Christianity is finished in the UK "Well thank god for that!"

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
I love it when Christians say this decline fulfills a prophecy, indeed it does, well then please for the love of God do not fight this decline, if anything ENCOURAGE it! Fulfill your prophecy, I'm begging you.

Not many Christians want you to miss the first ressurection because the second one after the 1000years means being judged for what you have done wrong and not what you have done right which is a lot better than the first time round. You also miss out on a lot and have more chance going to hell second time around.

No one wants to fullfil anything only the ignorant do that that don't know.

A lot of the Bible common contraditions by non believers alike have to go by translation and original text, the differences are not very big and does ot spoil the story even if they have this firm belief its flawed. But if people want to go that deeply then they have study why certain accounts sound differently and sometimes language can say the same thing but in different expressions. Some people can touch sound, feel the sound and not quite hear it, but does not mean there was no action for example.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by The time lord]

reply to post by The time lord


I'm not trying to say what Christians want or that even such assumptions are correct. I'm obviously just poking fun at Christians on here who use the prophecy argument to defend a decline.

Originally posted by moocowman
reply to post by ZenOnKwalsky

 

EU is descendant of Roman Empire just read a little more that Quran! All modern, european law comes from Roman Law developed afterwards in Germany,

yes quite a few xtians go round trying to scare people with this, can you produce any evidence other than pastors blog or a christian website ?

Nothing to do with the Pastors Mate ...cause I m Catholic

But this time it has nothing to do with dark prophecies this time- just basics... History!:in Medieval Age in todays Germany they tried to continue roman traditions. Hence omnipresent Latin language, roman law etc...and it came with that ugly Roman Church, not m-slims.
In many places it was the monks teaching local population about better ways of farming, handcrafting etc...

and its mainly Germany who makes modern united europe come true.

Can you explain what you mean by this exactly, is English not your first language ? Or is it just something else you heard at church or read on a an xtian website but have no idea what your actually talking about.

Sorry it isnt ...actually third or rather fourth...
So "xtian" it is in Your dictionary not representant of some reptilian race but simply: Christian... Nice. What about: m-slims?? Another race of invaders...I hope You dont mind... it sounds quite good...

Im not really fan of united Europe as it looks today.But I think there is still hope and Christians are, from the beginning very important part of this idea.
Maybe m-slims will again play important role, they deserve as unifying factor-common danger...
By the way...when there will be religious liberty in all islamic countries, (as a token churches in Emirates and Saudi Arabia) then it will be danger no more...
Dont delude Yourself! In long run there is not possible cohabitation with Islam, even the mainstream Islam!

peace

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
I'm obviously just poking fun at Christians on here who use the prophecy argument to defend a decline.

It's not a defense, it's an explanation based on sound doctrine.

If this was the only prophecy being fulfilled before our eyes, I'd be a bit worried. Being that this is going hand in hand with almost a hundred others and is right on schedule, I find it fascinating.

Or if this was a very vague prophecy that we were stretching to fit into this, it would be worrisome. But it's as clear as day Christianity would trickle throughout the current Roman Empire, then extend throughout the world, then 'explode' to it's peak, then go into decline. And that is exactly what happened beginning with the early apostolic church, then the Holy Roman Empire, then the Great Awakening, then the 'Laodecian' Era.

We were given a very specific timeline of the eras of the church and they happened one by one and the final era, the decline, is coinciding with dozens of signs.

[edit on 7/6/2009 by AshleyD]

reply to post by AshleyD

It's not a defense, it's an explanation based on sound doctrine.

Okay, not as a defense, as an explanation.

with almost a hundred others

Well I have read several essays and books from amazing authors who were far ahead of their time. Orwell predicted much of what has come based on human history and actions but he never claimed to be a prophet, if we are to believe the bible got some things right that doesn't necessarily go hand in hand with actual prophetic knowledge. As for these hundreds of things 99% of them seem to come from personal interpretation when the world has experienced similar instances over and over again.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]

Originally posted by WhatTheory
I guess you will hate Muslims next since they seem to be on the rise there and soon you will have to abide by sharia law.

You will be begging God for Christians once the Muslim extremists take over.

History is replete with invasions of all sorts. Decades and even hundreds of years of rule by evil, murderous regimes never brought "god" down to help. Why would we beg for "god" when he's done a piss-poor job throughout the ages? Oh yes, "please god, help us now. Not like you've helped us before, by ignoring our pleas and cries for help and mercy. No, this time we'd actually appreciate it if you #ING DID SOMETHING TO END SUFFERING!"

BTW, there is no god, FYI...

reply to post by moocowman

Did the men with paul hear a voice?

Yes, they heard the voice, but they didn't understand it.

Acts 9.7:

The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one.

Acts 22.9:

Now those who were with me saw the light but did not understand the voice of the one who was speaking to me.

The Greek word, for the bolded words, in those verses is ἀκούω. It can mean either to hear or to hear with understanding.

We often use "hear" in the same way in English. For example, let's say that my wife is in the next room and says something to me, but I didn't understand. What do we normally say? "What? I didn't hear you!" But, I had to have heard her to say that I didn't hear her.

What did the soldiers give jesus to drink?

Matthew 27.34:

they offered him wine to drink, mixed with gall

Mark 15.23:

And they offered him wine mixed with myrrh

I'm gonna say wine mixed with gall and myrrh. [Just because both verses don't mention both myrrh and gall doesn't mean they both weren't present. Remember the Gospels are all eyewitness accounts and not all eyewitnesses give the same details.] I would assume that you're referring to the King James, no? Just so you know, the Greek word in Matthew 27 can mean vinegar or sour wine. Sour wine is still wine.

Did jesus say "destroy this temple and in 3 days I will raise it up"?

Yes he did. You very conveniently left out the next two verses, which tells you what Jesus was talking about.

John 2.19-21:

Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” The Jews then said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” But he was speaking about the temple of his body.

So, Jesus wasn't talking about the Jewish Temple. He was talking about his body. Which, as it turns out, did resurrect, three days after his crucifixion.

Did the women immediately tell the disciples?

Matthew 28.8:

So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples.

Mark 16.8:

And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.

Luke 24.8-10:

And they remembered his words, and returning from the tomb they told all these things to the eleven and to all the rest. Now it was Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women with them who told these things to the apostles,

John 20.1-2a:

Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. So she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved...

Yes, the women did immediately go and tell the disciples. Mark inserts a detail that the others don't have. After seeing the angels, the women were afraid, but they nonetheless left the tomb. Matthew then tells us that on the way to the disciples, the women met Jesus, which took their fear away, and they continued on to the disciples and told them the news.

where did jesus tell the disciples to go after his resurrection?

Matthew 28.10:

Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me.”

Mark 14.28:

But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee.

Mark 16.7:

But go, tell his disciples and Peter that e he is going before you to Galilee. There you will see him, e just as he told you.

Luke 24.49:

And behold, I am sending the promise of my Father upon you. But stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high.

Seems to be a problem because Jesus told his disciples to go to Galilee and Jerusalem, right? I don't think so.

After the resurrection, according to two of the accounts, Jesus told the disciples to go to Galilee, because he'd meet them there. This did happen. Matthew 28.16 shows this:

Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them.

It's important to note that Jesus didn't ascend to heaven after he said this! Apparently, as I read the other Gospels combined with the beginning of Acts, this was just the beginning of Jesus' appearances to the disciples. He appears several other times [i.e. on the road to Emmaus, on the shore, when Thomas sticks his finger in Jesus' side, etc.] culminating to the point when in Luke 24.49, he tells his disciples to stay in Jerusalem after he's ascended. The reason was that they were to stay in Jerusalem until they had received the Holy Spirit. Which happens in Acts 2.

So, these two commands shouldn't be viewed as contradictory but rather as taking place in two different periods of time.

[edit on 7/6/2009 by octotom]

[edit on 7/6/2009 by octotom]

Originally posted by pieman

Originally posted by amazed
Because Christians do not KNOW that, they only BELIEVE it. Belief and knowing are two different things.

knowing is what you believe to be true.
belief is what someone else believes is true.

if you believe, knowing and believing are exactly the same thing.

uuuhhh NOT. You may think it so, but it is not. Otherwise show me the money. I could intensely believe that I have a million dollars, and believe it so much that I KNOW I have a million dollars, but those checks would still bounce at the bank no matter how much I believed it. If believing was all it takes then I am sooooo believing that I have a few million dollars in my bank account, along with awesome health insurance for my children. (I believe I believe I believe I know I know I know, yeah right)

Originally posted by octotom
Did the men with paul hear a voice?
Yes, they heard the voice, but they didn't understand it.

