Objective Moral Values

[makedonin]

Pilosopher, I don't have much time, so I will write quick response.

But I don't think it should bring anything about! I have my reasons and you have your reasons!

Hence the problem with discussing this matter with you. Rather than addressing the actual evidence (the gospels), you simply bypass what is written, scoff at it, and say they can’t be trusted.


Rather than exam the actual first hand evidence of the gospels, you start with presuppositions that you bring into the text and say “if the gospels don’t align with my thinking, I will dismiss them as untrustworthy and false.”

The so called actual evidence is stand alone evidence. Even the Moses law recognized the need of at least two witnesses.

All we are left is the Bible and dependence on it alone. This you call is internal evidence.

I can't recognize it as such because all those who went of to write stories like the gospel were in position to go back and fort in scripture and quote or misquote anything they liked.

Secular Biblical scholarship have shown that the gospels depend on one another, and each later writer had reduction works to do, to fit their agenda. So they as stand alone can't be seen as more than a one source of evidence.

For example Archbishop Peter Carnley explains:

The presence of discrepancies might be a sign of historicity if we had four clearly independent but slightly different versions of the story, if only for the reason that four witnesses are better than one. But, of course, it is now impossible to argue that what we have in the four gospel accounts of the empty tomb are four contemporaneous but independent accounts of the one event. Modern redactional studies of the traditions account for the discrepancies as literary developments at the hand of later redactors of what was originally one report of the empty tomb... There is no suggestion that the tomb was discovered by different witnesses on four different occasions, so it is in fact impossible to argue that the discrepancies were introduced by different witnesses of the one event; rather, they can be explained as four different redactions for apologetic and kerygmatic reasons of a single story originating from one source.

Peter Carnley, The Structure of Resurrection Belief (New York: Oxford, 1987), p. 47.

Although the above comment is now concerning the resurrection, it actually shows what I mean about reduction of the gospels thus we have no four different eyewitnesses reports but rather only one.

Seen in that light, it is absurd to claim that any "inner evidence" has to be taken as historical account or evidence of anything. Rather it is a kyrigma and theology that we are reading.

That is true—the apostles didn’t understand him.

If that is true, how are we to believe them that they communicated the message correctly?

They can be suspected for introducing their own interest in the whole thing, as Jeremiah 8:8-9 accuses the scribes, and all you have to prove their consistency is your belief that they were sanctified!

In that way, I can argue for divine inspiration of Hitlers "Mein Kampf"

I have other problems with the Gospels. For example Luke 1:1 tells us that: "Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled[Or been surely believed] among us.."

My problem is where are those accounts? We know that there are many non canonical gospels, and why are they not considered as such?

Well it is so, because someone decided to make a choice which should be considered true or false!

Why is someone making that decision for me? How can I know that this people were "inspired" by God to do so, and that in their sinful state they did not make false choice?

Another problem with all those gospels and why it's so called "inner evidence" is not trustworthy is because they have clear agenda!

In actuality they are religious propaganda! They have but one goal to make people believe and join the creed!

That this was process in development, we can only conclude from the so called synoptic v.s. Johanine gospel!

In the synoptics the topic of salvation is clear as day! Do good works, forgive each other and God will forgive you! Only some reductionist passages mention belief and faith!
Johanine gospel on the other hand renders the good works obsolete and only belief and faith is the means for salvation!

So, why is this so? Put in time line Johns gospel is the latest, thus there is very little doubt that for Johns writer the belief and faith thing is mandatory cause he was obviously confronted with disbelief in the accounts of the other gospels!

So is it really that necessary to believe in something that is self evidently true such as God is, or is it mandatory for people of certain creed to believe their version of God?

Good works and love your neighbor won't bind you to the creed and church! You don't need creed or church to be good person!

But belief will bind you, and that is exactly what the John and the late church wanted!

The gospel as accounts are not disinterested sources! They have clear agenda, they depend on each other and they are not reliable.

How should I believe to Marks account when it says to me:

When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons.
Mark 16:9

How am I to know that their meeting was not invented by her, or if the Demons did not make her give false testimony?

Can you grasp the huge problem that this verse poses for reliability of this account?


I can go on all day long, and I won't stop you from your apologies, so I will leave it at that!

And about your complaint of my disbelief.

Well if you honestly read the gospels, they clearly say that I don't believe because Jesus did not reveal God to me (Matthew 11:25-27), so I am in no position to believe.

According to Mark or the church reduction of Mark rather speaking:

He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that,

“‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!”

Mark 4:11-12

Do you really understand what that says? Others are fed with parables so that they not understand anything and be not forgiven!

Not all are to be forgiven, thus the outsiders are left out, at least that is what the Church want us to believe, and since I don't believe and dismiss your "inner evidence", it is only where Jesus wanted me to be!

I am predestined for destruction, praise to the Lord! Alleluia!

So we come to the claim of yours that "if it does not align with my thinking blah blah." That is not the reason why I dismiss them. But still, if God was to create this world which is impartial towards everybody, than I can't believe that God as he is can be partial and favoring certain groups of people! And that is exactly the reason why the Bible is not to be trusted, as show above and in other posts!

By the way, may be I would believe if at least you as firm believer show me some of this:

He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

Mark 16:17-18

How about demonstration of your belief? I will mix up deadly poison and you drink it! If you don't die, I will believe anything you say!

The fact remains the above information is partly erroneous.

Why should I give you the benefit of doubt and not to the one you claim his information is partly erroneous?

He claims exactly as you claim knowledge about the matter! He goes on and gives etymology etc. etc.

Above all, he also claims that he is believer! So he must have received the Holy Spirit, and this holy spirit should have prevented him from making the "error" you claim he made!

Why didn't the Holy Spirit inspire him and prevent him from being erroneous?

If I have to chose to whom I believe, I would say to non of you!

Go and google "what does aion mean" and tell me which one is pleasing to you, I will than consider it!

It appears to me that you misinterpret Matthew and confuse the meaning between Aion and Kosmos. If the author of Matthew meant to express the end of the world, he would have used the word KOSMOS, the Greek word for WORLD. He would not have used the word AION. You’re discrediting yourself by your poor understanding of the Koine Greek.

I know Koine Greek so far that I can read up in dictionary!

As for misinterpreting the word Aion with Kosmos, well this same word is used in the sense of the contemporary world of affairs, not the physical world. The world of humans with the whole of their affairs, thus, HEY who knows, maybe you have to go and learn more Greek.

But if the Koine Language is predisposition to understand the Bible, than the Bible fails miserable in communicating its message!

Actually, the prophecy was 100% correct. You're saying that Matthew wrote his gospel after 70AD, after the temple, then if Christ didn't predict the Desctruction of the Temple, and it was made up, why would Matthew after the fact write information that was factually incorrect? Surely he would have time, after the fact, to change the words of Christ or pretend Christ said this or that. Yet, he didn't!

He had simple reason why he didn't do that what you ask!

He had agenda to preach Kyrigma, Theology. He is a fan of fulfilled prophecies that he actually takes all out of context!

Why don’t you look up the Jewish-Roman Wars.
The Romans destroyed their Temple; murdered up to (perhaps more than) a million Jews; burned Jerusalem with fire; destroyed their city; and eventually expelled the Jews from Palestine. It wasn’t until 1948 that the Jews, in rebellion to God, returned to Palestine and created Israel. Jews from all over the world go to Jerusalem and weep at the fallen Temple and their miseries for the last 2000 years or so.

From the beginning of the world, the Jewish nation has never experienced more misery than in that era. The prophecy was that the destruction that fell on the Jews was never to be greater ever again than what happened to them. And this 100% true.


Which tribulations before the fall of the temple were greater than those which happened to the Jews during the Jewish-Roman Wars? Name them. Christ is not speaking of non-Jews; he is speaking of the punishment of the Jewish nation for all their sins, and the chief sin, of Murdering the Son of God.

And the holocaust is in what extent less catastrophic event for the Jews? They were persecuted through out whole Europe and Russia and were killed like a animals!

There were more Jews killed in holocaust than in Roman Wars, so how is that less of tribulation for you?


The notion of "in rebellion to God" is interesting! Your hate for the Jews is though understanding!
Their religion renders your invalid and that is what makes you angry at them!

If it was in rebellion to God, why didn't God step in and prevent it from happening. But rather you will tell me that he will wait for certain moment in uncertain future to handle things that need immediate reaction!

Also to pretend that Jesus is speaking only for Jews is introduction of non existing information into the text.

Palestine of the time is occupied by Romans and there were many other Groups living there. Many allegedly became believers and possibly followers!

It is your hypothesis, there is no mention of any Jewish Age, it is your construct.

