• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Revelation...

John Prewett said:
There sure are. And the more of them you read, the more resistant to truth you'll get.
Click to expand...

A while ago I read Jonathan Kirsch's book A History of the End of the World. Very informative and a good read.
 
Cherub786 said:
Paul gives Jesus as the preeminent example of the resurrection of man into a spirit body, so you argument is dashed right there. Go back and read the passage I cited from Paul (1 Corinthians chapter 15) and you will see that he gives the example of Jesus ("the last Adam") as being made into a spirit, and that flesh and blood is corrupt and cannot inherit the kingdom of God.
Click to expand...

You're still talking about two different things - the Resurrection of God / Jesus, who deliberately kept the marks of the crucifixion as evidence of who he was and what he went through, and the resurrection of man.

Cherub786 said:
Simple, how many women came to the tomb and discovered that Jesus had supposedly risen?

Matthew 28:1 says that Mary Magdalene and "the other Mary" came to the tomb. They see an Angel who informs them what happened and they go straight to the disciples and Jesus appears to the disciples

Mark 16:1 says it was Mary Magdalene, "Mary mother of James" and Salome (three people instead of two)

Luke 24 changes more details, because it says there were 2 angels instead of 1, and the three women were Mary Magdalane, Mary mother of James, Joanna and "other women"

John 20:1 says it was only Mary Magdalene and no other woman who discovered the empty tomb. It also says that Mary Magdalene met Jesus at the tomb whereas all other accounts say that Jesus didn't appear at the tomb but came to the disciples at Galilee. "And, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him" (Matthew 28:7)
Click to expand...

The thing conveniently missing from your examples is the timeline. Which woman came first, second, etc.?

Here's something to help you out - the Resurrection Accounts Harmonized: Greenleaf?s Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts

Cherub786 said:
There are loads of other contradictions, but since you said to pick only one... I'd like to see what kind of mental gymnastics you have to pull off to resolve these inconsistencies.
Click to expand...

There's loads of Christian websites that explain or refute them too. So the mental gymnastics are yours.

One other thing: None of your examples refutes the resurrection. So don't miss the forest for the trees.
 
Logicman said:
You're still talking about two different things - the Resurrection of God / Jesus, who deliberately kept the marks of the crucifixion as evidence of who he was and what he went through, and the resurrection of man.
Click to expand...

You missed the point that Paul speaks about the resurrection of man based on his proposition that the resurrection of Jesus (whom you call "God") into a celestial and not earthly body. Let me quote precisely what he said:

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

The thing conveniently missing from your examples is the timeline. Which woman came first, second, etc.?

Here's something to help you out - the Resurrection Accounts Harmonized: Greenleaf?s Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts



There's loads of Christian websites that explain or refute them too. So the mental gymnastics are yours.
Click to expand...

The problem with these attempts at harmonizing using the type of sophistry employed by lawyers in a court room is that 1. it is not an academic or honest approach, 2. it is a very modern approach after the emergence of fundamentalism and historically not practiced by Christians

The problem with this approach is it assumes the text is infallible without even the slightest error, and then attempts to harmonize the very apparent inconsistencies and errors. Bart Ehrman has illustrated very compellingly the problem with this approach: "And so, for example, what does one do with the fact (another fact) that in the Gospel of Matthew Jesus predicts Peter’s denial by saying that “he would deny him three times before the **** crows”, but in the Gospel of Mark he predicts that he would deny him three times “before the **** crows *twice*”? It’s very simple. Peter denied Jesus *six* times: three times before the **** crowed and three times before the **** crowed twice!"

One other thing: None of your examples refutes the resurrection. So don't miss the forest for the trees.
Click to expand...

The resurrection is a claim of something supernatural. It's not my job to refute it, rather your job to prove it. The burden of proof is with you. Contradictory writings many years after the event in question, written anonymously as devotional literature and not as history is a very weak basis to claim the resurrection was a historical reality.
 
Logicman said:
Nonsense.
Click to expand...

The Revelation is simple and strait-forward, if one just heeds the Revelation.

Vatican is the Great Whore.
JFK will reappear and is the supreme Beast of Rev 13.
Henry Kissinger is the subordinate Beast of Rev 13.

