Would you Follow Him and take his mark?

[JohnDB]

Christians don't have to be ignorant. The Hebrews emerged from the North Coast Canaanites. They borrowed extensively for Psalms . Dan'el and the Flood story.

Again with more lies, mischaracterisation and a complete misunderstanding of the faith that we hold so dear.

My sincerest hope is that one day you give up this nonsense and decide to become a Christian...
But chances are that you believe in yourself over and above anyone or anything else...

BUT

If you want to become a Christian I can assist you...I can't do it for you. But you pretty much have to give up all that you think you know and actually resign yourself to the real truth. But you probably won't unless you have a "Damascus Road incident"...

Christians aren't ignorant...most of the ones I know are highly educated in the faith they hold most dear... because they do hold it so dearly. Most may not be articulate teachers, lecturers, or leaders...but they do know a LOT. Which is why you find yourself here after getting tossed from every Christian forum. Why do you suppose that is?

The cannon of scripture is a miracle...an absolute bonafide miracle that you are seeking to dismantle. There are so many layers of complexity and coordination with intertwined threads that the Cannon must be accepted as a whole or rejected as a whole...there is no "in-between" ground here whatsoever. It is so sad that you cannot see this.

I, like so many others, know exactly what I believe and why I believe it as Paul, Peter, and James all exhorted us to do.

Again...if you want to become a Christian there are many people willing to assist...but it is going to cost you everything you currently think you know.

 

[surada]

Again with more lies, mischaracterisation and a complete misunderstanding of the faith that we hold so dear.

My sincerest hope is that one day you give up this nonsense and decide to become a Christian...
But chances are that you believe in yourself over and above anyone or anything else...

BUT

If you want to become a Christian I can assist you...I can't do it for you. But you pretty much have to give up all that you think you know and actually resign yourself to the real truth. But you probably won't unless you have a "Damascus Road incident"...

Christians aren't ignorant...most of the ones I know are highly educated in the faith they hold most dear... because they do hold it so dearly. Most may not be articulate teachers, lecturers, or leaders...but they do know a LOT. Which is why you find yourself here after getting tossed from every Christian forum. Why do you suppose that is?

The cannon of scripture is a miracle...an absolute bonafide miracle that you are seeking to dismantle. There are so many layers of complexity and coordination with intertwined threads that the Cannon must be accepted as a whole or rejected as a whole...there is no "in-between" ground here whatsoever. It is so sad that you cannot see this.

I, like so many others, know exactly what I believe and why I believe it as Paul, Peter, and James all exhorted us to do.

Again...if you want to become a Christian there are many people willing to assist...but it is going to cost you everything you currently think you know.

I have never been tossed from any Christian forum. There was NO Ur of the Chaldeans in the time of Abraham.. and the consensus is that he was from Urfa near Haran in Syria.

 

[JohnDB]

I have never been tossed from any Christian forum. There was NO Ur of the Chaldeans in the time of Abraham.. and the consensus is that he was from Urfa near Haran in Syria.

Now you are just spouting nonsense and haven't addressed anything that I have said to you...

Are you having trouble understanding the requisite elements of a conversation but expect us to take anything you say as "gospel truth"?

We already knew that you believe in you...what your objective is is for the Christians to believe in you...(which we don't due to your claims about the Bible being full of lies and falsehoods)

Calm down and try again.

We have this expression concerning ducks...

If it smells like a duck
Acts like a duck
Quacks like a duck
But claims it's a frog...

It's probably a misguided duck.

 

[The Original Tree]

So? He's wrong.. It was accurate because "Daniel" was written about 165-168 BC during the reign of Antiochus and the Maccabean Revolt. Daniel was a Jew.. and Jesus didn't fit the Messiah the Jews expected.

You are a known liar and blasphemer so why do you bother digging your eternal grave even deeper than it already is. Many Jews of Jesus time completely understood that He was The Messiah and accepted Him as Messiah. The entire early church was nearly 100% Jewish.....so again, you lie....but no surprise there, lying is your native language.

 

[The Original Tree]

I have never been tossed from any Christian forum. There was NO Ur of the Chaldeans in the time of Abraham.. and the consensus is that he was from Urfa near Haran in Syria.

