So you think only demonically possessed people can moan and groan?

He was farting!

You mean like how Cartman hates hippies? But he's an asshole.

kfc posts:

lula posts: 54

lula posts 57

kfc posts 59

KFC,

Maybe not your particular view of the "Rapture", but in general, Rapturists also have the same pre-conceived ideas as the Jews but for different reasons. They believe that the Jews will restart the animal sacrifices in a rebuilt Jerusalem about the time the Great Tribulation begins. The idea is that if they rebuild the Temple then Christ will come and "rapture" them into Heaven....aw, but some will be "Left Behind".  We've talked about this before.

............................................

KFC posts

I think all of the OT prophecies have been fulfilled including this one of Daniel. I could go on in detail but that would be getting way off topic.

 Daniels' vision teaches there will be one Messias who will come and then He will be "cut off" (killed). The one Messias and the one Temple and their rise and fall are described in relation to each other. Just remember there is only one Messias and only one Temple (Herod's Temple ..the only Temple God has ever inhabited..and the same one that at Christ's death God rent the Temple Veil from top to bottom).

I'll just say that I agree with St.Augustine whose sermon on St.Matt. 24, says the 70th week in Daniel's vision is not in the future, but rather was accomplished in 70AD, when the Temple was destroyed and Jerusalem was overthrown and burnt to the ground.

Almost all of the early Church Fathers believed that the last week of Daniel ended no later than 70Ad. In this they were in total agreement with the common Jewish interpretation of their time. That Daniel's 70 weeks ended with the destruction of the Temple in 70AD.

Rapturists must do Scriptural gymnastics to place Daniels 70th week in the future.

The bodies of burning animals stink. Therefore burning souls in Hell stink. Yeah. Makes perfect sense.

How can souls burn? How can they feel pain? It's our bodies that contain muscles and nerve endings.

Imbeciles.

nope.  Not at all.  Read Daniel 9:26-27 very very carefully.  I'll explain it as I write it out. 

"And after threescore and two weeks (62 weeks) shall Messiah be cut off (crucified)but not for himself (sinless) and the people of the prince  (not the prince) that shall come (anti-christ) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary (Jerusalem and Temple) and end thereof shall be with a flood (70 AD) and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. 

And he (anti-christ) shall confirm the covenant with many (what we're waiting for now) for one week, and in the middle of the week (halfway) he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease (abomination of desolation Christ spoke about in Matt 24:15) and for the overspreading of abominations he (anti-christ) shall make it desolate even until the consummation and that determined (preordained) shall be poured upon the desolate (end). "

I think it's remarkable that Daniel predicted with 100% accuracey the crucifixion and the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple more than 500 years before it happened.  But he didn't stop there.  He went all the way to the end when the A.C. would come and stop the sacrifices. 

The timing as you believe (YOU have to do scriptural gymnastics)  doesn't fit 70 AD. If it were consecutive (as you say) the destruction of Jerusalem (70th week) would have been around 39AD (seven years-a week after the crucifixion)  and that doesn't fit.  We know from history it was 70 AD.  There has to be a gap between the 69th week and the 70th week because of the church age. That fits.  The events in Revelation are the 70th week which resumes and that's why it's called Daniel's 70 week.  It hasn't happened yet. 

There's a guy in the 1800's who figured the timing and dates down to the exact day.  Google "The Coming Prince" by Sir Robert Anderson. 

So there you go.  It's right there in Daniel and Christ even referred to it as something to watch out for at the end of time.  And if that is not enough Paul wrote in 2 Thess 2:3-4:

"Let no man deceive you (Lula this would be you) by any means for that day (rapture) shall not come except there come a falling away first and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition (anti-christ).   

Who opposes and exalts himself above all that is calld God or that is worshipped so that he as God sits in the temple (rebuilt temple) of God showing himself that he is God (the abomination of desolation that Christ and Daniel mentioned). 

This did not happen in 70 AD.  No man of perdition was revealed.  No one sat in the Temple and called himself God. They came in and destroyed the Temple but there was no abomination of desolation happening then.  You're saying it's all included in 70 AD doesn't make any sense at all including the fact that Christ said this time would be: 

"shall be a great tribulation such as was NOT since the beginning of the world to this time, no, NOR ever shall be."  Matt 24:21

how can you say that is 70 AD?  It has to be a world-wide event.   Are you saying 70AD destruction of Jerusalem was worse than the flood that destroyed the whole world or worse than anything "ever including two world wars?" 