Remember the statement of Christ . He doesn’t mean all humanity; he means on the Jews. Look at the audience; look at the people he is addressing.

You can't prove that it was exclusive Jewish audience!

In those times Palestine was under Roman Empire, there were many different people living there!

Some gospels even show Roman centurion or Sarmatians that believed Jesus! How can you prove that those people did not became followers?

Just for that fact, your statement that the audience is pure Jewish is falsehood at best!

The fact remains: you cannot show me in Matthew 24 Christ saying the “WORLD” will end; nor can you show me that He means anything other than PALESTINE engaged in war. Show me; I want proof!!!

Here is another commentary, just for you:

Galatians 1:4:
The "world" being referred to here is the Greek aion and means "age"—a time period. The "present evil world" or "present evil age" which we need to be delivered from by God could be a reference to the strong influence the Jews had on the Galatians, as well as the Jews' wish to bind them (the Galatians) to the traditions and ordinances they had added to God's instruction, which He calls "burdens" elsewhere

Hebrews 11:3
The word "worlds" is translated from the Greek aion, meaning "age," in the sense of a period of time or a dispensation. It derives from a root that means "continued," and it is used as "world" only when "world" gives a better sense of a period of time, not the physical creation. It could be used if one said "the world that then was" or "the world to come."

Read more: http://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/...#ixzz1G62CoPOC

It is exactly as I said previously! The word age can be translated as world of human affairs, the present evil world, etc. See it must not be taken as literal, but it can have a metaphysic and metaphoric sense.

So, you can't really prove that the word "aion" in Matthew 24 strictly refers to Jewish Age, but the Bible and it's translations show that the word "aion" can be understood as I said.

So tell me what would Jesus end in Matthew 24?

It can be definitely the "present evil world" or "present evil age" which we need to be delivered from by God i.e. the so called end of the world, as spoken in 2 Peter 3!

Aion can mean the Age of the Kingdom of God but what does this mean? The Church in this World is the Earthly Representation of the Kingdom of God; and the Kingdom of God is within each believer. Christ reigns from Heaven the Heavenly Kingdom (the perfected souls) and the Earthly (his Church).

If the Church is the Kingdom of God, than I don't want to have any part of it, cause the church have shown to be worst than Sodom and Gomorrah with all it's pedophile tendencies. And when saying that, what do you mean, which Church you mean, Roman, Orthodox, Protestant?

If each believer is the Kingdom of God, than I am not confident that this is in any really moral and righteous Kingdom at all, since looking at the Christians who supposedly love their neighbors have been killing, murdering etc. etc. But hey than it will fit to the picture with the old Testament, wouldn't you mind?

Instead of petty excuses such as that, what could it mean, look at 2 Peter 3:13 where he says what it might be: "But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells. "

I neither see righteousnesses in the Church that was persecuting anyone that does not believe, starting wars of any kind, justified events as holocaust nor in the Christian masses that are participating in the crimes of the Church.

So the Kingdom of God did not come, not yet, specially not in the Church of today.

The “sun” mentioned is not the literal “sun”; nor is the moon spoken of, the literal “moon”; nor are the stars mentioned literally “stars;” but rather typical Jewish phraseology. They are symbolic esxpressions relating to the fall of the Jewish nation, see Daniel, (the Stars), and the Glory of God (could be the Sun) being darkened on the Jewish nation, and the moon his oracles (his words to Israel).

And now we come why you can't be trusted!

When discussing anything one has to attach the right Ideas on the right words!

What you do all the time is to jump from literal to symbolic meaning of words, and this is done when it fits you! (See above about aion)

There is no reason to think that the literal sun, moon and stars are not meant here, when you take the ride on the cloud as literal! And that this is so is seen from your on the fly apology which does not consider the shaking of the heavenly bodies! You don't have any idea what that might be in relation to the Jews! How do you imagine that the darkening of the sun could be to darken the Glory of God? Is he somehow hijacked and he went missing? Since when is the moon the oracle?

You are grasping at straws here!

Other than that, this is typical apocalyptic imagery which we ought to take as serious event in the future!

Take the most popular apocalyptic book:

I watched as he opened the sixth seal. There was a great earthquake. The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red, and the stars in the sky fell to earth, as figs drop from a fig tree when shaken by a strong wind.
Revelation 6:12-13

So are we to think that this is also imagery of the fall of the Jewish nation?

Common you gotta be kidding me.