Why would anyone toss you? They'd much rather point to you as an example of what not to be.

 

[The Original Tree]

Revelation is a bit of endtimes fantasy that should never have been included in the Bible.

Half the Bible covers the End Times around The Tribulation, so what other books are you going to throw out? Ezekiel. Isaiah, Jerimiah, Jude, Psalms, Daniel, The Book of Job?

 

[JohnDB]

Half the Bible covers the End Times around The Tribulation, so what other books are you going to throw out? Ezekiel. Isaiah, Jerimiah, Jude, Psalms, Daniel, The Book of Job?

Oh no... she's starting with Genesis and working her way through the Torah first...

By the time she get finished not believing any of the scriptures she will discover that she doesn't believe in anything except for herself...

Where the scriptures were written in a style that was extremely concentrated (because paper and ink were extremely expensive) and now out of the time period they were written in...there is quite a bit of study needed to comprehensively understand what was said and why it was said in the manner it was said in...but that's where extreme caution is needed. What sciences you study must be congruent with the scriptures...over 3500 years old and still more accurate than any other book on the planet.
Homer's Illead has fewer controversies surrounding it than the Bible...
And we only have 4 copies of it.

People want to discredit the bible for a laundry list of reasons...not a one of them any good.

But like James says, we don't need to just study and understand the scriptures...we need to do as they say.

 

[The Original Tree]

Oh no... she's starting with Genesis and working her way through the Torah first...

By the time she get finished not believing any of the scriptures she will discover that she doesn't believe in anything except for herself...

Where the scriptures were written in a style that was extremely concentrated (because paper and ink were extremely expensive) and now out of the time period they were written in...there is quite a bit of study needed to comprehensively understand what was said and why it was said in the manner it was said in...but that's where extreme caution is needed. What sciences you study must be congruent with the scriptures...over 3500 years old and still more accurate than any other book on the planet.
Homer's Illead has fewer controversies surrounding it than the Bible...
And we only have 4 copies of it.

People want to discredit the bible for a laundry list of reasons...not a one of them any good.

But like James says, we don't need to just study and understand the scriptures...we need to do as they say.

Best book ever written.

 

[SweetSue92]

What you call The Bible also commands you stone blasphemers and adulterers and to leave off eating cheeseburgers. It also has some not so nice injunctions about speaking about your parents.

Matthew 15:4 "He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die"

Safe to say, that you don't follow every provision of your scripture. So why are you so intent on sticking to the one that gives you license to push your faith into to the face of others?

You came to THIS forum, to read THIS thread, and then whine profusely about being offended.

 

[SweetSue92]

What Is the Mark of the Beast? (Revelation 13)

We must be willing to suffer, to give our all for Christ, to persevere until the end in order to obtain the final reward.

www.crossway.org

With the advent of RFID technology, a literal "stamp" would not be that far fetched, as the world is headed full tilt into a cashless society and discrimination against Christians becomes more prevalent, no matter what these Leftist kooks say, unless you are saved, born again, and heaven bound, there is no hope for mankind.

This becomes more apparent daily, and I think, Believer or not, people understand this intrinsically.

Maranatha.

 

[SweetSue92]

What you call The Bible also commands you stone blasphemers and adulterers and to leave off eating cheeseburgers. It also has some not so nice injunctions about speaking about your parents.

Matthew 15:4 "He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die"

Safe to say, that you don't follow every provision of your scripture. So why are you so intent on sticking to the one that gives you license to push your faith into to the face of others?

It is like seeing an evangelical church, strolling into it, and then crying about how "everyone there is pushing their faith into your face"

waaaaaah I'm OFFENDED

 

[buttercup]

This would be the problem....
You cannot go to an admitted satanist and expect to get the truth.

And then get your feelings hurt when we hear you say the things you say and then say that you are not a Christian... because when you spout the things from a Satanist... you are not a Christian.

He isn't a scholar or researcher or anything except in himself. There are true researchers and doctorates who do this for the love of learning and scriptures. They behave differently and don't write books like he has done....the real scholars have a completely different set of issues than that of this Vexen Crabtree.