No my friend, not only are you getting some bad information you don't make sense in believing it. 

The church fathers that you are listening to (men) are NOT scripture.  Time and time again, you go to men.  Some did, some didn't.  After years of pouring over the scriptures diff ones have come up with diff theories.  Some stuck some didn't.  As time went on and we received more light things changed and started either to not make sense or to make better sense.  The scriptures never change, but our understanding of them, in lieu of historical findings, evidences and what not, does.    

What didn't make sense 100 years ago, now does.  We have much more information today that we can use to help us with the scriptures like archeology for one thing.  The findings over the years have been a tremendous boost in helping us come up with certain dates and events that help piece things to gether easier than just guesswork which is more in line with what you're saying. 

Infidel posts:

Infidel,

Welcome back to the discussion.

The answer to your question lies in the fact that the Hell-fire isn't anywhere near like fire we have on earth.

Did you miss reading my post 16?

kfc posts:

kfc posts:

Some of the early Church Fathers were contemporaries of the Apostles. Many of them were Priests and Bishops in the Church and they KNEW SCRIPTURE I would dare say better than you or I ever could. Their writings and sermons on Christian doctrines are all based on Scripture and are considered of weight and worthy of respect.  St.Ignatius was Bishop of the Church at Antioch, Syria and martyr for the Faith. St.Irenaeus was a disciple of St.Polycarp of Smyrna. He was a presbyter of the Church of Lyons, during the reign of Marcus Aurelius. He most probably brought Christianity to many part of eastern Gaul. St.Augustine was a priest and bishop of the Church at Hippo, Africa for 35 years. I could go on but hopefully, you get my drift. The point is I am not getting "bad information" from them.

kfc posts;  

OK, ...some did, some didn't. St.Irenaeus (177AD) and Tertullian (200AD) come to mind...they both developed scenarios for the end times that fell into the "speculative" department. The important point is their views were never accepted and developed by the Church. 

It wasn't until St.Augustine who explained the prophetic texts concerning the endtimes in irrefutable language that the unanimous consent was taken as to how these Scriptural passages of St.Matt. 24, Daniel 9 and 2Thess.2 were to be understood.

I understand these Scriptural passages as they did and that's why I wrote...

The early Church Fathers taught that the last week of Daniel is not in the future, but rather was accomplished in 70AD, when the Temple was destroyed and Jerusalem was overthrown and burnt to the ground.

It's also no small point that in this, they were in total agreement with the common Jewish interpretation of their time. 

Those Scriptural passages all support Daniel's 70 weeks ended with the destruction of the Temple in 70AD so therefore they couldn't possibly be pointing to the building of a future Jerusalem Temple for offering animal sacrifices to God.  

If a Temple is built ....it will not be of God, but will be a work of man, by man and for man and and it will be a work in vain.

In your studies and research, dearest friend, please remember..... there is only one Messias the Christ that has come and Christ will come again, not as the Messias, but as the Judge of all mankind at the end of the world.  Christ has both a first and second coming.

(The "Rapture" posits that Christ will have a 3rd or "extra"coming between the other two and that is unBiblical and so alien to Christ's teachings and doctrines that it boggles the brain just thinking about).

As to the possible future building of a Jerusalem Temple, just remember ....there is only one Temple, Herod's Temple that Almighty God the Lord of hosts has ever inhabited..and the same one that at Christ's death Almighty God the Lord of Hosts rent the Temple Veil from top to bottom.

That's when Almighty God the Lord of Hosts announced to the world that He is done with the Temple in Jerusalem and its Old Law animal sacrifices. The Old Mosaic Covenant was perfectly fulfilled by Christ's birth, life's work, death and resurrection. Old Covenant Judaism has been translated into the New Covenant in the Sacred Body and Blood of Christ. 

All the OT prophecies have been fulfilled in Christ. As to the multiple fulfillments cncerning the Antichrist just before the end of the world, all the fury of the Antichrist will be against the sacrifice of the New Covenant.

kfc posts:

As to guesswork, let's be clear. These Rapturists' endtime speculations have been in circulation within the various sects of Protestantism since the 1800s. Christian Zionists and Rapturists are building on their guess-work of Scripture to come up with these endtime scenarios of the Antichrist and specific future political events in the Middle East. 

Your interpretation of the meaning of the passages above is guess-work and it's part truth riddled with errors.  Dangerous errors.

