CHECK THIS OUT: 666 IS REAL & PASTORS ARE PROMOTING IT!!! (Part 1)

[parousia70]

wow, read what I said...I said that you are basing your whole argument on the word shortly

And it's over 100 synonyms found in NT eschatology

it's not a problem for me because my argument does NOT rely on the word shortly in order to hold up.

Right, your argument relies on the notion that the scriptural terms "Shortly, at hand, about to take place, near, in a very little while, without delay, etc, etc" mean exactly the opposite...for if they are literal as I contend, your claims of a 2000 year delay dissolve into the ether.

In contrast, I have actual scriptrual testimony that challenge your view. I don't need to rely on any sort of "what if it the scripture were different" to challenge your view the way you used the "what if" it to try and challenge mine.
I'm confident our readers can determine whos view is more solidly grounded in actual scripture, and who's is grounded on 'If only it were different.."

what does scripture tell us that the believers view of time on this earth should be? It's not a hard question and will shed light on your interpretation if you allow it to.

Scripture UNIFORMLY teaches that When God places a time limit on a prophesy's fulfillment, it is given to be understood in the plain, simple, literal fashion of how time relates to man, not how time relates to God.

You are of course free (and even encouraged) to provide any scriptural examples showing why my contention is wrong. I'll wait as long as it takes.

 

[razzelflabben]

so.. a specific passage was not provided but let's look at Rev. 22:6 from strong's which offers a Lexicon for translational needs.

And G2532 he said G2036 unto me, G3427 These G3778sayings G3056 are faithful G4103 and G2532 true: G228 and G2532the Lord G2962 God G2316 of the holy G40 prophets G4396sent G649 his G846 angel G32 to shew G1166 unto his G846servants G1401 the things which G3739 must G1163shortly G1722 G5034 be done. G1096

when we follow the links here, shortly (the word in question) means....in, by, with etc. and quickness, speed...you see, it is not about shortness at all but about a set period of time.

but since the poster in question refuses to answer the question about how scripture tells the believer to see time let me fill you in...2 Corinthians 4:18 this life is a vapor...but look at these other passages that talk about the shortness of the time...Rev. 12:12...you see, where God specifies a time, that is to say, x number or days or years, you can bank on it but when the set time is more vague like "short" we do not know. In fact, the early church thought that Christ would return in their lifetime because the "time was short" two thousand years later we are still looking for Him to come in the clouds because the "time is short"....iows basing the claim that the mark of the beast has already come on the word "short" is so weak an argument that it cannot be taken seriously based on what we know of scripture.

 

[razzelflabben]

And it's over 100 synonyms found in NT eschatology


Right, your argument relies on the notion that the scriptural terms "Shortly, at hand, about to take place, near, in a very little while, without delay, etc, etc" mean exactly the opposite...




Scripture UNIFORMLY teaches that When God places a time limit on a prophesy's fulfillment, it is given to be understood in the plain, simple, literal fashion of how time relates to man, not how time relates to God.

You are of course free (and even encouraged) to provide any scriptural examples showing why my contention is wrong. I'll wait as long as it takes.

I just did, I will give you time to read and take in what I have said to you...

 

[parousia70]

so.. a specific passage was not provided but let's look at Rev. 22:6 from strong's which offers a Lexicon for translational needs.

And G2532 he said G2036 unto me, G3427 These G3778sayings G3056 are faithful G4103 and G2532 true: G228 and G2532the Lord G2962 God G2316 of the holy G40 prophets G4396sent G649 his G846 angel G32 to shew G1166 unto his G846servants G1401 the things which G3739 must G1163shortly G1722 G5034 be done. G1096

when we follow the links here, shortly (the word in question) means....in, by, with etc. and quickness, speed...you see, it is not about shortness at all but about a set period of time.

I believe in scripture when faced with this, usage trumps etymology.
By comparing scripture with scripture we can see that my understanding holds

From your post the greek word Used for Shortly is "Tacheos"

It is used throughout the NT, for example, lets apply your reasoning to it's use here:

Philippians 2:19
19 But I trust in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you shortly, that I also may be encouraged when I know your state.

Is your contention that Paul is telling the Philippians that He is going to send Timothy to them at some unspecified time that could be decades or millennia away, but when Timothy gets there they'll know it because once he finally gets there it will happen QUICKLY?

Really?

And what of Near?

