Tracking Earth's Future via Current Events, etc.

[aretood2]

There are people who see climate change as a sign of the impending end. Man's sin ruining the earth. Then the resistance to accepting that is further symbolic of man's inability to accept its own errors and continue down the same path.

[Gatefan1976]

There are people who see climate change as a sign of the impending end. Man's sin ruining the earth. Then the resistance to accepting that is further symbolic of man's inability to accept its own errors and continue down the same path.

Yeah, but we can -actually- do something about it Tood, there is nothing you can do for prophecy, it just is.
What gets me is that it is -generally- evangelicals who believe this, and they are -generally- in the group who either don't believe in climate change, or "worse" -look forward- to it happening.

I find that disturbing, don't you?

[SGalisa]

Yeah, but we can -actually- do something about it Tood, there is nothing you can do for prophecy, it just is.

True, there is nothing we can do to *change*prophecy* --IF-- it actually comes true.
And Yes, there are some things we CAN do about our environment. I just think *some* of the regulations and proposals thereof are a bit on the ridiculous side -- because I doubt if TPTB in control of enforcement haven't thought entirely thru ALL scenarios regarding some of their crazy ideas -- such as driving all electric vehicles and cutting down on the power line grid. Duh! Where do they think all that electricity comes from? Thin air? Oh ... forgot.. windmill power. Not enough to generate what we need to survive.


Solar power.. only good on sunny days and need storage unit to hold the energy absorbed.
Water power -- I've seen several of those. Except our rivers are drying up, thus drying up the dams. Niagra Falls is shrinking, too. Yet, TPTB are worried about the oceans rising. Problem is -- the internal land mass aquifers are drying up in some places, surface flooding in other places from severe storms, but not enough ends up in the reservoirs or aquifers to sustain the populations of the land mass.

I'm not done yet with this energy issue.. More to come later.. if I get time to discuss it.
And amazingly -- THE BIBLE agrees with the hotter HEAT waves (increasing in earth's average temps) and rising water *theory*/scientific mumbo-jumbo.. It took me a while to figure it out, but the waters might be rising -- just not in the way Al Gore and company have been installing fear-mongering into this world's various minds.

What gets me is that it is -generally- evangelicals who believe this, and they are -generally- in the group who either don't believe in climate change, or "worse" -look forward- to it happening.

I find that disturbing, don't you?

Seriously, I do NOT look forward to what is yet to come. It was never painted as a *pretty* picture, but one instead of chronic disease(s), famine, drought, flood, the same old -- same old, but on a greater scale than ever seen before.

I think the reason why some Bible believers *might* eagerly look forward to such times coming, is because many of them do NOT believe that they will be living on this planet when that time of disaster will be occurring on this earth----aka, the RAPTURE will occur prior to the worst events occurring.

However, me being a realist also sees life this way -- if God didn't spare the previous "believers" from the disasters the fell upon the millions of folks who suffered thru World Wars I and II and all the wars, disasters prior, what makes any other future event so exempting the new believers from not going thru more terrible times than what their parents and grandparents had to live thru? I keep hearing about "the elect" being spared having to suffer thru the worst of times yet to come, but at what point is that and how is it accomplished? There are plenty of non-bible believing folks out there who probably wouldn't hesitate to find ways to send the living off this planet for good.. and that means death is the only way out..

Sorry, but (death--) that's not very comforting. Not in my lifetime. And YES, it is disturbing when thought of in that manner.

Me.. I have my druthers. I've been thru enough personal crisises to continuously brace myself for the unexpected in the negative zone. If more pleasant moments occur instead on an individual basis, whew! It's just a short breather, and never seems to last long enough from my POV. The way this world is heading, seems any short moment of solitude is definitely being very short lived.

[Gatefan1976]

Let me cast aside all "reasonableness" for a moment here and speak to you as one believer, to another believer, one who's beliefs -also- have an "end time" event to come.
OK?

True, there is nothing we can do to *change*prophecy* --IF-- it actually comes true.

