Has the 2nd coming of Christ already occurred?

[Confused]

Most here know that I tend to follow St. Augustines line of thinking in regards to the anti-Christ not being a literal figure, but a figure of speech referring to the anti-Christ that can be found in all man that can turn them away from God.

I also tend to think (radically, I know) that the 2nd coming of Christ occurred the moment He was resurrected. With Revelations being so cryptic, not to mention based on a supposed dream in which it was revealed, I tend to question the validity of it in that it seems to me that it is a great scare tactic the Catholic church could have used to maintain their power.

So, open for debate:

Is it possible that the 2nd coming of Christ has already occurred? Is there any validity to the thought that Christ will come again and usher in an apocalyptic event? What would be the point of the event, what is stood to gain at the end for mankind?

[byofrcs]

no the second comming of Jesus didnt happen yet the rapture of the church has to happen 1st.

heres a vid that explains the 1st and second comming feel free to check it out if you feel like it (1st comming)

part2 (2nd comming)

VenomFangX is not an authoritative source on anything unless it is fapping over pictures of kittens whilst singing Kumbaya with an emphasis of the cum.

VenomFangX gives turn the other cheek a whole new meaning.

Given the lack of contemporaneous records of Jesus then it's the first comming (sic) that we question but given we defer to this boards moderators we simply consider the Bible to be canonical.

Like the early Star Trek episodes.

This doesn't actually mean that there are Tribbles in reality even though they appeared in the well received "The Trouble With Tribbles" on stardate 4523.3 which clearly shows Tribbles in the show.

[dunsapy]

Given the lack of contemporaneous records of Jesus then it's the first comming (sic) that we question but given we defer to this boards moderators we simply consider the Bible to be canonical.

The first-century Jewish historian Josephus referred to the stoning of “James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.� (The Jewish Antiquities, Josephus, Book XX, sec. 200)

Tacitus, a Roman historian who lived during the latter part of the first century C.E., wrote: “Christus [Latin for “Christ�], from whom the name [Christian] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.�—The Complete Works of Tacitus (New York, 1942), “The Annals,� Book 15, par. 44.

With reference to early non-Christian historical references to Jesus, The New Encyclopædia Britannica states: “These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries.�—(1976), Macropædia, Vol. 10, p. 145.

So it has only been in recent times that this question has come up.

[Goat]

no the second comming of Jesus didnt happen yet the rapture of the church has to happen 1st.

heres a vid that explains the 1st and second comming feel free to check it out if you feel like it (1st comming)

part2 (2nd comming)

Have you ever thought about using your own words rather than pointing to a web site, or a youtube video. You know.. actually debate and use your own thoughts?

[byofrcs]

Given the lack of contemporaneous records of Jesus then it's the first comming (sic) that we question but given we defer to this boards moderators we simply consider the Bible to be canonical.

The first-century Jewish historian Josephus referred to the stoning of “James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.� (The Jewish Antiquities, Josephus, Book XX, sec. 200)

Tacitus, a Roman historian who lived during the latter part of the first century C.E., wrote: “Christus [Latin for “Christ�], from whom the name [Christian] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.�—The Complete Works of Tacitus (New York, 1942), “The Annals,� Book 15, par. 44.

With reference to early non-Christian historical references to Jesus, The New Encyclopædia Britannica states: “These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries.�—(1976), Macropædia, Vol. 10, p. 145.

So it has only been in recent times that this question has come up.

Like I said - there are no contemporaneous records. Do you actually understand the meaning of the word "contemporaneous" ? It means (grabbed a dictionary at random) "Originating, existing, or happening during the same period of time".

Same time, not decades or centuries later. Same time. Contemporaneous notes are some of the most important records that can be made of subjective views but for what is considered by some to be the most important event since creation we have no contemporaneous records. It sounds like a fraud and given the mechanism used to protect the claims then it probably is a fraud.

The reason why it hasn't come up much before is that questioning this has not be very easy legally and until last year in the UK, with the chilling effect of the threat of punishment for blasphemy, certain claims about Jesus Christ have been subject to self-censorship.

I admit that the law hasn't imprisoned many people recently for blasphemy in the UK but they have before - and with hard labour. With the removal of this threat it is now possible to shine a light on this fraud.

[dunsapy]

Like I said - there are no contemporaneous records. Do you actually understand the meaning of the word "contemporaneous" ? It means (grabbed a dictionary at random) "Originating, existing, or happening during the same period of time".

Well of course there is the bible itself.
And Josephus who is just after Jesus.


The Bible writers were also meticulously accurate. After analyzing the Bible in the light of history and archaeology, writer Werner Keller said in the introduction of his book The Bible as History: “In view of the overwhelming mass of authentic and well-attested evidence now available, . . . there kept hammering on my brain this one sentence: ‘The Bible is right after all!’�
The more archeology, turns up thing the more the bible is authenticated.