I so have to ask this again, and never have I had a Christian reply, but..

Are you aware that when people hear voices, they are usually given medicines for a psychotic episode? If the medicines do not work they are put in a mental hospital.

But when someone hears "the voice of god", then oh thats all right then.

Why is this?

What makes hearing the "voice of god" any different then some psychotic people getting together, sharing their stories and writing a book?

NOTHING

I have said this before, even in this thread, that I want people to keep their beliefs, live by them, love them and be happy. But to please stop pushing those beliefs onto others. Stop telling me that I am going to hell if I do not believe just like you do. Stop coming by my house and leaving me pamphlets, stop trying to convert me, stop judging me. Follow your Christian beliefs which says something along the lines of "judge not least you be judged". Truth is? I live far more by the Christian ideology by the way I treat others and live my life than MOST Christians I have ever known.

What am I asking? Just, goodness enjoy who you are, enjoy your lives, do the best you can in this world and stop being so darn crazy with trying to force others to be just like you.

Harm None
Peace

[edit on 6-7-2009 by amazed]

Originally posted by moocowman

Sorry to disagree my learned friend, but if god is the creator of everything then it is god that is first cause, the cause of hate.

For someone who actively disbelieves in God as much and as often as you do moocowmao, you sure seem to have an intimate knowledge of how he does things. God just makes the bomb, moocowmao, he doesn't drop it.

I being merely a creation of a deity am merely acting in a manner that I was designed to do.

then why don't you get off your daughters neck and let her learn all the neat stuff you are telling me about God Madcow. Share with us please trhe reasons you have blamed God for your whole miserable life so you can hate him and his followers so. I mean you are being serious aren'ty you? Or are you just using sarcasm because you can't face the truth and you think it will make you look cool.

I could not possibly act in a manner that I was not designed to do as this would make god not my creator which would be impossible as you are fully aware.

Were you not designed to be serious about anything ir is this just going to be a one way conversation and you are only here to get stars, respond giving your supporters high fives and other types of emotional affirmations while your interlocutors who you deride, mock and use various ad-homs dressed in bitter sarcasm as the only dialogue

And yes I hate what xtians do, not all the things they do of course because that would be lie.

Yeah I hate a lot of things they do too,.

Christians (as you are fully aware) claim that although god recommended a punishment of death for those who practiced homosexuality. When god killed or had someone else kill the homosexual he did not hate the homosexual. God merely hate what the homosexual was doing.

And what was he doing?

Now the homosexual being created by god who created all that there is, upon death was loved by god.

I wasn't aware homosexuals were a species moocowman

Remember we are told god did not hate the homosexual, so one can reasonably assume he loved the homosexual as it is very difficult to envisage an indifferent god.

You keep refering to this thing as "the homosexual" are you sure you don't mean "Homosapeinne" ?

So, god creates something and loves what he creates, but hates the way his creation acts even though he created it and everything else in the universes as there is nothing that was not created by god.

Again, you lost me there but I kinda think I got some of it and Ill explain something to you. We are not a sinner because we sin, we sin because we ARE sinners. So in that context, we have all been attempting to fight against what we are and we are all sinners according to the stable datum I use for truth and if you are referring to the Christian God, I can tell you are so mis-led about the scriptures no wonder you hate what you think your daughter is learning, my my I doubt it could be any worse than your knowledge of him.

Here we have a very difficult problem, the god you would have me worship, kills what he loves and creates what he hates. We know that he kills what he loves because he killed his own son

Not a problem at all, because that isn't the God I would have you or anyone else worship, that is the one someone else told you about without the benefit of its contextual reference. He killed his own son? was it God that that nailed his son to the cross for you so he fix the corruption of sin in our DNA.

We cannot say oh but the Romans did it or judas did it, it was gods' big idea if those involved in the killing of gods son didn't do what they were designed to do then we wouldn't be having this lovely debate.

we cannot say that ? why not? God designed man that way? what he was programmed to do all that so he could destroy the entity for being guilty of carrying out the program is that my understanding?