Prophecy is unalterable, it is eventual, it -will- happen if that prophecy is true and comes from an "all knowing" source.
Loki will set forth on his ship, Fenris will break his chains and Ragnarok will fall upon all, That's my prophecy.

And Yes, there are some things we CAN do about our environment. I just think *some* of the regulations and proposals thereof are a bit on the ridiculous side -- because I doubt if TPTB in control of enforcement haven't thought entirely thru ALL scenarios regarding some of their crazy ideas -- such as driving all electric vehicles and cutting down on the power line grid. Duh! Where do they think all that electricity comes from? Thin air? Oh ... forgot.. windmill power. Not enough to generate what we need to survive.

Do you think electric cars run on thin air -now-?
We have plenty of hybrid and all electric vehicles right now that run on battery power, and if we can figure out effective ways to charge those batteries without needing grids to connect every home, then we move forward.

Solar power.. only good on sunny days and need storage unit to hold the energy absorbed.

Depends on what you are harvesting, and how good your batteries technology is.

Water power -- I've seen several of those. Except our rivers are drying up, thus drying up the dams. Niagra Falls is shrinking, too. Yet, TPTB are worried about the oceans rising. Problem is -- the internal land mass aquifers are drying up in some places, surface flooding in other places from severe storms, but not enough ends up in the reservoirs or aquifers to sustain the populations of the land mass.

Yes, that's climate change at work.

Quite frankly, all I am hearing -right now- is "throw it in the too hard basket", and that is -exactly- the attitude that concerns "non-believers" It's the thought patterns that lead to things like Waco, and ISIS.

I'm not done yet with this energy issue.. More to come later.. if I get time to discuss it.
And amazingly -- THE BIBLE agrees with the hotter HEAT waves (increasing in earth's average temps) and rising water *theory*/scientific mumbo-jumbo.. It took me a while to figure it out, but the waters might be rising -- just not in the way Al Gore and company have been installing fear-mongering into this world's various minds.

Sigh.
So, the "climate change people" are bad for installing "fear mongering", but teaching children that they are inherently flawed, and will suffer either unspeakable torment, or disconnection from the divine for not "accepting Jesus" into their hearts is what exactly?
Oh, and that's not just because you die because of your own stupid choices and turn to nothingness, but until the hands of time chime their last.
That is the choice given, believe or suffer for -eternity-, or just, die for your own stupidity.
Which one here is -really- selling the fear?

Seriously, I do NOT look forward to what is yet to come. It was never painted as a *pretty* picture, but one instead of chronic disease(s), famine, drought, flood, the same old -- same old, but on a greater scale than ever seen before.

Then why concern yourself with it?
Better question, why try to equate the now to the prophecy?
Here is where we diverge, I -know- what the prophecy states, but I -also- know that as inevitable as it may be, it is not the end of hope, nor life. A few Gods survive, a few people survive, and the cycle moves on. Death, change, rebirth -these things- are inevitable, but to stop all life, all existence, and lock them in a "box" of judgement is truly unnatural.

I think the reason why some Bible believers *might* eagerly look forward to such times coming, is because many of them do NOT believe that they will be living on this planet when that time of disaster will be occurring on this earth----aka, the RAPTURE will occur prior to the worst events occurring.

It's not just biblical folk, why do you think ISIS terrorists can continue to recruit people?
Your "end-game" is simply that, the end-game. Make your choice, before you are damned for not making one. That is no way to live, it is soul destroying.

However, me being a realist also sees life this way -- if God didn't spare the previous "believers" from the disasters the fell upon the millions of folks who suffered thru World Wars I and II and all the wars, disasters prior, what makes any other future event so exempting the new believers from not going thru more terrible times than what their parents and grandparents had to live thru?

Disasters?
What Disasters?
Those things are "car crashes", things that exist purely because of the decisions of -people-, they are not "accidents".

I keep hearing about "the elect" being spared having to suffer thru the worst of times yet to come, but at what point is that and how is it accomplished?

It's your story SG, how can I answer that?

