THIS WAS YOUR LIFE - a mormon story (MANY IMAGES)

[The n00b]

This is why I can't wait for scientists to prove life existed on other planets (even if its microscopic), then christianity (and most religions) will be f*ck'd.

LOL, I edited my post, but I liked your response seven force!

Actually that wouldn't mean anything to most major religions. I would actually feel sorry for the alien life we discovered because their planet would soon be covered with evangelical christians preaching against 'sinners" and fanatical muslims blowing aliens up for being different.

[FatCobra]

This is why I can't wait for scientists to prove life existed on other planets (even if its microscopic), then christianity (and most religions) will be f*ck'd.

LOL, I edited my post, but I liked your response seven force!

Actually that wouldn't mean anything to most major religions. I would actually feel sorry for the alien life we discovered because their planet would soon be covered with evangelical christians preaching against 'sinners" and fanatical muslims blowing aliens up for being different.

How the hell will we be able to get along with aliens from another planet if we can't all get along on the rock we live on.

Religous people scare me, by the way.

[GaijinPunch]

This is why I can't wait for scientists to prove life existed on other planets (even if its microscopic), then christianity (and most religions) will be f*ck'd. :

Not exactly. Right-wing Christians will then have to admit that perhaps, just MAYBE the bible (especially the old testament) wasn't written in the literal sense. I mean... c'mon. Dinosaurs people.

To be honest, there's plenty of creation-evolutionists these days.

[Ramus]

Or they can just say God made that life too. If God made Earth, Heaven, and everything else, then who says he didn't make life on other planets? Some say God made Earth for his chosen people or whatever, but that doesn't mean he didn't make life somewhere else.

I'm not on any one side here. I'm just saying what will probably be said by the right-wingers when or if life is found somewhere else.

[undamned]

This is why I can't wait for scientists to prove life existed on other planets (even if its microscopic), then christianity (and most religions) will be f*ck'd. :

Not exactly. Right-wing Christians will then have to admit that perhaps, just MAYBE the bible (especially the old testament) wasn't written in the literal sense. I mean... c'mon. Dinosaurs people.

Where, oh where, do people get the idea that the Bible A) is anti-dinosaur, and or B) does not speak on dinosaurs??? Both those ideas are false. Check out Behemoth and Leviathan in the OT. If those aren't dinosaurs I don't know what is.
-ud

[BulletMagnet]

The problem is those who, for whatever ill-advised reason, interpret the "seven days" of Creation as a literal set of 24-hour periods...seeing as the first bit o' creation mentioned therein was "let there be light," ostensibly before the sun existed, and along with it the set 24-hour period it takes the Earth to go around it, such an idea doesn't make much sense. Not to mention that "days," "years," and other such periods of time are used symbolically elsewhere in the scriptures (heck, in some cases the scriptures even say outright that such things are not to be taken literally). In a nutshell, the Bible does not say specifically how long ago the Earth came into existence. It DOES provide a timeline of HUMAN history going back 6-7,000 years, IIRC, and holds that IT began at that point, but as for the rest of creation, it doesn't say anything specific whatsoever.

In my experience, those who either badmouth the Bible directly or else give it a bad name through their speech or conduct are the ones who read it, or at least apply what it says, the least.

[Dylan1CC]

This is why I can't wait for scientists to prove life existed on other planets (even if its microscopic), then christianity (and most religions) will be f*ck'd. :

Not exactly. Right-wing Christians will then have to admit that perhaps, just MAYBE the bible (especially the old testament) wasn't written in the literal sense. I mean... c'mon. Dinosaurs people.

Where, oh where, do people get the idea that the Bible A) is anti-dinosaur, and or B) does not speak on dinosaurs??? Both those ideas are false. Check out Behemoth and Leviathan in the OT. If those aren't dinosaurs I don't know what is.
-ud

Not to rain on your parade (because believe me, when I read that passage I too get a nice little visual image of "Godzilla" in my head), but some believe Leviathan possibly referred to the Nile crocodile (the 'beaming eyes' and 'flames/mouth' possibly references to what happens when the evening sun reflects off their heads) and Behemoth possibly the Nile hippo. Just a random observation, nothing dogmatic.

And no, it is not "anti dinosaur."

And it is not "anti science."

Example:

Isaiah 40:22: "There is one dwelling above the circle of the earth."

Even up till Columbus's time in the 1400s it was common belief that the earth was either completely flat or had an "edge" that you could sail right off of.

And how many cultures on earth at the time besides the Jews had a kosher diet and health procudures as relatively advanced as theirs which prevented many forms of ailments and parasites when knowledge of bacteria was not known? Other cultures at the time like the Egyptians were rubbing poop on their wounds. The Jews were told "No, do not do that anymore and please no more touching of dead bodies."

And they probably scratched their heads sometimes thinking "Why are we being forbidden from eating pigs?" Maybe because pork = trichinosis?

Really like that verse in your sig from Romans chapter 7, btw. One of my favorite passages. Makes you wonder what kind of health problems Paul had?

[Dylan1CC]

The problem is those who, for whatever ill-advised reason, interpret the "seven days" of Creation as a literal set of 24-hour periods...seeing as the first bit o' creation mentioned therein was "let there be light," ostensibly before the sun existed, and along with it the set 24-hour period it takes the Earth to go around it, such an idea doesn't make much sense. Not to mention that "days," "years," and other such periods of time are used symbolically elsewhere in the scriptures (heck, in some cases the scriptures even say outright that such things are not to be taken literally). In a nutshell, the Bible does not say specifically how long ago the Earth came into existence. It DOES provide a timeline of HUMAN history going back 6-7,000 years, IIRC, and holds that IT began at that point, but as for the rest of creation, it doesn't say anything specific whatsoever.

