Down the water spout
I don't know about you, but I rejoice every time I see the market numbers plunging. 733 points today... pretty sweet, no? Forget how it affects the cost of stuff, soon it'll be the Endtime ya'll and that's an exciting thing!
Oh, and P.S... Home-made fish n' chips are pretty much the vision right now.
(To someone special)
Jesus loves you; even if your sad, confused, or lonely. Smile, if even only for me, darling. It'll be o.k.
Labels: thoughts
posted by thisisme @ 9:37 PM
34 Comments
34 Comments:
It's not the end of the world, really. What will happen is stock will drop extremely low, and while the poor people are starting wars and running around like headless chickens, the rich people will be buying abandoned stock and waiting for the market to regulate again. Then they will sell the stock at alarmingly high prices to the poor people and bring everything back up. It's happened before, it'll happen again. The end of the world? Not even close. (Check my facts, if you wish. I've done my homework.)
The problem with that is that the rich people who are "waiting for the market to regulate" are the ones that are regulating the market already. Making the stock drop is their way of getting all the other guys to sell so they can buy their stock cheap and expand their sphere of control.
Neither the Military or the Government control the people. Who holds the money decides who controls everything.
Even if the stock doesn't fall out in the next two or three years, its inevitable that it will happen within the next thirty years. The American economy is stretched beyond repair with both of its wars, the real estate market is dead, two of the major five American banks this year have collapsed and the faith in the dollar is failing. Faith is all that kept the American dollar alive since the Vietnam War, because by then they spent all the credit they earned from borrowing countries after WW2. (I blame the nuclear arms race and the space program, personally.)
Neither the 700 Billion dollars from Bush or the 1-2 Trillion pledged from the major European banks has stopped the skid yet, and even if it does stop for a little while and grow a bit stronger it'll pay off with the psychological effect. If stocks keep falling and then climbing, falling and climbing, it will create a false sense of security in the stock market because people will think "Heck, why should I sell? Its fallen like this before but got back up again pretty easily." But then, what happens when it comes to the point where it doesn't rise again? All the stocks become worthless at that point, and the credit system which holds up the NY stock exchange freezes up because nobody has the money to pay the bills that they owe.
The result: Worldwide depression and the big money boys then control ALL of the spheres of economic power instead of the current MAJORITY. The "mark" becomes the institutionalized problem solver for this economic problem and, once it becomes mandatory, the last three and a half years begin.
I've done my homework too ;)
I don't find the above argument convincing. You are searching for the proverbial monster under your bed instead of looking at the whole picture. But I'll drop it, because I know you will rely on the bible's take on it instead of what history has proven, which is an argument that I find dull and circular. Cheerio, darling. Don't forget to stock up on canned beans for when your *end of the world* springs up on you.
Please, darling, don't try to lecture me about economic history. The only time an economic crisis of this scale happened was during the mid 80's and the Great Depression. For both of these the American economy had wars to fall back on to boost the stagnation. However, the problem with this one, is that America is already in 2 wars, both of which are draining the economy, not helping it.
The reason why everyone watches the American economy is because all the world powers have invested so much into it. They were the only ones with money after WW2, that's why everyone either invested or became indebted to it. Just as English is the global language, American dollars are the standard of the world. If the American economy collapses, the rest of the world's will too.
If you will, a little bit of Journalism on the matter. Taken from Reuters talking about the American real estate crisis:
"...Banks which had previously handled trillions in investments were finding that they were becoming insolvent almost overnight. Because of the global reach of these companies, this became a crash even more severe than the series of banking failures that led to the Great Depression in the 1930s.
This financial crisis has spread through the entire banking structure of the West. It has moved from a crisis of insolvency to a crisis of confidence in the banking system—everyone wants their money out because no one trusts their banks. The essential trust that allowed the goldsmiths to lend on the basis of their borrowed gold has begun to evaporate.