I'm not guessing as to the Scriptural meaning of Daniel 9, 2Thess. and St.Matt. 24. As I have already made plain, I rely on the Church and the Church Fathers' interpretation of Scripture. And this is based on Acts 8:26-40 which is as you know the account of the Ethiopian eunuch who didn't understand the Scriptural passages he was reading and needed an official interpreter. That official interpreter of Scripture was St.Philip, a deacon of the early Church. After hearing the Scriptures rightly interpreted by St.Philip, the Ethiopian was converted and baptized by St.Philip.

If it isn't on Earth, where is it?

Nowhere in your post does it say that the fire is hot enough to burn souls.

Jeez. Logic slaps you people in the face and you turn the other cheek.

lula

Infidel

Good question. I don't know where Hell is, I just know that Hell exists and will be eternal.

Not those words directly but since you asked,

I answered saying becasue they are in the torment of Hell-fire which is hotter than fire we have on earth becasue it's kindled by the breath of God.  

Wouldn't it make more sense if it was kindled by the breath of Satan?

I suppose the idea that souls can burn is a real problem for people who believe in reincarnation.

Really?  That's it?  That's how you debate?  Where's the guesswork?  It's alot easier than you're making it out.  Errors?  Where did I make errors?  Go ahead show me. 

and that's it in a nutshell.  Glad you admit it.  You are going directly against God. (Read Psalm 1,  and 118:8 and the whole of 119) and following men; of course they have to be RCC card carrying members.

nope.  Not true.  Some may believe it but that's not scriptural.  I don't care what "people" think.  I only care what God revealed.

I agree.  But everything is allowed by God so in effect it will be of God because not only is he going to allow it, he wrote about it. 

there is NO official interpreter.  Every born again Christian is like Philip because of the guidance and indwelling of the Holy Spirit. 

John wrote to the Christians (Little children v18):

"But you have an unction from the Holy One and you know ALL THINGS.  But the anointing which you have received of him abides in you and you need NOT that any man teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you of ALL THINGS and is truth and is no lie and even as it has taught you, you shall abide in Him."  1 John 2:27

The Holy Spirit is our teacher not men of the RCC persuasion.   Good teachers led by the Holy Spirit may help us in our understanding of the scriptures but we should always test what they say to what scripture says.  

Regarding hell: 

Hell is most uncomfortable because we are separated eternally from the light and presence of almighty God.  Hell is separation from love.  Darkness is the absence of light. 

lula posts:

kfc posts:

Then why are you encouraging it?

First..everything is not allowed by God. Second, "so in effect it will be of God" is the wrong conclusion. God gave mankind freewill. It goes to man's free will. God isn't behind a future building of the Jerusalem Temple in any way, shape or form.  Man has freewill to do works of vain such as building a temple in Jerusalem and offering animal sacrifices in it. That God allows something doesn't mean it's of Him.

[quote]I agree. But everything is allowed by God so in effect it will be of God because not only is he going to allow it, he wrote about it.

No, God did not write about a future Jerusalem Temple in the endtimes. It's people who read Scripture and come to this erroneous understanding of it and then build speculative endtime scenarios on it.  

The last Jerusalem Temple mentioned in Scripture is Herod's Temple of the Old Covenant and we both know what heppened with that one.  

...............................

Yes, KFC. This is absolutely the very worse thing about Hell. One who is in Hell is eternally separated from God. 

Same that happened to the First Temple. These things happen.

The First Temple was destroyed by the Assyrians. The Second Temple was destroyed by the Romans.

The Second Temple was built by a Messiah. A Third Temple will surely be built by another Messiah, the Messiah.

You talk about prophecies all the time. But you fail to find any prophecy that actually supports anything you say.

And it shall come to pass that on that day, the Lord shall continue to apply His hand a second time to acquire the rest of His people, that will remain from Assyria and from Egypt and from Pathros and from Cush and from Elam and from Sumeria and from Hamath and from the islands of the sea.

And He shall raise a banner to the nations, and He shall gather the lost of Israel, and the scattered ones of Judah He shall gather from the four corners of the earth.

And the envy of Ephraim shall cease, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off; Ephraim shall not envy Judah, nor shall Judah vex Ephraim.

And they shall fly of one accord against the Philistines in the west, together they shall plunder the children of the East; upon Edom and Moab shall they stretch forth their hand, and the children of Ammon shall obey them.

And the Lord shall dry up the tongue of the Egyptian Sea, and He shall lift His hand over the river with the strength of His wind, and He shall beat it into seven streams, and He shall lead [the exiles] with shoes.

And there shall be a highway for the remnant of His people who remain from Assyria, as there was for Israel on the day they went up from the land of Egypt.