In my experience, those who either badmouth the Bible directly or else give it a bad name through their speech or conduct are the ones who read it, or at least apply what it says, the least.

The term "day" in the bible is often much longer than a literal 24 hour period. There is a prophetic verse (forget where, in old testament) which says "A day for a year." It can be even longer. Daniel's "prophecy of 70 weeks" (regarding the Messiah and his death/'cutting off') was not literal weeks but stretched out over centuries of time.

[dave4shmups]

Chick has been around forever. I think their comics are great Cheesy, yes, but still great. Oh, and as far as our righteousness being as filthy rags before God, He's not saying "don't do good things!" He's stating that we can't impress a perfect God w/ the deeds of imperfect people. Makes sense, really.
-ud

Agreed with what UD said, that's exactly the point.

[undamned]

...some believe Leviathan possibly referred to the Nile crocodile... and Behemoth possibly the Nile hippo.

ud believes people need to do their own homework.

Behemoth:
Job 40:15-19
"Look now at the behemoth,[a] which I made along with you; He eats grass like an ox.
See now, his strength is in his hips, And his power is in his stomach muscles.
He moves his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are tightly knit.
His bones are like beams of bronze, His ribs like bars of iron.
He is the first of the ways of God; Only He who made him can bring near His sword."

Ok, so, first off, hippos do not have tails the size of ceder trees. Second, vs 19 makes this thing out to be hard to kill. If anything this sounds more along the lines of a brontasaurus.

Leviathan:
Ok, first off, Isaiah 27:1 tells us that Leviathan is a sea reptile. Psalm 104:26 tells us that it plays where the ships sail about.
More Juice:
Job 3:8 arousing leviathan = owned
Job 41:1-2 cannot be fished for as other sea creatures
Job 41:5 cannot be made a pet
Job 41:6 people will not make a banquet out of him or sell him to merchants
Job 41:7 harpoons and fishing spears are worthless against him
Job 41:8-9 cannot be overcome
Job 41:10 no one dare stir him up
Job 41:12 has limbs, mighty power, graceful proportions
Job 41:13 burly outer coat
Job 41:14 terrible teath
Job 41:15-17 tight rows of scales that cannot be seperated
Job 41:18-21 glowing eyes and fire/smoke from mouth/nostrils
Job 41:22 strong neck
Job 41:24 heart as hard as stone
Job 41:25 the mighty are afraid of his crashings
Job 41:26-28 sword, spear, dart, or javelin no bueno
Job 41:26-28 arrows do not scare him away and slig stones no worky
Job 41:30 underside is sharp and leaves marks
Job 41:31 makes the deap [waters] boil like a pot
Job 41:32 leaves a shining wake
Job 41:33 "On earth there is nothing like him, which is made without fear."

Bonus:
Psalm 74:14 God broke the heads of Leviathan in pieces, and gave him as food to the people inhabiting the wilderness.

-ud

[FRO]

Just as I would never label any of my catholic relatives a "cult," or anyone who professed to be a Muslim just because there are things I do not immediately understand, I would expect the same courtesy. And Fro, please don't view this reply as a "challenge" or that I am in any way annoyed with you, just needed to get this off my chest OK?

I would certainly not want to start a flame war over this, so please don't take my post as such. However, based on what I believe to be the fundamental doctrines inherent in Christianity, the Jehovah's Witness movement is classified as a cult, because there are several doctrines that are different from what I believe (as what can be considered mainstream Christianity, though that terminology isn't exactly fitting or exact).

For example, here's something I know of Jehovah's Witness beliefs that differ from my own. It's my understanding that the JW belief system takes into fact that exaxctly 144,000 people will reach eternity/Heaven an no more/less. As such, a strict view of "predestination" if you will, that says no matter what anyone believes in their heart, if they aren't one of the chosen 144,000 they aren't going to Heaven. Have a look at the following site:
http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=1760

You'll see that the 144,000 is strictly Jews that are "saved" or converted during the Tribulation, or the 7-year period where the Anti-christ reigns over the earth. I myself am a pre-trib millenialist, in that I believe the literal return (or second coming) of Christ happens, then the 7-year Tribulation begins, followed by the 1000-year reign (millenium), then followed by Armageddon, & then eternity (either in Heaven or Hell, depending on whether you've accepted Jesus Christ as your savior). I'm not sure where you stand on this particular issue, but it has been seen as a fundamental difference between what I think of as evangelical Christianity & the Jehovah Witness movement. The text is pretty clear in its interpretation.

I, on the other hand, take a view that parallels the interpretation of theologan John Calvin, which states that we do not have the "free will" that so many evangelicals tout; rather, those who receive salvation do not do so of their own accord. Instead, they felt the "call" of the Holy Spirit & responded to it, with the knowledge they received through teachings they either heard in church, or from some other source. As such, anyone who is "saved" in the classic evangelical sense had already been predestined to be so, but rather than assume a # of "converts" that # is not known or given to mankind to know.

I'm not sure if I would classify the Catholic church as a "cult" per se, but certainly they fit the mold. They practically deify Jesus' mother Mary, which is in direct violation of the 1st commandment (from the original 10) as laid out in Exodus 20:3 - "You shall have no other gods before me." By that definition, the Catholic church is a cult as opposed to traditional evangelical Christianity.

The term "day" in the bible is often much longer than a literal 24 hour period. There is a prophetic verse (forget where, in old testament) which says "A day for a year." It can be even longer. Daniel's "prophecy of 70 weeks" (regarding the Messiah and his death/'cutting off') was not literal weeks but stretched out over centuries of time.

Interesting - do you have any links you can post as to where that interpretation stems from? I'd be curious to see the rationale behind that. I've always been confused about the literal interpretation of the 7 days, so it'd be neat to see that perspective on it. Of course, that's one of those things that you sort of "take on faith" since that's a large part of any belief system. Anyway, thanks for the thought-out reply. It's good to know people w/ differing views aren't simply lashing out, like most are prone to do.

[Dylan1CC]

...some believe Leviathan possibly referred to the Nile crocodile... and Behemoth possibly the Nile hippo.

ud believes people need to do their own homework.

Behemoth:
Job 40:15-19
"Look now at the behemoth,[a] which I made along with you; He eats grass like an ox.
See now, his strength is in his hips, And his power is in his stomach muscles.
He moves his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are tightly knit.
His bones are like beams of bronze, His ribs like bars of iron.
He is the first of the ways of God; Only He who made him can bring near His sword."

Ok, so, first off, hippos do not have tails the size of ceder trees. Second, vs 19 makes this thing out to be hard to kill. If anything this sounds more along the lines of a brontasaurus.

Leviathan:
Ok, first off, Isaiah 27:1 tells us that Leviathan is a sea reptile. Psalm 104:26 tells us that it plays where the ships sail about.
More Juice:
Job 3:8 arousing leviathan = owned
Job 41:1-2 cannot be fished for as other sea creatures
Job 41:5 cannot be made a pet
Job 41:6 people will not make a banquet out of him or sell him to merchants
Job 41:7 harpoons and fishing spears are worthless against him
Job 41:8-9 cannot be overcome
Job 41:10 no one dare stir him up
Job 41:12 has limbs, mighty power, graceful proportions
Job 41:13 burly outer coat
Job 41:14 terrible teath
Job 41:15-17 tight rows of scales that cannot be seperated
Job 41:18-21 glowing eyes and fire/smoke from mouth/nostrils
Job 41:22 strong neck
Job 41:24 heart as hard as stone
Job 41:25 the mighty are afraid of his crashings
Job 41:26-28 sword, spear, dart, or javelin no bueno
Job 41:26-28 arrows do not scare him away and slig stones no worky
Job 41:30 underside is sharp and leaves marks
Job 41:31 makes the deap [waters] boil like a pot
Job 41:32 leaves a shining wake
Job 41:33 "On earth there is nothing like him, which is made without fear."

Bonus:
Psalm 74:14 God broke the heads of Leviathan in pieces, and gave him as food to the people inhabiting the wilderness.

-ud

Wow, been awhile since I have read the entire passage. Maybe it is referring to a large sea monster or dinosaur like beast. Not all of the description can be "poetic" that is for sure.

I remember now in chapter Job 39:10 He asks Job: "Will you bind a wild bull fast with its ropes in the furrow, Or will it harrow low plains after you?" I now remember reading about a type of large "wild bull" which lived up till Roman times which according to some eyewitnesses could be as large as an elephant and some think this may be what this verse is referring to.

[Venom]

Isaiah 40:22: "There is one dwelling above the circle of the earth."

Consider a coin, it is circular and flat. As far as I know the babalonian picture of the universe involved a pancake flat earth among waters. Under a dome containing the stars (think snowglobe). Here's an article called "Is Heaven the Sky?", it explores some ancient perspectives of the earth/universe. http://www.infidelguy.com/article316.html

Behemoth:
Job 40:15-19
"Look now at the behemoth,[a] which I made along with you; He eats grass like an ox.
See now, his strength is in his hips, And his power is in his stomach muscles.
He moves his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are tightly knit.
His bones are like beams of bronze, His ribs like bars of iron.
He is the first of the ways of God; Only He who made him can bring near His sword."

Ok, so, first off, hippos do not have tails the size of ceder trees. Second, vs 19 makes this thing out to be hard to kill. If anything this sounds more along the lines of a brontasaurus.

Reading the verse it says it moves its tail like a cedar not that its tail is the size of a cedar. The way it moves would be all at once, no waggle in it, this coincides with the latter part talking about its strength of sinew and bone.

[Dylan1CC]

Isaiah 40:22: "There is one dwelling above the circle of the earth."

Consider a coin, it is circular and flat. As far as I know the babalonian picture of the universe involved a pancake flat earth among waters. Under a dome containing the stars (think snowglobe). Here's an article called "Is Heaven the Sky?", it explores some ancient perspectives of the earth/universe. http://www.infidelguy.com/article316.html.

OK, fair enough. But the Hebrew wording indicates a spherical object. Not a coin-like object or a flat area of land under a "globular sky." Other translations read it as: the globe of the earth" (Douay), "the round earth." (Moffatt)

[Venom]

Well, from the link I posted:

Isa 40:22 "[It is] he that sitteth [which can also mean rests] upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof [are] as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in." This verse has occasioned considerable debate, as fundamentalist apologists have seized upon it as a foothold for their attempts to read modern cosmology anachronistically back into the text. “According to [Henry] Morris this verse describes a spherical earth. The Hebrew word is hwg. I believe that this refers to the circular horizon that vaults itself over the earth to form a dome.” (Stephen Meyers, "A Biblical Cosmology." Th.M. Thesis, Westminster Theological Seminary. 1989, pp. 63-69) Similar opportunistic use is made of Job 22:14, “Thick clouds [are] a covering to him, that he seeth not; and he walketh in the circuit ( hwg ) of heaven.” But it is vain. H wg is “a primitive root to describe a circle:--compass,” as per Strong’s Concordance. Notice that hwgis most definitely not a sphere. There are perfectly adequate Hebrew words for sphere or spheroid if that is what one wanted to mention. First, there is the word meaning “ball,” rwd duwr . Second, the word for “pot,” dwd , duwd , a pot for boiling,or, by resemblance of shape, a basket. Third, the word meaning “round,” tlglg gulgoleth, a skull (as round) or a head. Fourth, there is the Babylonia loan word llg galal, the verb “to roll,” based on the description of a type of water pot shaped like a human skull. And the Bible never once uses any of these fine words to describe the earth. Again, we find the natural denotation of the word in cognate cultures of the day.

Which seems to be agreeing that they were not talking about a sphere or globe.

Another link which disusses it: http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/sho ... fldAuto=61

Some verses that make sense with a flat earth:
Matthew 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

I don't hope to convince you, just to show that there are other ways to take things. Though I am not christian or really any religion (a bit taoist maybe), I wouldn't say I'm anti-religion. I simply wish those that practice it to be open to different ways of looking at the writings.

As you seem to be really involved in exploring your religion, hope I've given you at least something to ponder.

[undamned]

Behemoth:
Job 40:15-19
"Look now at the behemoth,[a] which I made along with you; He eats grass like an ox.
See now, his strength is in his hips, And his power is in his stomach muscles.
He moves his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are tightly knit.
His bones are like beams of bronze, His ribs like bars of iron.
He is the first of the ways of God; Only He who made him can bring near His sword."

Ok, so, first off, hippos do not have tails the size of ceder trees. Second, vs 19 makes this thing out to be hard to kill. If anything this sounds more along the lines of a brontasaurus.

Reading the verse it says it moves its tail like a cedar not that its tail is the size of a cedar. The way it moves would be all at once, no waggle in it...

Yes, but it could have easily read "moves it like a stick/branch/rod/staff," which the Hebrew/Aramaic words for stick, branch, rod, or staff are indeed used in other scriptures, so this is not a "for lack of better words" situation. Ceders are spoken of as mighty in the OT. The mighty ceders of Lebenon are spoken of. This is indictative of girth, not imobility.
-ud

[PFG 9000]

The problem is those who, for whatever ill-advised reason, interpret the "seven days" of Creation as a literal set of 24-hour periods...seeing as the first bit o' creation mentioned therein was "let there be light," ostensibly before the sun existed, and along with it the set 24-hour period it takes the Earth to go around it, such an idea doesn't make much sense.

The term "day" in the bible is often much longer than a literal 24 hour period. There is a prophetic verse (forget where, in old testament) which says "A day for a year." It can be even longer. Daniel's "prophecy of 70 weeks" (regarding the Messiah and his death/'cutting off') was not literal weeks but stretched out over centuries of time.

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

According to the NIV, the heavens, the earth, and the sun were all created on the first day. Assuming there was both a sun and an earth, there could very well have been a 24 hour "day." Moreover, the account of each day ends with "and there was evening, and there was morning—the xth day." Years, decades, centuries, and millenia don't have evenings and mornings. The only unit of time that does is one day. If this is meant to be taken figuratively, where do the evenings and mornings fit in?

Also, evolutionism does not disprove creationism, even if there was certain undeniable proof that the earth was billions of years old. Assume for a second you were walking in the garden of eden at the end of the first week. If you had the means, couldn't you cut down a tree and see dozens of rings? Couldn't you analyze the soil and find that it was composed partly of decayed plant and animal matter? If the earth was created, it would have to have been created in an aged state: there is no other way for the earth to function. Long story short: assuming the earth was created, there would have been proof of its ancient age right at its very beginning.

[Venom]

Yes, but it could have easily read "moves it like a stick/branch/rod/staff," which the Hebrew/Aramaic words for stick, branch, rod, or staff are indeed used in other scriptures, so this is not a "for lack of better words" situation. Ceders are spoken of as mighty in the OT. The mighty ceders of Lebenon are spoken of. This is indictative of girth, not imobility.
-ud

If I am to describe some large beast, whether mythical or real I am going to choose impressive words. For describing a different type of tail, to convey the movement a string, rope or vine may fill that role. String would never be chosen, same as your example. The other words could have been used but would not convey the grandure or be as poetic as "moves like a cedar".

[greg]

Or they can just say God made that life too. If God made Earth, Heaven, and everything else, then who says he didn't make life on other planets? Some say God made Earth for his chosen people or whatever, but that doesn't mean he didn't make life somewhere else.

Actually, this reminds me of the Out of the Silent Planet trilogy of SF books by CS Lewis (of Narnia fame). In this book, the other planets of the solar system are inhabited by aliens. The first book takes place on Mars, I believe. Anyhow, each planet is governed by an angel of God, and our planet is governed by the fallen angel (ie Lucifer). Thus, communication had been cut off from our planet, hence the name "the silent planet." The big point: none of the other aliens would ever want to set foot on our cursed planet.

The first book was a very great read, but I barely got through the second book. I've known some non-Christians who've enjoyed the books, but even I got fed up with them by the end of the second book. The end of the second book got too irritating for me.

