Originally posted by robbie carrobieThere have always been famines and probably always will be.
'there will be famines' - Mattew 24:7 -
India drought 'affecting 330 million people' after two weak monsoons
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/20/india-drought-affecting-330-million-people-weak-monsoons
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYour notion of what is a "composite" and not a "composite" is pure speculation and conjecture.
No one has claimed that there has not, the sign that Christ gave is composite and its simply logicically fallacious to isolate elements and state that these have always occurred.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThis retort only serves as a dodge. Your notion of what is a "composite" ~ and what "evidence" can be included and what "evidence" can be dismissed (or ignored) ~ is textbook subjectivity.
Yes and divegeester is a Christian and Ghost of a Duke a retired spitfire pilot.
3 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou have no good grounds for insisting the evidence must lie in the past and not the future. It is like the drunk searching for his keys under the lamp post because the alley where he dropped them is too dark to see.
Its just too airy Finnegan, based on speculation and conjecture. I find it much more reasonable to examine the evidence from the past, of what has actually transpired and to attempt to determine if we can pinpoint the epoch that the Christ was referring to and this epoch from the First world war onwards has witnessed an unprecedented escalation in w ...[text shortened]... re. That is not saying I am right and you are wrong, its an appeal to reason based on evidence.
You also give me no assurance that what you see in the evidence is a rational judgement when it appears terribly similar to wish fulfilment - seeing what you want to see.
By your own account you start from the bible and then look around to see if there is the kind of evidence you might be looking for. Aha - is that a famine in India? Is that a war in Guatamala?
But you might in the same way see your famine and your war and decide to search in the bible for something to explain it. A little skill in its reading will ensure that you can always find something in there with a little creativity.
Is that not what Jews explicitly encourage - to find imaginative ways of relating a passage in the Torah to a current problem, even if that entails an entirely original interpretation in direct conflict with earlier readings? In their hands the process is not dishonest - they are quite clear about what their purpose is. In your case, sadly, there is sleight of hand and trickery with words taking place. You are a bit like the street performer with the three cups trick.
3 edits
Originally posted by finnegan'He would not speak to them without an illustration', such Christ like teaching should be commended!
You have no good grounds for insisting the evidence must lie in the past and not the future. It is like the drunk searching for his keys under the lamp post because the alley where he dropped them is too dark to see.
You also give me no assurance that what you see in the evidence is a rational judgement when it appears terribly similar to wish fulfilment - seeing what you want to see.
May I suggest that time flows in a unilateral direction, from the future, to the present, to the past. Thus while its true that we can influence the future by what we do in the present (for example if I jump from a tall building its likely that at some point in the future I may end up in a hospital) its almost impossible to discern what will really transpire by attempting to peer into the future. Thus it is much easier for humans to look at the present and the past for evidence.
Here we have a composite sign given in prophecy which would mark a particular epoch in time, the beginning of the conclusion of the system of things. It has as its basis, unprecedented warfare, famine, earthquakes and various other elements and you say that we should look for evidence of its fulfilment in the future despite there having been a huge and unprecedented escalation in warfare, horrendous famine which will probably only get worse as climate change makes both food and water difficult to procure, a marked increase in the frequency of large earthquakes and their devastating consequences. I think you are being wholly unreasonable if I am honest Finnegan and its clear that NO amount of empirical evidence would convince you otherwise that we have already entered the begging of this epoch.
So be it, bring me a bowl of water and a towel, I wash my hands in innocence itself. (nor will I return your insult of charlatanism, like for like)
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI did NOT say we should look for our evidence to the future. I said that when you claim there is no possible alternative to your interpretation that the prophecy refers to the 20th Century, you are mistaken, because it is POSSIBLE for the prophecy to refer to future events which are presently unknowable.
'He would not speak to them without an illustration', such Christ like teaching should be commended!
May I suggest that time flows in a unilateral direction, from the future, to the present, to the past. Thus while its true that we can influence the future by what we do in the present (for example if I jump from a tall building its likely that a ...[text shortened]... ash my hands in innocence itself. (nor will I return your insult of charlatanism, like for like)
I exemplified my point by observing that however good earlier Christians may have been, and however seduced by perfectly plausible examples of the type of event you envisage, such as the Mongol invasions which reached across the entire known world more or less, they could not have known what would transpire in the 20th Century until after the event. So we are in a position relative to our future that is no different to that of earlier Christians relative to their future.
You are not really demonstrating why our personal situation in the scheme of things must be priviliged in the way you demand.
As regards the deployment of personal invective, it is not intended to be hurtful, but is very much in the spirit of the way this forum operates.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut doesn't Chronicles use the same language? Was that also international /global, or only when such an interpretation suits your requirements?
Yes it does, 'For nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom', Matt 24:7 - refers to international warfare, please note the rather glaring and obvious clues nation against nation i.e International warfare. Its elementary.
'One nation was being crushed by another and one city by another, because God was troubling them with every kind of distress.' (2 Chronicles 15:6).
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI didn't say they didn't happen. It is your assuming these are signs of some end day thing that is just in your imagination based on words allegedly spoken by JC 2000 years ago. And I reiterate, JC said he was coming back 'soon', like he meant in a couple of months or years. There is zero indication of what he meant was really thousands of years.
ach yer bum! since when was the first world war non-existent, since when are earthquakes non-existent.
3 edits
Originally posted by finneganFine but you have seized upon a semantic argument, sure its possible, like a Grand Piano will fall from the sky and crush me next Wednesday at 2:25 in the afternoon is possible.
I did NOT say we should look for our evidence to the future. I said that when you claim there is no possible alternative to your interpretation that the prophecy refers to the 20th Century, you are mistaken, because it is POSSIBLE for the prophecy to refer to future events which are presently unknowable.
I exemplified my point by observing that howeve ...[text shortened]... ing why our personal situation in the scheme of things must be priviliged in the way you demand.
Nor does the fact that other Christians in other epochs which may have understood the prophetic word differently undermine the body of evidence that I have considered nor can it because until the first world war there was no really outstanding and unprecedented warfare like that, a war to end all wars, so yes you can argue that it may have been this and it may have been that but its hardly likely to be as convincing as all out global conflict and the escalation of violence and weaponry which ensued.
The Mongols got to France and got a pasting and were sent hame. Alexander was killed by a Pakistani mosquito! 😵
1 edit
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeOne nation being crushed by another is a local conflict as is one city with another, like when the Persians conquered Lydia and captured Croesus, or West ham beating Leicester city in the cup, its hardly the same as nation rising against nation and kingdom against Kingdom.
But doesn't Chronicles use the same language? Was that also international /global, or only when such an interpretation suits your requirements?
'One nation was being crushed by another and one city by another, because God was troubling them with every kind of distress.' (2 Chronicles 15:6).
Originally posted by sonhouseI think its entirely plausible if I am honest, way more plausible than anything else I have heard or read.
I didn't say they didn't happen. It is your assuming these are signs of some end day thing that is just in your imagination based on words allegedly spoken by JC 2000 years ago. And I reiterate, JC said he was coming back 'soon', like he meant in a couple of months or years. There is zero indication of what he meant was really thousands of years.