There are plenty of non-bible believing folks out there who probably wouldn't hesitate to find ways to send the living off this planet for good.. and that means death is the only way out..

And how many "holy book" believing folks have sent the living shuffling off this mortal coil?
Not for good mind you, but so they can get their "real punishment"?

Sorry, but (death--) that's not very comforting. Not in my lifetime. And YES, it is disturbing when thought of in that manner.

Good, it is supposed to be disturbing, because that sense of unease is what other people sense in some people's beliefs, and being able to step outside those beliefs and realise how "your beliefs" make others feel.

Me.. I have my druthers. I've been thru enough personal crisises to continuously brace myself for the unexpected in the negative zone. If more pleasant moments occur instead on an individual basis, whew! It's just a short breather, and never seems to last long enough from my POV. The way this world is heading, seems any short moment of solitude is definitely being very short lived.

Then your worldview is that bad is to be expected. Are you happy about how your God has made you view the world?

[aretood2]

Yeah, but we can -actually- do something about it Tood, there is nothing you can do for prophecy, it just is.
What gets me is that it is -generally- evangelicals who believe this, and they are -generally- in the group who either don't believe in climate change, or "worse" -look forward- to it happening.

I find that disturbing, don't you?

The people of Nineveh were able to do something about prophecy. The whole reason Jonah ran from delivering God's prophecy of Nineveh's destruction was that he knew that they would repent from their evil ways and God in turn would spare the city...which ended up happening. Sometimes prophecy is a warning of what might be, not of what will be. Nothing horrible in the Revelations is bound to happen irrelevant of people's actions. If anything, humanity changing its ways would change things. The prophecy would still hold true. We have already been through tribulations, famines, wars, plagues, despotic rulers who mislead the people, and so on.

Samaria and Jerusalem, unlike Nineveh, did not head the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah. So they did fall.

The question is, are we going to bring about the fate of Samaria and Jerusalem or the fate of Nineveh?

[Gatefan1976]

The people of Nineveh were able to do something about prophecy. The whole reason Jonah ran from delivering God's prophecy of Nineveh's destruction was that he knew that they would repent from their evil ways and God in turn would spare the city...which ended up happening. Sometimes prophecy is a warning of what might be, not of what will be. Nothing horrible in the Revelations is bound to happen irrelevant of people's actions. If anything, humanity changing its ways would change things. The prophecy would still hold true. We have already been through tribulations, famines, wars, plagues, despotic rulers who mislead the people, and so on.

Samaria and Jerusalem, unlike Nineveh, did not head the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah. So they did fall.

The question is, are we going to bring about the fate of Samaria and Jerusalem or the fate of Nineveh?

Ummm................
No.
Prophecy is not "dire warning's" or "predictions", and to conflate the two is disingenuous at best.
Revelations is not a "warning" or "keep doing that and see what happens". Those are predictions based on previous knowledge. Revelations (biblically speaking) is the revealed word of God of what WILL happen. The punishment for not "accepting God into your heart" is not a prediction, it is Biblical fact.

Does the Bible sometimes contain warnings for behaviour, that if altered can be avoided?
Sure.
Is revelations one of those things?
Not at all.

[aretood2]

Ummm................
No.
Prophecy is not "dire warning's" or "predictions", and to conflate the two is disingenuous at best.
Revelations is not a "warning" or "keep doing that and see what happens". Those are predictions based on previous knowledge. Revelations (biblically speaking) is the revealed word of God of what WILL happen. The punishment for not "accepting God into your heart" is not a prediction, it is Biblical fact.

What happens if the whole world accepts God into its heart? As for prophecy, its more along the lines of preaching. Which is actually how Jews define a prophet. They don't consider all the people of the bible to be prophets even though they may see "the future" because they don't all have a preaching component to it. Prophecy along those same lines is supposed to deal with teaching/preaching.

Does the Bible sometimes contain warnings for behaviour, that if altered can be avoided?
Sure.
Is revelations one of those things?
Not at all.

