Religion Thread

[rebelsquirrell]

9 “Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name. 10 AT THAT TIME many will [d]fall away and will [e]betray one another and hate one another. 11 Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many. 12 Because lawlessness is increased, [f]most people’s love will grow cold. 13 But the one who endures TO THE END , he will be saved.

How do you know for sure this is about the End of Times rather than about persecution of the Christians by, say, the Romans?

He liberally references Daniel

Jesus not only tells his disciples to watch out for the abomination of desolation but also says when you hear of wars and rumors of wars that these are the birth pangs of the end times.

Since he is talking about Daniel 11 we know what wars he is talking about.

In Daniel 11 the last king of the North fights a series of wars before building the abomination of desolation.



The this means jesus is literally saying that when you hear and see wars you will shortly see the abomination of desolation and then the subsequent end of the world, all in the lifetime of one man

If you want confirmation read Daniel 11:21-45

The end times king (king of the north) does the following in chronological order. 

1 seizes his throne by intrigue

2 Kills a prince of the covenant

3. kills egypt

4 comes back to reconquer egypt and fails

5 erects the abomination of desolation

6 attacks Egypt and spreads his empire far and wide

7 dies

8 the general resurrection of the dead  (daniel 12)

 

[Bromden]

You don't have to prove that an end of the world prophecy in the bible is bull****. We all know that the real end of the world will come in 2012.

 

[Captured Joe]

The prophecy is question is known as the "Olivet Discourse". It has three versions, Mark 13, Matthew 24, and Luke 21.

Jesus not only tells his disciples to watch out for the abomination of desolation but also says when you hear of wars and rumors of wars that these are the birth pangs of the end times.

[quote author=Matthew 24:6] You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come.[/quote]
He literally says that the end doesn't follow immediately.

[quote author=Luke 21:24] They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.[/quote]
Only after that (after what he calls the "times of the Gentiles") does Jesus talk about the End of Times (Luke 21:25 and onward).

Mark 13 is just vague about it, but doesn't contradict the two parts above.

 

[rebelsquirrell]

The prophecy is question is known as the "Olivet Discourse". It has three versions, Mark 13, Matthew 24, and Luke 21.

Jesus not only tells his disciples to watch out for the abomination of desolation but also says when you hear of wars and rumors of wars that these are the birth pangs of the end times.

[quote author=Matthew 24:6] You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come.

He literally says that the end doesn't follow immediately.

[/quote]

So does Daniel.

"And they will set up the abomination [an]of desolation. 32 By smooth words he will [ao]turn to godlessness those who act wickedly toward the covenant, but the people who know their God will display strength and take action. 33 [ap]Those who have insight among the people will give understanding to the many; yet they will fall by sword and by flame, by captivity and by plunder for many days. 34 Now when they fall they will be granted a little help, and many will join with them in hypocrisy. 35 Some of [****]those who have insight will fall, in order to refine, purge and make them [ar]PURE UNTIL THE END TIME; BECAUSE THE END IS TO COME AT THE APPOINTED TIME"

This means Daniel clearly stated the end time isnt officially started even while the abomination of desolation is set sup.

HOWEVER....

If keep reading you will see the king that builds the abomination of desolation is the same one alive in verse 40 "At the end time the king of the South will collide with him, and the king of the North will storm against him with chariots, with horsemen and with many ships; and he will enter countries, overflow them and pass through."


In light of the above the time of the Gentiles is only as long as one generation
So this objection has been defeated

 

[Captured Joe]

In light of the above the time of the Gentiles is only as long as one generation

How so? Where does it say that?

 

[rebelsquirrell]

Because Jesus is speaking about the Fulfillment of Daniel 11


Read Daniel 11 verse 21 through the end of daniel11 and you will notice all the events Jesus describes are the same events in daniel11

P1 if daniel11 21 through 45 happens within one human lifetime dim the age of the Gentiles can only last one human lifetime

P2 Daniel 11:21 through 45 happens within one human lifetime

C1 therefore the time of the Gentiles can only be one human lifetime

 

[Captured Joe]

Sigh... where to begin?

Jesus describes the fall of Jeruzalem and its destruction. This is Luke 21:20 to 24;

“When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

I don't see a reference to Daniel 11 in this part. Only after this, which Jesus clearly places after this period of time (again, times of the Gentiles, where I find no clear link to Daniel 11) does he talk about the beginning of the end, so to speak:
[quote author=Luke 21:25]“There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea.[/quote]
Et cetera.

