ok, i ask this seriously

Does anyone at DU believe in the Rapture? Or end times prophecy at all? I do. Flame away...

Not at all. I believe that Revelations was a semi coded work written about the political climate of the day rather than prophetic. I grew up within the Catholic Church, and the Rapture isn't a belief embraced by the Catholic Church.

I guess it doesn't make sense to ask someone why the believe something, since belief isn't based on rational reason, but anyway, why?

Many people have predicted the "end of the world"; may I ask what indicates to you that now is the time, and not any other time?

And what is your opinion of the Left Behind franchise?

No one can predict the rapture. There are no events leading up to it. The "end times" events lead to the second appearance of Christ, Judgement Day etc.

I should say that I am a hard atheist, raised Roman Catholic, so I really never was exposed to teleological theology. When someone says "Rapture", I think of what the common American protestant culture says (happening soon, unmanned cars on the road, etc, etc.)

But may I ask again what you think of the Left Behind books?

...find at least one or two other fellow crazies here, but I think it's all horse sh*t myself. :D

Now, completely apart from Biblical prophecies, there are good reasons to worry about the possibilities for various serious global problems and man-made catastrophes.

I do not dwell on the end.

If I believed in a god, it couldn't be one that threw tantrums.

by Blackstone who also popularized the idea of resettling the Jewish people in Palestine. Guess the Christian churches had a somewhat guilty conscience for driving them out back in the Roman Empire days.

(Funny you should mention this on the same day I was doing some research into this for a paper.)

Guess you could find support in the Bible for just about any theory if you dig enough and link passages taken out of context from diverse books together in some sort of cut 'n paste scenario.

Former exclusive brethren. Well, my family was anyway. I was about six when we left and gravitated to the open brethren side. Talk about a fucked up cult. Did some serious damage to my brain and I still get the heebee geebees when ever Israel decides to blow something up.

that seem to dominate the beliefs of what are now referred to as "fundies". That whole belief systems seems to be becoming some self-fulfilling prophecy and that's the scary part.

They believe that no "real" good can come from earthly governments and that social conditions will just continue to decline as the "end times" approach. Well, sh*t, so let's not bother trying to fix things...the poverty, injustices, infant mortality rates, etc, etc. Social justice issues are such a waste of time - gotta convert everyone to Jesus, let's just scare the hell outta 'em!!! So much easier than leading by example - it's too much work to actually attempt to exemplify Christ.

Even worse, seems some have taken the the position of "the world's gonna end, might as well take all that we can and profit from the misfortunes of our "condemned" fellow man. They're goin' to hell anyway.

under Hadrian drove the Jewish people out of Palestine around 135 A.D.

That was believed to be the fulfillment of Christian prophecy, hence the guilt complex comment.

Many believe that the book of Revelation relates to this period. Before this the early Christian church was primarily Jewish. The early Christians were granted some of the same "dispensations" that Rome allowed the followers of Judaism, such as not having to pray to the "civic gods". After the fall of Jerusalem the Christians were pretty much on their own, and that's where their real troubles with persecutions started.

fnord

the Jerry Falwell people are over at www.freerepublic.com

why did you invite people to "flame away" in your opening post? Just curious.

I think I got all defensive and thought I'd been asked to leave the forum. Instead of just spurring debate.

countless lives lost in the name of religions....

Tools by the various churchs and religious entities to scare the massess..

And I think I am a mediocre christian. But a proud member of the christian left!!!

If there was such a thing - does it matter??

Isn't it true that what counts is what you do in between the times, now and then that really counts anyway??

I have read Revelations many times now - And I really do conclude - it should never have been in the new testiment - and it is at best a raving.

Can you really believe in a christ that would do that to us??

You know, if I really thought god could be half as bad as depicted - I would definately be buddahist.

Joe

The Jesus of the Bible clearly expects certain things of his followers beyond simply "believing", even if he does realize that perfection is not possible. I would certainly expect anyone who called himself a Christian to do the best he can in these works prescribed by his Lord and Savior.

Can you post the relevant passages?

In these passages that I posted, Jesus is very clearly referring to the future, of what will happen after he comes back the second time.

I've heard the claim made many times that the death of Jesus has absolved people of any kind of personal responsibility, other than to just have "faith" and "accept him as your savior". I just haven't been able to find any Bible passages that support that view. Everything that I've read, especially of the words that are actually attributed to Jesus, seems to suggest that he expects a great deal more than that of his followers.

I don't claim to be highly knowedgable about the Bible though, so I'd be interested in being pointed to the relevant passages. Also interested in how you weigh the importance of different passages, if they seemingly contradict each other.

on this point. Here are the verses that seem to indicate faith alone is enough. Of course, there are others that indicate "works" are necessary too. So which verses are right?

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast." --Ephesians 2:8-9 (KJV)

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost." --Titus 3:5 (KJV)

"Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." --Acts 16:30-31 (KJV)

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth..." --Romans 1:16 (KJV)

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.... He that believeth on him is not condemned." --John 3:16,18 (KJV)


There are a lot more John passages that lean this way as well. The author of John had a much different Christology from the synoptic authors.

I studied the rapture very closely, even looking into the original Greek. I studied it to support my belief (and my church's belief) that the doctrine of the rapture was true. I came out the other side convinced that the doctrine of the rapture was NOT true based upon the study of scriptures. If you are honest and open-minded and willing to study it yourself as a believer, then you will come to believe the same. If you allow others to do your thinking for you and have no desire to study things for yourself, then good luck in life. It is my experience that most Christians have not even bothered to read the entire Bible even once and base their beliefs upon what they are told to believe.

I do not.
I will not flame you or belittle you because you do.
However...PLEASE don't tell me you like the 'Left Behind' books :P

last Tuesday, so if you are still here too bad.
By the way all of you that have the bumper sticker saying in case of rapture this vehicle will be unmanned please leave the registration papers signed in the glove box as I need a new car.

But feel free to keep waiting....and waiting...and waiting. Hey, whats another 2 thousand years, right?

I already got raptured, you missed it. It was pretty cool until I realized everyone was naked and I wasn't in the best of shape. Man boobies and all, you know kind of embarrassing. The food was pretty good, not Red Lobster good but alright.

As I was eating a cheesy garlic biscuit Jesus came up and asked me how I was doing. I said, "Jesus thanks for including me but it would have been a lot funner if we could have brought some of our stuff, a T-shirt, maybe some shorts and my new PSP." I found out he has a PSP also but no one to play against. We talked games and stuff, he's a big fan Halo.

Anyway to make a long story short he decided to put off the rest of the Rapture so they could rewrite the rules. Next time he's going to let us have some PJs, video games and Twinkies. He really digs those Twinkees.

Man I have to stay away from that bong, now that I look back that may not have been Jesus.

Why do you believe in the rapture? Was it something you read in the bible? Was it something someone told you? What evidence do you have to suggest such a thing were likely?

Oh... for the record... I do not believe in the Rapture.

they were seen thousands of years ago.

Bryant

What is its relationship to John's Apocalypse?

My attitude has always been that have enough to worry about without that. However, as I understand it, the Rapture refers to a time when God or Christ will bodily take the faithful into Heaven, similarly to what happened to Elijah in the old testament.

Bryant

and was interested to learn that there has always been a tension between belief in immediate judgment for the individual upon death, and belief in judgment all at once, after a reign of 1,000 years on earth. Strictly speaking, Revelation (being essentially a Jewish-messianic apocalypse) foretells of the 1,000 year reign preceding judgment; but a Europe that was used to pagan thought tended to subscribe to immediate judgment.

It seems that the Protestant churches are responsible for this idea of a sudden-death endtime (so to speak), when the all-at-once judgment is made even before many of the judged are even dead. I wonder where they got that idea? Is that your conception? You believe that every *body* (literally) will be restored in an instant (to what shape, I wonder, would a child born without limbs be "restored") and sent to their respective eternities according to, what, whether or not they believed?

And children born with handicaps, or others who suffer handicaps will be restored to berfect bodies. People will be judged according to how they lived by what light they had.

Bryant

If somebody was overweight by, say 30 pounds, their whole life yet never felt uncomfortable and never had their health impacted by being overweight would they be restored to a "perfect" body with a "perfect" weight?

How about a child that was born deaf that never knew what it was like to hear? There are many deaf people who will tell you that they don't feel as if there's anything wrong with them and even though there exists technology (cochlear implants) that might largely restore their hearing they choose not to use it. They don't think they need to be repaired because they're not broken in the first place. Would these people be restored to "perfect" hearing even though they don't wish it?

I'm sorry to pick on you, and I know you didn't intend it, but there seems to be a sort of disablism inherent in your beliefs that you might want to examine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disablism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_model_of_disability

Than yes, i'm a disablist.