Again:
Numbers 24:17 "I see Him, but not now; I behold Him, but not near; A Star shall come out of Jacob; A Scepter shall rise out of Israel, And batter the brow of Moab, And destroy all the sons of tumult.

Of what value are the time indicators in the above passage of "not now" and "not near" if the value of "now" and "near" is to be stretched into thousands of years?

If "now" and "near" are to be interpreted in polar opposite fashion of their literal meaning to mean "far" ie; thousands of years, then should "not near" and "not now" be likewise interpreted exactly opposite to mean near, soon, or even immediately?

I'm genuinely curious. In your view do the scriptural terms "Not Near" and "Near" mean the same thing? If not how are they different?

but since the poster in question refuses to answer the question about how scripture tells the believer to see time let me fill you in...2 Corinthians 4:18 this life is a vapor...but look at these other passages that talk about the shortness of the time...Rev. 12:12...you see, where God specifies a time, that is to say, x number or days or years, you can bank on it but when the set time is more vague like "short" we do not know.

So your contention is that Shortly, soon, at hand, etc are meaningless? Undicernable to the honest Bible expositor?

Scripture proves this wrong.
In every use of a non specific prophetic time indicator such as Near, at hand, shortly, etc, the time span NEVER goes beyond 1 human lifetime, and usually not beyond a few decades.

Feel free to list any examples you think testify the opposite.

In fact, the early church thought that Christ would return in their lifetime because the "time was short"

I believe they were correct in their expectation. They all taught it, they all believed it. If they got such a primary doctrine so wrong as you contend they did, what else do you believe they were wrong about? Doctrines of Salvation, Grace through Faith? the Resurrection of Christ? I can abide by later generations being wrong about much, but I can not abide by the notion, much less hang my hat on the notion - as you appear to be doing-, that the Divinely inspired apostles were wrong.

two thousand years later we are still looking for Him to come in the clouds because the "time is short"

I believe "we" are wrong in our expectation, the apostles were right..

There can only be one end time generation.
The apostles claimed it was Their Generation.
I believe them.

And I'm glad you mentioned coming on the clouds.... Several posts back I gave multiple examples from the OT where God Rode Clouds into Battle in fulfillment of OT prophesy which you ignored.... maybe now that you brought it up you can explain where you believe scripture instructs you to interpret those examples in Polar opposite fashion to the NT prophesies of Jesus coming on the clouds?

 

[razzelflabben]

I believe in scripture when faced with this, usage trumps etymology.
By comparing scripture with scripture we can see that my understanding holds

lol I compared scripture and showed you wrong....

From your post the greek word Used for Shortly is "Tacheos"

It is used throughout the NT, for example, lets apply your reasoning to it's use here:

Philippians 2:19
19 But I trust in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you shortly, that I also may be encouraged when I know your state.

according to strongs the "in" is the same word not the "shortly"

You see, you can't make your case by reinventing what the original says...

Is your contention that Paul is telling the Philippians that He is going to send Timothy to them at some unspecified time that could be decades or millennia away, but when Timothy gets there they'll know it because once he finally gets there it will happen QUICKLY?

what I am saying is it is a different word therefore not part of the argument you are trying to make.

Really?

And what of Near?

Again:
Numbers 24:17 "I see Him, but not now; I behold Him, but not near; A Star shall come out of Jacob; A Scepter shall rise out of Israel, And batter the brow of Moab, And destroy all the sons of tumult.

again, different word used...

Of what value are the time indicators in the above passage of "not now" and "not near" if the value of "now" and "near" is to be stretched into thousands of years?

If "now" and "near" are to be interpreted in polar opposite fashion of their literal meaning to mean "far" ie; thousands of years, then should "not near" and "not now" be likewise interpreted exactly opposite to mean near, soon, or even immediately?

I'm genuinely curious. In your view do the scriptural terms "Not Near" and "Near" mean the same thing? If not how are they different?

it all depends on the translation and context...that is basic scripture study rules.

So your contention is that Shortly, soon, at hand, etc are meaningless?

not meaningless just a poor interpretation.

Undicernable to the honest Bible expositor?

as I showed you, your biblical expositor did NOT say what you claimed.

Scripture proves this wrong.
In every use of a non specific prophetic time indicator such as Near, at hand, shortly, etc, the time span NEVER goes beyond 1 human lifetime, and usually not beyond a few decades.

I addressed this already, you can refute it but rebuttal is NOT "cause I say so". We already talked about that.

feel free to list any examples you think testify the oppsosite.

I did and started with Rev. 22:6 where the translation is the issue.

I believe they were correct in their expectation. They all taught it, they all believed it. If they got such a primary doctrine so wrong as you contend they did, what else do you believe they were wrong about? Doctrines of Salvation, Grace through Faith? the Resurrection of Christ? I can abide byt later generations being wrong about much, but I can not abide by the notion. much less hand my hat on the notion as you appear to be doing, that the Divinely inspired apostles were wrong.

what do you think they got wrong? I said they got it right. Why would you ask me to defend the opposite of what I said and believe...you keep doing that and it doesn't make sense for you to do so.

I believe "we" are wrong in our expectation, the apostles were right..

what expectations? That Christ has not yet come in the clouds thus the rapture? I'm with the Apostles, that hasn't yet happened...see, the mark of the beast is related to all of that and the early church was warned that teaching He has already come is a false teaching and we should consider anyone claiming it should be viewed as a false teacher.

 

[Straightshot]

Preterism is false teaching .... the scoffers of the last days [2 Peter 3]

 

[parousia70]

That Christ has not yet come in the clouds

Of course He has, in the exact manner as God "came on the Clouds" multiple times throughout the OT.

Is it your claim those never happened either?

 

[parousia70]

I said they got it right.

Rather, you said:
"the early church thought that Christ would return in their lifetime"

You are now telling me they were correct in that belief?

 

[Endtime Survivors]

Scripture UNIFORMLY teaches that When God places a time limit on a prophesy's fulfillment, it is given to be understood in the plain, simple, literal fashion of how time relates to man, not how time relates to God.

This is the problem with pet theories. You don't even believe your own arguments except when it suits the theory. Words like "near", "short", and "soon" are notoriously subjective, though Jesus himself strongly advocated the need for his followers to remain vigilant even if their lord delayed his coming and was later than expected.

Precise time periods are much harder to fudge, and for that reason preterism largely ignores them. Time periods are given in the Revelation and Daniel of 7 years and a period of 3.5 years which is alternately referred to in days (1260), months (42) and years (3.5), apparently for the express purpose of guarding against the kind of tampering on which preterism is built.

The Revelation is not a series of random events spread out over thousands of years (although the underlying spiritual lessons do apply to all of human history). The events specifically relate to one another to make up a coherent, bigger picture which actually affects the whole world in dramatic, practical ways that no sincere person could claim to have already happened.

Where are the two witnesses who preach for a period of 3.5 years? Where's the record of these two people burning their enemies with fire and calling down droughts and plagues? Where's the stinging locust-like plague which is meant to take 5 months circling the globe? Where's the army of 200 million meant to do the same thing? Where the "mountain" falling into the sea? Where's the false prophet and the Beast? They are said to also perform miracles of calling fire down from Heaven etc. Where's the Mark of the Beast? The list goes on and on. These are all events which are described in the context of a 7 year window of action, with most of them happening during the second half of that period (i.e. 3.5 years).

What Preterism has are events which are comparable (to some degree) to events described in the Revelation, and then jammed, shoved and out-right dishonestly glued together into a patch-work monstrosity of contrivance.

Preterism wasn't (and to a large degree still isn't) particularly popular (not that popularity should be any kind of legitimate measure of accuracy) but I suspect that, as the Mark of the Beast beast becomes more real, as more and more of the world's practical, day-to-day economy moves toward tap-and-pay technology inevitably leading to microchip implants, a whole host of heretofore disregarded convenient doctrines will experience sharp spike in popularity.

*Puts on the sleazy salesman voice*
Feeling burdened by pangs of conscience over taking an implant in your hand so that you may continue participating in the system of buy and sell? No problem; Here's a doctrine for you; "It's all already happened in the past so there's no need to feel guilty about performing actions which are uncannily similar to those described in the Revelation". Brilliant, right? We've got a whole host of carefully researched and rehearsed arguments to back you up any time your conscience starts to bother you again; you'll have that baby seared to silence in no time!

That one doesn't suit you? No problem, try this other one based on emotionally blackmailing God into giving you a free pass on the basis that you only want to feed your family (a little emotionally charged righteous indignation goes a long way to legitimizing this one).

Still not satisfied? No problem. How about this one, " You'll be raptured away before there is any need to suffer for your faith".

 

[razzelflabben]

Of course He has, in the exact manner as God "came on the Clouds" multiple times throughout the OT.

Is it your claim those never happened either?

hum...please point me to the multiple articles and sightings of the resurrection having already happened...see, in context that is what I said and taking it out of context to twist it is a violation of forum rules which we know you wouldn't do, right? So far I haven't seen this evidence so I am going with it hasn't happened yet...but please feel free to present the trumpet sounding, Christ coming in the clouds and the believers being taken into the heavens...you know the things I said I haven't yet seen evidence of happening, before you took out the context and tried to claim something else.

 

[razzelflabben]

Rather, you said:
"the early church thought that Christ would return in their lifetime"

You are now telling me they were correct in that belief?

huh??? you all need to keep things in context, it will go much better for you.

In context what I said is that the early church thought that Christ's return would be "soon" as in they would see it. They died knowing that it had not yet come but still believing it would be soon.

 

[CrystalDragon]

This is the problem with pet theories. You don't even believe your own arguments except when it suits the theory. Words like "near", "short", and "soon" are notoriously subjective, though Jesus himself strongly advocated the need for his followers to remain vigilant even if their lord delayed his coming and was later than expected.

Precise time periods are much harder to fudge, and for that reason preterism largely ignores them. Time periods are given in the Revelation and Daniel of 7 years and a period of 3.5 years which is alternately referred to in days (1260), months (42) and years (3.5), apparently for the express purpose of guarding against the kind of tampering on which preterism is built.

The Revelation is not a series of random events spread out over thousands of years (although the underlying spiritual lessons do apply to all of human history). The events specifically relate to one another to make up a coherent, bigger picture which actually affects the whole world in dramatic, practical ways that no sincere person could claim to have already happened.

Where are the two witnesses who preach for a period of 3.5 years? Where's the record of these two people burning their enemies with fire and calling down droughts and plagues? Where's the stinging locust-like plague which is meant to take 5 months circling the globe? Where's the army of 200 million meant to do the same thing? Where the "mountain" falling into the sea? Where's the false prophet and the Beast? They are said to also perform miracles of calling fire down from Heaven etc. Where's the Mark of the Beast? The list goes on and on. These are all events which are described in the context of a 7 year window of action, with most of them happening during the second half of that period (i.e. 3.5 years).

What Preterism has are events which are comparable (to some degree) to events described in the Revelation, and then jammed, shoved and out-right dishonestly glued together into a patch-work monstrosity of contrivance.

Preterism wasn't (and to a large degree still isn't) particularly popular (not that popularity should be any kind of legitimate measure of accuracy) but I suspect that, as the Mark of the Beast beast becomes more real, as more and more of the world's practical, day-to-day economy moves toward tap-and-pay technology inevitably leading to microchip implants, a whole host of heretofore disregarded convenient doctrines will experience sharp spike in popularity.

*Puts on the sleazy salesman voice*
Feeling burdened by pangs of conscience over taking an implant in your hand so that you may continue participating in the system of buy and sell? No problem; Here's a doctrine for you; "It's all already happened in the past so there's no need to feel guilty about performing actions which are uncannily similar to those described in the Revelation". Brilliant, right? We've got a whole host of carefully researched and rehearsed arguments to back you up any time your conscience starts to bother you again; you'll have that baby seared to silence in no time!

That one doesn't suit you? No problem, try this other one based on emotionally blackmailing God into giving you a free pass on the basis that you only want to feed your family (a little emotionally charged righteous indignation goes a long way to legitimizing this one).

Still not satisfied? No problem. How about this one, " You'll be raptured away before there is any need to suffer for your faith".

The "Mark of the Beast" is not a microchip implant. Revelation indicates it was addressed to the church leaders at the time, and the Number of the Beast was a way to refer to Nero, with 666 being the "number of his name".

It doesn't refer to the future, it's a vision meant to be a representation of Christians persecuted under the Roman Empire and eventually Nero would be stopped.

 

[razzelflabben]

I'm curious after reading some of you all's posts...how many people here think that there is suffering involved in following God and how many think that it's all sunshine and roses once we believe unto salvation? Just a quick survey to get a better understanding of who is involved in this discussion.

