Every generation claims the second coming in its time.

[rdcast]

You would think the title of your thread would give you some insight on why your theory is in all likelihood incorrect. Why is that after countless generations, your theory is suddenly correct?

Very nice that you would pick up on that Dark_Lite. I absolutely concur with your insight. But I know the critical anatomy of vanity. It's because of this I'm able to bring this to you. Please don't think I should apologize for that, because I get it honest. BTW, this material had never been popular and is likely never to be until it's too late. For decades I've refused to discuss it. Now that I've brought it forward, I can't pay people to receive it. So I don't expect it.

Love is what it's all about,
Robert

 

[rdcast]

God bless you Brother Jerry !!! That was right on time...

GROUP HUGS

 

[B1inHim]

God bless you Brother Jerry !!! That was right on time...

GROUP HUGS

ROFL... I'm here to help where I can and watch what I say...
LOL
Love,
Brother Jerry

 

[garry2]

B1inHim, these verses show that the day of the Lord (day of His wrath) is not 1000 years long as you say in another thread.

Job 5:19 NIV
From six calamities he will rescue you; in seven no harm will befall you.

Hos 6:1-3
1 Come let us return to the Lord He has torn us to pieces but he will heal us; he has injured us but he will bind up our wounds. 2 After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will restore us, that we may live in his presence.

 

[B1inHim]

B1inHim, these verses show that the day of the Lord (day of His wrath) is not 1000 years long as you say in another thread.

LOL...I never, ever posted anything that would remotely cause or look like or read like me saying that the 1,000 is what you say I said. Ever.

You do not read all that I write unless it is short like this.
Go find it "get it right". It is not there. * EDITED by Brother Jerry

The wrath of GOD goes for as long as GOD says. It does not continue for 1,000 years.
The wrath of GOD begins before Lord Jesus takes out the bad people in Rev 19 and ends before the 1,000 years start.
Unles one was to say that fireing up the cosmos to make the heavens and earth brand new is part of that wrath too. Which it is not part of it either.

It does not matter, once the Body has been "caught up" all the things that are going to take place will take place, in their place, and not those that men have placed them in.

Thanks
Brother Jerry

 

[rdcast]

ROFL... I'm here to help where I can and watch what I say...
LOL
Love,
Brother Jerry

I have no filter on what I say. So when I seem not to care, I hope everyone will consider how tact requires a level of intelligence I don't possess. But when you've had enough of my forwardness, you'll discover I cave if ever I've hurt your feelings.

rob n friends!

 

[contrabar]

You would think the title of your thread would give you some insight on why your theory is in all likelihood incorrect. Why is that after countless generations, your theory is suddenly correct?

firstly, Dark Lite, this is by no means some new theory...
this is a very old theory which was taught in the church and then dismissed...


unlike other popular doctrines today

 

[rdcast]

The wrath of GOD begins before Lord Jesus takes out the bad people in Rev 19 and ends before the 1,000 years start.
Unles one was to say that fireing up the cosmos to make the heavens and earth brand new is part of that wrath too. Which it is not part of it either.

Yes, we must not confuse the Great Tribulation with the Millennium. I'll know for sure when I'm confronted with the ultimatum to either deny my Lord and Savior or be killed(by whichever means)...This btw, is fearful only to those without the Holy Spirit, Praise God !!!!!

rob&friends

 

[rdcast]

this is a very old theory which was taught in the church and then dismissed...

I am sooo pleased to be involved in reintroducing the facts. I had no idea that anyone had discovered this other than myself until very recently. Tho many of my points haven't been mentioned. It would seem to me that the reason of its rejection would be because it is fixed outside earlier generation's life experience. The old sin of vanity blinds even the most devout man/woman. Another very interesting thing to me is the other independent, yet concurrent prophecies that proclaim that the year 2027 is in fact the approximate time of our Lord's return !

On second thought, can you prove that there was this so called rejection ?? I'm calling you out on this...

rob&friends

 

[nowfaith86]

I am sooo pleased to be involved in reintroducing the facts. I had no idea that anyone had discovered this other than myself until very recently. Tho many of my points haven't been mentioned. It would seem to me that the reason of its rejection would be because it is fixed outside earlier generation's life experience. The old sin of vanity blinds even the most devout man/woman. Another very interesting thing to me is the other independent, yet concurrent prophecies that proclaim that the year 2027 is in fact the approximate time of our Lord's return !

rob&friends

It has been rejected because it is unbiblical.....You have been unable to answer my questions I posted earlier.....if you cannot then your theory is unbiblical and full of error.....If you cannot answer the questions biblically then you are purposely choosing to believe something that the Bible does not support. You are adding to the word of God.

Here are the questions again with an added one......


To prove this answer a couple of questions for me?