The International Monetary Fund warned that the world financial system stood on the “brink of systemic meltdown” after stock markets plummeted around the world, with an estimated $4.6 trillion in losses. The financial crisis, which began in the U.S., has poisoned global finance, disrupting markets that trade everything from stocks to sugar. Russian financial markets have closed two or three times as stocks have plummeted. Banks failed or were nationalized in Europe, and the economic turmoil has taken a toll on governments as well, with Iceland desperately seeking a bail-out, Ukraine seeking IMF aid, Pakistan edging toward default on its debts, and a number of other countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America dealing with the plummeting value of their currencies."
Circular, dull, reasoning? Try hard fact, darling. I haven't been looking for "the monster under my bed" rather have looked at the whole picture, your view on it has been fed too much by Fox and CNN.
But whatever, if it doesn't happen with this, it will certainly happen within the next 30 years. One cannot live forever outside of their means, and that is what the United States has been doing for a little over half a century.
Cute, but I don't watch FOX or CNN. Neither do I rely on Reuters to inform me of economic drama. Your reasoning is blinded by the fact that you believe the antichrist is crawling around in the shadows waiting for world wars to erupt as a cause of market crash, and that is the point I was trying to make. Don't lecture me on subjects you know little or nothing about. Once you actually know something about the economy and stock market (without consulting Reuters or Wikipedia) then I'll converse with you on the subject. Until then, I am not convinced that the world will end in this lifetime or the next.
Curious then: you say that you'll end the discussion because it bores you, but then you continue talking.
And as for lecturing on subject I know little or nothing about, I was the only one giving actual fact to back up my reasoning. Just look at the comments so far. Need I expound further?
I wasn't trying to convince, only speculate.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
No offense to the one who wrote the previous comment. I just vehemently oppose his views on the Family and the Family lifestyle which I adhere to: body, mind, heart, and soul. Therefore, to not have any links to his profile or sites on my blog, I have deleted his comment.
However, he did say this which I will reply:
"In the great depression the stocks fell by around 22%, this time around its more like 7%. While the actual points drop is more this time around, the great depression was more than 3 times worse, and, would you believe it, here we are 80 years later, still going on..."
It does not matter about the percentages because during the Great Depression the big money boys grabbed most of the stock on the market. The current recession is just them expanding their influence and trying to get whats left. Once they have all of the power they can cause the financial meltdown that would be needed in order to institute the mark. Its needed because unless you hit the gut of man and take away his food, there is no way that he will give up his sovereignty. That's why they need first control over all the major sectors in order to do it.
Please, so this does not get ugly, do not comment on my blog again.
GBY
No need to be snippy dear, I was just clarifying my original point. I can back up my opinions with hard, cold facts if you wish, but I'm sure you'd prefer not to have to toil through them as they may be a little bit confusing to one who has already made up his mind. Anywho, be nice, and have fun with Mummy and Dad away. Throw a party, drink some vodka, and lock Rose in a closet. I'm sure that would bring a lovely smile to your face. :)
And yet again, you continue the conversation:P
Not being snippy darling, just find your stance and reluctance to say anything concrete in the first 3 comments you made amusing.
Confuse me with fact? I've been the only one saying any facts of us two. Haven't "made up my mind"... as I've said before... I'm only speculating.
But continue, if you wish. You said you wouldn't before because you find my argument dull and circular. But if its dull and circular, why do you keep coming back to this post, reading what I have to say, and commenting?
A brother-sister argument? lol. quite entertaining!
Hey thanks. am i the special someone? (dude i hope i am, this could be so embarassing. LOVE YOU
The problem I have with that is that it is (or seems to be) nothing but religiously based speculation.
You use the term 'Big Money Boys' which is ambiguous and vague.
Can you show not only who it was who profited from the great depression, but how it is that these same people are alive and kicking 80 years on and still looking to close the deal?
You hint at some blurry shadowed figures, but you have not shown a link between the people who profited in '29 and the people who are profiting from the current recession.
(I've linked a wonderfully conflict-free website to my name this time, so all your readers can go on pretending that unicorns exist and if they ever get a boo boo the fairy god mother will ride in on one and make it all go away.)
Yes Kathy, its you...
Your right Amos, it is religious speculation about the economic upheaval. But that is because I am a hardcore disciple of Christ and, therefore, am a very religious individual.
I use the terms Big Money Boys because it is my own term for the Illuminati. I don't know who they are, I don't care who they are. If it doesn't help me to win another soul to Christ or give God's love to humanity, why should I, being what I am, care to delve into it? It doesn't matter who the individuals are, only that the Endtime will soon be coming.
On a further note: I find it interesting that you, Amos, professing last year to be a Christian, do not believe that the Endtime will come soon-a basic tenant of a genuine Christian's faith.
Hey Amos; don't be silly. I absolutely believe in unicorns. (There is more proof that they exist, anyway.) Andre, it's quite rude of you to be deleting posts just because you don't agree with what the author says on his own site. If you don't like anyone who isn't christian, you may as well disown 2/3 of your family members because we've all grown up and realised that there is no boogeymonster and there is no saviour. (With the exception of Ginny, she just chose a different form of saviour.) And yes, commenting, not to argue (which i made clear in the second post), but to tell you to stop being a rude little boy. You're irritating me with your attempts to sound intelligent right now. Five words for you, Dear. They're, thier, there, your, you're.
You've failed once again to backup your statement:
"...the big money boys grabbed most of the stock on the market. The current recession is just them expanding their influence and trying to get whats left."
Just because your reasoning is religiously based does not mean you are exempt from providing a little evidence for your claims.
As for my religious beliefs, I may have professed to being a Christian last year, and the year before that I would have probably said that David Berg was a prophet of the end, guided by the masterful hands of Rasputin and Abrahim. Thankfully though, we live and learn. The world IS round after all.
Hullo Angie..
Angie:
First off, my blog, so I make the rules.
Second, its not that I do not like anyone who is not a Christian. Your not a Christian, I got friends that are not Christians; yet I still like them and I still like you. However, I do have a problem with people who are active and blatant in speaking against my faith. You keep your doubts and ridicule to yourself-or, at least, don't speak about it around me. That's the difference between him and you.
Third:
Honestly darling, is that the best you can come up with? I thought we were over the whole "name-calling, your-stupid-and-it-annoys-me" stage. If my demeanor to your friend, whom I have very deep differences with, annoys you then why continue reading? Again, my blog, so I make the rules.
Amos: It doesn't matter whether I've backed up my statement or not because, as I've said throughout my comments, its all SPECULATION. Therefore, there is no need to back it up because its not a hypothesis. (SURPRISE!!-there is a difference!) Its my interpretation of current events in relation to Biblical prophecy. You can say "It won't happen" all you want and I can reply "Yes it will" all I want. We can both give statistics to back up our theories. But, it all comes down to the same conclusion: only time will be able to tell absolutely. Because, until it happens, how can one say with absolute certainty that it will?
wow this looks so deep and entertaining!! shame i don't even have time to read through it all.
I'm on Amos's side, just cause from time to time we need things to agree on, haha riight??! (dumb.)
anyhow, delete this post, it's stupid randomness in the middle of intricate and complex statements.
love you Dre!
No... I think I'll leave it, just to spite you:P
Of course we can't be absolutely certain, that's not the point. I don't know whats going to happen anymore than you do.
But obviously, at least I'd hope, you've based your speculation and your statements on something other than just some conspiracy theorists wet dream and your own religious bias. And that's what I'm asking to see. (The alternative, that you really do have nothing else to go on, is far too worrying.)
I'm out of town for the weekend, so if I don't reply, its not because I'm chickening out or something. I'll be back to kick and scream on Monday.
Hello Elizabeth.
I must say dre...
you asked for it
i love you. Thanks.
Sorry Amos, haven't had much time to check my blog and approve the comments... the world is round, after all:P
Anyway, I can post up a few, good, news articles that I read on the subject. But to be honest, I'm a very religious person and, therefore, the manuscript of my religion (the Bible) plays a major role in my speculation. Therefore, seeing as you don't believe it, would it really be any good to argue the point further? One must be convinced of the accuracy of the Bible if they are to be confronted with deeper, prophetic passages.
And since this post is not about the authenticity of the Bible, but about economic speculation, its only an off-topic discussion.
I am really not that closed minded (I hope). Please do show from the Bible some passages to back up your claims.
(Specifically the one where you've said the same people that we're behind the '29 crash are the ones profiting from the current recession.)
First off, let us look at the passages of the Bible that play a role in my theory, then you can see where my own speculation lies.
First, the Antichrist’s tactics:
Daniel 8:23-25
And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.
1 Thessalonians 5: 3
For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
From this we understand that the Antichrist, foretold in Revelations, Daniel and other places uses “peace” in order to destroy others. It’s quite simple, really, to destroy someone once they have let down their guard. Like boiling a frog, one does not place it into the pot automatically. You put it in the cold water first, then slowly turn up the heat so it does not know what is going on. Therefore, I see the current economic crises in the same way. My speculation is that it does not matter if the economy rebounds for a little while, because it will fall inevitably. If it does rebound, it’s just to desensitize people, so that they think that nothing bad will happen because they came out of yet another one, and they will do it again, etc. etc.
Secondly, the reason for the Economic Crash:
Revelations 13: 16-17
And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
In order for this mark to be placed upon all mankind as the new means of economy, the current economic system (Dollars and cents) must first be done away with. The only thing that will make that come about is a worldwide, economic calamity.
Does the Antichrist want to rule the world? Yes! Why? Because he is Satan in the flesh, just as Jesus was God in the flesh. Satan has always wanted to rule as God (Isaiah 14:12-14) and that is why he has slowly led mankind along and desensitized the masses to believe that he is not real, there is no God, and that the Endtime does not exist. If one does not believe that the Antichrist exists, then they’ll just view him as a smart guy who has “saved them.” But that is because they are blind, and cannot observe the signs of the times. (Matthew 16:1-4)
So as for you asking to prove that the ones behind the crash of 29’ are the same ones profiting now, I cannot say, “this person” or, “that person” because I really don’t know the names and neither does the Bible name them. However, ultimately the Antichrist is the one who profits from it, because it is Satan that has ordained the entire thing.
So knowing that, and knowing how it will end up is all that matters, really. It’s the king that rules the puppets; not the puppets the king.
Did you just call yourself a puppet? And wtf, you keep deleting my comments. That's a little bit rude. And just for the record, you said *Jesus was god in the flesh*? Didn't the bible say he was the son of god, not god himself? Or is that one of those things that we won't understand until we're all dead, like so many other issues?
So as for you asking to prove that the ones behind the crash of 29’ are the same ones profiting now, I cannot say, “this person” or, “that person” because I really don’t know the names and neither does the Bible name them.
I did not mean that I needed a name, what I was asking for is for you to show what makes you believe (as you said) that it is the same people.
Now you are saying that it doesn't matter who the people are, because its the devil controlling them no matter what, which is a rather convenient fail safe.
Amos:
I gave you the verses for what the Biblical foundation is for my forecast. All the rest, including my claim that the ones behind the crash of 29 are the same people profiting now is part of my personal speculation.
Speculation is speculation. Must we really go into the definition of it again? I say that it doesn't matter who the actual people are who make the calls and tell the stock holders to sell, etc. because ultimately the Devil is the one behind it all trying to put the Antichrist in power.
Angie: Sorry, I'm not trying to be rude. Like I told you... I just don't want you turning this post into a chat with Amos, or you trying to mock me or my faith. If you have stuff to say that's pertinent to the discussion, then by all means do say it. If not, why should I post your comment then?
Second:
Yes, I did say that Jesus Christ was God in the flesh because, according to the Bible, he was. But the statement is twofold.
Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and God the Father are one and yet, separate--this is a mystery that I cannot explain and that, yes, I must just take by faith. There are alot of things that one must take by faith in religion, because if you could explain it all way and know everything, what would faith be?
The other half of the statement is quite simple, as it is clearly outlined in the first chapter of the Gospel of John.
John 1:1-5,14
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
We pray to Jesus because he is the door of salvation, the mediator between God the Father and human beings. "No man cometh unto the Father but by Me" and all that sort of thing.
Understand?
Actually, all my comments were pertinent to the discussion, but you apparently didn't like the points I made.