See ... simple and straight forward.
 
Cherub786 said:
You missed the point that Paul speaks about the resurrection of man based on his proposition that the resurrection of Jesus (whom you call "God") into a celestial and not earthly body. Let me quote precisely what he said:

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
Click to expand...

I'll stick with what I previously presented.

Cherub786 said:
The problem with these attempts at harmonizing using the type of sophistry employed by lawyers in a court room is that 1. it is not an academic or honest approach, 2. it is a very modern approach after the emergence of fundamentalism and historically not practiced by Christians
Click to expand...

I don't agree, and it's hardly a modern approach. Greenleaf was born in 1783. He also was a great professor of law and the rules of evidence.

Cherub786 said:
The problem with this approach is it assumes the text is infallible without even the slightest error, and then attempts to harmonize the very apparent inconsistencies and errors.
Click to expand...

That's your contention which you have yet to demonstrate. It's harmonized. That's what's important.

Cherub786 said:
Bart Ehrman has illustrated very compellingly the problem with this approach: "And so, for example, what does one do with the fact (another fact) that in the Gospel of Matthew Jesus predicts Peter’s denial by saying that “he would deny him three times before the **** crows”, but in the Gospel of Mark he predicts that he would deny him three times “before the **** crows *twice*”? It’s very simple. Peter denied Jesus *six* times: three times before the **** crowed and three times before the **** crowed twice!"
Click to expand...

Bart Ehrman is a left-wing loon. He was part of the dysfunctional Jesus Seminar which came to the process of reviewing the Gospels with an a priori anti-supernatural bias.

Cherub786 said:
The resurrection is a claim of something supernatural. It's not my job to refute it, rather your job to prove it. The burden of proof is with you. Contradictory writings many years after the event in question, written anonymously as devotional literature and not as history is a very weak basis to claim the resurrection was a historical reality.
Click to expand...

Hey, I don't care if you believe it or not. It's recorded history. You think it isn't make your best argument against it.
 
Last edited:
John Prewett said:
The Revelation is simple and strait-forward, if one just heeds the Revelation.

....
JFK will reappear and is the supreme Beast of Rev 13.
Henry Kissinger is the subordinate Beast of Rev 13.

See ... simple and straight forward.
Click to expand...

Ha ha.
 
Well it's easy to determine what's true and what's false, regarding books, preaching and teaching or otherwise...if it's not taken from God's Word, it is not true but merely man's speculation and assumptions...

"Whoever speaks of his own originality is seeking his own glory; but whoever seeks the glory of the one who sent him, this one is true and there is no unrighteousness in him." John 7:18
 
Elvira said:
Well it's easy to determine what's true and what's false, regarding books, preaching and teaching or otherwise...if it's not taken from God's Word, it is not true but merely man's speculation and assumptions...

"Whoever speaks of his own originality is seeking his own glory; but whoever seeks the glory of the one who sent him, this one is true and there is no unrighteousness in him." John 7:18
Click to expand...

19 Do not quench the Spirit. 20 Do not despise prophecies. 21 Examine all things. Firmly hold onto what is good. 1 Thess 5:19-20
 
Last edited:
While this discussion on Revelation has gotten "heated", I went back to the OT for answers. A total eclipse of the Sun was always portrayed as a judgement on Gentiles.

Now I ask you since the great event of watching the total eclipse of the Sun just weeks ago to count up all the natural catastophes that have happened since.

Stunning isn't it!

Birth pangs? I am inclined to believe so.

https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/news/1.647912
 
vesper said:
While this discussion on Revelation has gotten "heated", I went back to the OT for answers. A total eclipse of the Sun was always portrayed as a judgement on Gentiles.

Now I ask you since the great event of watching the total eclipse of the Sun just weeks ago to count up all the natural catastophes that have happened since.

Stunning isn't it!

Birth pangs? I am inclined to believe so.

https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/news/1.647912
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure it's a sign to the Gentiles only but perhaps a sign to all the nations of mankind to wake up and pay attention...like literal birth pangs, these “pangs of distress” will no doubt continue to intensify until Christ ‘completes his conquest’ by destroying every vestige of Satan’s visible organization...Matthew 24:8
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom