Matthew 10:34-38 becomes a disturbing reality when you begin following Jesus

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Jesus is the one that said that, not the Catholics.

Didn't you say earlier that what is in Revelation has yet to pass? That it is the book of prophecies? If Jesus has already sent the 7 letters, why is it in the book of prophecies? The book that tells of things that have yet to pass?

edit on 7-8-2012 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)

Because in chapter one John is told to write " what you have seen, what is, and what is to come hereafter". What John had seen up to that point was the vision of Christ (ch. 1), what "is" would be the letters to the 7 churches (chapters 2 & 3), and "hereafter" would be the vision of Daniel's 70th week and the 1000 year reign of Christ. (Ch 4-22)

The Greek word for hereafter is "metatouta". Chapter 4:1 begins with the word "metatouta".

reply to post by NOTurTypical


I added an edit to the post you replied to here.

Ok, thanks for clearing that up for me.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


Because Jesus never wrote a gospel. I thought you were asking me why He did not write a NT book. The only thing from Christ was seven letters dictated orally to John to write which appear in Revelation chapters 2 & 3.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


There is speculation that Jesus was illiterate, which is why he made others write it for him. That fact alone brings his divinity in question, because god gave him all these abilities yet left him illiterate, which seems a bit strange.

Also, the fact that the gospels are based entirely on hearsay calls into question the validity of the stories, in my opinion.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


It's not heresay, it's eyewitness testimony. That's the greatest form of evidence next to video evidence. Million of court cases hinged on eyewitness testimony. And Jesus was not illiterate, He began His public ministry reading from scrolls in synagogues and wrote in the sand when the woman caught in adultery was brought to Him. Perhaps you're thinking of Peter who was illiterate. Mark wrote his gospel account for him and Silvanus wrote 1 Peter as his amanuensis.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Why doesn't it ever specify what he wrote? You can write a line in the sand and it not mean anything.

Luke 4:16-20
16 He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read, 17 and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:

18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

20 Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him.

So he was handed the scroll of Isaiah, and when he reads it, it refers to 'me', so what he was reading was referring to Isaiah, not Jesus. But that's beside the point, something that short can easily be memorized if repeated to someone enough.

I know that is speculation on my part, but it is definitely a possibility.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


The prophecy was about Him, the Messiah.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


So he inserted the 'me' in there himself. That implies that he was not reading it, but paraphrasing.

If he was reading it word for word, why would Isaiah implement 'me' instead of 'him'?

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

So he inserted the 'me' in there himself. That implies that he was not reading it, but paraphrasing.

If he was reading it word for word, why would Isaiah implement 'me' instead of 'him'?

Because the prophecy was about Him. He didn't speak in the third person. Christ was not illiterate, Peter was.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Usually when you read something, you read it word for word, not insert words that aren't in the text.

If he was not illiterate then why didn't he write his own gospel instead of getting others to write it for him? It would have saved a whole lot of confusion and skepticism.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
We are the biblical Satan, not some invisible force that can't be detected, WE ARE. The bible says whoever receives the mark of the beast (money) will be thrown in hell. We have received money and we have already been cast into hell on Earth.

edit on 7-8-2012 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)

Note, 'Satan' is just a term or a title. You can earn the title like Jesus called Peter satan when Peter tried to save Jesus life which would not fulfill his mission on Earth.

This is not hell yet. Hell is for the destruction and imprisonment of souls, not just the body. Money had existed in the time of Jesus and the principle and the cravings for money was the same back then as it is now, it controlled people (Judas). It's the same dirty 'ol money used to buy and sell. Many of Jesus disciples were very much in the world and had their own trades before following Jesus. But when they repented and followed Jesus, the course of their lives changed. So nobody is doomed yet.

reply to post by ahnggk


Aren't our souls trapped in our bodies during this life? Aren't our bodies trapped on this planet for this life? So it goes to reason that our souls are trapped within hell on Earth.

Hell on Earth was here before either you and me were born and it will be here long after we die.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Usually when you read something, you read it word for word, not insert words that aren't in the text.

If he was not illiterate then why didn't he write his own gospel instead of getting others to write it for him? It would have saved a whole lot of confusion and skepticism.

The only reason there is confusion is poor scholarship, the reason there is skepticism is men are rebellious and immoral and Christ taught against both of those.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


I am not rebellious or immoral, yet I am still skeptical. I am not a scholar, but I'm not confused by what the true message is either.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


It doesn't really matter, we should still learn to love what God loves, righteousness, peace, justice, equality, wisdom, welfare of all other creatures above self.

Should we be doomed to hell, we should still help those that are suffering from the injustices of this system. I've seen a lot of suffering, been on many places around the world. It really pains me when I'm living in comfort while seeing other people and animals starve.

I'm prepared to give this all up and I'm telling you, many people who are close to me, many Christians, will hate me.

I think it's well worth we made a difference in our fleeting existence in this life.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

I am not rebellious or immoral, yet I am still skeptical. I am not a scholar, but I'm not confused by what the true message is either.

We are all by nature rebellious and immoral. Everyone. There are a plethora of scholars available to read.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


I am past the immoral stage of my life. I no longer hold myself above others as I used to do while I was Christian. The fact that you 'know' you're getting into heaven while others won't means you hold yourself above them. You think you are worthy while they are not.

I am no longer rebellious either, I have matured more in the past year than I did through my first 22 years.

No scholar from the time that Jesus was alive ever mentioned him, not one. The Romans never mentioned him, yet they mention many other so-called 'messiahs' from that time period. I find that fact alone highly suspect.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

I am past the immoral stage of my life. I no longer hold myself above others as I used to do while I was Christian. The fact that you 'know' you're getting into heaven while others won't means you hold yourself above them. You think you are worthy while they are not.

I am no longer rebellious either, I have matured more in the past year than I did through my first 22 years.

No scholar from the time that Jesus was alive ever mentioned him, not one. The Romans never mentioned him, yet they mention many other so-called 'messiahs' from that time period. I find that fact alone highly suspect.

But when God judges your morality He doesn't compare you to the bozo down the street who beats his wife, He judges you in perfect righteousness compared to Christ.

reply to post by ahnggk


I agree 100% that we should love one another. You don't need Jesus in order to know that.

How can you have equality when you don't put yourself on the same level as others? I get what you're trying to say, but holding yourself below others means you are inferior, and when you feel inferior you are easily manipulated.

You shouldn't hold yourself above others, but neither should you hold yourself below them.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


I thought Jesus could have no equal? If god judges us compared to Jesus, that means no-one would get into heaven because he has no equal.

If we actually can be an equal to what Jesus was, then how does that make Jesus so special?