[PFG 9000]

Actually, this reminds me of the Out of the Silent Planet trilogy of SF books by CS Lewis (of {i]Narnia[/i] fame). In this book, the other planets of the solar system are inhabited by aliens. The first book takes place on Mars, I believe. Anyhow, each planet is governed by an angel of God, and our planet is governed by the fallen angel (ie Lucifer). Thus, communication had been cut off from our planet, hence the name "the silent planet." The big point: none of the other aliens would ever want to set foot on our cursed planet.

The first book was a very great read, but I barely got through the second book. I've known some non-Christians who've enjoyed the books, but even I got fed up with them by the end of the second book. The end of the second book got too irritating for me.

I really enjoyed that trilogy. The first is probably the best, but I think the second, Perelandra, is my favorite. There's this wacked out part near the end where the main character wanders around in some underground caves on Venus and sees some vivid, bizarre imagery. Man, I need to read through those again.

[greg]

I really enjoyed that trilogy. The first is probably the best, but I think the second, Perelandra, is my favorite. There's this wacked out part near the end where the main character wanders around in some underground caves on Venus and sees some vivid, bizarre imagery. Man, I need to read through those again.

I was totally hooked all the way up to the end of the second book. The whole temptation of the Eve-type woman (sexy naked chick with green hair... I thought of Lum from Urusei Yatsura the whole time) and the discourse of the nature of sin was very intriguing. But how Ransom in the end just resorted to bashing the bad guy's face in was a bit silly. And at the end when the Aadam-guy and the Eve-lady were reunited and they rejoiced over and over again, it got silly. "And we'll have tall marble buildings and wear fine linens! And our toaster ovens shall be the envy of those on earth!" That kind of crap killed me. What's the point about Venus being a floating nudist paradise where people are free when they build marble pillars and stuff? Sounded like a contradiction. It became too long winded at the end and I skipped the last book in the trilogy. I'd rather re-read the Narnia books.

Anyhoo, that's my thoughts. I'm glad to have diverted this dumb thread a bit.

[BulletMagnet]

For example, here's something I know of Jehovah's Witness beliefs that differ from my own. It's my understanding that the JW belief system takes into fact that exaxctly 144,000 people will reach eternity/Heaven an no more/less. As such, a strict view of "predestination" if you will, that says no matter what anyone believes in their heart, if they aren't one of the chosen 144,000 they aren't going to Heaven.

It is true that Jehovah's Witnesses, of which I am also one, believe that only 144,000 are given spirit forms and enter into heaven; however, we have a different concept of "heaven" than most sects of Christendom. While we believe that a specifically limited number of people go to heaven (as in, the spiritual realm, to serve in God's presence, as opposed to clouds/harps/etc.), we also believe that many others, an unspecified number, who are willing to follow the Bible's teachings whole-heartedly (this group is referred to as "The Great Crowd" in Revelation, IIRC), are given the opportunity to remain on a renewed Earth after the Great Tribulation is ended, without the worries of sickness, death, etc...in short, the way that God originally intended for Adam and Eve to live. It makes sense, at least from my perspective...after all, if God's will is actually to destroy Earth utterly and bring everyone agreeable to him up to heaven, then his original purpose for the earth ("Be fruitful, become many, etc.") will have been successfully thwarted by Satan; what kind of omniscience/ominpotence is that? As Isaiah 45:18 says, "For this is what Jehovah has said, the Creator of the heavens, he the true God, the Former of the earth and the Maker of it, he the One who firmly established it, who did not create it simply for nothing, who formed it even to be inhabited." Not to mention that it wouldn't make sense for us to believe that less than 150,000 people will be "saved" at all, since there are at present more than 6 million of us.

You'll see that the 144,000 is strictly Jews that are "saved"...

Take a closer look: notice the "tribes" listed in Revelation 7:4-8 :

Judah, Reuben, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Manasseh, Simeon, Levi, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, Benjamin

Now look at the listing of the original tribes in the first chapter of Numbers, starting at verse 20:

Reuben, Simeon, Gad, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Ephraim, Manasseh, Benjamin, Dan, Asher, Naphtali (as verse 47 says, Levi remained unregistered)

Note that several tribes have been switched around or omitted. This would definitely suggest that we're not talking about literal Israel here...not to mention that, according to (among other things) Peter's vision in Acts 10 and his subsequent visit to Cornelius, the Jews were no longer God's specific chosen people after they rejected Jesus as the Messiah.

I, on the other hand, take a view that parallels the interpretation of theologan John Calvin, which states that we do not have the "free will" that so many evangelicals tout...

If this is the case, then how can 1) God be considered the personification of Justice, when certain people have no chance whatsoever to meet his requirements, and 2) How can this statement by Peter from the above-mentioned segment of Acts be explained:

"At this Peter opened his mouth and said: 'For a certainty I perceive that God is not partial, but in every nation the man who fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.'" -Acts 10:34

Interesting - do you have any links you can post as to where that interpretation stems from? I'd be curious to see the rationale behind that. I've always been confused about the literal interpretation of the 7 days, so it'd be neat to see that perspective on it.

Here's the "day for a year" scripture:

"And you must lie upon your right side in the second case, and you must carry the error of the house of Judah for 40 days. A day for a year, a day for a year, is what I have given you." -Ezekiel 4:6b

I don't have time to look everything up right now, but if you check somewhere in Daniel, the time period of "seventy weeks" is mentioned. If you count each "day" in that span as a year, then starting from the time the "the word to rebuild Jerusalem" was put forth (sometime during Israel's captivity in Persia), it ends when Peter is sent to Conrelius, with the final "week" signifying the beginning of Christ's ministry, his death occurring halfway through it, which is also prophesied in Daniel someplace.