Why not? Why bother writing about it then? Isn't the standard "You will die/go to hell" enough?

[Gatefan1976]

What happens if the whole world accepts God into its heart? As for prophecy, its more along the lines of preaching. Which is actually how Jews define a prophet. They don't consider all the people of the bible to be prophets even though they may see "the future" because they don't all have a preaching component to it. Prophecy along those same lines is supposed to deal with teaching/preaching.

If the whole world accepts god?
I don't know Tood, but IIRC, that is biblically impossible.
As for Prophecy, what you are suggesting is not really prophecy, and I am not sure how Judaism interprets prophecy is relevant to it either. Revelations, when penned was far removed from Judaism, and was not used to preach, but to lay out -in specific detail- what WILL happen, regardless of humanities choices. I could be wrong here, but SG's thread here seems to be predominantly dealing with revelations, so I feel that distinction is worth bearing in mind.

Why not? Why bother writing about it then? Isn't the standard "You will die/go to hell" enough?

Because that is not how revelations is written dude. Why did they write it? God told them to via angel express. Perhaps as a point of differentiation? I don't know.

[aretood2]

If the whole world accepts god?
I don't know Tood, but IIRC, that is biblically impossible.

Why? Linguistically, there's nothing in revelations that is different from God's prophecy of Nineveh's doom...the doom that never happened.

As for Prophecy, what you are suggesting is not really prophecy, and I am not sure how Judaism interprets prophecy is relevant to it either. Revelations, when penned was far removed from Judaism, and was not used to preach, but to lay out -in specific detail- what WILL happen, regardless of humanities choices. I could be wrong here, but SG's thread here seems to be predominantly dealing with revelations, so I feel that distinction is worth bearing in mind.

How does the Bible define prophecy? I mean our understanding today in the 21st century is nice and all. But what is the definition as used at the time of its writing? I'm prying because you're speaking in such a definite way. I see nothing in the book that makes it unalterable.

The structure is, that X will happen to those who do not accept God and do his will. While Y will happen to those that do. If there is no one who fails to do God's will...then who will get X? Nothing in the Bible says that everyone can't be saved (Okay, I lied, but that detail isn't in Revelations).

Just playing the um....contrary advocate (Can't use "devil's" in this context).

Because that is not how revelations is written dude. Why did they write it? God told them to via angel express. Perhaps as a point of differentiation? I don't know.

But here is how I see it. Are the events foretold all supposed to be material or spiritual or a mix? How does one tell which is which? There is no need to know what everything means, it was written for both people of those times and of these times. But in the end, it highlights the promise given to God's faithful of living in a new earth and new heavens where there are no woes as described. It's not so much so that we can find out if the hour is a hand, but so that we may understand the hope we have.

But to your question, if it worries me that some people are excited about the disasters that they see foretold in Revelations...well...in the other thread it seems that FH thought that Imzadi feeling sorry for people was somehow wrong. So what is it? Should we rejoice or feel bad about it?

To be honest, from what I have seen. People who rejoice in the idea of Armageddon tend to be of the same variety of "Christians" that I find the most bothersome for a variety of reasons. As for me, the further back we can push it (if possible) the better...so please remember the 3 R's.

[Gatefan1976]

Why? Linguistically, there's nothing in revelations that is different from God's prophecy of Nineveh's doom...the doom that never happened.

Hang on, you sure you quoted the right thing here?
What I was speaking about was I don't think there is any time in the bible where "everyone accepts God". I could be wrong, but I don't think so.
As for Ninevah, again, IIRC, it was indeed destroyed. (had to go look this one up, but Nahum reads like "we warned you buddy, and while you did not get struck down right away, you still burned" (forgive the modern interpretation)

How does the Bible define prophecy? I mean our understanding today in the 21st century is nice and all. But what is the definition as used at the time of its writing? I'm prying because you're speaking in such a definite way. I see nothing in the book that makes it unalterable.

Well, you are discussing 2 religions, even if one "builds on" the other, so why assume their version of prophecy is the same?
-from what I understand-, both still come to pass, Revelations even more so because it is pretty much the "so long and thanks for all the fish" endgame. Nahum -seems- to be just an example of Gods wrath against the believers of other Gods who persecuted the Jews, it's not the "end" of the world.

The structure is, that X will happen to those who do not accept God and do his will. While Y will happen to those that do. If there is no one who fails to do God's will...then who will get X? Nothing in the Bible says that everyone can't be saved (Okay, I lied, but that detail isn't in Revelations).

Just playing the um....contrary advocate (Can't use "devil's" in this context).

Sure, but as you say yourself, while that detail is not in revelations, it is certainly woven into the prophecy that the unbelievers will rise up against the "true king".
As you know yourself, there is much variation in the numbers of who can and cannot be saved, but I don't recall that ever being an "infinite number", there is always a "cut off" point.

But here is how I see it. Are the events foretold all supposed to be material or spiritual or a mix? How does one tell which is which? There is no need to know what everything means, it was written for both people of those times and of these times. But in the end, it highlights the promise given to God's faithful of living in a new earth and new heavens where there are no woes as described. It's not so much so that we can find out if the hour is a hand, but so that we may understand the hope we have.

Well, the whole trumpets thing is pretty darn literal dude!!
As for it being written "for then and now", how can you say that if you question what is or is not prophecy? I mean, you did say it was nice and all to use modern meanings, but how would we know? Would that same level of uncertainty exist today due to a mis-interpretation?

But to your question, if it worries me that some people are excited about the disasters that they see foretold in Revelations...well...in the other thread it seems that FH thought that Imzadi feeling sorry for people was somehow wrong. So what is it? Should we rejoice or feel bad about it?

You will note that I kept out of that particular discussion
In short, I think tone is not conveyed well in text.

To be honest, from what I have seen. People who rejoice in the idea of Armageddon tend to be of the same variety of "Christians" that I find the most bothersome for a variety of reasons. As for me, the further back we can push it (if possible) the better...so please remember the 3 R's.

Reading, Riting and Rithmatic?
I find them bothersome, and I find them dangerous. Spending all this life waiting for the next tends to not instil much value in this one.

[aretood2]

Hang on, you sure you quoted the right thing here?
What I was speaking about was I don't think there is any time in the bible where "everyone accepts God". I could be wrong, but I don't think so.
As for Ninevah, again, IIRC, it was indeed destroyed. (had to go look this one up, but Nahum reads like "we warned you buddy, and while you did not get struck down right away, you still burned" (forgive the modern interpretation)

Yeah, well Nineveh went back to its old ways by Nahum's time. As for the first part of your post here, technically there is some mentioning about many not making it by Jesus...so...technically you are right. But in theory, it can be done. And that was my point. In theory.

Well, you are discussing 2 religions, even if one "builds on" the other, so why assume their version of prophecy is the same?
-from what I understand-, both still come to pass, Revelations even more so because it is pretty much the "so long and thanks for all the fish" endgame. Nahum -seems- to be just an example of Gods wrath against the believers of other Gods who persecuted the Jews, it's not the "end" of the world.

Oh the world ending is a give in. There's no way around that. It's the matter of what happens to everyone at the end. It's important to note that there needs to be an out for it to be just. God in his wisdom does reveal that not everyone takes that out. That's the fate of those who will (Or, depending on the specific religion, the fate of those who have) refuse to take that "out".

As to Jewish views...read James and take out the half dozen or so references to Jesus and you end up with a book that is indistinguishable from that of a Midrash (A Jewish writing concerning the Torah). The writers of the NT were Jewish, raised Jewish, within a Jewish context. One of them was even educated in everything Jewish at that time! Also important is that a huge amount of the symbolism, the visions, and the events in Revelations are copies of different visions and events from the OT. I mean a humongous amount.

Sure, but as you say yourself, while that detail is not in revelations, it is certainly woven into the prophecy that the unbelievers will rise up against the "true king".
As you know yourself, there is much variation in the numbers of who can and cannot be saved, but I don't recall that ever being an "infinite number", there is always a "cut off" point.

Yeah, like I mentioned above there are references of those who don't make it for various reasons. At which point it becomes complicated. At this point I do want to mention that it is important (and I say this generally) to realize that it is a huge mistake to read revelations without the benefit of the rest of the Bible and the viewpoints that go with it.

Well, the whole trumpets thing is pretty darn literal dude!!
As for it being written "for then and now", how can you say that if you question what is or is not prophecy? I mean, you did say it was nice and all to use modern meanings, but how would we know? Would that same level of uncertainty exist today due to a mis-interpretation?

Trumpets...no. I mean...if they are literal, then what's the point? Only someone next to the trumpet would be able to hear it. So what's the point? And it's not a human blowing it either...begs a couple questions.

Take the moon turning red. Jews based their calendar on the lunar phases. The moon goes red, as red as blood, many times. It's an odd sign of the end of the world for a people who clearly know that it is a natural phase of the moon. And before you say "Not Jewish" the red moon is featured in the OT as well. Revelations borrows that imagery from the OT. It borrows a whole lot of things from the OT.

As to how we would know. Well that's a excellent question to ask. How can we know God's will if all we have to go by is a written word with no way to insure "proper" interpretation?

Reading, Riting and Rithmatic?
I find them bothersome, and I find them dangerous. Spending all this life waiting for the next tends to not instil much value in this one.

Don't know about the value of life thing. Life is what you make it. But they ignore a great deal of things. First of all, they are worried about the end of the world, when they themselves can easily die before it ever happens. Second of all, they tend to try to predict with certainty when it will happen when Jesus himself said that not even he knows, only God knows and he aint tellin'. Third of all, they revolve their lives around the end, they forget to deal with actually being Christian. I'm not of the "Salvation by faith alone" variety. Faith breeds deeds and deeds keep faith alive (as per James). People who focus on the end don't usually focus on living...I guess that's what you meant?

[Gatefan1976]

Yeah, well Nineveh went back to its old ways by Nahum's time. As for the first part of your post here, technically there is some mentioning about many not making it by Jesus...so...technically you are right. But in theory, it can be done. And that was my point. In theory.

Well, if you want to talk "in theory", then sure, you would avoid the need for "final judgement", so in theory yes, all the peoples of the world could convert to Christianity. I don't know how you would sell that, but sure.

Oh the world ending is a give in. There's no way around that. It's the matter of what happens to everyone at the end. It's important to note that there needs to be an out for it to be just. God in his wisdom does reveal that not everyone takes that out. That's the fate of those who will (Or, depending on the specific religion, the fate of those who have) refuse to take that "out".

That's why it is prophecy, not prediction dude
The question arises about the "opt out", and weather it is really an opt out, and that is tied into the notion of free will. What is the value of free will if you are punished for exercising it?

As to Jewish views...read James and take out the half dozen or so references to Jesus and you end up with a book that is indistinguishable from that of a Midrash (A Jewish writing concerning the Torah). The writers of the NT were Jewish, raised Jewish, within a Jewish context. One of them was even educated in everything Jewish at that time!

Umm, no.
What is codified and considered "the NT" was not formally decided until far, far after who may have written the first parts of the NT, some 7-10 generations removed from the events surrounding Jesus, so no, I'm not going to buy into that. Are some parts similar? For sure they are, they are also similar to other religions, -as is Judaism- for that matter, so be careful when opening the "similar to" door.

Also important is that a huge amount of the symbolism, the visions, and the events in Revelations are copies of different visions and events from the OT. I mean a humongous amount.

Oh, I know that, I also know that many visions and events are based on even older belief systems, so I don't know how going down this path helps you at all.

Yeah, like I mentioned above there are references of those who don't make it for various reasons. At which point it becomes complicated. At this point I do want to mention that it is important (and I say this generally) to realize that it is a huge mistake to read revelations without the benefit of the rest of the Bible and the viewpoints that go with it.

Sure, it should not be "read alone", I would -encourage- any person interested in the religions of Moses to read their biblical works, same as I would encourage any person to read what is extant of any other religion to read their various holy or important works.

Trumpets...no. I mean...if they are literal, then what's the point? Only someone next to the trumpet would be able to hear it. So what's the point? And it's not a human blowing it either...begs a couple questions.

I mean the events after the trumpets, and IIRC, the trumpets are heard around the world, so going literal here does not help.

Take the moon turning red. Jews based their calendar on the lunar phases. The moon goes red, as red as blood, many times. It's an odd sign of the end of the world for a people who clearly know that it is a natural phase of the moon. And before you say "Not Jewish" the red moon is featured in the OT as well. Revelations borrows that imagery from the OT. It borrows a whole lot of things from the OT.

Umm, 13 months a year, lunar based calendars did not "appear" with Moses, so I don't know where you are trying to go here.
See, this is where people can get annoyed, this notion that "before Judaism" there was no religion, or even worse, the was no "real" religion because there were no "real gods" (even though there are multiple commandments specifically referring to other gods existing, so riddle me that one batman)

As to how we would know. Well that's a excellent question to ask. How can we know God's will if all we have to go by is a written word with no way to insure "proper" interpretation?

There -is- no proper interpretation?

Don't know about the value of life thing. Life is what you make it. But they ignore a great deal of things. First of all, they are worried about the end of the world, when they themselves can easily die before it ever happens. Second of all, they tend to try to predict with certainty when it will happen when Jesus himself said that not even he knows, only God knows and he aint tellin'. Third of all, they revolve their lives around the end, they forget to deal with actually being Christian. I'm not of the "Salvation by faith alone" variety. Faith breeds deeds and deeds keep faith alive (as per James). People who focus on the end don't usually focus on living...I guess that's what you meant?

You got there in the end, and yes, that is exactly what I meant.

[aretood2]

Well, if you want to talk "in theory", then sure, you would avoid the need for "final judgement", so in theory yes, all the peoples of the world could convert to Christianity. I don't know how you would sell that, but sure.

Meh, far crazier has been posted here.

That's why it is prophecy, not prediction dude
The question arises about the "opt out", and weather it is really an opt out, and that is tied into the notion of free will. What is the value of free will if you are punished for exercising it?

That conversation would have to start with a definition of free will within the frame work of the theology involved. In essence, it goes along the line, do laws take away our free will? But most ancient people would have had absolute zero concerns with free will so it would have to be a very modern conversation.

Umm, no.
What is codified and considered "the NT" was not formally decided until far, far after who may have written the first parts of the NT, some 7-10 generations removed from the events surrounding Jesus, so no, I'm not going to buy into that. Are some parts similar? For sure they are, they are also similar to other religions, -as is Judaism- for that matter, so be careful when opening the "similar to" door.

I'll just go ahead and respectfully disagree and ask you to find sufficient mainstream scholarship that actually agrees with you. Most scholars date Revelations in the 1st century. The latest dates for any of the NT books is the 2nd century. Ancient writers reference the different books. That said, those Catholic forgers would have to be incredibly anal when copying and borrowing literary styles and genres from the Jewish community in the 1st century.

Now personally, I enjoy going into all things Jewish. So I purchased two study bibles printed by Jewish scholars. One of them is the Tanakh study bible (and written for non-jews) and the other is a Jewish commentary on the New Testament. The level of connections that they make to Judaism actually surprised me when I started reading it. It's called "The Jewish Annotated New Testament." It's a fascinating read. I am not done with it (sadly time is short for most things these days) but I can't read more than a few versus without seeing notes that connect Revelations to 1st century writings, Jewish pre-1st century writings, and the old testament.

Oh, I know that, I also know that many visions and events are based on even older belief systems, so I don't know how going down this path helps you at all.

It's the difference between claiming that I have brown eyes because humans evolved with brown eyes vs I have brown eyes because my mother has brown eyes.