So there you go my friend, jesus doesn't hate homosexuals he just hates what they do but still loves them. Although he would kill them anyway.

I don't hate xtians I just hate what they do and one of the things they do is to tell children, that there is a god in the sky that is their only father. And their father in the sky loves them, but unlike their own father the father in the sky will kill them if they act in a manner that he doesn't like. Allthough he (allegedly) created them to begin with.

Well ya know, it is easy to understand why you have issues with religion and God, but I will tell you this, that is the most twisted, convoluted, inside out and out of context bastardized version of the Bible and God I have ever heard but I am pretty certain for reasons to obvious to have to mention, that it is the version you will cling to.

It's ok, I understand, you behave just like every unsaved person I have ever met with an axe to grind about God and no worthy excuse for it beyond the pleasure it brings you as one of the few indulgences you can be a part of where you think God has it comin to him.

After you grow up and you get serious about knowing the biblical story and the solution God loved you enough to offer, let me know, Ill be honored to share the truth, I know I have a much more robust education in the scriptures than what I have seen you come out with and mine makes a hell of a lot more sense. You realize, if what you believed was within a million miles to being true, even I would not be on the opposite side of your argument. Do you think one of us could be waaaay off?

Care to go deeper and find out which one of us it is?







[edit on 6-7-2009 by DASFEX]

Well as they say the age of Aquarius is upon us. Out with the fish and in with the new belief for a new age.

I'm sure some new religion will be invented. Those churches will be full of disciples once again. Some people just need something to believe in.

Originally posted by moocowman
A long-serving Church of England bishop has predicted that the CofE will cease to exist within a generation. In an article in the Sunday Telegraph, the Rt Rev Paul Richardson said declining church attendance and the rise in multiculturalism meant that “Christian Britain is dead”.

The Church is rapidly declining, with attendances at its services in freefall, a proposal on the table at the next General Synod meeting to cut the number of bishops, and huge holes in its finances due to the economic downturn and a lack of congregants to donate to the collection plate. Read the article in full here.

Mr Richardson said that the Church had lost more than one in ten of its regular worshippers between 1996 and 2006, with a fall from more than one million to 880,000. “At this rate it is hard to see the church surviving for more than 30 years though few of its leaders are prepared to face that possibility.”

While seven in ten people described themselves as ‘Christian’ in the last census, the fall in church marriages and baptisms confirmed that the census could not be taken as a true guide to the situation. Britain was no longer a Christian nation.

The number of babies being baptised has fallen from 609 in every 1,000 at the start of the twentieth century to only 128 in 2006/7 and church marriages have also dropped

Originally posted by amazed

I so have to ask this again, and never have I had a Christian reply, but..

Are you aware that when people hear voices, they are usually given medicines for a psychotic episode? If the medicines do not work they are put in a mental hospital.

But when someone hears "the voice of god", then oh thats all right then.

Why is this?

Actually their is nothing really wrong with either one except many times it isn't the voices he hears that causes the state to have them committed to a mental hospital, it is when he acts on the voices obeying messages he may or may not perceive as God or Satan but if that causes him to be a danger to himself and others,, well I guess you would have to have a personal relationship with the lord but I can say this much, hearing voices that are telling you to jump off a building without the benefit of some good ole signs and wonders, hehe it ain't the lords style man.

What makes hearing the "voice of god" any different then some psychotic people getting together, sharing their stories and writing a book?

NOTHING

yeah because you have experienced BOTH right and you know better than anyone.

I have said this before, even in this thread, that I want people to keep their beliefs, live by them, love them and be happy. But to please stop pushing those beliefs onto others. Stop telling me that I am going to hell if I do not believe just like you do. Stop coming by my house and leaving me pamphlets, stop trying to convert me, stop judging me. Follow your Christian beliefs which says something along the lines of "judge not least you be judged". Truth is? I live far more by the Christian ideology by the way I treat others and live my life than MOST Christians I have ever known.