Again, the problem with discussing this matter with you. Apparently, words don’t mean what they mean. By your train of logic—and I know you will agree with this—we can’t trust or believe anything written, in anytime, in history, because words don’t mean what they mean.

What difference does it make if it did? Even if documents are found that say just that, you will dismiss it, since you don’t believe anything written by anyone. You believe words have no meanings.
The truth of the matter is: this did happen. Whether it was recorded and lost through the destruction, I can’t say for sure.

You are misinterpreting my words! I don't say that words don't have any meaning!

But words have to be attached to right Ideas if we are to understand each other! In the case of the gospel writers I don't disbelieve the words, but the writers and their interests and intentions! They are not disinterested sources!

Second, I would not dismiss any disinterested document just like that, specially not when it will come from someone that is not disciple of Jesus!

According to your belief, Jesus should have been floating into the sky so that Romans and Jews could have seen him! That must have induced enormous interest in every aspect.

Well, here is the catch, if some secular historian have seen this, and according to the description it is highly doubtful that everyone would have missed the event, than we could have something like "Hey this is in deed mysterious land, I just saw a floating man in the sky!"

But not just that we don't have such account, but we don't even slightly remote to that, something like second hand report, where secular scholar would say something like "Hey this people have seen a floating man in the Sky!".

Secular scholar would be Roman or Jew, it does not really matter!.

But what we have is your belief and the Gospel writers who had their own agenda and propaganda, and most probably you are misinterpreting them too!

As for the so called "they went lost" sort of argument!. Well that is only a dodge. You can in no possible way prove that anyone wrote anything!

We have cases of lost sources that are mentioned by others, so considering the immense importance and highly supernatural event such as floating on cloud, we will expect that many people have seen it and many have written about it!

Yet, all we have is glaring gap and your belief!

Sorry, I don't see any proof of your belief there!

There are two theories as to the meaning of 2 Peter. (1) Peter is speaking of 70AD; or (2) He is speaking of the Second Coming of Christ, in which the world will be destroyed by God. There is a difference between the prophecy of Matthew 24, and the end of the Jewish Age and 2 Peter, the End of the World. There are similarities to both, since Christ will appear as a thief but this is to be expected, since he refused to give a date of his return.

I haven't seen any such divided theories, to say the least, I first time heard from you about any supposed Jewish Age! All I find is gullible Christian videos and pages that are highly doubtful.

And about the thief thing! He didn't refuse to give a date, He said that he does not know the date! That is a huge difference, and your way of putting it is only a way how to avoid the obvious, because he is not same as God, but rather only God knows the time and date!

Really? So then how do you explain these verses:
Matthew 21.43

And again, Hosea 1.9
Yes, the Jews expect their Messiah to come; but the Jews don’t realize that he already came 2000 years ago, and that the physical Jews of today are no longer the people of God, and that their kingdom was taken from them, and given over to the Spiritual Seed of Abraham and the corporate, visible, Church of Christ. The Jews are a blind people.

That is only typical of you apologists!

You complain about context all the time, but than when you need it, you just throw verses around with out any context at all!

If I would bother, which now I won't, I am certain that those passages are to be understood at least partially different than you want them to present them here!


I am sorry that I can't play with you any longer, but I really have job to do!

So think and do what you will, it is your life! Save your self as virgin for your groom Christ if you prefer, I don' really care!

[Rogi]

makedonin, out of curiosity, what would a 'long' response look like, as opposed to that 'quick' one you wrote above?

[makedonin]

makedonin, out of curiosity, what would a 'long' response look like, as opposed to that 'quick' one you wrote above?

I have never written any long responses yet, so I don't really know! Maybe eloquently written. This above is really quick and tries to cover Philosophers ambiguity, which is not really nice way to write.

[makedonin]

Actually, all serious scholars, secular and atheist consider the gospels were written by those apostles.

When you say such thing as actually and all, I really wonder what you imagine in your head!

On the other hand, if I understand you I ran in danger to become like you, so no thanks!

Again, your inaccuracy is due to being uninformed (probably because you troll through really bad Christian fundamentalists websites rather than reading books and visiting museums).

It is your bias.

I could take your alleged argument and just replace atheist with Christian fundamentalists and you will see that you described your self, not me!

So just back off, will ya, you are really boring!

You have stated many of your beliefs on this thread and the other, only to quickly disown them (temporarily) when they are shown for the foolishness they are.

