hereticzero Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 I watch the news and I see where countries are developing missiles that can deliver nuclear bombs to Jerusalem. Are there any guarantees that God has made to protect Jerusalem from nuclear destruction? Would nuking Jerusalem prove to the world that it is not considered a holy place by God? Would nuking Jerusalem prove there is no God, especially if he does not intercede to protect it? In the last days, according to Revelations, there is supposed to be a lot of fire reigning down from heaven on the hordes trying to destroy Jerusalem. The city is surrounded and God destroys all the bad guys. What if Jerusalem is destroyed instead? How would that affect Christians, Jews, Muslims, anyone who has a 'claim' on Jerusalem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 In the case of fundy Christians who believe "Left Behind" is truly the future, they would love it if the mosque were destroyed where the Temple used to be (the Dome of the Rock?). That structure must come down completely if the Temple is to be rebuilt on this site and the rest of their end-times scenario is to be accurate. It used to be thought that Russia was going to invade and accomplish this but now I suppose they have a different explanation to make it appear that this event is going to happen in their lifetimes because all the preachers have to create fear by saying "Jesus is coming in my lifetime." I don't see how nuking Jerusalem would at all persuade them there is no God. If the city were completely destroyed they might have to alter their timeline a little but they would be pouring their money into any Jewish groups that wanted to occupy that spot (any force necessary) and to rebuild the temple. If Christ is to descend onto the Mount of Olives and that hill is levelled I wouldn't put it past them to move enough dirt to build up another one. These people are crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creepy Doll Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Nuke Jerusalem, then use it as the dumping ground for all the world's toxic and nuclear waste. Then let all the religious people who lay their claim to it come on over, build their temples and worship themselves to death on it. Sounds like a great plan to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pitchu Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 Holy site or not, real flesh and blood humans are there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creepy Doll Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 Holy site or not, real flesh and blood humans are there. True. But FWIW, what I wrote was very tongue in cheek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted May 21, 2009 Author Share Posted May 21, 2009 The Bible claims everyone outside Jerusalem will be killed. If the reverse happens, how will Christians perceive their doctrine of the rapture, since they are still around when Jerusalem gets the big one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagan Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 The rapture doctrine is unbiblical nonsense (pot kettle black, I know) based on Paul's fanciful story of being caught up in the third heaven and a severe misunderstanding of Jesus' statements about "one will be taken, and one will be left behind." The latter is about the destruction of Jerusalem and scattering of the Jews, not some "OMG my wife disappeared and I'm LEFT BEHIND! Save me Jebus!" nonsense. There is no other biblical basis for it. My understanding of biblical prophecy, through the way it's presented in the gospels, is that Christ fulfilled all the old prophecies, from Daniel on. "It is finished" means exactly that. There's nothing left for him to do. The covenant with his chosen people is fulfilled. "Now go and make disciples of all nations." Get your asses out of Jerusalem and spread the good news. As far as I can tell, after Christ, God no longer cares about what happens in Jerusalem anymore because his holy temple is wherever his people are. Of course, I may be way off on this, but what's one more heresy on my list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vixentrox Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 The only thing i see sacred about it is it is an archeolgical gold mine. So much history there I'd hate to see it destroyed even if it might cause some of the fighting to cease if the whole place was irradiated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 The rapture doctrine is unbiblical nonsense (pot kettle black, I know) based on Paul's fanciful story of being caught up in the third heaven and a severe misunderstanding of Jesus' statements about "one will be taken, and one will be left behind." The latter is about the destruction of Jerusalem and scattering of the Jews, not some "OMG my wife disappeared and I'm LEFT BEHIND! Save me Jebus!" nonsense. There is no other biblical basis for it. It is sheer nonsense, but these fundamentalists take it very seriously and to them it is Biblical. I listened to it for almost 10 years so I can tell you for certain they would be highly offended if you said it was unbiblical. They pull verses out of Daniel, Revelation and Pauls letters. Most of the truly crazy stuff comes out of Revelation. Except the rapture, which is Paul's doing. I'm just saying never underestimate a Christian's ability to cherry pick and cobble stuff together from the Bible so as to make whatever they want to be true "Biblical". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overcame Faith Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 Let's hope we never find out the answers to the questions posed in the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagan Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 The rapture doctrine is unbiblical nonsense (pot kettle black, I know) based on Paul's fanciful story of being caught up in the third heaven and a severe misunderstanding of Jesus' statements about "one will be taken, and one will be left behind." The latter is about the destruction of Jerusalem and scattering of the Jews, not some "OMG my wife disappeared and I'm LEFT BEHIND! Save me Jebus!" nonsense. There is no other biblical basis for it. It is sheer nonsense, but these fundamentalists take it very seriously and to them it is Biblical. I listened to it for almost 10 years so I can tell you for certain they would be highly offended if you said it was unbiblical. They pull verses out of Daniel, Revelation and Pauls letters. Most of the truly crazy stuff comes out of Revelation. Except the rapture, which is Paul's doing. I'm just saying never underestimate a Christian's ability to cherry pick and cobble stuff together from the Bible so as to make whatever they want to be true "Biblical". Believe me, I know. I grew up steeped in that junk and so was my entire extended family. When I was still a Christian, about three years ago I realized it was just nonsense created by Darbyites. I am very careful about who I talk to about it in "church" circles, but when people start spouting about how it's in the bible, I ask them for a biblical reference in context. They can never produce one, and I explain how "that verse doesn't mean what you think it means." That's when I see the shadow of doubt cross their faces, and the conversation is over. I have had some good conversations with my Dad about it, he grew up even more steeped in it than I. Now he hates it as much as I do because, we both agree, it paralyzes Christians into a fatalist view of the world and relationships. Why bother doing any good if the world's all going to end soon anyway? The doctrine is used to keep people afraid, to keep congregations in line, to keep them looking inward instead of trying to help others and to keep pastors and book writers and "prophecy experts" employed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts