Do you believe that 2007 will have the second coming of Jesus Christ?

[tik 🪀✨]

Wow, we have a number of budding theologians here.

I say no for a variety of reasons.

Firstly, revaltaions seem 'tacked on' to me.  I've never understood why some people put such high relavance on it - especially compared to the gospels.  It seems like many of those obsessed with end times tend to forget or ignore the whole "love they neighbor as theyself" and "blessed are the peacemakers' parts so often.  However, in a historical context that seems to be common for many of the writings of the late 1st century.  After all, with the mass persecution of the early Christian sects, who wouldn't want to wish pain and suffering onto their persecutors.  (oddly, this persecuted attitude has remained with some even as they use it as an excuse to persecute others).  In addition, I can't help but wonder if part of the book came from a halucinagenic dream.  (wormwood, mentioned in revalations, was a common halucenogen used in those days).  Use of halucenogens as a 'religious experience' exists in a number of religious traditions.

Secondly, I don't consider John Darby a prophet in any sense of the word.  Cutting and pasting pieces of the bible from all over and filling in a story to fit your position inbetween them and assuming it is all undebatable fact isn't research - it's claiming prophethood all in it's own.   At least the LDS church has the sense to call their new findings the discovery of latter day saints, as opposed to the dispensationalists, who like to pretend that it is all obvious as day as long as nobody looks too closely at their claims.

Thirdly, even if there were some sort of 'end times', only fools and madmen would seek to predict that which noone can 'predict', much less try and force God's will to bend to their own.  I think the best course of action is to live the best one can, and show kindness to one's fellows, and leave to God that which is God's buisness.

Your reasonable arguments and kindly demeanor have no place here! GET OUT!

[tik 🪀✨]

Probably one of the most distasteful parts of Christianity for me is the part that you hear over and over from people trying to convert others, which is that you get eternally tortured in hell if you don't believe that Jesus was the Son of God, etc.

No, Hell is the consequence of sin; it is NOT the consequence of disbelief:

John 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him."

But Salvation is the consequence of living by faith:

John 3:16-18 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

Dude, you're contradicting yourself - first you say that non-belief isn't the reason you go to hell, then you say non-believers are condemned (a.k.a. going to hell) because they don't believe. It's right there in plain English, the second half of the last sentence in your post.

Hello and welcome to Jesus 101!

In the beginning, God created man. He was all like, "Dude, don't do that sh**t over there." But man was all "Whatever, man," and did it anyway (man was probably high). God was pissed and was like, "You idiot, now I have to send you to hell. I LOVE YOU!" Man was like "That's lame." So God felt a little bad and was like "Well just wait 2000 years I'll fix everything."

So 2000 years later this Jesus guy pops out and doesn't do any of that sh**t over there. God was like, "Jesus is so awesome, let's kill him so that man doesn't have to go to hell." So they killed Jesus and that was a serious bummer. But then Jesus popped out of the ground a few days later all like, "Pshh death is for pussies. Believe me and you can come hang out with God."

To summarize: God condemned man to hell for sin. The belief, faith, and acceptance that Jesus died in stead of you is what forgives you your sin. Now, one could indeed argue that not believing results in going to hell, but not believing would not be a problem if you didn't already have sin on your plate. Besides, the Bible states that even the demons know and believe in God and Jesus.

[tik 🪀✨]

Dude, you're contradicting yourself - first you say that non-belief isn't the reason you go to hell, then you say non-believers are condemned (a.k.a. going to hell) because they don't believe. It's right there in plain English, the second half of the last sentence in your post.

Hello and welcome to Jesus 101!

In the beginning, God created man. He was all like, "Dude, don't do that sh**t over there." But man was all "Whatever, man," and did it anyway (man was probably high). God was pissed and was like, "You idiot, now I have to send you to hell. I LOVE YOU!" Man was like "That's lame." So God felt a little bad and was like "Well just wait 2000 years I'll fix everything."

So 2000 years later this Jesus guy pops out and doesn't do any of that sh**t over there. God was like, "Jesus is so awesome, let's kill him so that man doesn't have to go to hell." So they killed Jesus and that was a serious bummer. But then Jesus popped out of the ground a few days later all like, "Pshh death is for pussies. Believe me and you can come hang out with God."

To summarize: God condemned man to hell for sin. The belief, faith, and acceptance that Jesus died in stead of you is what forgives you your sin. Now, one could indeed argue that not believing results in going to hell, but not believing would not be a problem if you didn't already have sin on your plate. Besides, the Bible states that even the demons know and believe in God and Jesus.

LOL, amusing. Anywho, in response to the last part - in terms of "belief" I think "worshiping and submitting" were also implied, so keep that in mind for the rest of the conversation, but I digress...

Biblically, all humans are sinful in nature, right? Suppose a Christian and, oh I dunno, how about a Buddhist both live near identical lives, the primary difference being their religion. If the Christian commits a sin, the Buddhist also commits the same sin. Basically, if the Christian steals $10 from his grandmother, the Buddhist steals $10 from his grandmother. That's not to say they generally go around doing bad things, but even the most devout slip up now and then. So let's also say if one feels bad and tells his grandmother the truth and pays her back $20, so does the other.

When they both die, they have committed an equal amount of sins. The Christian is "saved" and goes to heaven, and the Buddhist is "condemned" and goes to hell - this is what the quote before says will happen. They have committed equal amounts of sin, and yet they receive different fates. Logically, given that they both have sinned equally, the consequences can't be because of sin. The only difference was their beliefs, and the one who believed in Christ gets saved and the one who doesn't burns eternally. The end result is the direct consequence of believing or not believing. Logically you can't get around it. You can still say that sin is the reason you go to hell, but you first have to also say that not believing is the only sin God won't forgive.

Before I continue I might state that I don't believe in Christian dogma really because I have the same sort of problems with it and its followers that I imagine you do. In fact your story exemplifies one of them, but under Christian dogma it is perfectly explainable - not fair, I think, but explainable.

Jesus acted as the ultimate offering for the sacrificial rituals laid out in the Old Testament that the Jews were meant to do on a regular basis for God to forgive them of their sins. It was in this way that he superseded the doctrines of the Torah by providing a more, shall we say, flexible, salvation. Basically Jesus's sacrifice acts to pay the debt owed by sinners, but that debt is only paid if one chooses to accept it by believing in it.

And after one has done so, things get more metaphysical and confusing. Because the Christian accepted the offering of Jesus, his sins in fact are said to be erased. He has never done them. I'm sure there is debate about how this is even possible with an omniscient God.. my understanding amounts to that if God forgets something, it must have never occurred. That makes all kinds of sense, right? Ultimately how you live your life is meaningless. The Buddhist could have lived an even purer life than the Christian by human standards and still be sent to hell.

And that is one big problem I have with Christianity. I understand how it works (at least I think I have a decent grasp on it), but it doesn't seem fair. No, it isn't fair at all. It's a travesty.