Posted on 07/05/2008 2:19:29 PM PDT by theoldmarine
I wonder if the Israel Antiquities Authority will be as diligent in proving this is a fraud as they were proving the James ossuary a fraud. It seems that the ossuary was a relic that would have proved Jesus’ historic presence and needed to be disproved by them. This “discovery”, however, seems like something they can use to disprove Christ as the Messiah.
“Wouldn’t it be nice to be able to read through a simple discussion of a rock with writing on it without all the ‘Jesus working through you” and “I’m right and you’re damned” crap that surrounds these threads?”
Maybe you should avoid this kind of thread.
Really? Who are those “many people?”
And many "Christians" too.
I believe that Christ was referring specifically to the yet to come latter day counterfeit of Christ, commonly referred to as the Antichrist, aka 'The Beast' of Revelation 13.
Absolutely he was.
"I believe that many of us will live long enough to see the literal Second Coming of Christ, and I am expecting to see it myself."
I don't think so, because so much has yet to happen. I believe we are well into the "great revolt" part of Prophecy however. (But then again things are happening fast) A brand new (and final) Persian empire has yet to rise,and a rebel which deceives so many comes from that. Europe has to fall, the Church becomes the rebels throne, etc. etc. Then horrible suffering from famine, persecution.
I don't think I would want to be in this earthly body during those end times anyways. I'll watch from the new world in the new heaven.
(Not often this ole granny gets called 'Dude')
WE have only Paul's word for it regarding his conversion - (Didn't Jesus establish the rule of "Two witnesses" to establish veracity?)
Paul is a self-appointed Apostle - after the Crucifiction, the manner of choosing Apostles was by choosing and annointing by the Twelve.
But Paul appoints himself on the road to Damascus and brushes off, with disdain, the need to confer with the leadership in Jerusalem.
He looked down on them - evident in his writings - and after suddenly turning from the murderer of any and all Christians he could find to an "Apostle" = he takes off, not for Jerusalem, but to Arabia and Damascus.
:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called [me] by his grace,
1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: [The Apostles, the leaders appointed by Jesus]
1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.
1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.
1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.
He was condescending to the leaders of the Church and there was a mutual dislike = "in nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles..." 2 Corinthians 12:11
and in 2 Cor. 11:5-6
11:5 For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.
11:6 But though [I be] rude in speech, yet not in knowledge;
Paul was an arrogant, angry little man...and we have only his word for what Jesus supposedly taught him in visions - totally at valiance with the way Jesus conducted His 'business'...
Paul saw no need to 'confer' with the very people that Jesus hand picked and taught, the people that lived, ate, slept and took instruction from Him for 3 years.
There are books and books about the subject of Paul - and "Paulinism" -
I notice you rely on the words of Paul - Myself, I rely on the 'red letters' - even have a book that has ONLY the words of Jesus from the Bible.
I believe Jesus was capable of explaining His Gospel - and that He did it very well.
I agree with Thomas Jefferson - have his 'Bible' where he took out only the words of Jesus to print by themselves.
I don't think Jesus and His words need reams and reams of others interpretations of what he said.
What He said, he said. Simply. Beautifully.
Most likely inscribe by an ancient relative of Dan Brown.
I totally agree with you and I’m a Christian.
BINGO
:o)
Unfortunately, some people I know.
I trust Jesus more that Paul - so I guess we're even
It seems, however, you do not trust in the Scriptures as the inspired word of God. What else is there in Scripture that you do not trust in?
“The fatal error of the Jews was refusing to look beyond this life into Eternity, and looking only to their immediate surroundings ...”
The Jews are charged with keeping the Torah, the very link between God and His earth. If they ever ceased being Jews the Torah itself would die. The Torah is the thing from which Jesus Himself depends. No Torah, no God. Why do you think Evil always wants to destroy the Jews? I believe there must always be Jews or God Himself will destroy the earth as a derelict.
Scripture does say that they will believe a lie.
The Talmud and Church Fathers are not considered Scripture. They are commentaries more or less that may or may not be considered authoritative, depending on who you talk to.
As to our reading of the English and Hebrew Scriptures saying something, it isn’t our reading. Jesus Himself pointed to Himself as the fulfillment of the Jewish Messiah. Paul and the other apostles reiterated that fact that He was the suffering servant who will return as triumphant king.
They word “may” puts the actual reading of this tablet under quite a fog.
Nevertheless if this reading is correct, there’s nothing here to alarm any Christian. Christ’s death and resurrection was all foreshadowed in the OT; all it shows is that the tablet’s author was able to read and understand the Scriptures available at that time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.