They could have been caught up around 70 c.e.. These verses are definitely speaking of a changing of corrupt mortal humans to incorrupt immortal humans. Then they are speedily snatched up to the spirit realm with Christ. Not modern at all,but plain as the nose on your face,with all due respect.
Chris Tann
JoinedPosts by Chris Tann
-
26
Parousia (again)
by leaving_quietly ini noticed this during the wt study on sunday.. 1 cor 15:23: "but each one in his own proper order: christ the firstfruits, afterward those who belong to the christ during his presence.
"the greek word for presence is "parousia", which needs no explanation here as to how wtbts views this word versus the rest of the world.. what i noticed was the striking contradiction made just a few verses later.. 1 cor 15:51,52: "look!
i tell you a sacred secret: we will not all fall asleep in death, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the blink of an eye, during the last trumpet.
-
-
-
26
Parousia (again)
by leaving_quietly ini noticed this during the wt study on sunday.. 1 cor 15:23: "but each one in his own proper order: christ the firstfruits, afterward those who belong to the christ during his presence.
"the greek word for presence is "parousia", which needs no explanation here as to how wtbts views this word versus the rest of the world.. what i noticed was the striking contradiction made just a few verses later.. 1 cor 15:51,52: "look!
i tell you a sacred secret: we will not all fall asleep in death, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the blink of an eye, during the last trumpet.
-
-
Chris Tann
You are quite right leaving_quietly,however notice in Corinthians 51,52 Paul is speaking of two different groups. Paul is addressing Christians in Corinth who are, of course,alive. He says of them and himself, that they all wont fall alseep,or die,but instead of dieing and being resurrected they will be changed. Notice he says changed,not ressurected.
He goes on to say that at the last trumpet the dead will be raised up,then he says "and we" ,that is the living of verse 51, will be changed. Verse 53 says "for (or because) this which is corruptible must PUT ON incorruption". Yes,this is how the living faithfuls are changed, by putting on incorruption. This is what the rapture is.
Notice how this also harmonizes with 1 Thess.4 15-17. Those who are alive at Christ Presence will not precede,or go before the dead. Vs. 16 says the dead in Christ will rise first,then, he says,addressing the very much alive congregation,that they,the living who are surviving(the greek can also mean left around) will be caught away. Or as the Greek can imply: being snatched up,;not resurrected.
Yes,Paul was speaking to and about living Christians of his time. They expected Christ's presence to occur soon in their time,not some 2,000 years later to those who die. The scriptures are very clear that the rapture,or if you prefer snatching up,is real.
-
112
Scientists Should Not Dismiss Genesis So Quickly
by Chris Tann innasa discovery proves the bible scientifically accurate.
the debate.
for decades there has been a long standing debate between science and religion as to the validity of the biblical genesis account of creation.
-
-
Chris Tann
Apognophos: very good replies. What would you say about the Hebrew word chug as describing the earth? This word denotes a sphere not a circle,which could still be flat. Also in its reference to God hanging the earth upon nothing. Can one really say this is mere coincidence?
-
112
Scientists Should Not Dismiss Genesis So Quickly
by Chris Tann innasa discovery proves the bible scientifically accurate.
the debate.
for decades there has been a long standing debate between science and religion as to the validity of the biblical genesis account of creation.
-
-
Chris Tann
Thanks Shana. The word firmament was derived from the Septuagint translation. These Jews were instructed by the Pharoah of Egypt to make a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures. The Egyptians believed in this hard dome concept,so the translators choose a word to fit their belief. However,the original Hebrew word means expanse or to flatten out,it does not denote a hardness.
Also, the serpent was later identified as Satan, the rebellious spirit, in Revelation. He talked to Eve through the serpent.
Of course there would be other ancient religious traditions thar are similar to the Genesis account. Even dating before Genesis. Orally,this true account would first be passed along within family circles. As populations grew, it would spread, become embellished and become the foundational belief of many different cultures. This happened with the flood as well.
Usually, if a story is prominent in many various cultures around the world for several centuries, it has truth to it. Although it may have been added to or taken away from through it all.
-
112
Scientists Should Not Dismiss Genesis So Quickly
by Chris Tann innasa discovery proves the bible scientifically accurate.
the debate.
for decades there has been a long standing debate between science and religion as to the validity of the biblical genesis account of creation.
-
-
Chris Tann
I love Australia!!
-
112
Scientists Should Not Dismiss Genesis So Quickly
by Chris Tann innasa discovery proves the bible scientifically accurate.
the debate.
for decades there has been a long standing debate between science and religion as to the validity of the biblical genesis account of creation.