Bryant

What is a "perfect" body?

I'm not God and I don't see things the way he does. But I would guess, at least, it would be one without pain. Beyond that we would have different ideas on what the perfect body is, and there's probably little benefit to trying to figure out which of us is right.

Bryant

Where does the idea that the body lives eternally after judgment come from? Is that a Greek or Jewish idea?

but i gather that you are looking for it being a corruption of Plato?

Bryant

which long preceded Plato.

PS: But I'm still curious about where the idea of "bodily" life after death is referred to in the Bible. I thought the afterlife was supposed to be spiritual--it's not the body, but the soul that lives eternally. Where did I get that idea from, I wonder?

I know that reading Corinthians you could go either way.

Bryant

is one that is perfect for our new circumstances. I don't know what physical changes take place. But, if you recall, in Acts, the disciples didn't recognize Christ's resurrected body...He had to tell them who he was. So, I assume, there is a "physical" change

18? 21? 25? 30? If a child dies, will they get the body they WOULD have had if they had survived longer? What if, kind of like your overweight example, someone gets into shape and has the best body of their life when they're 40? Will they go back to their flabby 20-yr-old form? Will bald men get a full head of hair? What about men who started balding in high school? What about gray hair? This "disablism" thing can go in a lot of different directions. Interesting.

I think you get it "perfectly". ;-)

It raises all sorts of questions about the kind of deity that would inflict an "imperfect" body, apparently randomly, on an individual during the period when their behavior determines their place in eternity, only to restore it to "perfection" after death. It makes sense now why the earliest Christians were so out of tune with each other about whether or not one god, or two (a good one and a bad one), or more, created the universe, given the way we receive it with all its pain, evils and suffering distributed so unequally. What a problem, to try to believe in the goodness of a divinity that would subject most (but not all!) of us to a lifetime of suffering, only to judge us on how well we were able to deal with it when we die. What insanity!

Oh well. Guess it was too much to hope for a reasoned reply back....

I believe in the Rapture and Bible prophecy in general based on the fact that there are over 1000 prophecies in the Bible and over 500 have already come true. I believe in the Word of God, that the entire Bible is the word of God, and that the Word of God is truth. I don't believe, as someone mentioned above, that Jesus wouldn't be so mean to His people. I believe His returning to claim his "bride" before the 7 years of the Tribulation, is a beautiful thing. It's not really "mean" to those that don't believe, because they'll get what they wanted anyway - separation from God.

I don't know, as no one can, how specific events will play out. But I believe they will in God's perfect timing and His perfect way.

That said, I'm still a democrat and also believe in impeachment. :)

I did NOT like "left behind" and do not like TIm Lahaye much

post and then sit around for hours further arguing :) My apologies for calling you out as a runner.

Are you familiar with David Plotz's Blogging the Bible project at Slate?

http://www.slate.com/id/2141050/
So, what can I possibly do? My goal is pretty simple. I want to find out what happens when an ignorant person actually reads the book on which his religion is based. I think I'm in the same position as many other lazy but faithful people (Christians, Jews, Moslems, Hindus). I love Judaism; I love (most of) the lessons it has taught me about how to live in the world; and yet I realized I am fundamentally ignorant about its foundation, its essential document. So, what will happen if I approach my Bible empty, unmediated by teachers or rabbis or parents? What will delight and horrify me? How will the Bible relate to the religion I practice, and the lessons I thought I learned in synagogue and Hebrew School?

I suspect it may interest you as much as it does me (former strict Roman Catholic, now atheist).

And I certainly will sit next to you at the impeachment table!

I'm really enjoying this blogging of the Bible. Thanks again.

1. The book of Revelation has always been considered suspect, and in fact, Martin Luther wanted to keep it out of his translation of the Bible.

2. Most theologians believe that Revelation was written as a comfort to the Christians who were undergoing persecution by the Romans, saying that Rome would soon be overthrown.

3. Revelation was NOT written by the author of the Gospel of John. This is quite certain, because their writing styles in Greek are totally different: the Gospel John writes like an educated man, and the writer of Revelation writes in a semi-literate style.

4. Jesus himself said that not even the angels in heaven know when the end of the world would come.

5. The passage usually cited for the rapture, the one about "one will be taken and one will be left," sounds EXACTLY like what happened at the bombing of Hiroshima, where people lived or died according to where they stood or sat at the moment of the blast. People who were just a few feet apart suffered different fates, due to such factors as being in the shadow of a building or near a window.