 

[CrystalDragon]

I'm curious after reading some of you all's posts...how many people here think that there is suffering involved in following God and how many think that it's all sunshine and roses once we believe unto salvation? Just a quick survey to get a better understanding of who is involved in this discussion.

I think there's suffering involved in following God's grace just as there's suffering involved in anything. Same with peace applying to both.

Peace happens, suffering happens. Good things happen bad things happen. It's life.

 

[razzelflabben]

I think there's suffering involved in following God's grace just as there's suffering involved in anything. Same with peace applying to both.

Peace happens, suffering happens. Good things happen bad things happen. It's life.

thanks for answering...

 

[parousia70]

This is the problem with pet theories. You don't even believe your own arguments except when it suits the theory. Words like "near", "short", and "soon" are notoriously subjective, though Jesus himself strongly advocated the need for his followers to remain vigilant even if their lord delayed his coming and was later than expected.

Matthew 24:32-33
32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:

33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

How Notoriously subjective do you believe "Near" is in this passage?

Do you believe this particular use of "near" by Jesus can be stretched into thousands of years? Do you believe it was His intent to convey an open ended time that could stretch millennia when He used the Term "When you see these things, know that it is Near & At the Doors" above?

Precise time periods are much harder to fudge, and for that reason preterism largely ignores them. Time periods are given in the Revelation and Daniel of 7 years and a period of 3.5 years which is alternately referred to in days (1260), months (42) and years (3.5), apparently for the express purpose of guarding against the kind of tampering on which preterism is built.

You mean the 42 Month Roman Siege of Jerusalem?

The Revelation is not a series of random events spread out over thousands of years (although the underlying spiritual lessons do apply to all of human history). The events specifically relate to one another to make up a coherent, bigger picture which actually affects the whole world in dramatic, practical ways that no sincere person could claim to have already happened.

How do you come to the conclusion it effects "The Whole World"?
What Language does John use that you believe indicates global/universal cataclysm?

Where are the two witnesses who preach for a period of 3.5 years? Where's the record of these two people burning their enemies with fire and calling down droughts and plagues? Where's the stinging locust-like plague which is meant to take 5 months circling the globe? Where's the army of 200 million meant to do the same thing? Where the "mountain" falling into the sea? Where's the false prophet and the Beast? They are said to also perform miracles of calling fire down from Heaven etc. Where's the Mark of the Beast? The list goes on and on. These are all events which are described in the context of a 7 year window of action, with most of them happening during the second half of that period (i.e. 3.5 years).

Again, the OT is chalk full of past fulfilled Judgments of God upon individual nations that use the same language of Universal cataclysm that John uses in the Revelation... Where does scripture teach you to apply a local/metaphoric interpretation to this language when used in the OT (as you do) and then apply a polar opposite Universal/Literal interpretation when you find it in the NT?

 

[Straightshot]

"Do you believe this particular use of "near" by Jesus can be stretched into thousands of years? Do you believe it was His intent to convey an open ended time that could stretch millennia when He used the Term "Near & At the Doors" above?"


Precisely .... this He has done for His purposes [2 Peter 3]

Wait and see .... you are going to find out .... sooner, or later

Argue all you want but you cannot prove against this truth

 

[CrystalDragon]

"Do you believe this particular use of "near" by Jesus can be stretched into thousands of years? Do you believe it was His intent to convey an open ended time that could stretch millennia when He used the Term "Near & At the Doors" above?"


Precisely .... this He has done for His purposes [2 Peter 3]

Wait and see .... you are going to find out .... sooner, or later

Argue all you want but you cannot prove against this truth

The truth is that the text indicates the Apostles thought that Jesus would come in their lifetime, that the world would end in their lifetime, hence phrases like "near", "we are in the last days", at the door", "we who are alive", etc.

They thought the end of the age would be then.

 

[parousia70]

hum...please point me to the multiple articles and sightings of the resurrection having already happened...... Christ coming in the clouds and the believers being taken into the heavens...you know the things I said I haven't yet seen evidence of happening,

Why?
Why should I provide you that which you refuse to provide me, and that which you Happily dismiss elsewhere in scripture?

