2012, does the world end?

@JesusDiedForU,

JesusDiedForU;23553 wrote:

No, it's a good question.

Yes, I believe part of the signs that Jesus is talking about is the rebirth of Israel.

The Jews returned to Israel in 1948.

Therefore, there will be people living from 1948 when Christ returns.

If Christ does not return and there are no more people left from 1948... Yes, I would not believe the Bible nor in God.

interesting, so you would abandon both religious and spiritual faith? You wouldn't hold out that there was still a God even if Christianity proved myth?

2 Replies

@Silverchild79,

Silverchild79;23619 wrote:

interesting, so you would abandon both religious and spiritual faith? You wouldn't hold out that there was still a God even if Christianity proved myth?

I believe the Bible and in Jesus not in blind faith but because of the solid evidence that backs up the Bible. Most people have no idea about the evidence that supports the Bible. Most people only have supposed evidence that debunks the validity of the Bible. They have never studied the evidence that supports it. Why? because the world has been against Jesus when He came to the earth and they have been against Him ever since.

Many people will spend their whole life trying to prove the Bible is inaccurate, but to the few that actually see past all the misconceptions they hit their head and say, "Why did I not see this sooner."

1 Reply

@Silverchild79,

If you get a chance, try to catch an episode on the history channel of decoding the past on the Garden of Eden.

It has a bunch of scientific theories about where it was from relation to the biblical text and geological events.

0 Replies

@JesusDiedForU,

JesusDiedForU;23637 wrote:

I believe the Bible and in Jesus not in blind faith but because of the solid evidence that backs up the Bible. Most people have no idea about the evidence that supports the Bible. Most people only have supposed evidence that debunks the validity of the Bible. They have never studied the evidence that supports it. Why? because the world has been against Jesus when He came to the earth and they have been against Him ever since.

Many people will spend their whole life trying to prove the Bible is inaccurate, but to the few that actually see past all the misconceptions they hit their head and say, "Why did I not see this sooner."

I've read apologetical work, the problem is Lee Strobel does allot to spin the facts, introducing countless probabilities and unlikely theory.

I read "The Case for Christ" and thought it was a very honest account until I read "Challanging the Verdict"

then I compared both to Wiki, Britanica, and other unbiased sources. It seems Strobel wants re-color history as he and his buddies see fit.

0 Replies

@Silverchild79,

Well thats just it, isn't it?
History, whether it be the Bible or Koran or any other historical document or book was written by those who had a vested interest in the books content. History and religion is interpreted in so many different ways, because like all things created by man, it is imperfect. Laden with inconsistencies and fallacy.
The attempt to pass these documents as divine fails upon scrutiny of the historical realities of the time. Just as Muhommed was a theif and a murder who attempted to morph himself into a prophet conceived in his own imagination, Jesus was only one of many "prophets" in his day. Historical documents suggest that John the baptist was a "prophet" of much greater reknown, Thus the fear that John created within the Roman governing body, leading to his eventual beheading. The Romans would typically behead those they felt was a threat to order, in order to prevent rebellious uprisings. Crucifixion was relegated to common criminals. The fact that Jesus's followers wrote about John being not worthy to wash Jesus's feet, was a example of history being re-written to boost their claim of Jesus "divine" nature. There were many testimonies and books written about jesus during his time and immediately after his death, yet none of those accounts made it into the bible, to much inconsistency. The Bibles creation took place under the direction on Constantine when he was attempting create a "state" religion. The accounts of Jesus and his life that he chose to use were decidely rewritten to create the image of divinity. Thus the reason why the gospel that was chronologically closest to Jesus's time, was written 70 years after Jesus's death. By then quite a story had been spun.

1 Reply

@Silverchild79,

Then where are John's writings which say that John did not claim jesus was greater than himself? IF John was so much greater and said nothing about Jesus being greater than him, where is his religion?

0 Replies

@Dmizer,

Dmizer;23715 wrote:

Well thats just it, isn't it?
History, whether it be the Bible or Koran or any other historical document or book was written by those who had a vested interest in the books content. History and religion is interpreted in so many different ways, because like all things created by man, it is imperfect. Laden with inconsistencies and fallacy.
The attempt to pass these documents as divine fails upon scrutiny of the historical realities of the time. Just as Muhommed was a theif and a murder who attempted to morph himself into a prophet conceived in his own imagination, Jesus was only one of many "prophets" in his day. Historical documents suggest that John the baptist was a "prophet" of much greater reknown, Thus the fear that John created within the Roman governing body, leading to his eventual beheading. The Romans would typically behead those they felt was a threat to order, in order to prevent rebellious uprisings. Crucifixion was relegated to common criminals. The fact that Jesus's followers wrote about John being not worthy to wash Jesus's feet, was a example of history being re-written to boost their claim of Jesus "divine" nature. There were many testimonies and books written about jesus during his time and immediately after his death, yet none of those accounts made it into the bible, to much inconsistency. The Bibles creation took place under the direction on Constantine when he was attempting create a "state" religion. The accounts of Jesus and his life that he chose to use were decidely rewritten to create the image of divinity. Thus the reason why the gospel that was chronologically closest to Jesus's time, was written 70 years after Jesus's death. By then quite a story had been spun.

A 2,000-year-old papyrus fragment in the Magdalen College Library at Oxford, England. Perhaps the most ancient fragments of the New Testament in existance, to some observers this papyrus supports the contention that Matthew's Gospel is an eyewitness account.
Named Magdalen GR 17, this discovery may change the way the New Testament itself is viewed by some scholars. Because the handwriting reflects a style current in the first century before Christ, but which may have died out during the middle of the first century after Christ, some scholars say they have good reason to believe that parts of the New Testament were written much earlier than (liberal modern scholarship had supposed.) If this dating is accurate, the inescapable conclusion is that the four Gospels were composed by authors who remembered Jesus Christ from personal experience or knew eyewitnesses who remembered Him.

It is believed that these fragments were written as early as 20 or 30 years after the crucifixion.

0 Replies

@Silverchild79,

the church will never Canonize it

1 Reply

@rugonnacry,

rugonnacry;25227 wrote:

the church will never Canonize it

Well the church does not have to, what is written on the fragments is the same writings we already have in our Bible. Which only supports that the copies of the Bible we have today, agree with these first century originals.

1 Reply

@Silverchild79,

Campbell, I see I misunderstood.

0 Replies

@Silverchild79,

What if it doesn't agree with what we have today?

0 Replies

@Silverchild79,

No, the world cannot end in 2012 because Satan is determined to give Hillary Clinton two full terms as US President, and Barak Obama two terms, as well, after having served as her Vice President. So, relax. We have until at least 2024. I'll be 67, God willing, and prime for fertilizing somebody's cemetery.:no:

0 Replies

@Campbell34,

Campbell34;20025 wrote:

The Bible has stated that the end of time will come shortly after the Jews return to the land of Israel. The Bible states that world conditions will center on the control for Jerusalem, and in fact the last battle on earth will be fought over the control of that city. Before Israel became a nation, non believers of the Bible use to laught at that prophecy. Mark Twain a non believer use to say poor Jerusalem never to rise again. Mark Twain should of read his Bible. There are people every year who say the world will end, yet the Bible does tell us such a thing will happen. And the Bible even gives us signs to watch for. The problem is, few people want to believe the Bible so they have not taken seriously the statements found in the Bible. Over the years I have found the Bible to be filled with startling information, yet few have considered it. The Bible is like a movie script that is being played out in great detail, and yet few want to read it. It clearly tells us what is going to happen at the end of time. It speaks of Israel, America, Russia, Europe, and the fate of planet earth. Yet most of the priest and ministers in the church are asleep and they are not warning the people of the coming events. We are soon approaching God's third day, will you be ready? It is believed by a number of Christian ministers that God's third begins around the year 2034.

the translation is The end of THE AGE not the end of time.

0 Replies

@Silverchild79,

Hillary Clinton is the Anti-Christ.

2 Replies

@Pinochet73,

Pinochet73;25374 wrote:

Hillary Clinton is the Anti-Christ.

Pinochet, I think thats a stretch. Yet she might agree with some of his ideas.

0 Replies

@Pinochet73,

Pinochet73;25374 wrote:

Hillary Clinton is the Anti-Christ.

she's worse then that, she's the herald of American Socialism

0 Replies

@Campbell34,

Campbell34;25231 wrote:

Well the church does not have to, what is written on the fragments is the same writings we already have in our Bible. Which only supports that the copies of the Bible we have today, agree with these first century originals.

Not neccessarily. The oldest Bible only dates to the early 4th century, the Codex Sinaticus. Its a huge logical leap to assume what was written in the Bible we have today was the same as what was on those fragments when they were whole, especially if one considers the many rejected and oppressed gospels and early Christian writtings. In truth it is a more logical assumption to conclude that what was originally written was in fact in direct contradiction to the first canonizied Bible, as It was not put together by the 'Hand of God' nor did it 'Fall from Heaven', but was administered by men and politications wholelly ignorant of the spiritual realities, and higher truth's their greedy and patricarchial minds could not comprehend.

And the common theme of the mostly Gnostic opposition, oppossed hierarchy of any kind, which I believe is far closer to what Jesus intended then the Christianity we have today. But to those who assume they knew what Jesus wanted editted the Bible to support their one-sided patriarchial theocracy, and destroyed the 'heretical' oppisition. How could any truth-seeker not question the real motives of the early church, especailly when it used oppression, book-burning, and genocide to spread its version of the gospel, and established power over the the western world? And since all sebsequent christian movements and denomination's are based upon such faulty foundations, they are just as suspect as well as the supposed infallibility of the Bible.

1 Reply

@Silverchild79,

Back on subject, it would perhaps be quite foolish to dismiss the original post and link, completely. Buying into fear, is never a good idea though, but there are several independant indications from numerous sources that all point to 2012-2013.

I think as with, many other subjects, its the basic premise that needs to be re-examined. That being the world will end on 2012. When it may be more realistic to say that the world will change, and possibly far more dramaticlly then can guess or know. And since an End is a change, a literal interpretation is still technically correct.

But there is some significant historical evidence that points to such a time as being a period of great upheaval or transformation.

1 Reply

@Truth Re-Minder,

[QUOTE='Truth' Re-Minder;27185]Not neccessarily. The oldest Bible only dates to the early 4th century, the Codex Sinaticus. Its a huge logical leap to assume what was written in the Bible we have today was the same as what was on those fragments when they were whole, especially if one considers the many rejected and oppressed gospels and early Christian writtings. In truth it is a more logical assumption to conclude that what was originally written was in fact in direct contradiction to the first canonizied Bible, as It was not put together by the 'Hand of God' nor did it 'Fall from Heaven', but was administered by men and politications wholelly ignorant of the spiritual realities, and higher truth's their greedy and patricarchial minds could not comprehend.

And the common theme of the mostly Gnostic opposition, oppossed hierarchy of any kind, which I believe is far closer to what Jesus intended then the Christianity we have today. But to those who assume they knew what Jesus wanted editted the Bible to support their one-sided patriarchial theocracy, and destroyed the 'heretical' oppisition. How could any truth-seeker not question the real motives of the early church, especailly when it used oppression, book-burning, and genocide to spread its version of the gospel, and established power over the the western world? And since all sebsequent christian movements and denomination's are based upon such faulty foundations, they are just as suspect as well as the supposed infallibility of the Bible.[/QUOTE]

The Gnostic Gospels were written over 200 years after the death of Christ. The first century fragments agree with the Bible we have today. And since the Majority Text numbers in the thousands of copies from so many time periods, and so many countries, its doubtful that any one group could of rewritten them all, and got them all to agree with one groups slant on things.
Also the New Testament is filled with detailed prophecies, and as a proof of authorship, it should be pointed out that all of these prophecies agree with the prophecies of the Old Testament. Now if you want to believe in an account that was written 200 years after the death of Christ, thats your choice. Yet First century accounts that are believed to be eyewitiness accounts should give you a more accurate picture. I would also say there are manuscrips of certain books of the Bible that were written long before an organized church was even in existance. And these manuscripts agree with the Scriptures. It is also doubtful that God could not get His Book together until the Gospel of Judas came to light in 1970. To believe that you would have to believe it was tought luck for the previous 49 generations. God could speak the universe into existance, He just could not get His Book published.

0 Replies

@Truth Re-Minder,

[QUOTE='Truth' Re-Minder;27187]Back on subject, it would perhaps be quite foolish to dismiss the original post and link, completely. Buying into fear, is never a good idea though, but there are several independant indications from numerous sources that all point to 2012-2013.

I think as with, many other subjects, its the basic premise that needs to be re-examined. That being the world will end on 2012. When it may be more realistic to say that the world will change, and possibly far more dramaticlly then can guess or know. And since an End is a change, a literal interpretation is still technically correct.

But there is some significant historical evidence that points to such a time as being a period of great upheaval or transformation.[/QUOTE]

significant historical evidence

Where?

Regards
DL

0 Replies

2012, does the world end?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know