You don't have the slightest Idea what you are talking about here!

But maybe you do, but you describe your self when looking into a mirror?

The Lords ways are mysterious, and Vangel you are part of his mystery and plan, so no need to shit your pants!

[Philosopher]

I, too, will give my final response—since I will not waste my time any longer. I love how you jump from subject to another subject to another subject. It’s like you have some brain issue or something.

If that is true, how are we to believe them that they communicated the message correctly?

Naturally, this is to be understood only in the beginning; it is evident from the rest of the New Testament that the apostles, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, taught the teachings of Christ accurately and understood them. So pay attention to context…

According to Mark or the church reduction of Mark rather speaking: He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that,

“‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!”

This is rather silly; did you read the part right before your quote begins? It says that the apostles came to Jesus and asked him the meaning of the parables. And Jesus said “The Secret of the Kingdom of God has been given to you…” why? Because they asked for the meaning of the parables; they humbled themselves and were not proud. To those without, who heard the parables, but didn’t ask Christ for the meaning, the parable remained a parable.

That’s like a school teacher teaching a complex subject and no one raises their hand to ask what it all means; and then after class, a few people ask the teacher after class for the meaning and she tells them. But to those who didn’t understand the meaning remained ignorant because they didn’t ask.

Difficult logic, I know!

He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

Naturally, if you understood the message of the whole Bible, and the arguments of St. Paul in 1 Corinthians, those very things of speaking in tongues, driving out demons, etc all happened in the book of Acts and in the early Church; however, as Paul writes, such things were only to be around until the Faith was established and the canon confirmed…and then they would cease.

I know Koine Greek so far that I can read up in dictionary!

As for misinterpreting the word Aion with Kosmos, well this same word is used in the sense of the contemporary world of affairs, not the physical world. The world of humans with the whole of their affairs, thus, HEY who knows, maybe you have to go and learn more Greek.

But if the Koine Language is predisposition to understand the Bible, than the Bible fails miserable in communicating its message!

You do realize that all of the writers in the New Testament (except Luke) were not native Greek speakers or writers. I can see your native language isn’t English, and you, too, do a miserable job communicating your thoughts into English in a rationale manner.

Aion, in context in Matthew 24, means the Age in which the Temple was to be destroyed; it is clear from the context that the apostles want to know the Aion in which Christ’s words would be fulfilled for the destruction of the temple. Context, Context, Context.

And the holocaust is in what extent less catastrophic event for the Jews? They were persecuted through out whole Europe and Russia and were killed like a animals!There were more Jews killed in holocaust than in Roman Wars, so how is that less of tribulation for you?The notion of "in rebellion to God" is interesting! Your hate for the Jews is though understanding!Their religion renders your invalid and that is what makes you angry at them!If it was in rebellion to God, why didn't God step in and prevent it from happening. But rather you will tell me that he will wait for certain moment in uncertain future to handle things that need immediate reaction!

How predictable! The holocaust was not worse, not even by a long shot. I don’t “hate” the Jews. I’m simply stating the “facts” about the Jews and their religious, political, and culturally belief systems. So “the Jews were persecuted through out whole Europe,” ha? Really? Why were they persecuted? The Jewish suffering, in totality, was far worse in the Jewish Roman wars.

Also to pretend that Jesus is speaking only for Jews is introduction of non existing information into the text. Palestine of the time is occupied by Romans and there were many other Groups living there. Many allegedly became believers and possibly followers!It is your hypothesis, there is no mention of any Jewish Age, it is your construct.

Don’t misunderstand me; throughout the gospels, Jesus has many audiences, even those who read the gospels themselves. Much of the teachings and parables of Christ are universal and are intended for the world. And I don’t dispute that there were gentiles in the crowds; the gospels tell us this.

The issue is: In Matthew 24, the context plainly states that the destruction of is for those in Palestine. He is speaking of the fall of Jerusalem, the fall of the Temple; there could have been gentiles listening to this and believing it. But they lived in Palestine and thereabout.

You have failed miserably to demonstrate that Christ is speaking of any other location. This is obvious: when he says “wars and reports of wars,” he doesn’t mean in other lands. There are always wars and reports of wars around the world at all times. He means those living in Palestine.

