Why did Jesus Leave?

[devolved]

Don't play coy. "To those who do not believe in Him, no evidence will suffice". Jesus could appear in the sky tomorrow and you'ld find some reason to dismiss what you saw as the planet Venus.

Of course we wouldn't automatically believe that every flying men in the sky is Jesus. It could be a hoax, after all. BUT, such line of evidence would add to plausibility of the claim, if true.

For example, I could say... you wouldn't believe me that I can turn invisible even if I've demonstrated it to you, so what's the point... but it's more of an excuse than explanation. You wouldn't take such line of thinking for anything other than me inventing some evasive means to actually demonstrate what I claim is so.

 

[amariselle]

Yes, but you seem to see ridicule in everything, so...

No, I do not.

 

[amariselle]

Don't pretend to know what I would or wouldn't say in response to such an event. I find it interesting though that, presumably, you would simply assume that the entity in the sky was Jesus. You wouldn't at all wonder how you know that to be true.

When Jesus returns again, no one will question whether it is actually Him or not. When He returns, there will be no more denying that He is real and that He is God.

There will come a time when every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that He is Lord.

Isaiah 45:23
Philippians 2:10-11
Romans 14:11

 

[Archaeopteryx]

When Jesus returns again, no one will question whether it is actually Him or not. When He returns, there will be no more denying that He is real and that He is God.

There will come a time when every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that He is Lord.

Isaiah 45:23
Philippians 2:10-11
Romans 14:11

Did I mention that we don't care much for preaching?

 

[amariselle]

Did I mention that we don't care much for preaching?

Did I mention that you are going to encounter Christian responses on this forum?

 

[amariselle]

Did I mention that we don't care much for preaching?

You prove my point by the way, some people here do not want to hear from Christians. You wrote a post specifically referring to Jesus' return, I gave you a Christian answer. In response you chose to accuse me of "preaching" and said you aren't interested.

Point proven.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You prove my point by the way, some people here do not want to hear from Christians. You wrote a post specifically referring to Jesus' return, I gave you a Christian answer. In response you chose to accuse me of "preaching" and said you aren't interested.

Point proven.

This is a philosophy forum. Preaching is no substitute for presenting a good argument for your position.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Did I mention that you are going to encounter Christian responses on this forum?

Did I mention that this is a philosophy forum? You can preach if you want. But it means as much on here as reciting incantations from a spell book.

 

[amariselle]

This is a philosophy forum. Preaching is no substitute for presenting a good argument for your position.

Oh, and I suppose you think that Christians shouldn't consider the Bible as presenting a "good argument" for their position.

You also seem to think that a thread discussing Jesus should be free of any responses containing Scripture references and the views of Christians in that regard.

Very odd assumptions if you ask me.

 

[amariselle]

Did I mention that this is a philosophy forum? You can preach if you want. But it means as much on here as reciting incantations from a spell book.

I am not "preaching." I am giving a response regarding Jesus' return. (Which just happens to be described in the Bible, multiple times).

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Oh, and I suppose you think that Christians shouldn't consider the Bible as presenting a "good argument" for their position.

I'm just as impressed by your Bible passages as you are impressed by verses from the Quran. Now you either have an argument to present, or you just have the Bible.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I am not "preaching." I am giving a response regarding Jesus' return. (Which just happens to be described in the Bible, multiple times).

Cool. So argue for it. Why should we think that what you've said is true?

 

[amariselle]

Cool. So argue for it. Why should we think that what you've said is true?

Christians give authority to the Bible over all other writings, and so they should.

When it comes to Jesus, the Bible is more authoritative than any other book, writing, speech, etc. If you truly want to know about Jesus, and His return, read the word of God.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Christians give authority to the Bible over all other writings, and so they should.

Yeah, but why should we?

When it comes to Jesus, the Bible is more authoritative than any other book, writing, speech, etc. If you truly want to know about Jesus, and His return, read the word of God.

Who says that it's the word of a god?

 

[devolved]

When Jesus returns again, no one will question whether it is actually Him or not. When He returns, there will be no more denying that He is real and that He is God.

There will come a time when every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that He is Lord.

I think it's sort of like someone saying "Well, I can play basketball really well, even if you don't believe me... but when I'll make it to the NBA, there will be no denying that I'm a good player"

Of course, in such instance there will be no denying. But, the question remains ... what do we do now? Would you have faith in a fat guy with a limp that you've never seen playing basketball telling you that he will be playing in the NBA soon? I don't think anyone should UNTIL he does, at which point faith is pointless.

Again, faith doesn't protect people from believing the wrong things, and that's the point that seems to be constantly missing here... is how do you know that you are not wrong about the faith?

 

[amariselle]

I think it's sort of like someone saying "Well, I can play basketball really well, even if you don't believe me... but when I'll make it to the NBA, there will be no denying that I'm a good player"

Of course, in such instance there will be no denying. But, the question remains ... what do we do now? Would you have faith in a fat guy with a limp that you've never seen playing basketball telling you that he will be playing in the NBA soon? I don't think anyone should UNTIL he does, at which point faith is pointless.

Again, faith doesn't protect people from believing the wrong things, and that's the point that seems to be constantly missing here... is how do you know that you are not wrong about the faith?

Do you think I haven't asked myself that? Do you think I have never struggled in my faith?

 

[amariselle]

Yeah, but why should we?

You don't have to, it's a choice.

Who says that it's the word of a god?

God does.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You don't have to, it's a choice.

But I asked you why we should. If you want me to take your Bible passages seriously, then you'd make some effort to answer that. Otherwise it was pointless to present those passages to begin with.

God does.

How do you know that?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

No, I said that the thread was started "to voice your complaints."

Hmmmm....... no ? ....... yes ? .........
If JESUS came back to start a thread,
like when HE came to earth a while back,
would His thread be "complaints"
about all the people who reject Him ? (almost everybody on earth) ... ... ...
OH,
wait,
is JESUS gone ?
or,
is JESUS ALIVE !

 

[devolved]

Christians give authority to the Bible over all other writings, and so they should.

When it comes to Jesus, the Bible is more authoritative than any other book, writing, speech, etc. If you truly want to know about Jesus, and His return, read the word of God.

Authority is somewhat misunderstood concept when it comes to it's original meaning, and what it tends to mean today.

Authority generally stems from authorship and origin. Thus, J.K. Rowling would have authority over Harry Potter narrative, because she authored it, thus she would be an expert in regards to Harry Potter world. There may be people who study the narrative and become expert in terms of their knowledge of that narrative, thus they derive some form of authority through expertise.

A book itself can't be an authority. It simply not what authority is. Authority is related to understanding of contents.

Today we generally use it as "power to give orders" type of context, but such power generally have to be justified and agreed upon. For example, just because Saddam was an authority in Iraq wouldn't mean that you should agree that he has authority over your decision-making.

It's the same issue when communicating Biblical authority for someone who doesn't excepts it as such, because it hasn't been justified as such.

For example, what use would claim to Biblical authority have if you haven't cleared the basic step #1 - Jesus and God exist in reality and not merely in the Biblical narrative?