According to the NIV, the heavens, the earth, and the sun were all created on the first day. Assuming there was both a sun and an earth, there could very well have been a 24 hour "day."

Take another look:

And God went on to say: "Let luminaries come to be in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night; and they must serve as signs and for seasons and for days and years. And they must serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth." And God proceeded to make the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for dominating the day and the lesser luminary for dominating the night, and also the stars. Thus God put them in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth, and to dominate by day and by night and to make a division between the light and the darkness. Then God saw that it was good. And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a fourth day. - Genesis 1:14-19

According to Genesis, the sun wasn't even created until the fourth "day." "Light" existed in some form on the first day, but the sun, the basis of the literal 24-hour day, did not.

Phew...nap time, heh heh.

[Dylan1CC]

I would certainly not want to start a flame war over this, so please don't take my post as such. However, based on what I believe to be the fundamental doctrines inherent in Christianity, the Jehovah's Witness movement is classified as a cult, because there are several doctrines that are different from what I believe (as what can be considered mainstream Christianity, though that terminology isn't exactly fitting or exact).

For example, here's something I know of Jehovah's Witness beliefs that differ from my own. It's my understanding that the JW belief system takes into fact that exaxctly 144,000 people will reach eternity/Heaven an no more/less. As such, a strict view of "predestination" if you will, that says no matter what anyone believes in their heart, if they aren't one of the chosen 144,000 they aren't going to Heaven. Have a look at the following site:
http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=1760

You'll see that the 144,000 is strictly Jews that are "saved" or converted during the Tribulation, or the 7-year period where the Anti-christ reigns over the earth. I myself am a pre-trib millenialist, in that I believe the literal return (or second coming) of Christ happens, then the 7-year Tribulation begins, followed by the 1000-year reign (millenium), then followed by Armageddon, & then eternity (either in Heaven or Hell, depending on whether you've accepted Jesus Christ as your savior). I'm not sure where you stand on this particular issue, but it has been seen as a fundamental difference between what I think of as evangelical Christianity & the Jehovah Witness movement. The text is pretty clear in its interpretation.

I, on the other hand, take a view that parallels the interpretation of theologan John Calvin, which states that we do not have the "free will" that so many evangelicals tout; rather, those who receive salvation do not do so of their own accord. Instead, they felt the "call" of the Holy Spirit & responded to it, with the knowledge they received through teachings they either heard in church, or from some other source. As such, anyone who is "saved" in the classic evangelical sense had already been predestined to be so, but rather than assume a # of "converts" that # is not known or given to mankind to know.

I'm not sure if I would classify the Catholic church as a "cult" per se, but certainly they fit the mold. They practically deify Jesus' mother Mary, which is in direct violation of the 1st commandment (from the original 10) as laid out in Exodus 20:3 - "You shall have no other gods before me." By that definition, the Catholic church is a cult as opposed to traditional evangelical Christianity.

For example, here's something I know of Jehovah's Witness beliefs that differ from my own. It's my understanding that the JW belief system takes into fact that exaxctly 144,000 people will reach eternity/Heaven an no more/less. As such, a strict view of "predestination" if you will, that says no matter what anyone believes in their heart, if they aren't one of the chosen 144,000 they aren't going to Heaven.

OK, first of all, thanks for being very civil with me. I will also try to make this post as concise and fit together as best I can. Let's start with the subject of predestination. My faith does not teach predestination. In the bible, God encourages people to make a conscious choice.

Does everyone have a predestined time to die?

Ecclesiastes 3: 1 and 2 speak of "a time to die." Yet Eccl 7:17 says "Do not become wicked over much, nor become foolish. Why should you die when it is not yet your time?"

Proverbs 10:27: "The years of themselves of the wicked one will be cut short."

Psalm 55:23: "As for the bloodguilty and deceitful men, they will not live out even half their days."

Psalm 90:10: "In themselves the days of our years are seventy years; And if because of special mightiness they are eighty years, Yet their instance is on trouble and hurtful things; For it must quickly pass by, and away we fly."

Jeremiah 7:23-26: "This word I did express in command upon them saying, 'Obey my voice....that it may go well with you." (abbreviated)

2 Peter 3:9: "Jehovah is patient with you because he does not desire any to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentence." Not everybody chooses to repent, while some do.

Ecclesiastes 9:11: "Time and unforseen occurrence befall them all."

So, it is not due to any "foreseeing" of a person's life, some make bad choices but as this verse points out, some are simply the victims of unfortunate circumstances." Also see Jesus' words at Luke 13:4-5 where he reflects with his listeners on a building/construction accident which killed some men: 4: "Or those eighteen upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, thereby killing them, do you imagine that they were proved greater debtors than all other men in Jerusalem? 5. "No, indeed, I tell you; but, unless you repent, you will all be destroyed in the same way."

Of course God has the ability to foresee the future to prophecy and to ensure his overall will is accomplished using his ability of foresight. But again, in the bible He does not do this at the expense of a person's free will. Yes, we can receive salvation only through God's undeserved kindness since he as the Almighty creator has the final jurisdiction over us. But as the scriptures show, He still wants to see us work at it and make a conscious choice:

James 2: 14: "Of what benefit is it, my brothers, if a certain one says he has faith but he does not have works? That faith cannot save him can it?" (then using an illustrative example of this) 15: "If a brother or a sister is in a naked state and lacking the food sufficient for the day, 16 yet a certain one of you says to them: "Go in peace, keep warm and well fed," but you do not give them the necessities for their body, of what benefit is it?" 17 Thus too, faith, if it does not have works is dead in itself."