Real scholars have issues with getting their research actually published...not because it's not done well...but because of doctrinal issues. Especially when it rubs on one of the pet core theologies of Calvinism or something else like that.

Satanists have an agenda that is exactly the opposite of Christianity.

Wow, you weren't kidding! I looked up the guy she used as her source and apparently he really is a flat out satanist. This confirms the gut feeling I had about her all along, and it goes along with what I was talking about earlier, wolves in sheep's clothing... people who profess to be Christians but spend all their time trying to subvert Christianity and constantly mislead people.

I don't understand why someone would claim to be a Christian while disbelieving pretty much everything about Christianity… unless they meant 'christian' it in a solely cultural sense, similar to Jewish atheists. Or, as I just said, to be a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Thank you for your posts on this thread, and thank you for pointing this out. I'll give surada the benefit of the doubt and assume she didn't realize he was a satanist. As you said, no Christian is going to spout things from satanists while constantly dismissing biblical scholars, historians and true researchers. That is completely insane and ludicrous.

 

[surada]

You are a known liar and blasphemer so why do you bother digging your eternal grave even deeper than it already is. Many Jews of Jesus time completely understood that He was The Messiah and accepted Him as Messiah. The entire early church was nearly 100% Jewish.....so again, you lie....but no surprise there, lying is your native language.

norwegen

Do you ever use your brain? Daniel was written about Antiochus who defiled the Temple and the Maccabean Revolt. Jesus wasn't born yet. Daniel was NOT a Christian.

 

[surada]

norwegen

Do you ever use your brain? Daniel was written about Antiochus who defiled the Temple and the Maccabean Revolt. Jesus wasn't born yet. Daniel was NOT a Christian.

 

[JohnDB]

Wow, you weren't kidding! I looked up the guy she used as her source and apparently he really is a flat out satanist. This confirms the gut feeling I had about her all along, and it goes along with what I was talking about earlier, wolves in sheep's clothing... people who profess to be Christians but spend all their time trying to subvert Christianity and constantly mislead people.

I don't understand why someone would claim to be a Christian while disbelieving pretty much everything about Christianity… unless they meant 'christian' it in a solely cultural sense, similar to Jewish atheists. Or, as I just said, to be a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Thank you for your posts on this thread, and thank you for pointing this out. I'll give surada the benefit of the doubt and assume she didn't realize he was a satanist. As you said, no Christian is going to spout things from satanists while constantly dismissing biblical scholars, historians and true researchers. That is completely insane and ludicrous.

I have bad habits...one of them is understating things.

I'm not much for slandering or ad hominem attacks either because they are the tools for someone who has a losing position. So when I actually say something about someone...it's an understatement.

We who study a lot do end up with our heads in the clouds and are worthless as a Christian...but this situation is vastly different than normal. This is advocating lies and falsehoods and an unraveling of scripture...just because a source is extremely old doesn't necessarily mean that it is accurate... usually just the opposite. Usually aggrandizing the author/commissioner of the writing way beyond the truth while disparaging everyone else.

 

[surada]

I have bad habits...one of them is understating things.

I'm not much for slandering or ad hominem attacks either because they are the tools for someone who has a losing position. So when I actually say something about someone...it's an understatement.

We who study a lot do end up with our heads in the clouds and are worthless as a Christian...but this situation is vastly different than normal. This is advocating lies and falsehoods and an unraveling of scripture...just because a source is extremely old doesn't necessarily mean that it is accurate... usually just the opposite. Usually aggrandizing the author/commissioner of the writing way beyond the truth while disparaging everyone else.

The Book of Daniel was written during the persecutions of Israel by the Syrian king Antiochus Epiphanes. This assertion is supported by the following data: The kingdom which is symbolized by the he goat (viii. 5 et seq.) is expressly named as the "kingdom of Yawan"—that is, the Grecian kingdom (viii.
DANIEL, BOOK OF - JewishEncyclopedia.com

DANIEL, BOOK OF - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

 

[JohnDB]

The Book of Daniel was written during the persecutions of Israel by the Syrian king Antiochus Epiphanes. This assertion is supported by the following data: The kingdom which is symbolized by the he goat (viii. 5 et seq.) is expressly named as the "kingdom of Yawan"—that is, the Grecian kingdom (viii.
DANIEL, BOOK OF - JewishEncyclopedia.com

DANIEL, BOOK OF - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

We know your lies already...you quote satanists and anyone and everyone who has an axe to grind against Christianity.

