1. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    18 Oct '09 23:001 edit
    Originally posted by 667joe
    I, si, feel sorry for you basing you whole life on make believe. You look facts in the face and ignore them. Everything I have said in recent posts is in the bible that you profess to believe in, yet you deny it.
    ==================================
    You look facts in the face and ignore them. Everything I have said in recent posts is in the bible that you profess to believe in, yet you deny it.
    ==========================================


    From memory I recall no facts but faulty interpretations, none of which constituted the "errors" that you assert are in the Bible.

    I recall three of them. I think I addressed three from you.

    Re-state the "facts" that I am ignoring briefly.
  2. Joined
    07 Jan '08
    Moves
    34575
    18 Oct '09 23:14
    Originally posted by 667joe
    I, si, feel sorry for you basing you whole life on make believe. You look facts in the face and ignore them. Everything I have said in recent posts is in the bible that you profess to believe in, yet you deny it.
    However, if the Bible is to be looked upon as a spiritual guide and not an almanac, then it is you we should feel sorry for.
  3. Maryland
    Joined
    10 Jun '05
    Moves
    156005
    18 Oct '09 23:31
    Originally posted by jaywill
    [b]==================================
    You look facts in the face and ignore them. Everything I have said in recent posts is in the bible that you profess to believe in, yet you deny it.
    ==========================================


    From memory I recall no facts but faulty interpretations, none of which constituted the "errors" that you assert ...[text shortened]... em. I think I addressed three from you.

    Re-state the "facts" that I am ignoring briefly.[/b]
    Go back to the very 1st post. One book says Jesus ascended to heaven the 1st day after being resurrected. Another book says he wondered around for forty days teaching his followers and then ascended to heaven. No place in the bible does it say he went back and forth between earth and heaven. Why is it so hard for you to admit ( what is right in front of your eyes ) in the book that you say is unerring, that at least one of these positions is not correct? Also, since you believe the bible is the unerring word of god, you must think slavery is OK and that women are inferior to men .
  4. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    19 Oct '09 01:144 edits
    Originally posted by 667joe
    Go back to the very 1st post. One book says Jesus ascended to heaven the 1st day after being resurrected. Another book says he wondered around for forty days teaching his followers and then ascended to heaven. No place in the bible does it say he went back and forth between earth and heaven. Why is it so hard for you to admit ( what is right in front of ...[text shortened]... is the unerring word of god, you must think slavery is OK and that women are inferior to men .
    ===============================
    Go back to the very 1st post. One book says Jesus ascended to heaven the 1st day after being resurrected. Another book says he wondered around for forty days teaching his followers and then ascended to heaven. No place in the bible does it say he went back and forth between earth and heaven. Why is it so hard for you to admit ( what is right in front of your eyes ) ========================================


    One thing at a time.

    First, I am not sure what you mean by the first post. However, the only passage I can think of which implies that Jesus ascended to heaven and returned in the same day is John 20:17.

    I believe that Jesus would not allow Mary to cling to Him because in some way He wished that the Father's enjoyment of the resurrected Son must preceed man's enjoyment:

    "Jesus said to her, Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brothers and say to them, I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God." (20:17)

    Don't touch me yet because I have not YET ascended to the Father.

    Now in the evening of the same day I read:

    "When therefore it was evening on THAT DAY, the first day of the week, and while the doors were shut where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst and said to them, Peace be to you.

    And when He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. The disciples therefore rejoiced at seeing the Lord." (v.20,21)
    .

    Let's be fair. It does not specifically mention that they TOUCHED Him. I assume that He had ascended to the Father that day and returned in the evening. And when He returned the restriction had been lifted. They could examine Him.

    If it is objected that this implies too much traveling of Christ back and forth that assumes things which I regard as not totally warranted. His public ascending on the cloud 40 days latter may have had a more VISUAL aspect for public effect.

    How do I know that He could not easily privately ascend to heaven in the twinkling of an eye and come back in the evening? Certainly John chapter 3 strongly implies that it is not that easy to locate WHERE He is to begin with:

    "And no one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended out of heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven." (John 3:13)

    Here "ascended into heaven" is in the past tense implying that the Son of Man ascended there at least once before His resurrection. Then it says "the Son of Man, who is in heaven". The verse is puzzling. But it seems that we should not assume too much about His traffic to and from heaven or even where He is while seeming to be on the earth.

    So I accept a secret and undramatic ascending into heaven on the day of His resurrection AND a returning to His disciples in the evening to present to them His resurrected body.

    He loved the Father foremost. It stands to reason that the Father was to be the FIRST to enjoy the firstfruit of the Son's resurrected being. There was a private ascending for the Father's enjoyment. Then 40 days latter there was a dramatic and more visual public ascending in Luke 24:50-53.