Let those in “Judea flee to the mounts.” And “pray ye that your flight may not be in winter or in the Sabbath.” Why? Because the Jewish legal system of Sabbath observance would not allow people fleeing for their life on the Sabbath. All this relates to Palestine. Even if there were non-Jews living in Palestine. The destruction was for Palestine. This is why Christ says in Luke “daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but for yourselves,” because of the mass carnage coming to that people.

It is exactly as I said previously! The word age can be translated as world of human affairs, the present evil world, etc. See it must not be taken as literal, but it can have a metaphysic and metaphoric sense.

Absolutely! But the “human affairs” spoken of and the “present evil world” is referring to the Jewish human affairs and the “present Jewish world.” It was the end of the Jewish Age or Dispensation. The fall of the temple in a small land (Palestine) did not concern anyone except the Jews; the Romans did not care for it and destroyed. This hardly would quantify as “the end of the evil world,” because the Romans destroyed the Temple—but it does quantify as the end of the Jewish Age (Jewish world, if you will) because Rome destroyed Jewry and they were expelled from Palestine.
THINK ABOUT IT!!!

What you do all the time is to jump from literal to symbolic meaning of words, and this is done when it fits you! (See above about aion)There is no reason to think that the literal sun, moon and stars are not meant here, when you take the ride on the cloud as literal! And that this is so is seen from your on the fly apology which does not consider the shaking of the heavenly bodies! You don't have any idea what that might be in relation to the Jews! How do you imagine that the darkening of the sun could be to darken the Glory of God? Is he somehow hijacked and he went missing? Since when is the moon the oracle? You are grasping at straws here! Other than that, this is typical apocalyptic imagery which we ought to take as serious event in the future!

So you think when Peter states in Acts 2.20

And the sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon to blood.

That Peter really means “actual blood?” That the moon will be turned to blood? Or is this symbolic language? For example, here is what

John Gill states:

Ver. 29. Immediately after the tribulation of those days,.... That is, immediately after the distress the Jews would be in through the siege of Jerusalem, and the calamities attending it; just upon the destruction of that city, and the temple in it, with the whole nation of the Jews, shall the following things come to pass; and therefore cannot be referred to the last judgment, or what should befall the church, or world, a little before that time, or should be accomplished in the whole intermediate time, between the destruction of Jerusalem, and the last judgment: for all that is said to account for such a sense, as that it was usual with the prophets to speak of judgments afar off as near; and that the apostles often speak of the coming of Christ, the last judgment, and the end of the world, as just at hand; and that one day with the Lord is as a thousand years, will not answer to the word "immediately", or show that that should be understood of two thousand years after: besides, all the following things were to be fulfilled before that present generation, in which Christ lived, passed away, Mt 24:34 and therefore must be understood of things that should directly, and immediately take place upon, or at the destruction of the city and temple.

Shall the sun be darkened: not in a literal but in a figurative sense; and is to be understood not of the religion of the Jewish church; nor of the knowledge of the law among them, and the decrease of it; nor of the Gospel being obscured by heretics and false teachers; nor of the temple of Jerusalem, senses which are given into by one or another; but of the Shekinah, or the divine presence in the temple. The glory of God, who is a sun and a shield, filled the tabernacle, when it was reared up; and so it did the temple, when it was built and dedicated; in the most holy place, Jehovah took up his residence; here was the symbol of his presence, the mercy seat, and the two cherubim over it: and though God had for some time departed from this people, and a voice was heard in the temple before its destruction, saying, "let us go hence"; yet the token of the divine presence remained till the utter destruction of it; and then this sun was wholly darkened, and there was not so much as the outward symbol of it:

and the moon shall not give her light; which also is to be explained in a figurative and metaphorical sense; and refers not to the Roman empire, which quickly began to diminish; nor to the city of Jerusalem; nor to the civil polity of the nation; but to the ceremonial law, the moon, the church is said to have under her feet,
Re 12:1 so called because the observance of new moons was one part of it, and the Jewish festivals were regulated by the moon; and especially, because like the moon, it was variable and changeable. Now, though this, in right, was abolished at the death of Christ, and ceased to give any true light, when he, the substance, was come; yet was kept up by the Jews, as long as their temple was standing; but when that was destroyed, the daily sacrifice, in fact, ceased, and so it has ever since; the Jews esteeming it unlawful to offer sacrifice in a strange land, or upon any other altar than that of Jerusalem; and are to this day without a sacrifice, and without an ephod:

and the stars shall fall from heaven; which phrase, as it elsewhere intends the doctors of the church, and preachers falling off from purity of doctrine and conversation; so here it designs the Jewish Rabbins and doctors, who departed from the word of God, and set up their traditions above it, fell into vain and senseless interpretations of it, and into debates about things contained in their Talmud; the foundation of which began to be laid immediately upon their dispersion into other countries:

and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken; meaning all the ordinances of the legal dispensation; which shaking, and even removing of them, were foretold by Hag 2:6 and explained by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Heb 12:26 whereby room and way were made for Gospel ordinances to take place, and be established; which shall not be shaken, so as to be removed, but remain till the second coming of Christ. The Jews themselves are sensible, and make heavy complaints of the great declensions and alterations among them, since the destruction of the temple; for after having taken notice of the death of several of their doctors, who died a little before, or after that; and that upon their death ceased the honour of the law, the splendour of wisdom, and the glory of the priesthood, they add {g};

"from the time that the temple was destroyed, the wise men, and sons of nobles, were put to shame, and they covered their heads; liberal men were reduced to poverty; and men of violence and calumny prevailed; and there were none that expounded, or inquired, or asked. R. Elezer the great, said, from the time the sanctuary were destroyed, the wise men began to be like Scribes, and the Scribes like to the Chazans, (or sextons that looked after the synagogues,) and the Chazans like to the common people, and the common people grew worse and worse, and there were none that inquired and asked;''

that is, of the wise men there were no scholars, or very few that studied in the law.

Or the meaning is simply the sun, moon, and stars were obsecured or darkened by the Greatness of Christ's appearence.

And about the thief thing! He didn't refuse to give a date, He said that he does not know the date! That is a huge difference, and your way of putting it is only a way how to avoid the obvious, because he is not same as God, but rather only God knows the time and date!

Did you even read my answer to this? Apparently not. He either pretended he didn’t know, like God does in the Old Testament, or his human nature was ignorant, not his Divine. Why don’t you READ before making a FOOL of YOURSELF!

[makedonin]

Here is a secular way to look what we have about the original gospels!

YouTube - Misquoting Jesus, Stanford Lecture, How Bible Got Tainted 2/10

YouTube - Misquoting Jesus, Stanford Lecture, How Bible Got Tainted 3/10

Around 4:00 the lying pen of the scribes.

8 " 'How can you say, "We are wise,
for we have the law of the LORD,"
when actually the lying pen of the scribes
has handled it falsely?
Jeremiah 8:8-9

YouTube - Misquoting Jesus, Stanford Lecture, How Bible Got Tainted 4/10

Around 0:20, who was the father of Jesus? Around 2:00 Matthew chapter 24!

YouTube - Misquoting Jesus, Stanford Lecture, How Bible Got Tainted 7/10
Around 8:50 trinity concerned.
YouTube - Misquoting Jesus, Stanford Lecture, How Bible Got Tainted 8/10
trinity continued.

YouTube - Dr. Bart Ehrman Sums it all up BIBLE NOT RELIABLE [MUST SEE]

I love how you jump from subject to another subject to another subject. It’s like you have some brain issue or something.

There are no distinct subjects, but one subject, Bible and it's errancy and non reliance of it for objective morals as proposed here. So if you can't follow, it is your problem.

I can grant you all the dodges you make, say it is a prophecy fulfilled, the obvious apocalyptic imagery is actually symbolism of the Jewish nation, the end of Age is the Jewish age, I grant you all that.

Yet all you have is empty sack of nothing, because you say Jesus came floating on cloud and yet such extraordinary event did not come to be recorded into secular history at all. Not that you don't have any first hand secular reports of such extraordinary event , but the painful thing for you is that you don't even have the possibility to point out a second or third hand reports which will than somehow show that some secular historians have written something about such extraordinary event but their sources went lost. Knowing the curiosity of people, such supernatural event could not possibly skip attention of so many gentiles and Jews of the time that were living during the destruction of temple. At least one would have written about it, but all we have to prove your story and belief is nothing.

That is where it ends.

[Vangelovski]

Makedonin,

What a f'ing waste of time you have been. This may be intriguing for the uninformed, but you have not provided one informed, sensical argument. Most have been so mind-blowingly stupid that one does not even know where to begin. The worst has been you jumping from one topic to the next, without addressing responses and without focusing on the substance of the topic at hand, attempting to divert attention from sensical informed debate to just plain spamming of internet junk. You're latest videos are more uninformed garbage by a man who makes a lot of claims that "we" don't know (attempting to prescribe that to wider scholarship) when he should be stating "I" don't know. Many of the "we" don't knows that he states are actually "I" don't knows because wider scholarship does know. He seems to be suffering from not having educated himself on the topic he feels he his qualified to speak on - much like yourself.

If anyone genuinely has any questions or wants to debate something seriously, I'm happy to do so. Getting back to the original topic, noboby that claimed they do not believe in objective moral values was able to explain the absurdities that stem from that view.

[osiris]

Anyone who disagrees with you is uninformed you are such a self righteous person vangelovski yet you believe in what can only be described as one religions propaganda. Grow up.

[Vangelovski]

Anyone who disagrees with you is uninformed you are such a self righteous person vangelovski yet you believe in what can only be described as one religions propaganda. Grow up.

Osiris, I never called you uninformed. However, you never provided an answer to the absurdities that arise from your belief that objective moral values do not exist. Surely if what I am spreading is only "propaganda" you should have no difficulty in addressing the issue.

I believe the same people telling me to 'grow up' on this topic today are the same ones telling me to grow up on the issue of UMD a couple of years ago. Don't wait until its too late to eat your words. Think about it now.

[makedonin]

Vangel what do you think how informed your posts appear to any regular reader? You are good example of how to use your imagination.
I am not here to give you answers nor to chew anything for you, rather to question you cause you pretend you have the answers! How ever it turns out that just to do so is a full time job to consume enormous time that I don't have, thus everything said is far from any academic level.
But hey we are on forum and not on university writing Phd. or other scientific literature, and when many people jump into a discussion it is partially impossible to follow the mess. So I would say it was from beginning doomed to be waste of time, and with your short temper I would ask my self twice if I am going to do the trip again, maybe only if I get borred and maybe if I want to manhandle your short temper and pumped up ego. Many times it is a real fun watching you anger.

Sayonara

[julie]

The energy and time devoted to this topic could have been spent in developing strategies and positive outcomes for the mess Macedonia is in

That is all

[makedonin]

The energy and time devoted to this topic could have been spent in developing strategies and positive outcomes for the mess Macedonia is in
That is all

That is true, but I am starting to realize that Macedonians from Macedonia are content with their situation and what ever is here discussed has almost no impact on what is happening in there.

Take the wiki leak related to NATO summit and Gruevski name change treason! We have little chat here and let some steam out, and that is where most of the time ends.

[Vangelovski]

Vangel what do you think how informed your posts appear to any regular reader? You are good example of how to use your imagination.
I am not here to give you answers nor to chew anything for you, rather to question you cause you pretend you have the answers! How ever it turns out that just to do so is a full time job to consume enormous time that I don't have, thus everything said is far from any academic level.
But hey we are on forum and not on university writing Phd. or other scientific literature, and when many people jump into a discussion it is partially impossible to follow the mess. So I would say it was from beginning doomed to be waste of time, and with your short temper I would ask my self twice if I am going to do the trip again, maybe only if I get borred and maybe if I want to manhandle your short temper and pumped up ego. Many times it is a real fun watching you anger.

Sayonara

My short temper? Just because I use words found in the Oxford dictionary to explain the lack of depth in your understanding does not mean I have a short temper, it just means you do not fully appreciate the English language. If anything, you have blown my mind as to how ridiculous some people can be. Further, if your only purpose in spamming religious threads are to arouse a temper that does not exist, but is really a figment of your imagination resulting from a lack of English language skills, then that makes you even more pathetic than I first thought.

[makedonin]

My short temper? Just because I use words found in the Oxford dictionary to explain the lack of depth in your understanding does not mean I have a short temper, it just means you do not fully appreciate the English language. If anything, you have blown my mind as to how ridiculous some people can be. Further, if your only purpose in spamming religious threads are to arouse a temper that does not exist, but is really a figment of your imagination resulting from a lack of English language skills, then that makes you even more pathetic than I first thought.

What ever makes you feel better. Hope you feel right about your self image now, or do you need some more ego petting. Go ask your friend indigen or maybe philosopher could help you out a little bit with it too.

[makedonche]

The energy and time devoted to this topic could have been spent in developing strategies and positive outcomes for the mess Macedonia is in

That is all

Julie
Amen to that!

Makedonin
Wouldn't our time be better spent on a strategy to release the Macedonians in RoM from their shackles?