This is not to say that a person is saved by their works of course or that we can "earn our way in" by accumulating good deeds.

Rom. 2:4,5: "Do you despise the riches of his kindness and forebearance and long suffering, because you do not know that the kindly quality of God is trying to lead you to repentence? But according to your hardness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on thae day of wrath and of the revealing of God's righteous judgement."

Did God know that Adam would sin when he created him? If so, then why would he give him the warning not to eat fromt he tree of knowledge of good and bad? Genesis 1:28. 2:16 and 17.

Based on scripture such as these, I as a Jehovah's Witness cannot reconcile any of these verses with Calvin's teaching of predestination.

Now, on the subject of the 144,000 and heaven.

To sum it up first, according to the bible, there is both an earthly hope and a heavenly hope.

At Matthew 6: 9 and 10 Jesus asked we pray for his will to be done on earth, and in heaven.

Do all good people go to heaven? Some of Jesus followers were annointed with holy spirit after Jesus died and received a heavenly hope as his apostles. Yet some faithful ones died before Christ's ransom was given:

Matthew 11:11 "Truly I say to you people, Among those born of women there has not been raised up a greater than John the Baptist; but a person that is lesser one in the heavens is greater than he is."

Acts 2:34: "David did not ascend to the heavens."

What was God's original purpose for mankind? To become angels? Genesis 1:26: "Let us make man in our image, and let them have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the domestic animals and all the earth and every moving animal that is moving upon the earth."

Gen 2:16 and 17 and scriptures such as Isaiah 45:18 show that it was not God's purpose that man die, he was to live on the earth and be happy.

Does that mean that without a heavenly hope, there is no hope for a happy future/salvation?

Psalms 37:11 (refer back to the Lord's prayer re: the earth and heaven) "The meek ones themselves will posess the earth, and they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace."

Matthew 5:5 "Happy are the mild tempered ones, since they will inherit the earth."

Isaiah 2:4: "And he will certainly render judgement among the nations and set matters straight respecting many peoples. And they will have to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. Nation will not lift up sword against nantion, neither will they learn war anymore."

This prophecy is re-emphasized with force at Micah: 4:3 and 4: "They will not lift up sword, nation against nation, neither will they learn war anymore. And they will actually sit, each one under his vine and under his fig tree, and there will be no one making them tremble; for the very mouth of Jehovah of armies has spoken it."

Revelation 21: 3 and 4 - "I saw a new heaven and a new earth...I heard a loud voice form the throne say "Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them. And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore, the former things have passed away."

Clearly these types of conditions cannot be accomplished on the earth unless God steps in, for as 1 John 5:19 states: "We know we originate with God. But the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one."

At Revelation 7:4-8 we can see all the tribes that the 144,000 are sealed from. However, not all of the tribes listed were tribes of ancient Israel. For instance, there was never a "tribe of Joseph," the list does not include the tribes of Dan or Ephraim and the Levites were set aside for temple worship but were not delegated as an actual tribe.

After Peter was commanded by God to convert Cornelius (Acts chapter 10), the way was then paved for non-Jews to become followers as well.

So a person of any race could be among the 144,000.

Romans 2:28, 29: "He is not a Jew who is one on the outside, nor is circumcision that which is on the outside upon the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one on the inside, and his circumcision is that of the heart by spirit, and not by a written code."

Galatians 3:26-29: "You are all in fact sons of God through your faith in Christ Jesus...There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor freeman, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one person in union with Christ Jesus. Moreover, if you belong to Christ, you are really Abraham's seed, heirs with reference to a promise."

After listing the 144,000 in verses 4-8, at 7:9, it says "After these things I saw, and Look! A great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throwne and before the Lamb, dressed in white robes; there were palm branches in their hands."

So we believe based on the scriptures there are two groups, a privileged heavenly group and a "great crowd" blessed with earthly hope. John 10:16 "I have other sheep which are not of this fold; those also I must bring," we believe this is the earthly great crowd of "other sheep."

2 Peter 3:13 "There are new heavens and a new earth that we are awaiting according to his promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell. Again ties in with the prophecy at Psalm 37:10 and 11 which states that repentent people would inherit a peaceful earth.

So what will be the duty and purpose of the chosen 144,000?

Revelation 5:10 "You made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth."

A peaceful rule over earthly subjects after the earth has been reclaimed from Satan. 1 John 5:19, Revelation 12:12, the devil's abyssing and then later subsequent destruction covered in Revelation chapter 20.

I am using my bible, the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (which as I said before for further research is based in part on the Kingdom Interlinear Translation by Westcott and Hort) and also using the King James, Duoy and NIV. Again, it is because of scriptures such as these that I eventually based my personal decision on what I believe regarding heaven, the 144,000, an earthly and heavely hope and God's coming Kingdom. This again, is a summary of my beliefs re: the issues you raised in the last reply and of course is in no way meant to be "in your face" or to convert you via the internet.

And yes, I agree that the Catholic church venerates icons and statues. The scripture you cited from Exodus/ten commandments is very clear and Paul himself said at 1 John 5:21 "Little children, guard yourselves from idols."

