Mhoram, Kenny and Pedant

In Australia we are still allowed to believe what we want, but for how long it will be interesting to see.

Mhoram will already know the following but others may not. The Catholic Bible has an introduction at the beginning of each book where the Catholic Church tells the reader what it is about and what it means. Also the Catholic Bible has at least five extra books in the Old Testament that the Protestants reject.

We are supposed to be discussing the Apocalypse. Pedant, the scriptures say, Beware, lest Christ comes upon those who belong to Him like a thief in the night, unexpectedly. The teaching is not to do with expectation, but rather to be ready in accordance with His overall instructions, regardless of when He comes. The parable of the 12 virgins also discusses this.

While you may find “end of the world” in some Bibles, this is a poor translation and reflects the beliefs of older translators. In most cases a better rendering is “end of the age”. One such end of the world took place during or as the great flood. But the planet survived and God made an everlasting covenant with Noah and his descendants, that the world would never be destroyed again.

You (atheists or monkeyians) really should be aware of unfulfilled prophesy, incase someone tries to self fulfill one. Now history, is the leopard like beast, the two horned beast, and we know the identity of the prostitute who rides on the scarlet coloured image of the beast. Next to be revealed by history is the identity of the scarlet coloured image of the beast. Prophesy tells us what this beast is going to do. And we can know that it will be the power ruling the world at the time of Christ's return. Those who support it will receive it's mark or Law in their forehead.

The most likely candidate is the scientific dictatorship or scientific community, who's routes can be traced back through communism, Fabianism to the Illuminati and then to the Roman Catholic Church.

cheers

Goldbrick,

Thanks for attempting to share knowledge, I do appreciate it.

However you have made many errors.

Where does the Bible say, "Beware, lest Christ comes upon those who belong to Him like a thief in the night, unexpectedly."?

Are you paraphrasing one of 2 Peter 3:10 ("But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare."), 1 Thessalonians 5:2 ("for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night."), Revelations 3:3 (Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; obey it, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you.) or Revelations 16:15 (Behold, I come like a thief! Blessed is he who stays awake and keeps his clothes with him, so that he may not go naked and be shamefully exposed.)? If so IMHO it's not a good paraphrase.

Further there is no "parable of the 12 virgins". Perhaps you mean "parable of the 10 virgins"?

You also say, "You (atheists or monkeyians) really should be aware of unfulfilled prophesy". I'm not an atheist or evolutionist. Monkeyian isn't even a word and if you are deliberately using monkeyian to insult evolutionists, well that reflects badly upon you.

I already know of those extra books in the Roman Catholic Bible to which you refer. The Apocrypha - biblical books included in the Vulgate and accepted in the Roman Catholic and Orthodox canon but considered non-canonical by Protestants because they're not part of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Although message is more important than grammar, as a pedant I can't go past your incorrect uses of "it's" and "who's". "It's" is a contraction of "it is" while "its" is the possessive pronoun of "it". Also, "who's" can be a contraction of "who is" or a contraction of "who has". "Whose" is the possessive form of "who".

Pedant

Part 1

I shouldn't have lumped you all together, it was a mistake, I was in a hurry.

You are well educated, darling, and it shows. I don't experience any shame or embarrassment regarding my level of literacy and I don't offer any excuse. I pay to have important documents edited. Your literacy hasn't helped you to understand the scriptures.

I am neither a Catholic or a Protestant. I would not waste time arguing the origins of God or the Holy Spirit. I accept no man as an authority representing God or in place of God, and I accept only Christ as teacher.

I feel justified mistaking you for an atheist. You took the side of an atheist against me. Myself being a disciple of Jesus Christ and coming in the name of the Lord.

If you have pedantry problems then I sympathize with you, young lady. But hey, take it easy, it is a phase we all go through.