And yes, the bible does say *word was made flesh* but it does NOT say Jesus is/was god. That is the point I was trying to make. And I'm sorry, but I know you are a smart kid when you put your mind to something. And I don't understand why you'll discard valid points and just say "Oh, well I don't understand it so I'll just have faith in something I don't know anything about at all." Not to mock you or anything (really), but how can you use Blind faith to fill in glaring Black Holes in your end-of-the-world theories and expect to be taken seriously? I really don't understand that.
Fair enough, speculation is speculation.
I just wondered if anything was behind it, or if it was, as Angie said, just looking for the monster under your bed.
I do hope you are quite wrong, as this world is starting to grow on me.
Amos:
I guess we'll just have to see then. Cause like I said before, until the time for it is past, can we ever truly say that we'll know? Especially in matters as volatile as economy.
Angie:
I was talking about you going on and on about how I do not like anyone who is not a Christian. Simply put, it is not true. Coincidentally, the Holy Book I follow admonishes me to show love unto every man, whether or not I agree with his worldview.
However, that is not the point. About the Bible saying that Jesus is God, let me make this nice and simple so that you can understand. (Note: This is all according to Biblical teaching, as I have shown in the verses in my last post)
1. The Word is God
2. The Word was made Flesh and dwelt among us
3. Jesus was born in the flesh
4. Therefore, Jesus was the son of God
This claim was not only made by the authors of the Gospels, said by Jesus (John14:6) but is cemented by the fact that Jesus fulfilled every conceivable prophecy concerning the "Messiah" in the Old Testament, written hundreds-or even thousands-of years before his birth. I'll list a few here to show you:
# Born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:21-23)
# A descendant of Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3; 22:18; Matthew 1:1; Galatians 3:16)
# Of the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10; Luke 3:23, 33; Hebrews 7:14)
# Of the house of David (2 Samuel 7:12-16; Matthew 1:1)
# Born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2, Matthew 2:1; Luke 2:4-7)
# Taken to Egypt (Hosea 11:1; Matthew 2:14-15)
# Herod´s killing of the infants (Jeremiah 31:15; Matthew 2:16-18)
# Anointed by the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 11:2; Matthew 3:16-17)
# Heralded by the messenger of the Lord (John the Baptist) (Isaiah 40:3-5; Malachi 3:1; Matthew 3:1-3)
# Would perform miracles (Isaiah 35:5-6; Matthew 9:35)
# Would preach good news (Isaiah 61:1; Luke 4:14-21)
# Would minister in Galilee (Isaiah 9:1; Matthew 4:12-16) Would cleanse the Temple (Malachi 3:1; Matthew 21:12-13)
# Would first present Himself as King 173,880 days from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25; Matthew 21:4-11)
# Would enter Jerusalem as a king on a donkey (Zechariah 9:9; Matthew 21:4-9)
# Would be rejected by Jews (Psalm 118:22; I Peter 2:7)
# Die a humiliating death (Psalm 22; Isaiah 53) involving:
1. rejection (Isaiah 53:3; John 1:10-11; 7:5,48)
2. betrayal by a friend (Psalm 41:9; Luke 22:3-4; John 13:18)
3. sold for 30 pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12; Matthew 26:14-15)
4. silence before His accusers (Isaiah 53:7; Matthew 27:12-14)
5. being mocked (Psalm 22: 7-8; Matthew 27:31)
6. beaten (Isaiah 52:14; Matthew 27:26)
7. spit upon (Isaiah 50:6; Matthew 27:30)
8. piercing His hands and feet (Psalm 22:16; Matthew 27:31)
9. being crucified with thieves (Isaiah 53:12; Matthew 27:38)
10. praying for His persecutors (Isaiah 53:12; Luke 23:34)
11. piercing His side (Zechariah 12:10; John 19:34)
12. given gall and vinegar to drink (Psalm 69:21, Matthew 27:34, Luke 23:36)
13. no broken bones (Psalm 34:20; John 19:32-36)
14. buried in a rich man’s tomb (Isaiah 53:9; Matthew 27:57-60)
15. casting lots for His garments (Psalm 22:18; John 19:23-24)
# Would rise from the dead!! (Psalm 16:10; Mark 16:6; Acts 2:31)
# Ascend into Heaven (Psalm 68:18; Acts 1:9)
# Would sit down at the right hand of God (Psalm 110:1; Hebrews
The Book of Daniel was written 500 years before the birth of Jesus. In Chapter 9, Daniel predicts the very day that the Messiah would enter Jerusalem and present himself as king for the first time. The prophecy states that 69 weeks of years (69 x 7 = 483 years) would pass from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem until the coming of the Messiah. (Daniel9:25) Since Daniel was written in Babylon during the Jewish captivity after the fall of Jerusalem, this prophecy was based on the Babylonian 360-day calendar. Thus, 483 years x 360 days = 173,880 days.
According to records found in the Shushan (Susa) Palace, and confirmed in Nehemiah 2:1, the decree to rebuild Jerusalem was issued by the Persian king, Artaxerxes Longimanus, on March 5, 444 BC. Remarkably, 173,880 days later (adjusting for leap years), on March 30, 33 AD, Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey (fulfilling the prophecy in Zechariah 9:9).4 Five days later, Jesus was crucified on a Roman cross just outside Jerusalem. (Actually, the form of his execution and even his last words were foretold hundreds of years earlier in Psalm 22.) Three days later, the New Testament accounts declare that Jesus rose from the dead on Easter Sunday, fulfilling numerous other prophecies of the long-awaited Messiah.
Were these predictions really about Jesus though? Come on!-someone cannot manipulate or accidentally fulfill so many prophecies about him.
Coincidentally, Professor Peter Stoner found out the same thing: (Professor Peter Stoner (1888-1980)was Chairman of the Departments of Mathematics and Astronomy at Pasadena City College until 1953, and Chairman of the Science Division of Westmont College from 1953 to 1957. Stoner calculated the probability of one man fulfilling only a handful of the over 300 Messianic prophecies. In 1944, he published his research results in Science Speaks: Scientific Proof of the Accuracy of Prophecy and the Bible. Stoner concluded that the probability of one person fulfilling just eight of the specific prophecies was one chance in 10 (to the power of 17, or one followed by 17 zeros). How about one person fulfilling just 48 of the over 300 prophecies? Stoner calculated these odds at one chance in 10 (to the power of157).)
(Cited from: Peter Stoner, Science Speaks: Scientific Proof of the Accuracy of Prophecy and the Bible, 1944, 109-10.)
Can this be called actual statistical science though? According to the American Scientific Affiliation it is: "The manuscript for Science Speaks has been carefully reviewed by a committee of the American Scientific Affiliation members and by the Executive Council of the same group and has been found, in general, to be dependable and accurate in regard to the scientific material presented. The mathematical analysis included is based upon principles of probability which are thoroughly sound and Professor Stoner has applied these principles in a proper and convincing way."
(Cited from: American Scientific Affiliation, H. Harold Hartzler, Ph.D., Secretary-Treasurer, Goshen College, Ind.)
Concurrently, we must ask ourselves, was Jesus a real human being? You can take the Biblical answer if you want, but there were also secular scholars after his death that acknowledged that he was a real man, and did indeed walk the earth. Here are a few of their quotations to prove it:
Flavius Josephus (37 - 100 AD)
"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders.
***
After the death of the procurator Festus, when Albinus was about to succeed him, the high-priest Ananius considered it a favorable opportunity to assemble the Sanhedrin. He therefore caused James the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, and several others, to appear before this hastily assembled council, and pronounced upon them the sentence of death by stoning. All the wise men and strict observers of the law who were at Jerusalem expressed their disapprobation of this act...Some even went to Albinus himself, who had departed to Alexandria, to bring this breach of the law under his observation, and to inform him that Ananius had acted illegally in assembling the Sanhedrin without the Roman authority.
***
Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness."
(Cited from: Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 3, paragraph 3; Book 20, chapter 9, paragraph 1; and Book 18, chapter 5, paragraph 2, respectively.)
Mara Bar-Serapion, a stoic philosopher from Syria, wrote this letter to his son from prison sometime after 70 AD:
"What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as a judgment for their crime. What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burning Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the Jews gain from their executing their wise king? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: The Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion. But Socrates did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Plato. Pythagoras did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Hera. Nor did the wise king die for good; he lived on in the teaching which he had given."