6. End times prophecy is nothing new. Whenever the world situation looks bleak, people find parallels in Revelation. This was true before the fall of Rome, during the years of the Black Death, and during every war and economic crisis that has ever occurred. Also, google "Millerites."

7. You do know that the Left Behind series is fiction, don't you? And it's not only fiction but fiction written by a close associate of Sun Myung Moon of Moonie fame. Google "Tim LaHaye"+"Unification Church" and you'll see what I mean. It's appalling that so many evangelical clergy are urging their flocks to believe this series of hate-filled books that were totally dreamed up by a guy who finds nothing wrong with working for the Moonies.

I believe in the End Times prophecies as set forth in the Bible. Whether they include a Rapture of Christ's followers is a subject of debate and I have not yet come to a definitive conclusion on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eschatology

is a part of theology and philosophy concerned with the final events in the history of the world or the ultimate destiny of mankind, commonly phrased as the end of the world. In many religions, the end of the world is a future event prophesied in sacred texts or folklore. More broadly, eschatology may encompass related concepts such as the Messiah or Messianic Age, the afterlife, and the soul.

here is a list from the same site of religions that have these theologies:

1 Zoroastrianism
2 Judaism
3 Buddhism
4 Christianity
5 Hinduism
6 Islam
7 Mormonism
8 American Indian
8.1 Hopi
8.2 Lakota
8.3 Maya
9 Norse mythology
10 Prophetic movements

would spend more time behaving like Christians in this life instead of worrying about who gets Raptured or not.

(Christian behavior might include acknowledging the people who responded thoughtfully to your OP.)

I like that many Christians are acting less like Christians, and stopped hanging and burning people at the stake. I quite like Christians these days who don't act like christians, and are instead tolerant and accepting of other viewpoints. Like the "christians" at DU!

I didn't mean to sound "preachy," actually. This End Times stuff just really gets on my nerves, precisely because it promotes intolerance by its very nature.

:hi:

Some of us don't really think "being Christian" is something to be especially proud of. If you take "acting like a christian" in perspective of the last 2 thousand years, maybe its not such a good thing, right?

Pat Robertson or William Sloan Coffin?

There have been some halfway decent Christians in the last 2000 years. They just don't get the media attention. Probably because they're working in a soup kitchen or something.

In reality, I could care less about the term Christian. It is meaningless to me in a way few people can understand. If someone tells me their christian, I just think that they have one bsically non-sensical belief. It tells me nothing about their morality or their personality.

To me, if anything, "acting like a Christian" means going to church and worshipping Jesus. Thats it.

That was more or less my point too! And it was aimed at the OP, cause s/he started the topic, then split.

(That other thread is more fun, btw.) :)

I too wish more people would worry about behaving like Christians and not claiming judgement as to who is the real Christian belongs to anyone here on earth.

Sorry about my earlier snark. It's just that phrases like "end times" and "the rapture" do bring to mind the less inclusive types of Christianity.

I know what you mean. But there really are those of us who believe and really try to be non judgemental. I posted last night just to get a flavor of the people posting.

And now it's my turn to step away from the computer. :)

..You do know that the Rapture is not in the bible? All those books that LaHaye and Co. have written are fiction and have no biblical tie at all, because the rapture is not in the bible.

in Matthew, Thessoalonians, 2Peter, etc.

But I'm a female. Wonder if it turns guys off?

took place. Once a couple became engaged, the families got together to go over every detail of the wedding except the date. Once those details were settled, the fiance and fiancee were separated. The woman was to be in a constant state of preparation. The man was to go prepare a suitable dwelling for the new couple. Once his father (His Father!) signed off his son's preparations, the groom went to claim his bride, and the wedding took place. I love that. The bride never knew when it would happen, only to be ready. The father determined when. Beautiful.

Because the idea of being the bride in that situation isn't especially appealing to this female. :)

the "Second Coming" (Parousia) of Christ, but in the "rapture". They are two different things to a lot of Chirstians. The 2nd coming of Christ is part of the doctrine/dogma of the numerous creedal denominations (...He will come again to judge the living & the dead & his kingdom shall have no end...).

All three of the Synoptic writers link the Jewish revolt against Rome (mid-60s to mid-70s CE) with supernatural omens of the end times and Jesus' reappearance. Mark was the first to tie the events together. Scholars believe he was writing in the early days of the revolt's beginnings. He called the events "the birth pangs of the new age". (Didn't Condi steal that line?)

