Do you believe in zombies?

[One Bad Pig]

Why do you keep dishonestly cutting off the words of John? He continues... "Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist."

It's the only way he has a case, that's why.

[JimL]

Why do you keep dishonestly cutting off the words of John? He continues... "Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist."

Because it should be self evident. Because the desciples realize that Jesus is speaking of John when he identifies him as Elijah only means that they are recognizing the fact that John is Elijah. That's what Jesus is telling them. "But I tell you, Elijah has come" as it is written of him!

[Cow Poke]

Because it should be self evident. Because the desciples realize that Jesus is speaking of John when he identifies him as Elijah only means that they are recognizing the fact that John is Elijah. That's what Jesus is telling them. "But I tell you, Elijah has come" as it is written of him!

I'm just going to have to assume you're purposely being a blockhead, because nobody can be that birdbrained stupid and type on a computer.

[JimL]

I'm just going to have to assume you're purposely being a blockhead, because nobody can be that birdbrained stupid and type on a computer.

Well, apparently you can be CP, so, wrong once again.

[One Bad Pig]

Well, apparently you can be CP, so, wrong once again.

And once again, Jim goes with his best 'argument' - ape the other guy.

[Cow Poke]

Well, apparently you can be CP, so, wrong once again.

Have fun, Jim - unsubscribing.

[Cow Poke]

And once again, Jim goes with his best 'argument' - ape the other guy.

I'm outta here!

[Teallaura]

Because it should be self evident. Because the desciples realize that Jesus is speaking of John when he identifies him as Elijah only means that they are recognizing the fact that John is Elijah. That's what Jesus is telling them. "But I tell you, Elijah has come" as it is written of him!

Okay, you've completely lost me. Are you accepting that John the Baptist is the successor to Elijah or are you contending that John was Elijah reincarnated?

The latter is theologically flawed but even so, both undermine the argument for contradiction. Would you please explain what you're now arguing?

[JimL]

Okay, you've completely lost me. Are you accepting that John the Baptist is the successor to Elijah or are you contending that John was Elijah reincarnated?

The latter is theologically flawed but even so, both undermine the argument for contradiction. Would you please explain what you're now arguing?

I'm alleging that John is supposed to be exactly who he is prophesied to be, and exactly who Jesus says he is. You Christians believe the body to be just the shell within which the spirit, i.e. within which the actual being is housed. John is the body in which Elijah is housed. Not sure why christians have such a problem with this idea, particularly when that's the way it's literally spelled out in the bible.

[JimL]

And once again, Jim goes with his best 'argument' - ape the other guy.

Wrong. I gave you a perfectly good argument, you're just blind to it apparently.

[One Bad Pig]

Wrong. I gave you a perfectly good argument, you're just blind to it apparently.

Repeating that assertion doesn't make it any more true, Jim. I am more than willing to concede when you make a good point.

[JimL]

Repeating that assertion doesn't make it any more true, Jim. I am more than willing to concede when you make a good point.

No, you're really not OBP. Tell me why post 444 is not a good point in support of my contention.

[One Bad Pig]

No, you're really not OBP. Tell me why post 444 is not a good point in support of my contention.

Because reincarnation is entirely foreign to the Jewish POV. It is patently obvious that John is not literally Elijah.

[JimL]

Because reincarnation is entirely foreign to the Jewish POV. It is patently obvious that John is not literally Elijah.

Ah, if you think you're coming back, then you believe in reincarnation, whether you know it or not. Matter is just matter, it decays in the grave. So if you're coming back in the flesh, then you're coming back reincarnated. And no, it is not patently obvious since it is actual scripture that Elijah would return and in Jesus own words he did return, and John is the returning Elijah.

[rogue06]

Because reincarnation is entirely foreign to the Jewish POV. It is patently obvious that John is not literally Elijah.

Those hearing Jesus (and Matthew's early readership) would not have assumed He was referring to reincarnation. This would seemly be especially true since II Kings 2:11 makes clear that Elijah did not die but was taken to heaven while still alive. You have to die first before you can be reincarnated.