Umm, 13 months a year, lunar based calendars did not "appear" with Moses, so I don't know where you are trying to go here.
See, this is where people can get annoyed, this notion that "before Judaism" there was no religion, or even worse, the was no "real" religion because there were no "real gods" (even though there are multiple commandments specifically referring to other gods existing, so riddle me that one batman)

What are you talking about? My post mentioned that Jews were well aware that the moon turns blood red ever so often that it seems odd that they'd have a blood red moon be a literal sign of the end of times. You have seen a red moon before, right? So did my great great great great (times 1000) grandfather. It was an example of caution when wanting to take something metaphorical/spiritual and turn it into literal materialistic meaning.

There -is- no proper interpretation?

There is a way to methodologically read passages. several actually. But that may come short too. But that doesn't mean there isn't a correct interpretation. I'll leave it up to everyone to find out how one might get a proper interpretation. I won't divulge my particular belief on the matter here.

[Gatefan1976]

Meh, far crazier has been posted here.

Fair point.

That conversation would have to start with a definition of free will within the frame work of the theology involved. In essence, it goes along the line, do laws take away our free will? But most ancient people would have had absolute zero concerns with free will so it would have to be a very modern conversation.

You have free will to reject my teachings, but I will punish you if you choose to ignore them.
It's not that hard really.

I'll just go ahead and respectfully disagree and ask you to find sufficient mainstream scholarship that actually agrees with you. Most scholars date Revelations in the 1st century. The latest dates for any of the NT books is the 2nd century. Ancient writers reference the different books. That said, those Catholic forgers would have to be incredibly anal when copying and borrowing literary styles and genres from the Jewish community in the 1st century.

You are not reading what I wrote.
I did not say that they were not written in the 1st century, I said that they were not -codified into the NT- until much later. It's a -very- important distinction Tood.

Now personally, I enjoy going into all things Jewish. So I purchased two study bibles printed by Jewish scholars. One of them is the Tanakh study bible (and written for non-jews) and the other is a Jewish commentary on the New Testament. The level of connections that they make to Judaism actually surprised me when I started reading it. It's called "The Jewish Annotated New Testament." It's a fascinating read. I am not done with it (sadly time is short for most things these days) but I can't read more than a few versus without seeing notes that connect Revelations to 1st century writings, Jewish pre-1st century writings, and the old testament.

Sure, and I can't read the NT or OT without seeing connections to older religions.

It's the difference between claiming that I have brown eyes because humans evolved with brown eyes vs I have brown eyes because my mother has brown eyes.

A distinction that does not really matter as no one is denying that the NT sprung directly from the OT.

What are you talking about? My post mentioned that Jews were well aware that the moon turns blood red ever so often that it seems odd that they'd have a blood red moon be a literal sign of the end of times. You have seen a red moon before, right? So did my great great great great (times 1000) grandfather. It was an example of caution when wanting to take something metaphorical/spiritual and turn it into literal materialistic meaning.

It seems I misread your intent, apologies.

There is a way to methodologically read passages. several actually. But that may come short too. But that doesn't mean there isn't a correct interpretation. I'll leave it up to everyone to find out how one might get a proper interpretation. I won't divulge my particular belief on the matter here.

Who is the arbiter of what the "correct interpretation" is?
If it is God, and we can't receive a direct "YES" from god, even in his own book, then what is "correct" will always be in the eye of the beholder, or what they feel in their heart, or what the voice in their head told them.

[aretood2]

You have free will to reject my teachings, but I will punish you if you choose to ignore them.
It's not that hard really.

No.

You are not reading what I wrote.
I did not say that they were not written in the 1st century, I said that they were not -codified into the NT- until much later. It's a -very- important distinction Tood.

Okay. But I'm not following you here.

Who is the arbiter of what the "correct interpretation" is?
If it is God, and we can't receive a direct "YES" from god, even in his own book, then what is "correct" will always be in the eye of the beholder, or what they feel in their heart, or what the voice in their head told them.

What if we could though? What if God did have a way of saying "Yes?"