Matthew and Luke (writing a couple decades later) follow Mark's lead and connected the presecution of Christians to the political mess as well. They go on to add that the sufferings of the Christian community will bring God's wrath on all humanity. They took Mark's "new age" and made it about the "end of the age" - the end of history as we (they) know it. Meanwhile, the people are caught up in the middle of this revolt. They have this expectation that their Messiah will return and there are plenty of false reports floating around that he has. Hence both of these Gospel writers caution that not even "the Son" knows the exact date, but when he does it will be unmistakeable.

To Matthew, the fall of Jerusalem coincided with the rise of the Christian church distinct from Judaism was an important fulfillment of part of Jesus' prophecy and the dawning of a "new age".

Most, obviously not all, scholars believe Revelation was written as a book of hope and inspriation for the Christians being persecuted by Rome. Rome recognized and allowed Jewish monotheism, so they were exempt from worshipping the "civil gods" of the Roman Empire. The Christians, now being recognized as separate and distinct from the Jews weren't allowed that same exception. Their refusal to worship the "civil gods" (along with other issues) led to some pretty hard times. Hence inspiration and hope (and maybe even prophesy) that Rome would fall.

Finally, Jesus speaks of the Kingdom of God in the Synoptic Gospels in very disparate ways. In different verses it could be taken any of the following ways: As a future event; as some unexpected event; as a hidden power that slowly grows; as a present reality; as physically present but unnoticed by us.

So, in answer to your question do I believe in the "rapture" doctrine? - nope. Do I believe in the return of Christ and the Kingdom of God? - yep. Is it already here? - Could be.... :shrug:

And I believe the Bible talks of two "second comings" The rapture is not defined in Revelations or foretold in the Gospel. It is mentioned in 2 Peter, Thessolonians and a few other books. The ultimate reappearance of our Savior is foretold throughout the New Testament and what is typically described as Bible prophecy, end time prophecy, Judgement Day, etc. The rapture cannot be predicted based on earthly events. The "end times" can somewhat be. I believe in both.

theologians on that one (actually 2 Peter as well). Both fall into the the category of pseudonymous letters. Writing under the name of a well-known author was very common back then, certainly not meant to deceive the reader but to honor and give voice an esteemed figure from the past. The pseudo authors wrote what they believed that person might have thought or said regarding an issue being dealt with at the time, if they were still alive. We can only guess at the motives.

Regarding 2 Thessolonians:
If Paul actually wrote it, why would he repeat, almost verbatim, much of what he'd already written in the first letter? More importantly, why did he suddenly completely change his eschatology from the first letter? The first letter states the Parousia comes secretly, "like a thief in the night". In the second there's a huge advertising campaign of apocalyptic signs. The second moves the eschaton into the future while the first claims the end is extremely close. Some define this change as Paul attempting to correct a misinterpretation of his teachings since there were people running around saying "the day of the Lord is already here" and they sort of stopped working and functioning as part of society. Sounds logical. But the rest of the change in tone found in 2 Thessolonians have yet to be explained. It is cryptic, and very reminiscent of the Book of Daniel - hardly "Pauline" in nature.

Regarding 2 Peter:
Again, most scholars consider it another pseudonymous letter. There's a lot of evidence that it was written long after Peter's death. It appears to attempt to defend the Parousia doctrine at a time when many had given up on the idea of Christ's return. The early church fathers even doubted it's "apostolic origin" and left it out of the lists of "approved" books (the lists from before the idea of canonization). There was as much debate about including it in what we now know as the New Testament as there was around the inclusion of Revelation. It was one of the last works to be included and is also believed to be one of the last canonical books written (100-150CE).

Please don't get me wrong, I am not knocking or challenging your faith here. Just wanted to give some food for thought and to explain why I don't buy into the Rapture frenzy. Religion has been used and abused to "shape" society through out history and Christianity has "evolved" into something far different than it was in Jesus' day. My personal preference is to go back as far as possible in history, sort of a getting back to the basics. Some people find that threatens their faith, and that's OK. I find that it strengthens mine, though it also means my faith ends up not fitting into any one sort of denominational box either. I suppose that makes me some sort of pseudo-christian, but it makes my faith just that - mine. :hi:

I don't feel you're knocking or challenging my faith at all. I wish, and I always mean to, dig deeper into the study. I think the apologistic study of the Bible is fascinating and it does strengthen my faith, as history proves itself. As far as the Rapture and future events...of course that's up to debate and I don't think any one of us has less faith for whatever interpretation of future events we come to believe. I know what I believe. I have, frankly, no idea if that's how things will ultimately play out. Who could, it's not up to us, after all. Thank you so much for your thoughtful and intelligent response. Really.

