Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Jesus knew what was coming upon his disciples. Persecution first from the Jews, then pagan Rome, then papal Rome. This was what he was preparing them for. But Jesus also wanted us to be prepared. So his lessons apply to both generations. His prophecies had a double fulfillment.
the Pharisees and Sadducees were in opposing camps with regard the afterlife. Both Jesus and Paul used this disagreement to their advantage on several occasions. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection. This life, they thought, was all there was. I don't know how recent this development took place. We do know that Israel had some baggage when they returned from Babylon 400 years previously. Some of that baggage they never got rid of.
i see we still differ on the definition of Absolute Truth. i can prove bowling balls are spheres, see, not perfect spheres, but spheres. And i could demonstrate God as an Old Guy with a beard too, in adults that perception is shifted to Christ, bodily returning in a world-wide Miracle, always soon or very soon of course right, nevermind all those wars or rumors of wars or earthquakes or famines in our time. Just turn Jesus into God, and voila, right
then you might prefer another example, i just threw out the first thing came to mind.
imo it relates bc if i were able to define God for you perfectly, you would surely deny knowing Him, or at least acknowledge that you cannot know Him completely i guess. You would surely be intensely uncomfortable in His Presence, etc. so a point was to see that "God" as we have likely defined Him prolly does not exist anyway.
that is your perception surely, but then you could have asked for clarification if something was too vague or even a reasoning as to why the ref might be pertinent, and we could go from there. Or better yet demo why it may not be pertinent
yes, i do, but that does not make God an AT, but rather a belief that we share; and that is why we call them "beliefs." And were we to delve much into this shared belief, we would see further divisions, in our def of God, bc you have defined God in your own image, just like me, and what you are really asking me is "do you believe in my god?"
well you say "double" where i would say "cyclical" maybe, all generations rather than two, but of course applying to your specific gen also yes, so that works fine for now. Be prepared for lightning to flash from the East to the West imo
and there were many other competing factions, Essenes, Nazarenes, Nazarites, Sons of God, Simeonites, Zealots, on and on
"Does ____ exist."
no
yes, but we are prolly talking about two different things now; by definition we almost have to be.
Actually, I was referring to last time when, after all the relatively frustrating chasing of AT definitions, you couldn't actually deny that what the bible said was true after all. Oh, and that you agreed with me.
Just like hope does not mean 'wish' in this instance, when we talk about our beliefs in God's existence, we rarely just mean 'we think'. This is heavy stuff. If we are wrong and God does not exist, then our souls are forfeit. No...mostly, when a person comes to a 'belief' in God, they embrace it, accept it, as an absolute truth. God does exist.
Have you even read your Bible? God never changes. He IS always the same. All his attributes remain constant. It doesn't matter a jot what you think, or others think. He is the very definition of AT.
then you need a diff term, other than AT wadr, bc AT is about what you can demonstrate, the fruit is all that matters there.
i agree, yet we do this all the time nonetheless, very similar to your assumptions at Absolute Truth in fact. Everyone does this, bc we have to; we all make assumptions, thousands a day prolly, and the joke about them is strictly cute tv, at least in that context, the general one. We have expectations too, and generally speaking we define God by them...which is why i asked about your expectations.
i agree, i was not doing that; that was not the standard. The standard was Absolute Truth. (Which btw God can still fit as long as the definition is "unknown," in a neat little trick even Atheists have a hard time disagreeing with--i'll see if i can dig it up) but anyway, this is why i invoked the fruit, you will know them by their fruit.
hopefully we have at least realized the issue there; he can embrace it and accept it better as a grilled cheese sandwich than an AT.
actually that was your God, you were asking me if i believed in your God, what you are about to do below there, once again; having rejected my definition, see. How 'bout we discuss that one?
lots of gods, different classes of gods even, all acknowledged by God.
The same One Who wrote "No Son of Man may die for another's sins?"
ok, we'll see if you are in fact convicted of your belief next if you like;
the verses that you have not bothered to list, i notice, while skipping over the ones i posted, tra-la. Ok, what vv Naomi.
we can note that those in Acts were in those same last days, and we don't really acknowledge this, but every generation since then has surely considered themselves the generation i guess lol. Armageddon is only in the Book in one place for a reason; bc there are no witnesses, see. Dunno if that makes any sense yet or not though. But those vv are about the Revelation of Christ, after all. And Christ is being revealed, no doubt about that; just apparently not in the manner that we expect or desire, right.
what might be the more foolish is to pretend you have not defined Him, as soon as you say "God is going to do _____ (for me)." (God = going to do ____)
