[Zechariah Smyth]

Re: Hey There

This coming from the guy who said "Do you see how stupid your pseudo-Christianity is now?"

I'm not ill-tempered, I am just presenting a fact. You know nothing about me, so please don't pretend that you do.

That's been done already.

Dragons are a myth. One of the given abilities of this myth is the ability to breathe fire.

Anyway, you guys are totally missing the point of what I am trying to say.

WRONG.

The dragons YOU describe are mythical. The dragons as detailed in the KJV Bible are quite real.

Your fundamental refusal to understand the difference will be your eventual downfall.

Shame.



YiC,

Zech

[s. warnin]

Re: Hey There

You all seem to be questioning the whole metaphor thing, so rather than doing a bunch of quotes I'll try to explain a bit more.

Revelations is full of metaphors, and what Revelations is actually talking about is unknown. It is impossible just to read Revelations and know what it is saying.

Most of the interpretations fall into one or more of the following categories:

Historicist, which sees in Revelation a broad view of history;

Preterist, in which Revelation mostly refers to the events of the apostolic era (1st century);

Futurist, which believes that Revelation describes future events;

Idealist, or Symbolic, which holds that Revelation does not refer to actual people or events, but is an allegory of the spiritual path and the ongoing struggle between good and evil.

I forget where, but at one point Revelations talks about dragons. Now, there obviously aren't any dragons flying around right now, and they don't even exist. When Apostle John was getting these visions, I can see how he could have seen a fighter jet and had no idea what it was. It would make sense for him to call them dragons.

That's what I mean. Revelations can be taken in many different ways.

Your are making two errors Octavia. One, your insistence that God's Word is can be taken anyway you want to take it. God's Word denies that, which you have already been quoted, but here it is again 2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
So regardless of whether you think that what God says is a matter of interpretation, God's Word states the He differs.

And two, how can you argue something you haven't even read or can't remember? If you would actually read the Bible, you would know that a dragon is mentioned long before Revelation.

Isaiah 27:1 "In that day the Lord with his sore and great and strong sword Shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, Even leviathan that crooked serpent; And he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea."

Psalm 74:13 "Thou didst divide the sea by thy strength: Thou brakest the heads of the dragons in the waters."

I am by no means a Bible scholar; however, even with my limited knowledge, I have provided you with two references to dragons in the sea Octavia. Have you been to the bottom of the sea to prove God wrong? Because that's what you are trying to do. You say that we are wrong; however, we tell you that we believe what God says in his Word. It is not us you are trying to prove wrong, but God's Word.

[Brother V]

Re: Hey There

Now, it's not that I think they were poorly thought out or incorrect, I just think that people interpret them in many different ways. That's why we have so many different types of Christianity. All Christianity has the same core belief, but its the other things within the Bible that is commonly debated.

Why are there several versions of Christianity? That's easy to answer. Originally, there was just one, when Jesus was walking around. Then when He left, there became about 12 (one for each of the disciples). Then, it kind of cut back to two (Peter and Paul). Then Peter's version (that the Catholics use) really took over, they included some of the Paul stuff, but mostly it was Peter-ish.

Then, around 1517 a monk named Martin Luther, started the protestant reformation. Thereby breaking it into two different versions. He thought that the Catholics weren't strict enough, and that it should be more accessible (having the Bible in the common language, instead of just Latin).

Then, the brits decided they wanted their own version, so they started the anglicans, because the king wanted a divorce. They went back and forth for a while, so now there's 3, and they are all versions of Catholics.

THEN, a wonderful thing happened. A group called the puritans arrived on the scene. They were preaching hellfire and damnation. They weren't teaching a version of Catholicism. They basically made a NEW version of Christianity. One that wasn't beholden to the customs and traditions and pageantry of the catholics.

So, these guys were actually the first (what we would consider) evangelical christians. You've got the catholic-ish religions of the catholics, lutherans, and anglicans (methodists are an offshoot of anglicans), and now puritans.

The puritans are pretty much gone now, but their spirit lives on in the Baptists. There are other versions of christianity that aren't too catholic, presbyterians, reformed, anabaptists, church of christ, apostolic, pentecostals, charismatics... these all exist and aren't too catholic-y.

So why are there all these different versions of Christianity? Surely there can actually be only ONE right way to get to Jesus. Remember when I mentioned the strait path, or the wide path? There are many paths, but only one is right... only one HAS to be right. They can't all be right, can they?

So, out of all those different versions of christianity, how do people actually select one. Most people just take the one their parents had, unless they are rebelling, and then they might go shopping for a new church. So, how do people select a new church.

It seems, people select a religion, based on what behaviors they find acceptable. Someone who likes drinking, isn't going to be a southern baptist, the SB's frown upon drinking, so a drinker isn't going to go to them. They might pick methodist, they don't mind having a beer every now and then. They might pick catholic, because they see Father Steve out at the bars all the time.

