepts contained in a text then you still reference your source with a footnote or in brackets, but no quotation marks.

This convention, which should be familiar to anyone who has ever written an essay, is also commonly observed when Christians discuss the Bible in non-academic books, magazines or internet message boards.

No linguistic engineering - just standard English usage.

But you could make the bible say anything you want, using this approach.

PDN · 16-05-2008 10:20am

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Once again another sloppy argument by analogy. If were really interested in truth why deliberately distort it. I go to Bible gateway, I look of Revelation 11:18 and I get the exact same.

18And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=revelation%2011:18;&version=9;

This isn't an issue about the skepticsannotatedbible, it's that my quote was KJV.

More to the point, there seems to be no reference to climate change in any translation.

Who is deliberately distorting truth, or who accused anyone of distorting truth?

I don't care whether you quote the KJV or any other version. As a moderator I have asked you to link to scripture another way rather than using an anti-Christian propaganda site. There is no 'sloppy argument from analogy'. The needless linking to such a source, when you can easily link to scripture via a non-antagonistic source or by cutting and pasting, can serve no purpose but to antagonise the natives. My use of the Ken Hamm illustration was simply to try to get you to think how you would feel if the situation was reversed.

Is there really any need to get snotty over a simple and polite mod request?

all the stars · 16-05-2008 10:26am

PDN wrote: »

Probably a few little clues will give the game away. Things like every eye seeing Him coming in glory, the dead being raised from their graves etc.

OK,.... but why would he raise people from the dead - would that not be taking them back from heaven? would that not be against god will as he took them?

JimiTime · 16-05-2008 10:32am

The second coming will occur on Gods appointed day. I can certainly see things gearing up towards the signs talked about by Jesus, but personally 'around the corner', i don't think so. I think the global warming thing is very relevant. Jesus talked about the earths 'Pangs of distress'. I think that that global warming will probably be one of the causes of such things. Of course, this is all just my opinion based on my observations. I think there are alot of religions that are constantly saying, 'Its just around the corner'. Serves no good purpose IMO. There'll still be people saying, 'its a coincidence', when disaster after disaster strike though.

PDN · 16-05-2008 10:33am

daithifleming wrote: »

But you could make the bible say anything you want, using this approach.

No more so than with any other subject. Whether we are talking about the Bible, a book by Jared Diamond, or the Constitution of Ireland, we all make reference to them without quoting them exactly. In such a case we may well refer to the page number, the chapter, the article etc. If we quote them verbatim we tend to use quotation marks.

Now, if we think that someone is inaccurate in what they are saying then we can question them. eg "Is that really what Jared Diamond says?" Then we get into the issue of interpretation and, as part of that discussion, we often quote the text under discussion verbatim.

I'm really not sure where you're trying to go with this. You seem to want the Bible to be treated as a special case when it comes to referring to it, rather than using the same literary conventions that we use with any other source.

PDN · 16-05-2008 10:36am

all the stars wrote: »

OK,.... but why would he raise people from the dead - would that not be taking them back from heaven? would that not be against god will as he took them?

No. Biblical teaching indicates that when a Christian dies then their spirit goes to be with God. When Jesus returns then their spirits will be reunited with their bodies, their bodies will be resurrected, and they will be with Jesus.

Ekancone · 16-05-2008 10:38am

PDN wrote: »

No more so than with any other subject. Whether we are talking about the Bible, a book by Jared Diamond, or the Constitution of Ireland, we all make reference to them without quoting them exactly. In such a case we may well refer to the page number, the chapter, the article etc. If we quote them verbatim we tend to use quotation marks.

Now, if we think that someone is inaccurate in what they are saying then we can question them. eg "Is that really what Jared Diamond says?" Then we get into the issue of interpretation and, as part of that discussion, we often quote the text under discussion verbatim.

I'm really not sure where you're trying to go with this. You seem to want the Bible to be treated as a special case when it comes to referring to it, rather than using the same literary conventions that we use with any other source.

I dunno, I just find it odd that there aren't stricter rules regarding interpretation/quoting of the Bible, considering how important it is to you guys.

PDN · 16-05-2008 10:39am

Tim Robbins wrote: »

More to the point, there seems to be no reference to climate change in any translation.

There certainly is no explicit reference to climate change per se. There is, however, a reference to "those who destroy the earth". Therefore, if a poster sees climate change as man destroying the earth, he is entitled to make the connection between the Scripture in question and climate change.

PDN · 16-05-2008 10:42am

daithifleming wrote: »

I dunno, I just find it odd that there aren't stricter rules regarding interpretation/quoting of the Bible, considering how important it is to you guys.

You want us to have a special set of made up rules instead of using the standard rules and conventions of the academic world? Then, if we did so, no doubt you would accuse us of being irrational.

all the stars · 16-05-2008 10:43am

PDN wrote: »

No. Biblical teaching indicates that when a Christian dies then their spirit goes to be with God. When Jesus returns then their spirits will be reunited with their bodies, their bodies will be resurrected, and they will be with Jesus.

right, ok, but will he only raise the christians from the dead?
or will he be the type of God i would like - one that doesn't really care what religion you are? seen as Jesus was Jewish and all...

Is Jesus about to return?

Comments