Yes there is an official interpreter.

The entire book of Acts all 28 chapters is a small picture of the actual history of the early Church. Here St.Philip, a deacon in the Chruch, was the official interpreter. Why was he an official interpreter in the Church? Becasue Christ founded His Church and built it upon St.Peter and the other Apostles. Christ personally gave them His authority and sent them to baptize and teach all nations. St.Philip is the official interpreter in the Chruch becasue the Apostles in turn gave their preaching, teaching and baptizing authority to St.Philip by the imposition of hands. Acts. 6:5-6. In time and develolpment of the Church, this official authority would be known as the Magisterium of the CC.

The official guide to understanding the true meaning of Scripture is the teaching authority given by Christ to St.Peter and the other Apostles and from them to others through the imposition of hands (Holy Orders). God Who inspired the Sacred Books, has entrusted their interpretation to His Church. Scripture itself states "The Church is the pillar and ground of truth".

......................................

1St.John 2:27 is one verse. You could arrive at this conclusion if there weren't 26 verses in front of it teaching a completely different conclusion than yours.

When you take the entire chapter in it's proper context, it cements my point about the Chruch being under the "unction" guidance of the Holy Spirit her authorities have all necessary knowledge and instruction so that we have no need to seek it elsewhere.  

Re: the highlighted...

This is a commonly held belief within Protestantism....that when individuals read their Bibles prayerfully, the Holy Spirit would guide each individual to a knowledge of the truth.  

However, Protestantism with all the different sects shows it doesn't work. For if it did, they would have come to the same conclusions, would all have exactly the same faith.  

Let's start with 10 people reading the same version of Scripture.

Ask them to give their respective interpretations of a given passage and you are going to get as many as 10 different answers.  Now, these 10 think themselves capable of interpreting it correctlly...but which one is correct? If they are different, they can't all be correct. Individual readers are liable to mistakes. Image the results if you multiply that 10 by 100s. Which one is led by the Holy Spirit?  

I don't have this problem. I believe that God confided the inspired writings to the guardianship of a living and infallible Church. The written pages cannot explain themselves and we need an official guide to interpret its pages. The living voice of an authentic interpeter is necessary and God provided that in the CC.   

lula posts:

kfc posts:

The Bible teaches the Holy Spirit acting through and within the Chruch which Christ personally founded and built upon St.Peter and the other Apostles is the official expounder of God's Law and Word.

The Bible teaches that the rulers of Christ's Church have authority which must be obeyed in matters of faith and morals.

Hebrews 13:17, "Obey your prelates, and be subject to them. For they watch as being to render an account of your souls; that they may do this with joy, and not with grief for that is unprofitable for you."

St.Matt. 18:17 "And if he will not hear them: tell the Church. ANd if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican."

St.Luke 10:16, "He that heareth you, heareth Me. And he that despitheth you, despitheth Me. And he that despitheth Me despitheth him Who sent Me."

St.Matt. 16:19 "And I will give unto thee (Peter) the keys to the kingdom of heaven; and whatever thou (Peter) shall bind on earth, shall be bound in Heaven, and whatever thou (Peter) shalt loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven."

The Apostles repeatedly claimed this authority Gal. 1:8; St.John 1:10; Acts 15, 23 and 28. These all show the Chruch of Christ has authority to act in His name.

We know the Bible teaches the Chruch was necessarily infallible 1Tim. 3:15, "the pillar and ground of truth."

That the Holy Spirit would guide her until the end of the world unto all truth...St.John 14:26; 16:13, and Acts 1:8.

The Bible teaches that the Chruch always has Christ with her and the HOly Ghost always to guide her...St.Matt. 28:20, St.John 14:16.

.................................................

lula posts:

kfc posts 87

I agree it's not true, but that seems to be what you are thinking when you posted:

post 60

You included the word "rapture". What then is the "rapture" here to you? Is this not a 3rd or "extra" coming of Christ?

I didn't appoint one.

I thought the Bible has all the answers.

I don't believe in hell. I don't believe that a loving G-d would send any of His children to such a place.

In my religion we do not do good things because we fear hell, we do good things because we fear disappointing our good Creator; just like children ultimately stop doing bad things not because, at 32 years old, they fear punishment from their parents but because they don't want to disappoint them.

The punishment for the wicked will never be a hell, it will be, in the next world, the realisation that they haven't contributed and have instead relied solely on their Creator's good will for their share.

