Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Ask God -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Berry Picker who wrote (38182)	7/28/2004 2:01:11 AM
From: Berry Picker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39621

As far as the foolish argument that Jesus knew what the "whole world" consisted of - it is a direct violation of any respectable literary critic or hermeneutical principle to suggest that Jesus would teach his hand picked apostles using terms that had ulterior meanings that would only be know to the likes of the dregs of this thread. Pathetic.... YOU ARE ALL SO INTELLIGENT I AM PROUD OF YOU ALL You guys make me ashamed to be known as a Christian. This thread is a sewer and you turds will float in here until the day you all die without ever seeing Christ return nor learning anything other than the crap you have all been fed. ENJOY YOUR SHALLOW LITTLE LIVES Not a drop of respect or even a window of hope of any of you ever hearing or understanding a properly composed argument based on scripture - EVER Why are you here - YOU ALL KNOW IT ALL ALREADY oh wait - I forgot - you are making sure heresy does not spread. Good job guys - I am sure Christ is proud of you... but I'm not - not in the least. Any one got any matches - let's burn us one of them thar heretics.... They seem a lot like them Jehovah witnesses to me don't they Jed??? Darn rights Jethro We know what Jesus meant cause we're always right - right? RIGHT ON BRO ... WE IS BROTHERS!!! Luke 23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.

To: Berry Picker who wrote (38182)	7/28/2004 2:39:40 AM
From: Greg or e	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 39621

"Thou shalt not bear false witness" "Physician; heal thyself." Let James speak for himself. His view is different from yours. He has clearly and repeatedly claimed that Jesus' resurrection body was spiritual and not physical by twisting first Cor 15:. That is denying the physical resurrection body of Jesus and that makes you a "false witness" He outright denies the physicality of the resurrection while you just say Christ ditched his physical body sometime after the resurrection. Either way, the result is the same. Jesus, in your view does not now have a physical body. That's "THE TRUTH" that you present and that's Heretical! Romans 3:8 is irrelevant to this discussion BTW, but OTOH Col 2:8-9 is. I suppose I'll have to wait another year or two for you to respond to Paul's assertion that Christ now resides in a body. "Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. 9For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily"

To: Berry Picker who wrote (38182)	7/28/2004 3:51:12 AM
From: Greg or e	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39621

"Greg over and over you have been told that no one teaches that Christ did not rise physically" Apparently you missed Otto's book. He takes the same position as James. "One author whose exegesis of Acts 1:9–11 is cited regularly by hyper-preterists is Randall E. Otto. He outlines his understanding of the text at some length in his book Coming in the Clouds.27 It should be noted that Otto’s argument for the invisibility of Christ at His Second Coming rests on his denial that Christ’s resurrection body was a physical body. Otto argues instead that Christ’s resurrection body had a “very evanescent and vaporous quality.”" 27 Randall E. Otto, Coming in the Clouds: An Evangelical Case for the Invisibility of Christ at His Second Coming (Lanham: University Press of America, 1994). Quote taken from Keith Mathison "Acts 1:9–11 and the Hyper-Preterism Debate" ligonier.org