If they are pro-choice, they aren't going to choose to be a catholic, because that's grounds for being excommunicated. They might pick something a little more tolerant.

If they think women should just wear long dresses and never cut their hair, they will pick apostolic christian.

It comes down to this: People pick the religion that suits them, based on the things they want to do. They will not pick a religion that says that their behavior is sinful. They will find the most strict version, that still allows them to do the things they want to do. They will then look down upon another religion that has ... "looser" standards. They will then mock, a religion that has ... "stricter" standards.

For a good example, look to Westboro Baptist Church. Everything (well most everything) they do has a firm biblical basis. (Yes, God hates Fags, sorry to say, but it's true). Because they actually DO something about it, they are relentlessly mocked. They are marginalized. They are ... fringe. Why? Because people look at them, and are scared because they are MORE christian than them (don't try to deny it, you know it's true).

So, what do you do about it? Do you stick with your version of christianity (the one that allows you to be what you want, and requires nothing more), or do you try to get with the one that accepts, values, follows, and enforces the WHOLE Bible?

The choice is yours. Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Do you take the easy wide gate? Or are you going to take the hard strait gate?

YIC
V

[Octavia]

Re: Hey There

WRONG.

The dragons YOU describe are mythical. The dragons as detailed in the KJV Bible are quite real.

We have never seen dragons before. Not ever.

That's why I, and others, believe that the dragons in Revelations are symbols and represent something else.

Because that's what you are trying to do. You say that we are wrong;

No, I'm just presenting my views. You are attacking my views, not me attacking yours.

They basically made a NEW version of Christianity

That's what a lot of people see as the problem. They made their own.

Surely there can actually be only ONE right way to get to Jesus

And again, all versions of Christianity believe that same core value. It's just the other small things that are debated.

It seems, people select a religion, based on what behaviors they find acceptable

Which would make sense as to why puritans came in with a totally new type of Christianity. They didn't like the versions already available because their thoughts on what the Bible were saying were different from all the others. They just decided to create their own new one.

Because they actually DO something about it, they are relentlessly mocked

People don't hate them because of what they believe. People hate them because they push their views up in your face and they are incredibly disrespectful about it.

So, what do you do about it? Do you stick with your version of christianity (the one that allows you to be what you want, and requires nothing more), or do you try to get with the one that accepts, values, follows, and enforces the WHOLE Bible?

Over time I have read the Bible, and thought about what God was telling me. I then discussed with other people about what they thought and they had different views on it than me.

This is where the discussions come in. That's what church is. God wants us to talk about his word, and the fact of the matter is that we all see something different.

I see a kind and loving God based on what I've read, but you see something different.

[Redeemed Papist]

Re: Hey There

Look, pal, I think it's time to point out that from the moment you have entered this place you have systematically tried to erode our fundamental principle of reading the whole Bible with least scripture twisting. It's what we stand for.

So we're bound to clash with you for the simple reason that you are wibbling on about what you think God is based on an edited fluffy highlights version of the Bible and a good dollop of deciding you know what God really meant about all the bits that make you feel uncomfortable.

You've been kindly rebuked by everyone and are now coming over all defensive.

We're not suddenly going to all facepalm and follow you because you are a bombastic person with an over-inflated sense of his own opinion.

In fact God warns us about people like you. Now why would He do that?

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Matthew 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Jeremiah 23:16 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD.

Galatians 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

And so on and so on.

This is what you are doing.

[Bob4God]

Re: Hey There

We have never seen dragons before. Not ever.

The Bible is proven right once again.

[Brother V]

Re: Hey There

That's what a lot of people see as the problem. They made their own.



And again, all versions of Christianity believe that same core value. It's just the other small things that are debated.

So would you all have us be catholic?

Actually, there isn't the same core value.

There are several different beliefs (all christian) on how people are saved.

Sola Fide: Justification by faith alone. Exclusion of "works". It means you just have to believe, and it doesn't matter what else you do. (It's about as fluffy bunny as you can get).

Sanctity: A belief that the chosen are set apart.

Grace: That everyone is saved, regardless of who you are, or what you do.

Predestination: Similar to sanctity, except you are chosen to be saved, and if you aren't chosen, you won't be.

There are three versions in the New Testament that cover salvation.

Faith alone: Romans 3:28
Works alone: James 2:18
Faith and works: James 2:17 (requires both)

Just to cover the bases, you should have faith and works. But most people just go with faith, without having to actually do anything.

YIC
V

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Hey There

Here is all about dragons:
Dragons are poisonous - De:32:33: Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps.

Dragons live in or near a river: Psalms:74:13: Thou didst divide the sea by thy strength: thou brakest the heads of the dragons in the waters. Isa:43:20: The beast of the field shall honour me, the dragons and the owls: because I give waters in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert, to give drink to my people, my chosen.
Eze:29:3: Speak, and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, Pharaoh king of Egypt, the great dragon that lieth in the midst of his rivers, which hath said, My river is mine own, and I have made it for myself.

Dragons that live near the sea will be killed by God. Isa:27:1: In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

Dragons are not very big - Psalms:91:13: Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet.

Dragons are holy creature who love God - Psalms:148:7: Praise the LORD from the earth, ye dragons, and all deeps:

Dragons live in palaces in dens- Isa:13:22: And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged.
Jer:9:11: And I will make Jerusalem heaps, and a den of dragons; and I will make the cities of Judah desolate, without an inhabitant.

Dragons snuff up the wind - Jer:14:6: And the wild asses did stand in the high places, they snuffed up the wind like dragons; their eyes did fail, because there was no grass.

Dragons are big enough to swallow a man - Jer:51:34: Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon hath devoured me, he hath crushed me, he hath made me an empty vessel, he hath swallowed me up like a dragon, he hath filled his belly with my delicates, he hath cast me out.

Dragons make a wailing sound - Mic:1:8: Therefore I will wail and howl, I will go stripped and naked: I will make a wailing like the dragons, and mourning as the owls.

The Dragon of Revelation
Are red and look like this: Re:12:3: And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.

This dragon is not one that lives near water - Re:12:7: And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

The Dragon is not Satan - Re:12:9: And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

But it could be Satan - Re:20:2: And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

Dragons can give people powers - Re:13:2: And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

So we see a dragon is nothing like an aircraft and they don't breathe fire. OK?

[Jack O'fagan]

Re: Hey There

Octavia, I will ask you again. Was the virgin birth a metaphor? Do you think that Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Christ. I believe she was because the Bible tells me so but I am interested in your thoughts.

Thanks

Jack

[Redeemed Papist]

Re: Hey There

Octavia, I will ask you again. Was the virgin birth a metaphor? Do you think that Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Christ. I believe she was because the Bible tells me so but I am interested in your thoughts.

Thanks

Jack

A more pertinent question might be whether Jesus temporarily died for three days before later rising to Heaven.

Or was that a metaphor too?

I'm wondering, like you, what the magic formula for metaphor detection is.

[Jack O'fagan]

Re: Hey There

A more pertinent question might be whether Jesus temporarily died for three days before later rising to Heaven.

Or was that a metaphor too?

Yes, I asked her that as well but she didn't answer, maybe she thought the question was metaphorical?

YIC

Jack

[James Hutchins]

Re: Hey There

Octavia, I ama bit miffed you ignored my post to your (This One).

Do you treat God's Word(r) like this too?

[Octavia]

Re: Hey There

Wow. A busy night in real life leaves you with lots of questions here.

There are three versions in the New Testament that cover salvation.

Faith alone: Romans 3:28
Works alone: James 2:18
Faith and works: James 2:17 (requires both)

Well there you go. 3 different verses saying different things. That is why there is so much debate about this stuff.

Quotes about dragons

The discussion here is not about dragons. I was just using them to try to make a point.

Octavia, I will ask you again. Was the virgin birth a metaphor? Do you think that Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Christ. I believe she was because the Bible tells me so but I am interested in your thoughts.

No, because this is pretty straight forward and doesn't leave room for interpretations. Plus Jesus is mentioned in the Bible later on as well and all that.

Octavia, I ama bit miffed you ignored my post to your (This One).

Do you treat God's Word® like this too?

I apologize for making you feel ignored, but I had felt that those questions had already been answered previously.

Anyway, we're just going in circles here. You all have your own beliefs, and I have mine. It's just something we are going to have to accept. And by doing discussions like this we help ourselves solidify our beliefs. That is my main goal in most of this.

[Redeemed Papist]

Re: Hey There

[speaking about virgin birth]

No, because this is pretty straight forward and doesn't leave room for interpretations. Plus Jesus is mentioned in the Bible later on as well and all that.

1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Please let me know what it is about this that tells you that it's not "pretty straight forward and doesn't leave room for interpretations" or do you, like us, believe that, too?

Jeremiah 20:16 And let that man be as the cities which the LORD overthrew, and repented not: and let him hear the cry in the morning, and the shouting at noontide;

Did God actually do what is mentioned in this similie or is it a similie about a metaphor? God either did or did not overthrow cities without repenting. which is it? How do you know?

[Octavia]

Re: Hey There

Please let me know what it is about this that tells you that it's not "pretty straight forward and doesn't leave room for interpretations" or do you, like us, believe that, too?

What are you asking exactly? Whether or not I think those verses are metaphors?