As it was in the days of Noah

Originally posted by GameKeeper
the god you speak of is their God.

Nope. He is my God also. He is the only true God.

It's rained half the time in the past 2 or 3 weeks where I am. I can't even remember the last time it didn't rain for 40 days.

While being awake, they sleep spiritually and do not hear.

Originally posted by truejew
While being awake, they sleep spiritually and do not hear.

Some do. All expressions of faith get bashed on this site. The scoffers and skeptics will have their reward. Remember that God's plan involves most folks not being awake spiritually in this life.

Oh dear is that pesky insecure biblical god going to slaughter everyone.............again?

It/he/she's one of those "do as I say, not as I do" guys huh?

Originally posted by Prezbo369
Oh dear is that pesky insecure biblical god going to slaughter everyone.............again?

It/he/she's one of those "do as I say, not as I do" guys huh?

He is going to stop us from slaughtering ourselves....... again.

reply to post by truejew


He's going to stop us from slaughtering ourselves by depriving us of rain until we slowly suffer to death. Praise the lord!

reply to post by truejew

He is going to stop us from slaughtering ourselves....... again.

Over 6 billion global population, and most, if not all, of the world superpowers have agreed not to use nuclear weapons.

Slaughtering ourselves? Please. When's the last time your god showed up and stopped anyone from dying?

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I think the opportune time for him to show up would have been before WW1 or 2, but alas, no show once again.

I don't understand why some believe he is coming now, he's had the past 2,000 years to show himself. Countless wars have been started within that time frame where countless people have been slaughtered, but I guess he was just too darn busy at the time to worry about them.

reply to post by truejew

We are living in the days before the tribulation.

Someone could probably think that, if they believed that Revelation was written in the Second Century, rather than by someone who was a contemporary of the Apostles.
A conservative Christian view of the canonical New Testament would place Revelation before the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple there, making the prime candidate of a foretold tribulation that very event.
Probably a more traditional Christian view of things like the end of the world would be something like eventually every person on Earth believes in Jesus, then he returns to change everyone into immortals, and raises the dead who died in Christ into that same state. Then Jesus presides in person among those who are now entering into a new era which was the goal of Jesus in the first place.

The mocking has begun as in the days of Noah.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by truejew

 

We are living in the days before the tribulation.

Someone could probably think that, if they believed that Revelation was written in the Second Century, rather than by someone who was a contemporary of the Apostles.
A conservative Christian view of the canonical New Testament would place Revelation before the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple there, making the prime candidate of a foretold tribulation that very event.
Probably a more traditional Christian view of things like the end of the world would be something like eventually every person on Earth believes in Jesus, then he returns to change everyone into immortals, and raises the dead who died in Christ into that same state. Then Jesus presides in person among those who are now entering into a new era which was the goal of Jesus in the first place.

edit on 18-8-2012 by jmdewey60 because: add Bible quote: "For the creation eagerly waits for the revelation of the sons of God." Romans 8:19

The events in the book of Revelation is still future. The temple was not fully destroyed in 70 AD.

reply to post by truejew

The events in the book of Revelation is still future.

All of them? So all that "things that must soon come to pass" was lies?

The temple was not fully destroyed in 70 AD.

What do you mean by "fully destroyed", do you mean the earth beneath it? Get real!

reply to post by jmdewey60


Jesus said not one stone shall be left upon another. That was not fulfilled in 70 AD.

reply to post by truejew


17
For forty years the rainbow will not be seen.
For forty years it will be seen every day.
The dry earth will grow more parched,
and there will be great floods when it is seen.


The ark is indeed here.
40 years ago there was the world's worst drought
After 40 years it will be seen everyday, and there will be great floods when it is seen.

***

The Prophet has a saying about this, truejew
I'm sure you won't be pleased.

Q

reply to post by truejew

Jesus said not one stone shall be left upon another. That was not fulfilled in 70 AD.

Look at any photo of the temple mount and point out one stone from the temple which stood when Jesus made his prophecy.
To simplify things, take that as a rhetorical question.
Take that historical event as a sort of Judgment from above and up there overseeing it was Jesus, returned from heaven. This is surely what the writer of Matthew had in mind and what the people who later published and distributed the book had in mind.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by truejew

 

Jesus said not one stone shall be left upon another. That was not fulfilled in 70 AD.

Look at any photo of the temple mount and point out one stone from the temple which stood when Jesus made his prophecy.
To simplify things, take that as a rhetorical question.
Take that historical event as a sort of Judgment from above and up there overseeing it was Jesus, returned from heaven. This is surely what the writer of Matthew had in mind and what the people who later published and distributed the book had in mind.

There are many stones still left upon another. Here is a study on it. Pictures included.

jesus-messiah.com...

reply to post by truejew

There are many stones still left upon another. Here is a study on it. Pictures included.

That is just using semantics carried to the point of absurdity
There was an attempt at a temple rebuilding by various rebel groups before they were finally driven out for good by Hadrian. Also there would have been other buildings set up there during the Middle Ages which would account for why there were stone up there to be pushed off later.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Nope. There are still original stones upon another. You should read the study.

reply to post by truejew

Nope. There are still original stones upon another. You should read the study.

Rubble lying a hundred yards away from where the actual temple was . . this proves to you that somehow the temple is still alive and well? So what is your point and don't direct me to some crazy blog?