As for Armageddon and the 1,000 year reign (I need to go sleep so I'm summarizing some more), Revelation 19 and 20 are quite clear. 19 and 20 detail that Armageddon sweeps away the wicked, then in chapter 20 Satan is abyssed. Then in 20 at the end of the 1,000 year reign and resurrection, some of the resurrected rebel along with Satan who after being released the abyss is then shortly thereafter thrown into the lake of fire (destroyed forever for his wicked deeds) In chapter 21:1-4 we see prophecied that both the heavens and the earth are restored to the peaceful purpose Jehovah God had originally purposed before the rebellion in Eden of Satan Adam and Eve after he uses his Son Jesus Christ to "crush the serpent in the head."

Prophecies regarding "a day for a year," a few examples:

Ezekiel 4:6 and 7 "And you must complete them. "And you must lie on your right side in the second case, and you must carry the error of the house of Judah forty days. A day for a year, a day for a year, is what I have given you. 7. And to the siege of Jerusalem you will fix your face, with your arm bared, and you muct prophecy against it."

Numbers 14:34 "By the number of the days that you spied out the land, forty days, a day for a year, a day for a year, you will answer for your errors forty years."

Anyways, hope at least some of this gave you some insight into why I believe what I do according to the bible. I enjoyed cracking my knuckles and doing some research.

Bear in mind also that I do not presume to know what your exact view on certain matters is (especially regarding predestination), this was also again, a long general reply on my beliefs in regard to your reply. And sorry for any typos.

[undamned]

I'm glad to have diverted this dumb thread a bit.

Thanks greg
Taco? *offers greg a taco*
-ud

[JBC]

WOW. I figured i'd check back here to find a bunch of LOL's or something but this... Who would've thought the original post would turn into that? Not that i mind, of course. It's just a funny contrast.

[PFG 9000]

Take another look:

And God went on to say: "Let luminaries come to be in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night; and they must serve as signs and for seasons and for days and years. And they must serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth." And God proceeded to make the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for dominating the day and the lesser luminary for dominating the night, and also the stars. Thus God put them in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth, and to dominate by day and by night and to make a division between the light and the darkness. Then God saw that it was good. And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a fourth day. - Genesis 1:14-19

According to Genesis, the sun wasn't even created until the fourth "day." "Light" existed in some form on the first day, but the sun, the basis of the literal 24-hour day, did not.

Phew...nap time, heh heh.

You are absolutely right. I meant the light, not the sun. I swear! Honest! I'm not kidding!

[LoneSage]

I'm a Christian, I'd like to view myself as non-denominational though I was baptised as an Episcopalian.

I think that, even though all the wrongs religion has wrought, religion inspires hope, that through Death I'd like to think I don't just stop, but continue. I've been wavering these past two years, but I'm still proud to be a Christian.


I read some of those Mormon comics back in middle school at the YMCA, they literally scared the shit out of me. I really do hate them. I don't believe a man should live a God-fearing life, if anything I view him as a peer.

[FRO]

I don't believe a man should live a God-fearing life, if anything I view him as a peer.

That depends on your definition of fear. If you talk to most non-denominational ministers, they'll tell you the verbage used in the original text was more akin to "reverence" or "deep-seeded respect" than what we think of as fear, or being afraid. There are instances where actual fear is in play (garden of Eden when Adam & Eve realized their sin & were truly afraid), but IIRC most instances of the term fear are as much a token of reverence than of fear.

Dylan1CC - man, that's a lot of info to dissemenate!
As far as the interpretation on Revelations 20, I'm not sure I'm with you on that one. You said that some of the resurrected rebel - I see no evidence of that in Rev. 20. It mentions that he goes out to the 4 corners of the earth, as well as Gog & Magog to deceive the nations & bring them to battle. It's not clear to me that he actually accomplishes that goal. In any event, I believe in the concept of "once saved, always saved", so if the 1,000-year reign is nothing but those who are "saved" then Satan (conceivably) could not deceive them into turning away from God at the very last. I would have to do some reading on that (& probably consult my dad, who is more an authority on this than I could ever hope to be).

It would appear that you have studied scripture quite a lot! I am embarassed to say I am not as well read as you are. However, I believe very firmly in the "faith" aspect, that while I don't understand the bulk of it, I know enough to have that faith. Thanks for sharing your references & views - it's always interesting to see things from another perspective, despite the differences.

[BulletMagnet]

In any event, I believe in the concept of "once saved, always saved"...

Out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on James 2:24-26?

You see that a man is to be declared righteous by works, and not by faith alone. In the same manner was not also Rahab the harlot declared righteous by works, after she had received the messengers hospitably and sent them out by another way? Indeed, as the body without spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

It's nice to speak to someone else who's genuinely interested in "spiritual things" once in awhile.

[FRO]

Faith without works is dead. That's plain. However, that doesn't mean that at the time of the original "answer to the call" the answer wasn't sincere or without faith. It does mean, however, that they are letting Satan get in their way & keep them from growing in their faith. I don't believe, however, that they are lost forever or that they have forfeited their salvation.

As for Rahab, remember that in the OT all men/women were saved by works. In order to be righteous before God, they had to offer animal sacrifices as a replacement for their own lives. They also were required to follow very specific laws & do the best they could. Rahab helped the Jews to conquer Jericho. It was apparent that she knew of God's power & already believed in Him. Though it's unclear when she truly confessed that faith, her works (i.e. aiding the Jews in their God-given command to overtake Jericho) proved out that faith.