But earlier he says this (which actually contradicts your point):
[quote author=Luke 21:5-10]
Some of his disciples were remarking about how the temple was adorned with beautiful stones and with gifts dedicated to God. But Jesus said, “As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down.” “Teacher,” they asked, “when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?” He replied: “Watch out that you are not deceived. For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am he,’ and, ‘The time is near.’ Do not follow them. When you hear of wars and uprisings, do not be frightened. These things must happen first, but the end will not come right away.” Then he said to them: “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be great earthquakes, famines and pestilences in various places, and fearful events and great signs from heaven.
[/quote]
So again, just like in Matthew 24:6, Jesus says that wars and even the destruction of Jeruzalem must come first, but aren't signs that the end is coming. Only from Luke 21:25 onward does he talk about that.

In Matthew 24:5-14 Jesus says the same things as the above: False prophets will come and go, wars and famine and all sorts of bad stuff, but it won't be the end yet. Only from Matthew 24:15 onward does he reference Daniel 11, the events of which he says will only happen AFTER the gospel has been preached throughout the world, to a witness for ALL peoples. Which also contradicts your point.

 

[rebelsquirrell]

I AM NOT SAYING THE END IS IMMEDIATE AT THE TIME OF THE ABOMINATION

Were talking about matthew 24, where jesus mentions the abomination.

24: 15 “Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), 16 then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains."

I pointed out to you that Daniel doesn't say the end is immediate when the Abomination of Desolation is erected.

Daniel 11

"32 By smooth words he will [ao]turn to godlessness those who act wickedly toward the covenant, but the people who know their God will display strength and take action. 33 [ap]Those who have insight among the people will give understanding to the many; yet they will fall by sword and by flame, by captivity and by plunder for many days. 34 Now when they fall they will be granted a little help, and many will join with them in hypocrisy. 35 Some of [****]those who have insight will fall, in order to refine, purge and make them [ar]pure until the end time; because it is still to come at the appointed time."

Daniel clearly states the end time has not begun at the time of the abomination.

My point is Jesus and Daniel both say that the end time has not officially begun when the abomination of Desolation is erected, rather the end is within one human lifetime ONCE IT HAS BEEN ERECTED

Edit:

We know that jesus expects the abomination to be erected within the disciples lifetime because he says  the wars are "birth pangs" and that subsequently there will be a persecution.

The next word is important.

"Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation "

He says "therefore" after he mentions the persecution, meaning the reason you are to look for the abomination is BECAUSE ITS THE SAME PERSECUTION MENTIONED AS HAPPENING BEFORE THE ABOMINATION IS ERECTED IN DANIEL.

My caps are for emphasis not rage

 

[Captured Joe]

I AM NOT SAYING THE END IS IMMEDIATE AT THE TIME OF THE ABOMINATION

I am saying, the whole abomination thing isn't gonna be in one lifetime since the fall of Jerusalem and the "age of Gentiles".

My point is Jesus and Daniel both say that the end time has not officially begun when the abomination of Desolation is erected, rather the end is within one human lifetime ONCE IT HAS BEEN ERECTED

I would agree with that.

We know that jesus expects the abomination to be erected within the disciples lifetime because he says  the wars are "birth pangs" and that subsequently there will be a persecution.

The next word is important.

"Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation "

He says "therefore" after he mentions the persecution, meaning the reason you are to look for the abomination is BECAUSE ITS THE SAME PERSECUTION MENTIONED AS HAPPENING BEFORE THE ABOMINATION IS ERECTED IN DANIEL.

Let's put these things into the right order then; again, this is Matthew 24:
[quote author=Matthew 24:1-16]Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

Jesus answered: “Watch out that no one deceives you. For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and will deceive many. You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains.

“Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold,  but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

“So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’[a] spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.[/quote]
So Jesus says, there will be wars and persecutions, but these things do not mean the end is near; but afterwards he says again, "Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom", there will be natural disasters etc., which would be the beginning of birth pains. I have the old Dutch bible translation here, and it actually says: "But all these are only the beginning of the birth pangs." Some English translations write it as "But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pangs."

So... first Jesus says, there will be great wars and natural disasters, but they won't mean the end is near; in fact, they are only what he calls "birth pangs", which could be either interpreted as a warning that something ominous is being born out of them, or as a reassurance that these aren't the real deal, so to speak. The latter interpretation is reinforced by the way Jesus mentions them: These are only birth pangs, after already saying: The end is still to come; it's not there yet. And afterwards he says that the Christians will be persecuted (which they still are to this day), but that the Gospel has to be preached all over the world before the end will come -- and only after that does he mention the Desolation, at which point he indeed is talking about the end.

Anyway, it all comes down to interpretation, and, in combination with the other gospels where Jesus also says the end isn't near when wars and persecutions happen, I think it's most reasonable to interpret Jesus prophesies as not saying that the end of times will happen within a lifetime of his disciples. I can see how you'd come to your interpretation though, as apparently many early Christians did too.

 

[rebelsquirrell]

Daniel is supposed to be fulfilled within 490 years going forth from the decree to build the second temple.

So yes, he means the current generation because that prophecy is near its end point

 

[Captured Joe]

Wait, you mean from Daniel 9?

Let's quote that here for the sake of clarity; Daniël receives a prophesy from the angel Gabriel:
[quote author=Daniel 9:24-27]Seventy weeks are decreed for your people and your holy city: to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place.

Know therefore and understand: from the time that the word went out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the time of an anointed prince, there shall be seven weeks; and for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with streets and moat, but in a troubled time.

After the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing, and the troops of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed.

He shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall make sacrifice and offering cease; and in their place shall be an abomination that desolates, until the decreed end is poured out upon the desolator.[/quote]
Apparently, the word "week" in Hebrew also means "seven", so it should read "Seventy sevens", which is usually interpreted as 70 sevens of years. This is because the events/phases described in the prophesy roughly correspond with the biblical history of Israel, if one takes the restoration of Jerusalem and the Temple as being Xerxes' degree to Ezra in (about) 458 BC to restore Jeruzalem's walls, and counts the years as 360-day "Prophetic years".

In verse 26, we count after the first 69 "weeks of years", "an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing"; this is usually interpreted by Christians to be Jesus, who is annointed because he's the Messiah, and who is killed and abandoned. The destruction of the city and sanctuary that follow are usually interpreted to be the destruction of Jeruzalem and the Temple, of course (although the interpretations of who the "prince to come" is differ wildly).

After this we get the first reference to the Abomination in the Old Testament, who is to do bad things for half a "week"; this actually corresponds nicely with Daniel 12:
[quote author=Daniel 12:11]And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.[/quote]
...which is roughly 3 and a half year, so half a "week".

In your interpretation, the 70 "weeks of years" are a continuous sequence of phases, which makes sense of course. But if you read closely, you see that verse 26 is placed after the first 79 "weeks", and the events of the last "week" (verse 27) take place after that. Hence, there is a "gap" in the chronology, which apparently is placed by some scholars in the middle of the 70th "week" rather than between the 69th and 70th (with Jesus rather than the Antichrist ceasing the sacrifices and offerings, with his death). With the benefit of hindsight, of course! During Jesus' life, there are no references at all to Daniel's 70 weeks; it is reasonable to assume the Jews weren't counting down the years and expecting the end to be within the next generation! After all, "sevens" in biblical context also have the symbolical meaning of completion; God created earth in seven days. Only after the destruction of Jeruzalem has this timeline been put into the context of "sevens of (360-day) years", and the Abomination as something other than a sacriliegous Roman or Seleucid conqueror.

But how to explain the "gap" of the prophesy, since the 70th "week" still has to come? With the benefit of hindsight, it is usually said that, because the 70 weeks were decreed "for your people and your holy city", and, since with Jesus' death the covenant between God and Israel has been broken, the appointed period has been broken up as well; in the 70th "week", there will be made a "strong covenant", implying that there wasn't one before, or that it has been broken, which would be the case with the events after the 69th "week" of verse 26. Only with the creation of the "strong covenant", which happens sometime after the war and destruction of Jeruzalem and the Temple, does the final phase of the prophesy begin. Here's a chart I shamelessly stole from some site:

Is this convoluded? Absolutely! But it's as much an explanation in hindsight as the "490 years after the decree to rebuild the temple" is; in Jesus' time, there is no notion of the prophesy being fullfilled within those 490 years, otherwise it would've been brought up during the New Testament, but apparently this isn't considered relevant at the time. On the contraty, one could consider Jesus' prophesy that the end will only come after the "gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations", as an indirect reference to the "strong covenant" of the 70th "week". Otherwise he doesn't say anything about being anywhere near that point in time.

But if at some point in the future Israël would suddenly turn to Christianity, that would be a point of concern, yes.

 

[OghuzBey]

I think the religon is not a bad things for our life or our culture. Because it has made a moral sentiment. I think religions made by the local culture for example land of the viking is very cold and the heaven is very hot. Arabian desert is very hot and they heaven is cool.

I am sorry for my bad english.

 

[Captured Joe]

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/scientists-finally-read-the-oldest-biblical-text-ever-found-a7323296.html

Scientists have finally been able to read the oldest biblical text ever found.

The 2,000-year-old scroll has been in the hands of archaeologists for decades. But it hasn’t been possible to read it, since it was too dangerous to open the charred and brittle scroll.

Scientists have now been able to read it, using special imaging technology that can look into what’s inside. And it has found what was in there: the earliest evidence of a biblical text in its standardised form.

The passages, which come from the Book of Leviticus, show the first physical evidence of a long-held belief that the Hebrew Bible that’s in use today has is more than 2,000 years old.

Scholars have believed the Hebrew Bible in its standard form first came about some 2,000 years ago, but never had physical proof, until now, according to the study. Previously the oldest known fragments of the modern biblical text dated back to the 8th century.

The text discovered in the charred Ein Gedi scroll is "100 percent identical" to the version of the Book of Leviticus that has been in use for centuries, said Dead Sea Scroll scholar Emmanuel Tov from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, who participated in the study.

"This is quite amazing for us," he said. "In 2,000 years, this text has not changed."

 

[Adorno]

It' from 2016, but still interesting of course.

 

[Adorno]

Masturbation is a sin, at least in Catholicism. But there's no reason for that.

In the Book of Genesis, chapter 38 (verses 8-10), we hear of Onan, who is ordered to have sex with his deceased brother's wife.
However, since Onan knew the offspring would not be his - but in his brother's name - he wasted the semen on the grund when he was with the wife.
"What he did was evil in the eyes of the Lord, and He let him die."

It's not the masturbation - or coitus interruptus - but refusing to have a child in his brother's name, that's the sin here.
So how did masturbation become a sin?

 

[Dryvus]

How did a Nazi become the Pope

 

[Roccoflipside]

Masturbation is a sin, at least in Catholicism. But there's no reason for that.

In the Book of Genesis, chapter 38 (verses 8-10), we hear of Onan, who is ordered to have sex with his deceased brother's wife.
However, since Onan knew the offspring would not be his - but in his brother's name - he wasted the semen on the grund when he was with the wife.
"What he did was evil in the eyes of the Lord, and He let him die."

It's not the masturbation - or coitus interruptus - but refusing to have a child in his brother's name, that's the sin here.
So how did masturbation become a sin?

I think it's along the lines of why contraceptives and abortion are considered sins, as it's a "waste of life". I guess it goes back to the last command to Noah, "go forth and multiply", and all these (masturbation, contraceptives, etc) are te "opposite" of that.

Could also e like some of the laws in Levititicus, which are believed to have come about for the betterment of the civilization (no eating pork because you can get sick etc), if you're masturbating then you're not procreating, therefore not contributing to the society.

Of course that's all theory.

 

[kurczak]

A vulgar Catholic would argue that what Rocco said - sex is for procreation etc. A learned Catholic knows that the Church actually recognizes two purposes of human sexuality - procreation and strengthening of marriage, which is a sacrament and a valid path to salvation.

 

[Roccoflipside]

A vulgar Catholic would argue that what Rocco said - sex is for procreation etc. A learned Catholic knows that the Church actually recognizes two purposes of human sexuality - procreation and strengthening of marriage, which is a sacrament and a valid path to salvation.

And so, a married person masturbating, according to te logic, weakens the marriage by not participating with the partner. I suppose I see the logic in that, as there are also studies that suggest porn "consumption" can lead to divorce/marriage break down.

 

[kurczak]

Yeah, but the married couple is expected not to sabotage the procreation purpose by using contraception, but at the same time the Church not only allows but encourages that couples do the math when conception is least likely to avoid unplanned pregnancies.

Of course a couple where one party is completely infertile around the clock can have as much sex as they want and not only is it not sin, it is active pursuit of salvation