1. The same chapter where you find the thousand year 1 day comparison (2 Peter 3) also says that we can hasten (speed up) the coming of the Lord.......How can this be possible if your theory is true and Jesus' return is a date marked on a calendar in the 7000th year......either this verse in 2 Peter 3 is a lie or your theory is false.

2 Show me one passage or verse in the bible that says that there is ever a literal 1000 year period on earth that was only 1 day for God.

3 Show me one passage where any Biblical author interpreted time in that manner.

4 If days represent 1000 years in Gen 1, then what does the word years represent in Gen 1.

5 It says that morning and evening were the first day and so on....morning and evening speak of the earth and of a literal day. So the days here do not represent one day of God time, but rather 1 day of earth time....so wouldn't that make it only a few milliseconds of God time?

6 Peter does not say that 1000 years is 1 day etc....He said 1000 years is "AS" 1 day....this is a similie..."A simile is a figure of speech comparing two unlike things, often introduced with the word "like" or "as". Similes allow the two ideas to remain distinct in spite of their similarities." (quoted from wickipedia)
So in other words the similarity is the fact that they are both lengths of time and it makes the point that no matter If God promised His return yesterday of 1000 years ago it is all the same....He will fulfill His promise, however these 2 lengths of time remain distinct. They are not the same in God days and man days.....they are seperate and distinct.

 

[rdcast]

It has been rejected because it is unbiblical.....You have been unable to answer my questions I posted earlier.....if you cannot then your theory is unbiblical and full of error.....If you cannot answer the questions biblically then you are purposely choosing to believe something that the Bible does not support. You are adding to the word of God.

However you see yourself, I can assure you that your questions left unanswered does NOT determine biblical validity. I have spoke plainly with all the proper references. I won't take the bait to judge you beyond the observance that I do not get along with your spirit.

rob&friends
P.S. I reserve the right to change my mind about your spirit if and when it becomes seemly to do so.

 

[Almighty's humble servant]

Peace and ALmighty's favor upon all,

Whew! 2027! That's great, it gives me 8 more years to prepare the way for the Lord!
I don't know dates or calendar this and calendar that, but all my heart was saying is 2019!
I know that Dan,2 says that the western multicultural empire to arise in the end days will be smashed, and that nation will invade both Iraq and Iran, and break off the kings respectively. Then the king from the western multicultural nation will himself be broke off, setting the stage for a/c. Then seven years right?

My heart has always told me 2012 for the breaking off of Hussien and Ahmadinajed, then the breaking off of the big "O"!(by mislead Christians no doubt), then maitreya will start peace process, heal the wounds of the wars and the meteor, and be exalted by Christian, Muslim, and Jew as messiah! My guess it would take about 3/12 years for him to accomplish that, then set in the rebuilt temple next to Al Aqsa and proclaim himself god.
Most of the world will either take him as such, or take his rfid for the sake of maintaining their unholy abundant life of earthly pleasures.(aka american dream)

But i am quite pleased to have seen these dates and their calendar and scriptural proof. And unless the stone is thrown or maitreya is exalted as messiah prior to 2019, Ill be happy as pigs in mud.
But Ill not take my chances waiting for it. Ill continue preparing as charged!


May ALmighty, be praised and exalted above all forever!

 

[nowfaith86]

However you see yourself, I can assure you that your questions left unanswered does NOT determine biblical validity.

It is not the question being left unanswered that determine biblical validity, but rather the nature of the questions. If it cannot be biblically proven that these questions do not hinder your theory and the first one fully deny your theory, then your theory must be said to be unbiblical.

If, however, you can answer these questions with biblical clarity then your theory would have biblical weight. It is not your lack of answering, but rather the content of the questions that cannot be answered biblically that show your theory is unbiblical.

I have spoke plainly with all the proper references.

I have shown in the questions I raised that the "proper" references that you have shown have been taken out of context. My questions show that your references do not prove your theory.....So yes you have spoken clearly with references that do not prove your theory.

There are many many many ideas that have been built and sustained off of the Bible that are completely false, including slavery, rape, muder like hitler, etc. All of these have had references from scripture, but the references were shown to be incorrectly being used. Unless the questions I have raised (not because I raised them, but because of their content) can be answered biblically then your references do not prove your theory but rather disprove it.

I won't take the bait to judge you beyond the observance that I do not get along with your spirit.

If you do not get along with my spirit you must ask yourself 2 questions....1. Why? The only thing you know about me is what I have posted in this thread. My posts have directly went against your theory by bringing biblical evidence and asking questions that you cannot answer biblically. So do you not get along with my spirit because I have went against your theory and said it is wrong and unbiblical.

Why does that upset (for lack of a better word) you? If the bible says that Iron sharpens Iron and that we should be able to learn from each other, then shouldn't you invite a biblical critique of your theory.

I know for me I desire the truth of God's word so much that I encourage anyone to challenge my beliefs. Because if I can't defend my position from scripture then I need to rethink my beliefs.

I am a youth pastor and encourage my youth to question me on everything I believe. If they raise a question that disproves my theory and I cannot answer the question biblically (after study of course) then I will change my belief....not because a person said to but because scripture defeats that belief.

You should encourage and love critique of your beliefs even if it disproves your belief. It is always a positive result either you find your belief to be supported by scripture and learn how to defend it, or you realize scripture does not support your belief and you change to line up with the word of God. Either way you end up believing the bible, the only wrong mindset is to cling to a belief that in not biblical....

rob&friends
P.S. I reserve the right to change my mind about your spirit if and when it becomes seemly to do so.

On a personal note, I have no problem with you and do not know you enough to say I do not get along with your spirit.....I am just wanting the truth of God's word.

God Bless

 

[rdcast]

Peace and ALmighty's favor upon all,

Ill not take my chances waiting for it. Ill continue preparing as charged!

May ALmighty, be praised and exalted above all forever!

I suppose you understand these words you typed assures our brotherhood.

rob&friends

 

[rdcast]

"On a personal note, I have no problem with you and do not know you enough to say I do not get along with your spirit.....I am just wanting the truth of God's word."

I posted my references and for what it's worth, your opinion of them becomes your theory, for I'll presume none of it. As far as your interest in all this is concerned, I suggest you open the Holy Scriptures while in the Spirit and prepare to receive Holy Inspiration. At that juncture I'd be more than interested in hearing what was provided you.

rob&friends

 

[garry2]

Originally Posted by garry2

B1inHim, these verses show that the day of the Lord (day of His wrath) is not 1000 years long as you say in another thread.

LOL...I never, ever posted anything that would remotely cause or look like or read like me saying that the 1,000 is what you say I said. Ever.

You do not read all that I write unless it is short like this.
Go find it "get it right". It is not there. * EDITED by Brother Jerry

get it right

My memory is quite good and I did go and find it.

The wrath of GOD goes for as long as GOD says. It does not continue for 1,000 years.
The wrath of GOD begins before Lord Jesus takes out the bad people in Rev 19 and ends before the 1,000 years start.

That's what you are saying now after having been shown.
See below.

Unles one was to say that fireing up the cosmos to make the heavens and earth brand new is part of that wrath too. Which it is not part of it either.

It does not matter, once the Body has been "caught up" all the things that are going to take place will take place, in their place, and not those that men have placed them in.

Thanks
Brother Jerry

B1inHim:

The day of the Lord is preceeded by a major melt down... that "day" is 1,000 years of man days...

#61 http://www.christianforums.com/t7408441-7/#post53626440


#63

One day of the Lord, many actions take place during that 1,000 years...

In context, it is 1,000 years and not just a "day"

You soon begun to change your opinion from mine and others posts, but you would not admit you were wrong and even now deny having said it.


You not only said that the day of the Lord is 1000 years long, you said the day is preceeded by the earth being burned up (a major melt down)


You soon changed your mind on that one too, you don't admit your wrongs but instead go further and deny having said them.


John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

 

[nowfaith86]

I posted my references

And I posted questions that contradict your references....you seem to be saying that it does not matter if your references are shown to be taken out of context and taken wrong biblically as long as you posted some sort of reference.....if that is your attitude, then you do not want the truth of scripture, rather you choose to cling to a belief that has some major biblical flaws......why do you say you posted references without addressing any concerns of questions.

If your belief is really biblical, and should be believed by people then why do you avoid showing that.

You can ask me any question on what I believe and I will answer it, why do you run from any question that does not agree with you.....

and for what it's worth, your opinion of them becomes your theory

We all have theories, the question is can you biblically back it up. I gave you scripture (not just opinion) that disproves your belief. I have cleary said if you can answer these questions biblically and prove your belief is biblical then I will believe it. You cannot or at least have not been able to do this, so why should anyone believe you....

for I'll presume none of it.

I don't want you to presume anything. I offered questions, not just statements of fact. I am asking you to prove your belief. You cannot biblically. I am asking for you to show biblical evidence so we do not have to presume your belief......the references you quote do not prove your belief, but rather are references you are using to build a belief that is not found in those references alone. You are taking verses and adding opinion into them to get a belief.....rather than just taking the references themselves and saying I believe that.

For example....you take the 7 day creation and say that this is symbolic of human history....not one verse says it is....you take the 7th day of rest and say this must be symbolic of the 1000 year millennium.....again not one verse says it is. You say that all of human history will be only 7000 years but not one verse in the Bible says this. You say Mankind is denied access to the tree of life for 6,000 man-years...where does the bible say it is for 6000 man-years that we cannot eat of the tree of life? You give a verse saying that man cannot eat of the tree of life after the sin, but assume that this is only for 6000 man-years......see your references do not say what you are trying to make them say.

You say Jesus does not reveal the exact time of his second coming, but we must heed God's timetable of Creation to arrive "in or around" the year of these events. Again where does the Bible ever say that creations timetable is the same as Christ's return time table.....it doesn't again another assumption.

You say It is a simple if not divisive mind that would accuse Our Heavenly and Holy Father's 6 day creation should refer to the time in which the physical cosmos was created. What actually has occurred within God's 6 days of work(6,000 man-years) is the revelation of redemption.
Yet scripture says in Gen 1-2 in great detail of the world being created, your assumptions say otherwise, but scripture does not.

You say Three ways God's Will toward man adds up.
(1) 6 days of creation plus the 7th day of rest.
(2) 6 seals plus the 7th seal when Satan is bound for 1,000 years.
(3) 6,000 years of man's mortality plus the 1,000 year Millennium = 7,000 years.

There are 6 days of creation and the 7th God rested. During the 6 days Genesis says that the grass was made, animals were made, Man and woman were made, the sun and moon and stars were made....this is all spoken of a literal....it says these thing happened during each certain day and that the morning and evening (earthly terms) were each day. These are literal days.

Show me one verse that says satan is bound at the 7th seal....it is not in the Bible....after the 7th seal comes 7 trumpets and after that 7 bowls of wrath it is not until after the bowls of wrath that satan is bound. The Seals, trumpets, and bowls have to many clear distinct differences to be the same events.

You assume the 7000 years....there is not a single verse in the Bible that says Jesus will return after 7000 years of Adams sin....Your references prove nothing because you add your assumptions to them.

Do I need to go further.....I think I have made my point.
You offer references that do not say what you are tying to make them say and you take them out of context and give your opinion on those references as proof with not scripture to back your opinion.

As far as your interest in all this is concerned, I suggest you open the Holy Scriptures while in the Spirit and prepare to receive Holy Inspiration. At that juncture I'd be more than interested in hearing what was provided you.

I have spent a Great deal of time studying this. I used to believe in this theory myself until Holy Spirit revelaed otherwise. I suggest you stop assuming and adding things to scripture, but rather take the Bible for what it says. The Holy SPirit illuminates what is there, He does not add things that are not there.....His voice always lines up with scripture....it does not change it.

rob&friends

In Christ.....Matt

 

[contrabar]

I am sooo pleased to be involved in reintroducing the facts. I had no idea that anyone had discovered this other than myself until very recently. Tho many of my points haven't been mentioned. It would seem to me that the reason of its rejection would be because it is fixed outside earlier generation's life experience. The old sin of vanity blinds even the most devout man/woman. Another very interesting thing to me is the other independent, yet concurrent prophecies that proclaim that the year 2027 is in fact the approximate time of our Lord's return !

On second thought, can you prove that there was this so called rejection ?? I'm calling you out on this...

rob&friends

from what I recall, it was mostly rejected due to the mistranslations of the ages of the generations in the Greek Septuagint. They misread it, and were off by 1500 years. Because of the differences in the Greek and Hebrew text of the Old Testament, they believed that the Second Coming of Christ was very soon, and looked for the reign of Antichrist... this teaching fo the six day theory is even found in the Epistle of Barnabas

Instructions of Commodianus, LXXIX
Irenaeus: Against Heresies V. XXVIII, 3
Cyprian: Treatise XI, 2
Methodius: Extracts From The Work on Things Created. IX
Lactantius: The Divine Institutes, Book 7, Chapter XIV, XXV
Lactantius: The Epitome of the Divine Institutes, Chapter 70
Theophilus to Autolycus, Book III, XXVIII

http://www.oasischristianchurch.org/air/018.pdf

at 1000 AD, they flocked to Jerusalem to await Christ, but of course, He didn't come... at that time premillennialism was more considered heretical than Biblical, with the Book of Revelation and the Bible being taught more from an allegorical and an idealistic standpoint... of course, this was before postmillennialism and historicism made it's introduction sometime in the 15th-18th century

 

[rdcast]

nowfaith86,

I welcome your scouring my observances, but sometimes I'm lazy for which I will not be forgiven because of Christ's command to not repeat the sins we repent for having. Do you know where I get that? It's kinda like "go your way and sin no more". Having told this to a dear brother just last week, he comforted me with the understanding of the two greatest commandments, to love God and to love one another

Your charge of Junior Pastor is a huge responsibility. God be with you.

 

[rdcast]

they believed that the Second Coming of Christ was very soon

contrabar,
Does the above excerpt ring a bell with you? It is that vanity I speak so vehemently of. The belief that our lives are SO significant that it should require the Second Coming. This is a sin of vanity, near impossible to defeat.

What you site is in no way similar to what I bring up for discussion here.