Are We In "The End Of Days"?

Not The End, But The Beginning Of The End...Your Thoughts?

Published on April 25, 2006 By Nadeon In Religion

It's been played through before, but I'm curious what other's observations might be. From subtle to not so subtle changes in everything from global warming to increases in persecutions, locutions, apparitions etc. Are we about there yet? Are the branches growing tender on the old fig tree? Should we start carrying our coats to the roof top? I'm looking for personal impressions, not a sermon or evangelization. Whadda ya think?

Comments (Page 3)

Ionolast

on May 01, 2006

It's like finding secret messages in the newspaper

Comparing the bible to a newspaper? Shame, shame.

statistically any suffciently dense text will contain a series of words you could uncover through the right code. That doesn't make it prophecy.

It was intended as prophecy. The prophecy is invalid whatever the reason.

No, just pointing out the silliness of trying to turn one of the most debated books in history into a word problem, and then using your failure as yet another snide jab at religion.

You consider yourself religious and yet you're saying the bible is not to be trusted or taken seriously? Shame, shame.

Don't hyper-intelligent folks like yourself have anything better to do than critique superstitious peons like us?

...oh, wait, critiquing superstitious peons like us is what MAKES you smart. Sorry, I forgot.

Yeah, you really have a short-term memory, don't you.

Ionolast

on May 01, 2006

The bible's gone through dozens of revisions since anyone even remotely holy put their hands on it. Words changed/substituted, language (and therefore grammar) shifted and then shifted back again - it's not the same book it was at Nicea.

I was unaware of that 30 something years ago.

Ionolast

on May 01, 2006

Like one of my favourite authors wrote, you have to believe in the little stuff (god, santa, the easter bunny etc) before you can belief in the big stuff like fairness and liberty and freedom.

Saying God is little stuff and equating him with Santa and the Easter Bunny? Shame, shame.

cactoblasta

on May 01, 2006

Comparing the bible to a newspaper? Shame, shame

There's nearly always something admirable in someone who's utterly contrary, but it rarely plays across well online. Even the most rabid of Christians will accept that the bible is the Word of God; a newspaper is simply the Word of Man. I think the similarities are entirely lacking in shame.

Winterblade

on May 01, 2006

The word of God as interpreted and written (and re-written countless times) by man.

Celebrate? Celebrate!? I thought you said "celibate!"

bakerstreet

on May 01, 2006

"You consider yourself religious and yet you're saying the bible is not to be trusted or taken seriously? Shame, shame."

No, I'm just pointing out that you seem to believe that you have a handle on something that untold numbers of people have debated for centuries. So much so that you can just make a word problem out of it and hand someone a date of a calender.

Making fun of Christians makes you LOOK smart, but evidently it doesn't do much in terms of real content. I've never called my self religious that I am aware of. For someone who considers himself intellectually superior you seem to need to spend a lot of time trying to prove it.

Ionolast

on May 01, 2006

I've never called my self religious that I am aware of.

Oh. Excuse me. For someone who doesn't consider himself religious, you seem to need to spend a lot of time taking things I say personally.

Don't hyper-intelligent folks like yourself have anything better to do than critique superstitious peons like us?

"Us" includes yourself, right?

bakerstreet

on May 01, 2006

Evidently you aren't aware of what the word "religious" means. Espousing a belief does not equal beling "religious". Religious has more to do with "religion" I would think, which is institutionalized service and worship. I'm sure you can tell the difference between people who are "religious" and people who simply espouse a belief in God.

Granted, from your past and current behavior I can see why it would appeal to you to make anyone who espouses a belief in God out to be a "religious" person, since that brand is all you need to devalue people.

sushiK

on May 01, 2006

I think the whole arguement that GOd will destroy the earth and save only the Chosen from certain Religions is ridiculous and only serves to drum up numbers for Religion in general.

Why would God who supposedly created everyone and everything need to destroy the earth and save certain people on a certain day?

It is laughable when man kind put his/her own spin on things, and this was clearly the case in so many religions that call for a judgement day.

It makes Zero sense why an all supreme being would have a judgement day.
If God is so mighty why wipe everything out?

bakerstreet

on May 01, 2006

SushiK: I don't believe in the "end of days" myself, but your statements imply that a perfect God would somehow fall in line with what your mind can find plausible. Parents, to their children, make 'zero sense'. How much more impossible would it be for us to comprehend omnipotence?

I'm not sure you're making your point when you say that it is "clearly the case" judgment day is mankind's spin on things. You've stated you believed that, and that you can't comprehend anything else, but you haven't really offered any real argument. People a few thousand miles away from each other can't comprehend how we can possibly believe and behave as their counterparts do.

I think you are inflating yourself, or deflating God, when you imply that what He is or does has to make sense to you.

sushiK

on May 01, 2006

Your arguement that a god would have a judgement day has about as much weight as me saying Aliens will destroy the world.

Both are abstract since we can not prove either one exists yet.
Then there is the first question why they / he would want to destroy our world.

I am just starting on the second -why.
Yes I think the earth will have it "end" in the future, that so much is a sure thing.

Since I am not a institutionally religious person I need someone to tell me why is it that a God would need a judgement day. And realize there were the Greeks with all their multitude of Gods that probably thought judgement day was coming for them.

I believe religions incorporated this idea of judgement day simply because it was the zeit geist (spelling) of their times. Eons ago were punishments and death were more common than rewards, this idea of "bad people" being punished and good getting a cookie worked for them.

It saddens me that modern day religious people can not see past this morbid antiquated idea of a judgement day. Religions should morph over time, and this is one idea that needs to be put to rest.

sushiK

on May 01, 2006

I think you are inflating yourself, or deflating God, when you imply that what He is or does has to make sense to you.

I am not trying to be arrogant BakerStreet, I think it it high time some Religions rethink this idea of doom and gloom. This is a major part of why I hate Christainity (but not Christians) so much.

bakerstreet

on May 01, 2006

"Your arguement that a god would have a judgement day has about as much weight as me saying Aliens will destroy the world."

No, your argument that God WOULDN'T destroy the world has as much weight as me saying aliend WOULDN'T destroy the world. It may seem an esoteric difference, but you are the one stating what God wouldn't do when you can't even prove He exists. Our material relating to God, on which we base our belief in God, also relates to us the concept of judgement day.

Arguing whether there's a judgement day is like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. I can see you claiming that God doesn't exist by refuting the material outright, but in terms of what God would be, you have nothing any more authoritative than anyone else, and frankly the other side has around 2000 years of pondering it behind them.

"Since I am not a institutionally religious person I need someone to tell me why is it that a God would need a judgement day. And realize there were the Greeks with all their multitude of Gods that probably thought judgement day was coming for them. "

Which... again, implies that there is any reason for God to explain to any of us where there needs to be a judgement day. Which implies that we with our teeny brains could fathom why there needs to be a judgement day, when most of us can't grasp high school physics. You might need to understand in order to believe, but that doesn't mean that things you don't understand can't happily exist without your leave.

"I believe religions incorporated this idea of judgement day simply because it was the zeit geist (spelling) of their times. Eons ago were punishments and death were more common than rewards, this idea of "bad people" being punished and good getting a cookie worked for them.

It saddens me that modern day religious people can not see past this morbid antiquated idea of a judgement day. Religions should morph over time, and this is one idea that needs to be put to rest."

I'm sure that people in the South pre-civil war couldn't conceive of a God that had a problem with slavery. Ideas change, but will the ones you differ with change, or will we be able to concieve of things tomorrow we can't conceive today?

People couldn't fathom the concepts of gravity, or a round earth, or the sun not revolving around us. Commonly held beliefs can be very hard to overcome, even in the face of proof. You and I can't conceieve of a great apocolyptic day of judgement, but that doesn't mean our inability to conceive it isn't to blame.

"I am not trying to be arrogant BakerStreet, I think it it high time some Religions rethink this idea of doom and gloom. This is a major part of why I hate Christainity (but not Christians) so much."

Heh, that would be easy for you and I to say because our beliefs don't depend on the source material in question. If it was as easy as "rethinking" you could make a religion anything you want. That can be a good thing, or you can end up drinking kool aid with the rest of the followers of silly people.

I applaud you for coming to your own beliefs, but I just take issue with the idea that people who don't come to the same conclusions have "laughable" beliefs. If you could pose some sort of proof of that assertion, great, otherwise they have as much merit as your own.

KFC Kickin For Christ

on May 01, 2006

Since I am not a institutionally religious person I need someone to tell me why is it that a God would need a judgement day

God is going to destroy the earth and all in it for one reason....SIN. It's corrupted and dirtied our world, and God is a holy God and cannot stand sin. He will dwell among his people in a new day with a new heaven and a new earth. All will be new and free from sin.

A picture of sin in the scripture was leaven. Leaven (yeast) ferments the dough bringing it to decay. It spreads throughout the dough corrupting it. Jesus warned the Jews to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees. The Israelites were told to eat unleavened bread with their Passover. Sin corrupts as leaven does the bread. Jesus was called the bread of life and he is a picture of this unleavened bread (without sin).

Just as Jesus was laid in a brand new rich man's tomb that was not defiled with leaven (sin) so too will there be a time when the earth will be without sin as God cleanses it by fire and ushers in the new. Just like the Jews of old (and still today) burn the leaven in their homes before the Passover begins, God will also burn all traces of sin up.

That's why.

This is not true. We have over 5,000 original copies in their original languages more than any other work of antiquity in circulation today. I am absoulutely confident that the bible we hold in our hands today is the same bible that the first century Christians had in theirs (so to speak). Check it out for youself.

bakerstreet

on May 01, 2006

"This is not true. We have over 5,000 original copies in their original languages more than any other work of antiquity in circulation today. I am absoulutely confident that the bible we hold in our hands today is the same bible that the first century Christians had in theirs (so to speak). Check it out for youself."

How is that possible when the Bible wasn't even compiled by that time into a single volume? Heck, it is debatable whether or not it was all even written by that time. There were MOST certainly other works that were accepted then that were rejected later.

I understand that you believe that as an inspired work the impossibility of what you describe becomes possible. I don't think, though, you can really make the point that what we have in our hands was what other people used before it was even compiled into the form we have.

Frankly, you can't really even prove to me that they considered those texts inerrant until much later.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!