Another example of a discovery that confirms the historicalness of a person mentioned in the Bible is given by Michael J. Howard, who worked with the Caesarea expedition in Israel in 1979. “For 1,900 years,� he wrote, “Pilate existed only on the pages of the Gospels and in the vague recollections of Roman and Jewish historians. Next to nothing was known about his life. Some said he never even existed. But in 1961, an Italian archaeological expedition was working in the ruins of the ancient Roman theater in Caesarea. A workman overturned a stone that had been used for one of the stairways. On the reverse side was the following, partially-obscured inscription in Latin: ‘Caesariensibus Tiberium Pontius Pilatus Praefectus Iudaeae.’ (To the people of Caesarea Tiberium Pontius Pilate Prefect of Judea.) It was a fatal blow to the doubts about Pilate’s existence. . . . For the first time there was contemporary epigraphic evidence of the life of the man who ordered the crucifixion of Christ.�28—John 19:13-16; Acts 4:27.

[otseng]

VenomFangX is not an authoritative source on anything unless it is fapping over pictures of kittens whilst singing Kumbaya with an emphasis of the cum.

VenomFangX gives turn the other cheek a whole new meaning.

Given the lack of contemporaneous records of Jesus then it's the first comming (sic) that we question but given we defer to this boards moderators we simply consider the Bible to be canonical.

Moderator warning:

Your comments are not contributing to civil debate. Please desist from making sarcastic sexual comments.

[byofrcs]

Like I said - there are no contemporaneous records. Do you actually understand the meaning of the word "contemporaneous" ? It means (grabbed a dictionary at random) "Originating, existing, or happening during the same period of time".

Well of course there is the bible itself.
And Josephus who is just after Jesus.


The Bible writers were also meticulously accurate. After analyzing the Bible in the light of history and archaeology, writer Werner Keller said in the introduction of his book The Bible as History: “In view of the overwhelming mass of authentic and well-attested evidence now available, . . . there kept hammering on my brain this one sentence: ‘The Bible is right after all!’�
The more archeology, turns up thing the more the bible is authenticated.

When you write fiction in a historical setting then you don't unnecessarily invent the history but piggy-back onto existing historical events. It is so much easier and less chance of getting caught.

Everything from romantic bodice rippers through to time travel stories.

Once again ALL the bible writers are AFTER the events are alleged to have happened. The ONLY evidence of which is the Bible itself.

It is the same internal consistency of all good canonical works of fiction. The Bible is not a book of Science and it is not a book of History. It simply details the Bible story....which is the story of the Bible. A circular reference.

Another example of a discovery that confirms the historicalness of a person mentioned in the Bible is given by Michael J. Howard, who worked with the Caesarea expedition in Israel in 1979. “For 1,900 years,� he wrote, “Pilate existed only on the pages of the Gospels and in the vague recollections of Roman and Jewish historians. Next to nothing was known about his life. Some said he never even existed. But in 1961, an Italian archaeological expedition was working in the ruins of the ancient Roman theater in Caesarea. A workman overturned a stone that had been used for one of the stairways. On the reverse side was the following, partially-obscured inscription in Latin: ‘Caesariensibus Tiberium Pontius Pilatus Praefectus Iudaeae.’ (To the people of Caesarea Tiberium Pontius Pilate Prefect of Judea.) It was a fatal blow to the doubts about Pilate’s existence. . . . For the first time there was contemporary epigraphic evidence of the life of the man who ordered the crucifixion of Christ.�28—John 19:13-16; Acts 4:27.

Like I said you wrap fiction around existing historical events. You'd be stupid to invent a public post like a Procurator - you use an existing one and for that matter an existing victim.

This won't eliminate the fact that where it counts there are no contemporaneous records of the Bible (specifically the New Testament). It has all been documented after the events are alleged to have occurred conveniently dove-tailing with existing historical events but without any evidence of the supernatural.

[Buster]

My post is in the belief that the bible is accurate and the question is if the 2nd coming has occurred, this debate would turn into a debate of the validity of the bible instead of just the 2nd coming if we are not debating just the 2nd coming in context with the bible as the basis of our truth. Lol hope that made sense.

[dunsapy]

This won't eliminate the fact that where it counts there are no contemporaneous records of the Bible (specifically the New Testament). It has all been documented after the events are alleged to have occurred conveniently dove-tailing with existing historical events but without any evidence of the supernatural.

You mean like evolution, there wasn't very many contemporaneous writers, around documenting that. It's more like witch doctors, digging up bones and shaking them around, doing a little dance, and coming up with some myths about them.

Actually now that I think about it, this explains evolution pretty good.

[dunsapy]

My post is in the belief that the bible is accurate and the question is if the 2nd coming has occurred, this debate would turn into a debate of the validity of the bible instead of just the 2nd coming if we are not debating just the 2nd coming in context with the bible as the basis of our truth. Lol hope that made sense.

I am serious about this, but others are not.