posted on April 25, 2001 01:24:10 PM new
Yes it is James. It has been greatly debated. Do you know what actual word was used in the Greek? I don't. I will look it up.
T
posted on April 25, 2001 01:47:35 PM new
The word was genea.
Scholars say:
1. Means 40 years and was refering to the first question concerning the destruction
of the temple.
2. "generation that seeks the Lord"
3. "final generation before Christ" (This is a weak argument.)
4. "race" interpreted as "the Jews will not be destroyed with the temple but will exist
until the end of time". (This is the common understanding and generally noted as a
footnote in most translations.)
It is similar (although not exact) to the word used in 1 Peter 2:9 which refers to the
members of the church.
Good question. Much disputed. Worthy of consideration in light of all other end of
time references.
posted on April 25, 2001 02:14:27 PM new
The south. Egypt. It's all about Egypt. Where did you think Jesus was all those years? Catholic schools? The tribes sent him south because his birth" coincidence with the appearance of a 'star' was puzzling, and such a thing had been spoken of in the south. Not foretold in the south, but as something which had occured and was believed to have been a message from Ra. The deity Ra was built around a somewhat similar earlier occurence which happened in the daytime and was therefore from the sun. Jesus was sent to the place that the previous appearance had happened.
posted on April 25, 2001 02:23:33 PM new
The Egyptian Re cult was long gone, as Egypt had already been occupied by Greece 350 years earlier. Egyptian culture and religion was thoroughly Hellenized at the start of the 1st century.
posted on April 25, 2001 02:39:59 PM new
Not so far as the Isrealites were concerned. They knew that the source of all of their beliefs were in the south, in Egypt. It still is.
posted on April 25, 2001 03:07:15 PM new
No, it's a history of oppression, of cultures buried under arms and enslaved, with the traditions and belief systems kept alive by word of mouth, often in secret and at peril, passed from generation to generation. All of man's history is the same story told in different lands, but squished, seemingly out of existence at the time, incompletely and able to find expression again. Always with variations which endure for as long as they can, altered by communication over centuries. Today there is Christianity, tomorrow? Who can say? But the belief in the reality of the current system is no stronger than that of Greeks, or Romans, or any other transient culture. The first was in the south, in Egypt. Before that there was only fire.
posted on April 25, 2001 03:20:40 PM new
Well according to Jeff Rense there is a big announcment confirming "the crash". Maybe we will be all enlightened by a new perspective when we meet the non-humans pretty soon.
~thinks if this happens it will be the biggest deception of them all
*rolls eyes*
Sorry, I seem to be off topic.
T.
But you know what...it's very cool to talk to you guys (n-girls) about, of all things, religion, without all out war. Very very good! Thumbs up!
[ edited by jt on Apr 25, 2001 03:22 PM ]
posted on April 25, 2001 04:16:55 PM new"Sorry, I seem to be off topic"
Terri,
Even given that no one can say that you WERE off topic, you meant to ridicule, roll your eyes etc., because such ideas conflict with your beliefs. But you don't know anything; you weren't there for any of the actual happenstance, if there was one or several. You know only the end written result of several thousand years of allegory, interpretation, and fable. There are many of those collections, and they are religions. Belief in Allah, and all of the rest are no better or worse, or more true or not. All do seem to come from one source area, Africa, and Egypt, the gateway, is the first place that had a development of culture sufficient to record any of it. Had there been no Egyptian beliefs there would be no Christian ones.
Look at the book of the dead above. See how similar it is to your bible, particularly to the old testament, in style and in content.
Remember that Jesus came and said, 'now I know that book, but set it aside for a while as I've got a different slant on this story for you.' He brought it from the south.
struck Buddha down, as he is a different migration, aCro Magnon result.
posted on April 25, 2001 04:36:20 PM new
I think Matthew 24:36 sums up my sentiments quite nicely on the issue. I leave it up to those in insane asylums with time on their hands to second-guess God.
HJW:"My question is how would you distinguish a dangerous cult from the normal organizied religious cult?"
Helen, I'd answer your question this way: I think it is not possible to teach anyone how to get to God, one can not read books, nor watch movies, or have discussion groups and get anywhere nearer to God. You can intellectually get closer to God through reading books and listening to lectures, but your spirit never will. Likewise, one can not follow a list of Things One Must Do and Not Do to get closer to God. God is not a list of things, a series of steps, a history, or something that can be discussed, and so you get closeer to God spiritually. Therefore, since you asked me what I personally thought on the issue, I must say that all religions have only part of the truth; that none that teach are able to do the job; that all that promise you things if you follow a Do and Don't list are deceivers; and that one may show another the way through any means is likewise deceitfull. For a person must bring themself to God and no one can do that for them. Therefore, all religions that claim to have the answer or to know the Way are false to me and all are cults.
You asked - I told.
"Of course, I know very little about religion but it would seem to me that it would be very easy for a "dangerous" cult to evolve from an organized religious cult ... just as it has happened in Atlanta."
OK. So the many Fundamentalist-type churches with millions of members and registered voters are told to vote Republican George Bush as President, even though it was proved that George Bush is about half as bright as a dead firefly, even though he and Dick Cheny are major Oil companies and stated that they'd screw America if elected -- so they voted!
Q. Just because a religion has millions of members, can it be dangerous? Does it only have to have just a few members? I certainly do not think that being "dangerous" distinguishes a mainstream religion from a cult.
posted on April 25, 2001 04:44:20 PM new
In fact it's only the mainstream religions who can object to being classified as a cult and have hope of escaping that definition. They legitimize through numbers and numbers are their power.
Yet they celebrate cannabalistic ritual on Easter, and flaunt their freedom from Judaism with Christmas hams.
posted on April 25, 2001 07:57:59 PM new
Borillar,
Thanks for your answer. It's a very interesting subject.
The news story on which this thread is based on people whose religious motivation is stronger than love for their children. They are willing to sacrifice their children, beat them and it would not surprise me if they would also be willing to kill them for their strong religious faith.
As Krs pointed out, the numbers form the force and I believe that this strong group attachment legitimizes just about anything, including murder.
posted on April 25, 2001 08:20:49 PM new
For me religion is not a thing grounded in intellectual knowledge, nor historical fact, nor membership, nor political alliance, etc., etc. it is a thing faith because of spiritual evidence in my own life. You can't teach faith, that's for sure.
posted on April 25, 2001 08:23:45 PM new
Another thought...War is even a sort of religious phenomenon.. The nation becomes the idol and the children of the nation are sacrificied.
There is even a song...onward "christian" soldiers, marching on to war,
with the cross of Jesus, marching on before.
Really...I should probably go back to the Christian chat where everyone pretty much agrees about everything (not really)...and it's sometimes kinda boring.
Night yall.
[ edited by jt on Apr 25, 2001 08:50 PM ]
posted on April 25, 2001 10:41:17 PM newKRS:, I think that Faith as it is used as jt was using it is a different matter. If you think about it, the word Faith can be used in many different and unrelated contexts.
jt: leave if you must, but remember the disturbing thoughts that have come before you from being here. You can't learn in a vacuum and when everyone agrees with you, it's a vacuum.
posted on April 25, 2001 10:49:01 PM new
Well, if the word faith as used by Terri was used in any meaning other than that which I took it to have been meant, then only one person knows that, don't you think, Borillar?
I did not intend to engage in a battle about religion with you, terri.
Even I know that is a losing battle. But I was just stating my opinion. Earlier in the thread, when you asked me to read the chapter in Matthew about the end of the world and the fact that the angels do
not know the time and date, I read it and thanked you with no further comment.
The Bible contains over 60 books, written by even more people over a period of a thousand years.
It's not a place that I would turn to for truth. Because of all the
viewpoints in the Bible, anyone can do anything and justify it by
a verse in the bible.
Faith in an omnipotent being is not learned by osmosis. It is taught. My mother took me to Sunday School every week when I was a child to learn this nonsense. But when I arrived home, my Father would ask me what I had learned and then proceed to deprogram me. I will always be so grateful for that.
Southern baptists are a hypocritical,
narrow minded bunch of holier-than-thous.
This is my opinion. It has been my opinion for many years. So don't be scoring a win/loose game with your buddy, krs, using me as a pawn!!!
posted on April 26, 2001 08:41:02 AM new
In reference to your Masonic rants earlier, Borillar. You never responded, and I didn't think you could. That's all.