    In between these two Acts records that to His disciples " ... He presented Himself alive after His suffering by many irrefutable proofs, appearing to them through a period of forty days and speaking the things concerning the kingdom of God." (Acts 1:3)

    Eating fish before them and allowing them to handle His resurrected body were part of these irrefutable proofs of Him having resurrected.
  5. Maryland
    Joined
    10 Jun '05
    Moves
    156005
    19 Oct '09 05:06
    He was never dead.
  6. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    20 Oct '09 02:01
    Originally posted by 667joe
    He was never dead.
    He lived. He died. He rose from the dead.
  7. weedhopper
    Joined
    25 Jul '07
    Moves
    8096
    20 Oct '09 07:32
    Originally posted by 667joe
    So you are saying the 2cd coming has already happened and maybe a 3rd and 4th coming also........ Most watchers have not been as astute as you.
    second coming refers to a return from heaven, not an ascencion TO heaven.
    Sorry--Bible still wins: no contradiction there. 🙂 But you're in a lot of company. Folks have been trying to find a "gotcha" moment in the Holy Scriptures for going on 2 millenia now without success.
  8. England
    Joined
    15 Nov '03
    Moves
    33497
    20 Oct '09 10:071 edit
    Originally posted by 667joe
    Luke 24:51 Jesus ascends to heaven the 1st night after the resurrection.

    Acts 1:3, 9 Jesus ascends to heaven at least 40 days after the resurrection.


    Once again the bible conflicts with itself and is obviously wrong on at least one count. Of course the most likely case is that the bible is wrong on both counts because Jesus was never resurrected.
    sorry for the late reply. i carry a small bible around with me most of the time the luke 24 51 while he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up to heaven. Is what is written where does your bible say the 1st night?
    in acts 1 9 after he said this he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight. Again no mention of days
  9. Standard memberWulebgr
    Angler
    River City
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    16907
    22 Oct '09 01:09
    Originally posted by 667joe
    He was never dead.
    Evidence?
  10. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    22 Oct '09 03:33
    Originally posted by PinkFloyd
    But you're in a lot of company. Folks have been trying to find a "gotcha" moment in the Holy Scriptures for going on 2 millenia now without success.
    Without success? Where have you been the last 2000 years? Are you blind? Are your eyes really so selective?
  11. Standard membermenace71
    Can't win a game of
    38N Lat X 121W Lon
    Joined
    03 Apr '03
    Moves
    154856
    22 Oct '09 03:47
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Greenleaf

    Apparently from what I understand he challenged his students to try & prove the bible to be true so he could smash them. He became a Christian.



    Manny
  12. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    22 Oct '09 05:02
    Originally posted by menace71
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Greenleaf

    Apparently from what I understand he challenged his students to try & prove the bible to be true so he could smash them. He became a Christian.



    Manny
    Simon Greenleaf (1783 – 1853) doesn't have a bearing of today. I doubt that anyone of us has read any of his books regarding this subject.
    If it would, then the names of his students would be far more interesting, and their reasoning.
  13. Standard membermenace71
    Can't win a game of
    38N Lat X 121W Lon
    Joined
    03 Apr '03
    Moves
    154856
    23 Oct '09 03:263 edits
    I have to respectfully disagree with you on this. I think people in history and what they had to say and what they wrote at times are more relevant than ever. If we forget history (specially the bad) we are doomed to repeat it.
    Plus what we can learn.



    Manny
  14. Standard membergalveston75
    Texasman
    San Antonio Texas
    Joined
    19 Jul '08
    Moves
    78698
    23 Oct '09 16:11
    Originally posted by menace71
    I have to respectfully disagree with you on this. I think people in history and what they had to say and what they wrote at times are more relevant than ever. If we forget history (specially the bad) we are doomed to repeat it.
    Plus what we can learn.



    Manny
    That's exactly why so much was written down in the Bible. Among hundreds of other things such as our God and his dealings with mankind, it has thousands of scriptures peering into the past that gives us proof after proof that the Bible is accurate and has no flaws with detailed accounts of many points in history that have been proven to be accurate. It's only by ones that don't and won't take the time out to research these facts that don't believe and see the truth in the Bible. But then that's exactly what the Bible says would happen. They let themselves be blinded...
  15. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    23 Oct '09 16:19
    Originally posted by menace71
    I have to respectfully disagree with you on this. I think people in history and what they had to say and what they wrote at times are more relevant than ever. If we forget history (specially the bad) we are doomed to repeat it.
    Plus what we can learn.



    Manny
    Of course we learn from history. But only if we let it teach us something.
    But only becase a man become a christian doesn't say that christainity has any value.
    Not more than, say, Cassius Clay became a muslim makes islam better?
    Or that christian people in medieval times thought that earth was flat, doesn't mean that the earth actually is flat, not even then.
    But this insignificant man from 200 years ago doesn't teach us much. If so, what?
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree