According to some Jewish sources, things are also supposed to get worse (though not like it is described by some Christian sources) before they get better, i.e. when the Messiah comes.
But, no one would want to "make it worse" for the following reasons:
- There is no guarentee that such bad things are heralding the advent of the Messiah, maybe they would just be bad things
- The main target of such "troubles" would be the Jews.
- Someone would have to be quite sadistic to actually want to do that
- And most importantly, those Jewish sources maintain that it is possible for the Messiah to come without such turmoil preceding.
2006-12-23 13:17:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by BMCR 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Reading your question, I cant help the feeling that you dont really know about prophecies.
Those ones, you are referring to as being "of violent" nature arent by any means different from those you are referring to as "promising a better place"
Its a bit difficult to explain, but just take into consideration that both kind have their origin in the same god, so therefore they dont outweigh eachother.
To understand this you must know:
A prophecy usually is based on an "if - then" scenario.
(eg. IF people continue to live like that THEN this will happen)
So a prophecy given, doesnt necessarily have to be fulfilled, its up to the people receiving the prophecy to make it happen (or not happen.)
There have been biblical examples for this, eg where the people of Ninive have been saved from doom because they listend to the prophet, deciding to repent.
The final thing I would suggest to answer your question:
As you mentioned Jewish eschatology you might like to give christian preterism a shot.
Full preterists will give you good examples for their understanding how the "violent" prophecies have been fulfilled and how they - like the jewish people - are waiting for the "good ones" to happen now.
2006-12-23 15:00:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by ganja_claus 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Consider that evangelical Christians were in positions of power when the U.S. invaded Iraq. John Ashcroft able to encourage the destruction of Babylon? Certainly a conflict of interest there.
Christianity doesn't have to be that way. But some of its followers do insist on taking it there.
2006-12-23 15:57:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by The angels have the phone box. 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
HAHA, yes, we'll all hold hands and skip into the woods with the anti-christ and all the nations that will rise up against Israel.
Sorry, but the point of religion isn't to promote peace, it's to promote the truth and reality of the world.
The end times will be bad. That's the reality. Adjust to it.
2006-12-23 14:59:35
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
If you ask a muslim whats better hinduism or islam he ll say islam
If you ask a jew, is christanity more peaceful or jewish ... they will reply jewish
my point is that a chrisitian will say his religion is peaceful, a muslim will say islam is peaceful , a jew will say his religion is more peaceful
dont relly on other people search and find out what do you think is good for you
2006-12-23 15:03:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by => the guy <== 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
well, it wouldve been if ALL THE OTHER GODDAM RELGIONS DIDNT KEEP ATTACKING US!
2006-12-23 14:54:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by eNdofthELinE9 3
·
0⤊
0⤋