Jeeziz man GET a HOLD of yourself! Judas Priest guy have a canniption much? I mean if Christians were that persistent and that bothersome, if you were that worried about our disapproval they would have us all working as bill collectors

Well, if christianity is dying, we should be kind & put it out of its misery. Soon too.
So we can have a proper secular funeral for it. I'd suggest a massive p!ss-up in westminster abbey with Motorhead playing live in front of the alter... (hence soon before they're dead)
Intentionally provocative? Yes. Why? When islam & judaism are down, I'll kick them too. For the moment, there's no point. But ridiculing christianity may just bring its complete demise a little closer.
Try having some wild sex for a change. I guarantee its better than worrying about your or anybody else's soul!

reply to post by Bunken Drum


And then run the chance of catching AIDS where you will really be in a position to sooner than later know if there is an afterlife.

Originally posted by Visiting ESB
BTW, there is no god, FYI...

Wow, I did not realize you had the supernatural power in order to know this as fact.

Hey, you are entitled to your wrong opinion.

I can play the same game.
BTW, there is a God, FYI...

reply to post by WhatTheory

Wow, I did not realize you had the supernatural power in order to know this as fact.

He's probably just as gifted as Christians who claim to know that God exist.

wrong opinion.

Oxymoron-ish?

An opinion is a belief that may or may not be backed up with evidence, but which cannot be proved with that evidence. It is normally a subjective statement and may be the result of an emotion or an interpretation of facts; people may draw opposing opinions from the same facts.

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
He's probably just as gifted as Christians who claim to know that God exist.

Now you are making no sense again.
Let's see....you believe Christians are wrong and there is no God.
Since you just said this guy is just as gifted as Christians which means that he is also wrong in believing there is no God which means there is a God.

To recap...you believe there is and is not a God.

Oxymoron-ish?

Oh, good grief!
That was intentional.
Some people have no sense of humor.

reply to post by octotom

The whole point of introducing this subject was to observe that jesus did not, say that he would destroy the Temple of Jerusalem and rebuild it in 3 days.

I have christian friend (who's not the only xtian to be of this belief) who is adamant that based on these verses, the temple of Jerusalem is shortly to be rebuilt and that is the sign of the prophesy.

So we have a bunch of xtians waiting for the temple of jerusalem to be rebuilt as this would be the sign of jesus returning.

But jesus said no such thing !!

As we can see the verses are pretty clear, jesus implies no such thing. Some men(claim) they heard jesus discussing the destruction of the temple and raising it in 3 days.

He is clearly saying in his defense that he was speaking figuratively, and that he was talking about himself as a temple that they the accusers would destroy, but he would raise his body in 3 days.





Matthew 26:
59
The chief priests and the entire Sanhedrin 32 kept trying to obtain false testimony against Jesus in order to put him to death,
60
but they found none, though many false witnesses came forward. Finally two 33 came forward
61
who stated, "This man said, 'I can destroy the temple of God and within three days rebuild it.'"


Mark 14
57
15 Some took the stand and testified falsely against him, alleging,
58
"We heard him say, 'I will destroy this temple made with hands and within three days I will build another not made with hands.'"
59
Even so their testimony did not agree.

John 2
:19 Jesus replied, 1 “Destroy 2 this temple and in three days I will raise it up again.” 2:20 Then the Jewish leaders 3 said to him, “This temple has been under construction 4 for forty-six years, 5 and are you going to raise it up in three days?” 2:21 But Jesus 6 was speaking about the temple of his body. 7

reply to post by WhatTheory

To recap...you believe there is and is not a God.

I think you're confused. Sarcasm. I hope that clears this up for you.

That was intentional.

Suuure. Dramatic emphasis is more like it...

Some people have no sense of humor.

But your post always give me a good laugh, perhaps not what they are intended for but...

reply to post by moocowman

Christianity is finished in the UK

" thats not what i heard"i heard your headline should read,
Christianity finished WITH the U.K.. condemns all brits to catholicism. story goes
some of you in gen.pop. caught wind of it, tweaked the HL abit and popped off first. so whats the attraction to catholic preists?



[edit on 7-7-2009 by randyvs]

[edit on 7-7-2009 by randyvs]

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
I think you're confused.

Sarcasm. I hope that clears this up for you.
Really?? Wow, I would never have guessed.
Seems you missed it also since I was obviously being facetious.

Suuure. Dramatic emphasis is more like it...

Same difference.

But your post always give me a good laugh, perhaps not what they are intended for but...

No, I'm sure its how it was intended given your responses.