THE CHURCH IS NEVER INFALLIBLE.   NEVER.  The church is made up of human sinful believers.  It's not infallible.  That is NOT what that scripture says. 

actually Lula, that was v20 and v27.  So if you're wrong here...tells me you didn't even look at it.  Gotcha!    There is no other conclusion.  What are you referring to?  Why not just answer the charge instead of bringing me to other scriptures?   You do this alot.  What did John mean then?  Answer that without going anywhere.  Answer it in context. 

Remember you can ALWAYS make scripture say what you want it to say when you go from one scripture to another without staying in context which is almost always what you do to prove your point.  I'll say it again...a scripture taken out of context is nothing but a pretext.  False preachers are usually topical.  It's much harder to twist scripture when you're expositional. 

How?   You gave me nothing here.  you have to twist the scriptures to make it say what you want it to say.  didn't I put in he wrote to the individual Chrisitians?  He called them "little children."  It's a letter to them telling them that they have the Holy Spirit in them as Philip did.  Now this Eunuch could go back to his own country and do the same.  He could read, meditate on the scriptures and teach.  We should all be doing that.  That's how the gospel spread so far and wide. 

The rapture is scriptural.  Very scriptural.  It's not that it isn't.  It's that some have made a whole lot out of it that it isn't.  In other words I don't agree with the "Left Behind Series" view of the Rapture although I do believe in the Rapture because it's in scripture. 

rapture is simply the gathering together of the Saints in the air when he returns.  It's at His second coming that this will happen.  No third coming. 

it has all the answers about life and our purpose in this life that we need to know.

and that's a very good reason to do good things.  We do good things because we love God and we want to give back to Him as He's been so generous and good to us. 

where are you getting this from? 

be careful Leauki with the "I don't believes" or "I believes"  Remember it doesn't really matter what we believe.  It matters more what God says.  Obviously the Jews in the OT had their own way of worship that didn't include God because they "believed" they were in the right then too only to find out they were really very radically wrong. 

He doesn't send HIS children to hell.  Remember His children and His creation are NOT the same.  Right from the get go we have Cain's line and we had Seth's line.  One line followed God, one did not and it went on from there.  If we find ourselves in Hell we have only ourselves to blame.   It's not God's fault.  He gave us so many opportunities thru the Prophets, His Word, other People and lastly His Son to give us the message but yet we, remain  as stubborn and rebellious as ever. 

Are you saying that those who sin are not his children?

lula posts:

Infidel posts:

Well, it doesn't. The Holy Bible is only part of God's revealed Truth in which He manifested and communicated both Himself and the eternal decrees of His Will concering His salvation plan for all mankind. Even the Bible itself states there is always something more to be known , infinitely more. It's found in St.John 21:25, "But there are also many other things which Jesus did, were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written."

LEAUKI POSTS :

Remember, God who is Infinite Love and Mercy, is also Infinite Justice. Becasue of God's justice, as well as His total respect for human freedom, Hell is a real possibility as a person's eternal destiny. This side of God's mystery is difficult to grasp, but CHrist Himself taught it and so does His Church.  

leauki posts:

The teaching that Hell exists is clearly in Scripture. In St.Matthew 25:34, 41 Christ says to the just: "Come, you who are blessed by My Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. But to the unjust He says, " Depart from Me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels." In St.Mark 9:43, Christ said, "It is better for you to enter into life maimed then with two hands to go into Gehenna."

There is something absolutely basic about every one of us...right from the get go--we are all seekers having questioning intellects. Whether we know it or not, the Ultimate Reality that we all seek is God.

We also have something else that's very basic...we go through life making constant decisions...yes to this and no to that. That is our free will..the power to want and the power to choose.

One point that emerges from the doctrine of those 2 passages quoted above is the reality of human freedom. We are free to seek God and serve Him and we are free to do the opposite. In either case, we are responsible for the consequences. Our short time of life on this earth is indeed a serious matter. The way we live it make a serious difference. We are free to seek God to choose the inexpressible pain of His absense.

Lula if you're going to use scripture to try and convince a Jewish person, you'd best not use the NT.  Since they don't recognize it it means little.   

No.  Everyone sins.  I'm saying I agree with you that God would NOT send HIS children to Hell anymore than any of us would send our children to hell.

The only diff between a believer who sins and an unbeliever who sins is the Saviour.   We are either in the family of God or we're not. 

There is a diff between His children and His creation. 

That was Leauki.

I respect the Christian Bible for its teachings about morality but whether or not there is a hell is really pure faith.

Gehenna is a physical location near Jerusalem.