"always mean to do".

"Nor do I seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe that I may understand. For this too I believe, that unless I first believe, I shall not understand."

But after the faith is held fast, the attempt must be made to demonstrate by reason the truth of what we believe. Indeed, it is wrong not to do so:

"I hold it to be a failure in duty if after we have become steadfast in our faith we do not strive to understand what we believe."

--- (Saint) Anselm of Canterbury

:pals:

and am properly rebuked. But at least I first believe. And actually, I have worked out my own reason and understanding of it. I'm just not so good at stating it.

claim to know the mind of God?

If you have it worked out in your own reasoning and truly believe, then why the question of the opening post? Does what others believe matter?

Romans 12:2


(Just messin' witchya) :evilgrin: :hi:

I am over my head here. I didn't want to debate whether my faith was real or not. I was curious what others ON THIS BOARD believed. I think I've found the answer to my question. If I were a true evangelist, I'd pursue. It's not up to me to change another heart. It's up to God. I'll respond when I feel motivated. But I will not post for a while. And no, I do not claim to know the mind of God. I just believe.

I'm of the liberal (very!) Christian persuasion, so no, all of that tribulation stuff is not my thing.

but, i'm truly curious, why do you believe some of the New Testament, but not all? Serious question, not a slam.....

great amounts of metaphor and allegory intended. I think it was inspired by God, but written by human beings, and therefore flawed. I think it's very important to read it with an eye toward the culture of the times in which it was written. I think it's important to read it not as God's dictated rule-book and history, but as I said, a work full of art and allegory. Jesus taught in parables, we're told -- why wouldn't the bible be meant to be read in a similar way?

Think of it like this: my son's reading The Crucible right now. Now, it's entirely possible to read the play straight on -- as a thrilling emotional drama of the Salem witch trials. It certainly works just on that level. But you'd be missing so much! And you'd completely be missing Miller's intent.

You don't believe in the 'miracles' etc as literally-happened events?

That's awesome! I love meeting non-supernaturalist Christians, or what some have termed 'ethical Christians'. It's nice to see an appreciation for some fairly good (if not original) alleged teachings of Jesus, if he existed, without the buy-in to mythical stuff that has no evidence to back it up and (IMHO) dilutes the good human-created teachings.

You guys are rare, but I dig ya.

And I have no interest whatsoever in flaming you for your own privately held beliefs. As long as you're not trying to impose them on me, or using them as an excuse for bad behavior, your beliefs are absolutely immaterial to me.

If you were to suggest that we don't need to worry about global warming because the end times are almost here so it doesn't matter anyway, well then I would flame you.:hi:

but whether we disappear naked into the clouds, I don't know. I do think I will be VERY surprised if that happens. And so will a WHOLE LOT of other people! LOL.

I think probably extinction is more likely? Without the rapture part?

This is one of the things that drives me crazy about what so often passes for religious "thinking". Extinction seems a greatly more probable event than "the rapture", a totally unrealistic fantasy. What you, me, or the poster you were responding to would rather have happen matters not one bit. Truth sometimes can be bleak. Do you care about truth, or only about insulating yourself from unpleasantness?

This life is NOT easy. This life IS bleak. It is only my faith in God's promises that give me hope. To live His word, to be a better person, to know Him and love Him more. That is freedom. I've fucked up so much of my life here on earth....and I live with those earthly consequenses every day. I don't know how end time results will play out. But I believe they will. And I believe I will be a part of them. And I hope you will be also.

It's more a measure of that thing's efficacy as a drug. Sounds like you're judging the truth of a thing based on beneficial side-effects of believing in that thing.

being irrational and deliberately pulling the wool over your own eyes?

Why should anyone take anything seriously that you say or profess when your criteria for what to believe in are so shoddy?

I believe the Bible is truth. And I have faith in the Lord. It pleases me and I know it pleases the Lord. If that pisses you off, sorry. Faith is the belief in something that can't be seen.

...might as well pick the unseen things which give you the best warm fuzzies?