For a contextual example, There is a famous Biblical Battle Between King David and Saul that I'm certain we both agree is Past.
Notice the Language used:

God Comes to End Saul's Kingdom - 1000 BC
Then the earth shook and quaked, the foundations of heaven were trembling and were shaken, because He was angry. Smoke went up out of His nostrils, fire from His mouth devoured; coals were kindled by it. He bowed the heavens also, and came down with thick darkness under His feet. And He rode on a cherub and flew; And He appeared on the wings of the wind. And He made darkness canopies around Him, a mass of waters, thick clouds of the sky. From the brightness before Him coals of fire were kindled. The LORD thundered from heaven, and the Most High uttered His voice. And He sent out arrows, and scattered them, Lightning, and routed them. Then the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were laid bare by the rebuke of the LORD, at the blast of the breath of His nostrils. (2 Sam 22:8-16)

Please show me the evidence (because I haven't seen it) That God was seen doing all these things at the time of this Ancient Battle:

1) The Shaking of the foundations of the entire earth and heaven
2) Smoke billowing from God's Nostrils
3) Coals of Fire being Kindled by the Brightness of God
4) God being seen riding a Cherub, Appearing on the Clouds
5) God Shooting Arrows
6) God Laying the Foundation of the Entire Earth Bare By the Breath from His Nostrils

Once you can show me the physical, Historical evidence of all these things having taken place at the time of this Battle between David and Saul, then I will agree I need to show the same to you regarding the NT Revelation account.

 

[razzelflabben]

Why?
Why should I provide you that which you refuse to provide me, and that which you Happily dismiss elsewhere in scripture?

this reminds me of another discussion I had with someone on these boards, I said I could not hind any evidence that supported either side of the issue in question. The other poster demanded that I provide evidence to back my claim. I asked what that would look like and all I got was more demands. So I provided my key words searches and was told that I needed to evidence my claim that i couldn't find evidence to support either side of the argument. So I posted both sides of the argument and that which I could find that gave no definitive answer. that wasn't sufficient either. This went on for days and days and days.

My position is that the second coming of Christ talked about in Rev. has not yet come....what would you accept as evidence to that claim that hasn't already been presented? SEriously, like the above case, what would evidence that something hasn't yet happened look like to you so that I can find that evidence and present it so you are happy and content? If it didn't yet happen, there would be no evidence of it happening, right? Your claim is that it has happened, therefore the only evidence that can be presented would come from you and you refuse to present it and try to demand I present evidence that something didn't happen. Folks, we are tinkering on the brink of in sanity here.

For a contextual example, There is a famous Biblical Battle Between King David and Saul that I'm certain we both agree is Past.
Notice the Language used:

God Comes to End Saul's Kingdom - 1000 BC
Then the earth shook and quaked, the foundations of heaven were trembling and were shaken, because He was angry. Smoke went up out of His nostrils, fire from His mouth devoured; coals were kindled by it. He bowed the heavens also, and came down with thick darkness under His feet. And He rode on a cherub and flew; And He appeared on the wings of the wind. And He made darkness canopies around Him, a mass of waters, thick clouds of the sky. From the brightness before Him coals of fire were kindled. The LORD thundered from heaven, and the Most High uttered His voice. And He sent out arrows, and scattered them, Lightning, and routed them. Then the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were laid bare by the rebuke of the LORD, at the blast of the breath of His nostrils. (2 Sam 22:8-16)

Please show me the evidence (because I haven't seen it) That God was seen doing all these things at the time of this Ancient Battle:

1) The Shaking of the foundations of the entire earth and heaven
2) Smoke billowing from God's Nostrils
3) Coals of Fire being Kindled by the Brightness of God
4) God being seen riding a Cherub, Appearing on the Clouds
5) God Shooting Arrows
6) God Laying the Foundation of the Entire Earth Bare By the Breath from His Nostrils

Once you can show me the physical, Historical evidence of all these things having taken place at the time of this Battle between David and Saul, then I will agree I need to show the same to you regarding the NT Revelation account.

I'm so confused....where did I ever suggest that "God was seen doing all these things at the time of the Ancient Battle"? Seeing someone doing something and seeing the evidence of something are not the same thing....I even asked you for some article or other report of all the believers living at the time being taken I said nothing at all about seeing God take them...my thresh hold for evidence is at this point extremely low, anything at all that even resembles the second coming would be worthy of looking at in my opinion but you won't even give us that, all you give us is some demand you want to make that I evidence something didn't yet happen....seems to me that you might be that evidence. You see, if you can't evidence that it did happen, wouldn't that be evidence that it hasn't yet taken place?