666 - The Antichrist, The New World Order and The Mark Of The Beast!

[Dion]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I don't think they needed you to be involved in the baptism to carry it out.

There was a show on PBS last week about the LDS church and according to the story millions (the number might have been 200 million but I can't remember) of deceased people have been baptized posthumously in Mormon temples.

They had some fella on there who had left the church and he said he was physically dunked in the name of some dead person 20 or 30 names in a stretch and it went on all the time.

Well, they said i would have to join the church to have the baptism done and all. The story behind why they baptise the dead was even wierder. The fact I wasn't a Mormon and baptised in their church meant i was going to Hell. My respone was; "So what, I'll be so damned busy shaking hands with friends to know where i am". I also asked if they would lower down a bucket ice and some cold beers from time time as i heard that Satan is a real tyrant

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by chris lindberg

Some say The European Union is rapidly fulfilling prophecy in becoming the prophesied revived Roman Empire

http://www.raptureready.com/abc/Roman_Empire.html

Other people say different.

http://www.thatisabunchofnonsense.com/notarealarticle.html

[J pold]

edit

[Azure]

Originally Posted by chris lindberg

Some say The European Union is rapidly fulfilling prophecy in becoming the prophesied revived Roman Empire

http://www.raptureready.com/abc/Roman_Empire.html

Please, please quit quoting people like that.

Seriously....its a bunch of hogwash.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by peter12

Go to www.allsp.com .
Every single episode has been uploaded to the site.

I looove you.



Danke!

[photon]

Originally Posted by chris lindberg

Some say The European Union is rapidly fulfilling prophecy in becoming the prophesied revived Roman Empire

http://www.raptureready.com/abc/Roman_Empire.html

Except that the prophecies in Daniel aren't about what that site says they are. Their concept that the 4th kingdom is the Roman empire is them just reading what they want into what was written.

In that link they talk about the "Medo-Persian empire" as one of the four kingdoms, when there was no such thing. If you don't lump the Medes and the Persians together, then the whole thing falls apart for Christian end-timesers.

You do realize that Daniel was written far far after the period in which it was set; it was written in about 165 BC?

"Some say...", using the passive voice to deflect from yourself? How about stating what you think and defending that?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by peter12

Actually, I do remember that. Wasn't the period of Christ considered to be an almost feverish period of millenarian movements?

In a manner of speaking, but then the 1st cent. C.E. was really no different in this regard from the past 400–500 years in Palestine. Some of the most prolific apocalyptic activity occurs during the Ptolemaic and Seleucid periods in history, leading up to the Maccabbean revolt in Jerusalem c. 170–160 B.C.E. Antiochus IV was almost universally considered in Judaism to be the equivalent of the Christian "AntiChrist". There is also evidence that many Jews thought the same of Ptolemy I c. 300 B.C.E. By the time of Jesus, expectation of the "Last Days" was nothing new. In many respects, his own eschatology and that of the Church was merely constructed upon well established ideas and teachings that had been prevalent for centuries.

Originally Posted by peter12

What's your opinion on Karen Armstrong's thesis on fundamentalism and eschatology being the result of modernity?

I think Armstrong is generally correct, at least as far as Christian fundamentalism/evangelicalism is concerned. I'm not too sure about her appraisal of Islamic history, and she has been roundly criticized for her presentation of it. My own ideas on the subject appear in post #81 at the top of page five in this thread:http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...t=54557&page=5.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by photon

...You do realize that Daniel was written far far after the period in which it was set; it was written in about 165 BC?...

A perfect example of the anti-Seleucid polemic I mentioned in the previous post.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

In a manner of speaking, but then the 1st cent. C.E. was really no different in this regard from the past 400–500 years in Palestine. Some of the most prolific apocalyptic activity occurs during the Ptolemaic and Seleucid periods in history, leading up to the Maccabbean revolt in Jerusalem c. 170–160 B.C.E. Antiochus IV was almost universally considered in Judaism to be the equivalent of the Christian "AntiChrist". There is also evidence that many Jews thought the same of Ptolemy I c. 300 B.C.E. By the time of Jesus, expectation of the "Last Days" was nothing new. In many respects, his own eschatology and that of the Church was merely constructed upon well established ideas and teachings that had been prevalent for centuries.


I think Armstrong is generally correct, at least as far as Christian fundamentalism/evangelicalism is concerned. I'm not too sure about her appraisal of Islamic history, and she has been roundly criticized for her presentation of it. My own ideas on the subject appear in post #81 at the top of page five in this thread:http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=54557&page=5.

Thanks for that. That was truly a great discussion and sort of formulates some of the questions that I've begun to consider in my young age. It's sort of a tough world to live in these days.

In regards to a previous discussion in a thread about the half-century's greatest intellectuals, I've been reading quite a bit of E.O. Wilson lately. I think the world needs more thinkers like that. He teaches so much to both fundamentalists and reductionists with such a measure of moderation, it's amazing.