Try starting your own thread to promote your antichrist viewpoints.

 

[surada]

We know your lies already...you quote satanists and anyone and everyone who has an axe to grind against Christianity.

Try starting your own thread to promote your antichrist viewpoints.

You think the Jewish encyclopedia might know what they are talking about? After all Daniel was a Jew not a Christian.

 

[surada]

Daniel

Daniel on Early Jewish Writings: a comprehensive sourcebook for ancient Judaism.

earlyjewishwritings.com

Information on Daniel
W. Sibley Towner writes: "Daniel is one of the few OT books that can be given a fairly firm date. In the form in which we have it (perhaps without the additions of 12:11, 12), the book must have been given its final form some time in the years 167-164 B.C. This dating is based upon two assumptions: first, that the authors lived at the later end of the historical surveys that characterize Daniel 7-12; and second, that prophecy is accurate only when it is given after the fact, whereas predictions about the future tend to run astray.

Based upon these assumptions, the references to the desecration of the Temple and the 'abomination that makes desolate' in 8:9-12; 9:27; and 11:31 must refer to events known to the author. The best candidates for the historical referents of these events are the desecration of the Temple in Jerusalem and the erection in it of a pagan altar in the autumn of 167 B.C. by Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
The inaccurate description of the end of Antiochus' reign and his death in 11:40-45, on the other hand, suggests that the author did not know of those events, which occurred late in 164 or early in 163 B.C. The roots of the hagiographa (idealizing stories) about Daniel and his friends in chaps. 1-6 may date to an earlier time, but the entire work was given its final shape in 164 B.C." (Harper's Bible Commentary, p. 696)

Louis F. Hartman writes: "Having lost sight of these ancient modes of writing, until relatively recent years Jews and Christians have considered Dn to be true history, containing genuine prophecy. Inasmuch as chs. 7-12 are written in the first person, it was natural to assume that Daniel in chs. 1-6 was a truly historical character and that he was the author of the whole book. There would be few modern biblical scholars, however, who would now seriously defend such an opinion. The arguments for a date shortly before the death of Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 164 are overwhelming.

An author living in the 6th cent. could hardly have written the late Hebrew used in Dn, and its Aramaic is certainly later than the Aramaic of the Elephantine papyri, which date from the end of the 5th cent. The theological outlook of the author, with his interest in angelology, his apocalyptic rather than prophetic vision, and especially his belief in the resurrection of the dead, points unescapably to a period long after the Babylonian Exile. His historical perspective, often hazy for events in the time of the Babylonian and Persian kings but much clearer for the events during the Seleucid Dynasty, indicates the Hellenistic age. Finally, his detailed description of the profanation of the Temple of Jerusalem by Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167 and the following persecution (9:27; 11:30-35) contrasted with his merely general reference to the evil end that would surely come to such a wicked man (11:45), indicates a composition date shortly before the death of this king in 164, therefore probably in 165." (The Jerome Biblical Commentary, vol. 1, p. 448)

 

[JohnDB]

You think the Jewish encyclopedia might know what they are talking about? After all Daniel was a Jew not a Christian.

Judaism is not a "one speaks for all" type religion...
There are wildly varying sets of beliefs...many of them were routinely causes for apostasy. (Getting tossed from the Jewish community...which to Jews is the most extreme punitive measure possible)

So just because you have a "Jewish theological perspective" it means nothing.

Three Jews will collectively have 5 opinions because one of them will have to hold 5 arguments at the same time with himself and the other 2.
Even Messianic Jews hold varying opinions and not all of them are good or reliable.

Modern Judaism and Messianic Judaism are not reliable and credible sources for much.

Again...can you please keep your antichrist promoting ideas to another thread.