I wasn't thinking too good the other other day and I can see why a evolutionist might be insulted, but because you missed the point I am surprised that you assume the evolutionists would be insulted. I think that you think that a black man would be insulted if called black, that a white man would be insulted if called white, and that a green man would be insulted if called green etc. How you have come through the education system not knowing the current beliefs of evolutionists is a mystery and a credit to you. I get evolution shoved up my nose every time I turn on the TV, so I should not have made the error I did. Evolutionists, who use scientific methods, not as strict as yours, claim to be descendants of Apes not monkeys. Monkeys, while having a common ancestor with Apes, belong to a different evolutionary line. Therefore delete “monkeyian”and insert “Apemanian”. Now if you say 'Apemanian' is not a word, I would like to know what perceived authority you say says so.

Pedant

Part 2

“Apeman' was a word used in relation to Tarzan, with evolutionary over/under tones. I am not suggesting that Tarzan is Gog. I believe that true believers of evolution will not be insulted by the tag, 'Apemanian' or even 'Tarzanian' but will enthusiastically take hold. Now they have a tangible platform on which to build a belief system. Instead of the 'is but is not', intangible, abstract theory, they now have a tangible identity. It is only a matter of time before the 'First Apemaniacal Church of Gog' appears, then the Second and then the Third and so on. No longer will they need to use Christian Churches as social refuges.

Apemanians will decide themselves what they do. But my new year resolution is to be 'to make “Apemanian” a worldwide household word'. The term 'Is there a monkey in the house', while technically incorrect will also attain common usage if I have my way. I will show the world that an uneducated man can make a difference.

Ode to Gog.

Our Gog who art in the jungle

Hollow is thy name

Thy jungle come

Let it be in the city as it is in the jungle

Give us our daily peanuts

Gog Gog Gog

Gog Gog Gog.

I do paraphrase verses from time to time, but not in a literal sense like you expect, but as an expression of my understanding. My response was my understanding of Mat 24., in reply to your non-quote of the Bible.

“I thought the Bible said that Christ would come again when nobody expected it ("like a thief in the night") so obviously it won't be anytime soon since people seem to be expecting it.

Your use of Rev 3:3 was unfortunate. Catholic translations aside,

Sardis, you use My name but you do not do the will of My Farther, or keep My perfect Law ( the fate of most is that their names are about to be blotted out of the book of life) wake up, because when you die or when I come it will be too late.

Goldbrick,

Thanks for unincluding me in that group. You've said such lovely things about me that I almost hate to point out that you're wrong again and just for you I've used a word that isn't real ("unincluding") even though to me, as a pedant, that's like fingernails on a blackboard.

Correct:
1. That's a fair paraphrase of Matthew 24:42-44, "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.", thanks for that clarification.

Actual wrong things:
1. Apemanian isn't a word (my authority: the dictionary) at best you could try building a case for it as a neologism.
2. Evolutionists don't claim that people are descendants of apes. They claim that people and apes are descended from a common ancestor ("the missing link"). (Of course there is no common ancestor in the fossil record but that's another argument to have with the evolutionists.)

Opinion things:
1. I don't see that I have taken the side of atheists against you if I point out things you say that aren't nice.
2. My direct quote "like a thief in the night" [the bit in direct quote marks funnily enough] is actually from 1 Thessalonians 5:2. So it's a little unfair to class it as a non-quote.
3. All the verses I quoted came from the New International Version of the Bible, if you think that's an "unfortunate" translation that's your prerogative but I quite like it.
4. I prefer to use the term "evolutionist" because it is a real word rather than make up (IMHO) silly names and chants.
5. I think my understanding of the Scriptures is just fine as between God and me (but I would say that, wouldn't I? Tee hee).

Goodbye and cheers :-)

Atman,
Just posting this a second time as you may have missed the first one (it's scrolling pretty fast).

Still not certain of your belief on this matter- do you believe that the world will end, but without Christ's return?

If you believe that the world will not end with Christ's return, what do you believe regarding the ressurection of the body?

If I've misenterpreted you and gone off on a random tangent, no worries.