(Cited From: British Museum Syriac Manuscript, Addition 14, 658.)
This letter refers to Jesus as being the "wise king." The writer is obviously not a Christian because he places Jesus on an equal level with Socrates and Pythagoras. Without bias in his reference to Jesus and the church, this letter is a valuable historical reference regarding the historicity of Jesus.
A passage from Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 43A:
"It has been taught: On the Eve of the Passover, they hanged Yeshu. And an announcer went out in front of him, for forty days saying: 'he is going to be stoned because he practiced sorcery and enticed and led Israel astray.' Anyone who knows anything in his favor, let him come and plead in his behalf.' But, not having found anything in his favor, they hanged him on the Eve of the Passover."
Now then, since we have established the fact that Jesus really was a historical character, was he really the Son of God? As it stands, there are several other alternatives, "He was a good man" "He was a teacher" "He was a prophet" "A moral standard" etc. However, the problem with this is that, if he were all of these things, he would be a liar, purposefully deceiving the masses and, therefore, could not have been an effective "moral standard" or any of the above. I take here, two solid Christian writers who better explain my point:
Josh McDowell, "More than a Carpenter" (pages 33-34): The issue with these three alternatives is not which is possible, for it is obvious that all three are possible. But rather, the question is 'which is more probable?' Who you decide Jesus Christ is must not be an idle intellectual exercise. You cannot put Him on the shelf as a great moral teacher. That is not a valid option. He is either a liar, a lunatic, or Lord and God. You must make a choice. 'But,' as the Apostle John wrote, 'these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and' - more important - 'that believing you might have life in His name' (John 20:31)."
C.S Lewis, "Mere Christianity" (pages 40-41): "I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg - or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."
So therefore, as it says in the Bible, Jesus is the Son of God. And, if one is persuaded on this point (what I've typed up here is just a short version really) why could not the Bible be true in its perdiction in the Antichrist and the Endtime?
Wow. You totally overlooked what I said. I did not say he was not the son of god. I said he was not god in the flesh, as you claimed earlier. And as far as trying to prove he did exist, I was not debating that. There is, in fact, scientific evidence that Jesus (or a man similar) did exist and was regarded as a prophet, et cetera. I do believe your little rant was just for the sole purpose of trying to cover the fact that you ignored what I said and tried to prove something other than the subject at hand. But just because he existed does not mean that the bible's predictions of doom and hellfire are valid. Thats like saying if a man writes a book saying we'll all become Mermaids and the main character was based off of a real human being, then the book must be right and we'll all live in an Aquatic Wonderland someday. (Yes, stretching it a bit, but you get the general idea.)
Anyways, all that aside, I happen to believe quite strongly that the world is not coming to an end any time in the foreseeable future. So, beware the Boogeyman, and learn a few new recipes involving refried beans and canned tomatoes. If your version comes true, I'm sure you'll need them. As for me, I'll sleep in peace, a blissful Unbeliever in folklore and fairy tales.
Sigh…
You just don’t understand it, do you? If Jesus was the Son of God then he was God in the Flesh. The Word was God, the Word was made Flesh. Its like saying 1 plus 1 is two, so therefore if you have 2 ones and add them to zero you’ll get the same results. How is that so hard to comprehend?
My “little rant” as you put it was not trying to discuss something other the subject at hand. You have equated my faith several times to believing in unicorns, fairytales, the boogeyman, and have stated, “Your brothers and sister’s have all grown up and come to realize that there is no savior.” That’s an issue in my books, because, simply put, your wrong. Also, if the Bible is right about the predictions of Jesus, as well as in other prophecies in the Old and New Testament’s why would it be wrong in predicting the Endtime? That is the point I was trying to make. If someone tells you that adding one to four makes five and you try it and find out that its true, why would they be wrong in stating afterwards that five minus two is three?
But, I can see that is pointless to argue it with you. It will just go back and forth and nothing will be accomplished. Denial of a truth does not make that truth void. Believe what you want and I will believe what I want. When we are dead we will both find out which one was right.
Until then, let this be the end of the discussion.
Recession over. What will you soil yourself over next?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home