-
-
Chris Tann
I will still learn about evolution, and read posts on here. I think perhaps my posts on JW's teachings may b out of place here ,thats all. But u r correct,I posted this article,and I must humbly accept any ridicule with an open mind.
-
112
Scientists Should Not Dismiss Genesis So Quickly
by Chris Tann innasa discovery proves the bible scientifically accurate.
the debate.
for decades there has been a long standing debate between science and religion as to the validity of the biblical genesis account of creation.
-
-
Chris Tann
Thank you all for your insightful responses. Some things that you have written are things that I can find answers to and others not. I guess Iam going to keep searching...however, I will keep favoring the creator belief. But who knows what the future can bring? Im thinking that this site may not be for me. I was looking for a site with fading JW's who need help deciding. I did not intend to argue creation and evolution. I just may visit now and then but not post anything.thnx.
-
112
Scientists Should Not Dismiss Genesis So Quickly
by Chris Tann innasa discovery proves the bible scientifically accurate.
the debate.
for decades there has been a long standing debate between science and religion as to the validity of the biblical genesis account of creation.
-
-
Chris Tann
I would like to apologize for posting such a lengthy article. I'm new at this and was not sure what I was doing technically. Wont happen again.
Apognophos: Thank you so much for your respectful disagreement. I will now like to atempt to respond to your statements."creation of plants before the sun was shinning"; in verse 3 light comes through. Just as the article states,the dense cloud of debris gradually get devoured by the forming planet. I would say that verse 3 is explaining when enough debris is gone for sun light to shine on the surface but not completely gone for the sun to be seen yet by an observer.
"Animals created before plants"; Chapter 2:4-6 is describing the condition of the earth that is the time period between chp.1:9 and vs.11; land had been formed but no rain,therefore the seeds could not germinate. But as chp.2 vs.6 states, a mist went up and watered the whole land. I would assume that misting seed might take longer to saturate it than a downpour of rain. This speaking of a mist would imply that the seeds of grass and trees eventually grew. We can see that there was vegitation before animals because in vs. 8-9 there is a garden and trees for food. Also in vs. 10 a river is formed to water the garden. It is not until vs.19 that animals are created. Vegitation before animals.
-
112
Scientists Should Not Dismiss Genesis So Quickly
by Chris Tann innasa discovery proves the bible scientifically accurate.
the debate.
for decades there has been a long standing debate between science and religion as to the validity of the biblical genesis account of creation.
-
-
Chris Tann
Wow!!! I guess this web site is predominantly of atheist members. Only one believer in God responded. The funny thing is ,he or she was respectful, everyone else mean spirited. I understand that this argument can foster intense emotions,and I welcome knowledge unknown to me that condradicts my beliefs. However, why can't these be posted in a way that shows respect for the other person and their beliefs? Okay, you are absolutley correct, evolution is true and Genesis is a myth. There is no way in a million years that evolution can be proven untrue. But resorting to insults and the sort wont convince me, it just pushes me away.
I would like someone to take one subject at a time regarding why they believe Genesis is inaccurate, and I will see if I can resonably adress it. Thank you all.
-
112
Scientists Should Not Dismiss Genesis So Quickly
by Chris Tann innasa discovery proves the bible scientifically accurate.
the debate.
for decades there has been a long standing debate between science and religion as to the validity of the biblical genesis account of creation.
-
-
Chris Tann
Sorry for the lenghth. Dont know how to do everything on my Kindle. I was reading how the universe was very bright at first so the earth could not be in darkness as Genesis says. This discovery shows that planets are formed in their own dark cocoon so to speak. As the planet sucks in the dust and such around it, gradually light penetrates to it's surface.
This can be what Gen. says when reporting "let there be light." The sun and stars had already been created, the light from it was blocked and gradually came through. Cofty, just because Iam reading one book about evolution, doesn't mean I'm going to believe it right off the bat. Sometimes things seem 100% true. All evidence points to it being true, but as time goes on things are proved otherwise.
A true example: awhile back a notorious criminal was arguing with a policeman. The officer was shot and injured. The criminal did have a gun on him, he was known for this kind of activity, he even admitted that he shot the officer. Later it was brought out that the officer had an illegal pen gun in his shirt pocket and in the scuffle it went off. When asked why the criminal lied about shooting him he said that nobody would believe him over an officer, so he pled guilty to get a lighter sentence. Point is dont discount something totally. Always leave room for further discoveries. Doesn't mean you have to believe it, just put a pin in it.