There are plenty of things that can't been seen. I take it you don't believe in all possible unseen things. It's the way you're expressing how you choose which among the many unseen things you choose to believe in I'm taking issue with at the moment.

The ridiculousness of those things is a separate issue.

How do you know the many unseen things I choose to believe in? I have faith in the Lord. Always will. Regardless of whether you think my argument is ridiculous or not.

...you haven't the slightest clue of what I'm even talking about. Your every response shows you completely missing nearly every point you can miss -- and no, I'm not being that unclear or difficult.

Are you trying to convince me I'm wrong? Or shouldn't have faith? Why?

:banghead:

Your response to MistressOverdone was that her worldview was bleak, and why wouldn't she rather believe in the rapture.

Kerry4Kerry's point (please correct me, K4K, if I am wrong) was that the bleakness or happiness of a worldview is not the standard we should use in choosing a worldview, rather we should have the worldview that most coincides with reality. We can't fool ourselves into thinking the world is different than what we think it is, just because that might give us solace. Rather we must bear the "bleakness" we perceive as best we are able while not fooling ourselves about its nature.

I'd rather have a great jump shot than be raptured - but that ain't gonna happen either.

Rapture would be a great party, if I were invited. Which, since I don't quite buy the concept, I might not be?

Extinction...not so much.

It's just silly.

To me it does not make sense at all.

:crazy:

Not even all Revalation literalists, believe in the "Rapture" which is more a doctorine based on one verse that doesn't have much of an explanation.
I think that there may be a big change going on soon that may or may not follow the Revalation prophecy or that of other religions. That have been many times in history that people thought that it was the end of the world or end of the age though. I think that it is best for believers to live their lives as if though they will live out a full life as will their children and only keep it in the back of their minds for if these things occurr.

Here is an interesting idea about the “rapture.” Makes sense to me.

“...the idea of the so-called ‘Rapture of the Church’ that is so popular among the evangelical and fundamentalist ‘born-again Christians’ and was the inspiration for the ‘Left Behind’ book series, it is a fantasy based on a false interpretation of scripture. It is in fact very similar to the idea that cult members of ‘Heaven’s Gate’ and Jim Jones’ ‘People’s Temple’ had, which led all of them to commit mass suicide. They think they will be magically ‘beamed up’ by God, out of this ‘evil’ world to their heavenly reward. And that idea comes mostly from one single quote from a letter Paul wrote in 1Thessalonians 4:16-17. It states: ‘The Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God. And the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we that are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air, and so shall we ever be with the Lord."

“This single subject could be discussed at great length, because there is dispute even among Christians about it, and there are valid questions about when this event did occur or would occur. After all, Paul said ‘we that are alive,’ which certainly could have meant he was talking about himself and his fellow Christians at the time. Another view, however, is that Paul was not writing of a literal event, at least not one that would take place in this world. Remember, John also wrote that Jesus spoke of coming ‘in the air’ and followed that by saying, ‘If I go to prepare a place for you, I will come again to receive you unto myself, that where I am, there you may be also.’ (John 14:3) In saying that, Jesus was not talking about this world. He was talking about the wonderful spiritual possibility of ‘meeting him where he is now.’ He was not talking about a literal and physical ‘second coming’ in the material world. As I discussed earlier, Jesus was talking about what has happened and can still happen in the ethereal ‘air’ that is the realm of the spirit. He was talking about a spiritual ‘meeting’ or union — the union of the human spirit-soul which is ‘carried away in the spirit’ to meet with the Holy Spirit which “comes down out of heaven from God” (as is mentioned in Revelations 21:9-10).

“(The idea of ‘the rapture’ has been misinterpreted by certain misguided Christian groups and cults as an event that all ‘saved’ and ‘born-again’ Christians will experience at the ‘second coming’ of Jesus. But they wait in vain for such an event. The actual rapture, the baptism in the Holy Spirit and resulting spiritual rebirth is an experience that happens to individuals, each in their own time and each in their own way. And it’s a very rare event.”

The above was quoted from What IS the World Coming To? by Joseph J. Adamson.

Http://realprophecyunveiled.netfirms.com

I meant to pick up reading his books after a thread you started on him last spring. Interesting author.

I am so glad to hear from those who also recognize the truth in the works of the messenger who writes under the pen name of Joseph J. Adamson. Those of us who are trying to spread the word often find it frustrating, because most people have been cynical, skeptical, or worse. All we can do is keep on trying.