God's timetable for mankind

[shturt678]

Are you using emoticons as bullet points?

Most view the older non-non-modern Lutheran works that I bring forward as insane to just fallacious hence just in case it's on the money, ie, one chance in a goo-gall plex...still possible, then I want others to remember I did all that I could to snatch their souls out of the eternal fire while they are thinking about the smilely faces for forever in between looking for pain meds.
Used "3" smily faces before and in bold, ie, was too much acid hence backed off to the irritating vinegar. btw in hell awaiting the lake of fire one will have full memory especially where rejected God's grace his way or is it ways? Just ol' old Jack.

 

[Gnarwhal]

So if I'm reading you correctly, those smiley faces are for those who disagree with you because they're going to hell?

 

[shturt678]

So if I'm reading you correctly, those smiley faces are for those who disagree with you because they're going to hell?

My works of faith is to make sure that I place the exact Truth under one's nose. Decades ago when I seen when they viewed this Truth as insane to fallacious, then I raised the bar to make sure that if they end in hell, ie, I don't know if they will end there, that I did all that I could possible do to present a coherent lucid and to the point Truth. After this has been done on each thread, then I can enjoy having fun with Jn.8:51. Now you know how I tick; however you will have to reject the older out-dated Lutheran's interpretation hence you won't know if they had the Truth until you pass on.

 

[PaladinValer]

So if I'm reading you correctly, those smiley faces are for those who disagree with you because they're going to hell?

I echo this, but it raises another, forgive me, more vital question: how does a Lutheran reject the orthodoxy of amillennialism? Or did I miss something?

 

[Standing Up]

As I knew, no one can show a continuous belief of any sort of millennialism by the orthodox Christians from ancient times to today.

However, I can show not only is amillennial belief ancient, but it was held by the orthodox from then continuously in unbroken lineage from then to now...and that all other forms of millennialism were not only abandoned but declared heretical due to association with and out of interpretation from heretical groups like the Apollinarians and the Montanists.

Even St. Justin the Martyr cited that there were those who disagreed with him and were completely orthodox. St. Augustine, the premier Western authority of the Holy Bible, was strongly amillennial, and the Second Ecumenical Council declared premillennialism unorthodox largely due to its common usage by the Apollinarians and the Montanists among others. Indeed, the Revelation of St. John the Divine was among the most disputed books, largely because of premillenial interpretations were so popular.

This is your proof? That different views existed c150ad? That Augustine c400ad represents an unbroked line of like minded? To which canon of the second EC from c350ad do you refer?

Give us a break. You've proved nothing of an amillenial view, except that it was some 400 years after apostles and tradition through Martyr, Irenaeus, Barnabas.

PS. Memo: Revelation is part of the bible, not Augustine or any EC so-called.

 

[Standing Up]

Find me it found by the Nicene Church...the Undivided Church...please.

To which Nicene creed do you refer?

I did already. Please reread my replies.



The only Straw Man here is the fact that, once again, it is again proven no one likes to read that destroys erroneously-held beliefs so they'll ignore it and say "well you didn't say X" when it was said.

I'll give a chance for it to be corrected. I did actually give the information requested of earlier. Please do look carefully at my previous posts. I will be more than happy to accept a retraction and a Straw Man will have been withdrawn, removing the guilt from it. It is no big, huge deal to admit we missed something; I did it last week I believe and was a big enough of a man to correct it.

Answer my challenges please. Find me millennial beliefs continuously from the 1st century onward within a Nicene body until today like I showed that amillennial belief has been. And please retract the false accusation of a Straw Man, because if it is not, I will reply with exactly where I did say it and it will become clear to all that it was a false accusation, and I don't wish to do it but in order to defend myself, I will.

So, read my post above #65. You got nothing till c400ad. We have scripture and tradition from apostolic times.

Your smokescreen of Nicene creed and orthodoxy have gone poof, as you already know, since you're not part of RC (or EO) anyway (and they're the ones who claim to be the original).

 

[shturt678]

I echo this, but it raises another, forgive me, more vital question: how does a Lutheran reject the orthodoxy of amillennialism? Or did I miss something?

I've been putting forth the out-dated unorthodox non-modern Lutheran's, and non-Lutheran's works, from about 1521-1918 Amillennialism for almost three decades now with most viewing as insane to fallacious hence no matter how much you will not be able to find contextual and grammaitcal error, due to appearing insane, you will also have to reject. Again I've been following along on the threads your work and thank you so much for caring as you really do! btw I seen the 7 different endings of the world in Revelation long ago and one of the reasons I converted over from Pre-mil. Just ol' old Jack.

 

[PaladinValer]

This is your proof?

Yup.

That different views existed c150ad?

Implied in St. Justin's words are those who did not espouse any millennial belief. That, by definition, is amillennial.

That Augustine c400ad represents an unbroked line of like minded?

Yup. There are others too: Psuedo-Barnabas, Caius, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen.

To which canon of the second EC from c350ad do you refer?

The 1st canon. The Apollinarians were adherents of chiliasm. Thus, the Creed was augmented with the clause "whose kingdom shall have no end".

Give us a break. You've proved nothing of an amillenial view, except that it was some 400 years after apostles and tradition through Martyr, Irenaeus, Barnabas.

Actually, I did. What is more important is no continuous premillennialism can be shown past the 4th century in the Nicene Church.

PS. Memo: Revelation is part of the bible, not Augustine or any EC so-called.

Straw Man. I never questioned its canonical nature; I merely brought up the point that it was due to premillennial interpretation, largely by heretical groups, that it was such a disputed book.

 

[PaladinValer]

I've been putting forth the out-dated unorthodox non-modern Lutheran's, and non-Lutheran's works, from about 1521-1918 Amillennialism for almost three decades now with most viewing as insane to fallacious hence no matter how much you will not be able to find contextual and grammaitcal error, due to appearing insane, you will also have to reject. Again I've been following along on the threads your work and thank you so much for caring as you really do! btw I seen the 7 different endings of the world in Revelation long ago and one of the reasons I converted over from Pre-mil. Just ol' old Jack.

Okay, without using smilies for bullets and run-on sentences, can you answer whether you agree or disagree with premillennialism? And also whether or not you are an amillennialist.

My appreciation for a reply in advance.

 

[shturt678]

Okay, without using smilies for bullets and run-on sentences, can you answer whether you agree or disagree with premillennialism? And also whether or not you are an amillennialist.

My appreciation for a reply in advance.

I disagree with Premillennialism and adamantly disagree with modern Amillennialsim. Modern Amilliannialism is closer to the Truth and more difficult for others to detect the subtle lies mixed with Truth hence more damnable. And I appreciate you helping me.

 

[Strong in Him]

Stronginhim, The info I have is this. Abram, or Abraham the son of Terah was born at Ur in the year 2008 B.C.

Moses time of birth is made certain by the Exodus of the Jews when Moses was 80 years old. The date I have for the Exodus is 1441. Add 80 years (Moses age) that takes us to 1521.

That wasn't actually what I wanted to know. I asked how you account for the fact that Scripture says that the Hebrews were in Israel for 430 years before the exodus.

And another problem is that no one seems really certain when the Exodus was.
1 Kings 6:1 says that the 4th year of Solomon's reign was 480 years after the Exodus, which would be fine if it wasn't for 2 further difficulties; the first is that the Septuagint apparently says 440 years in this verse, and the second is that some people say that you have to make adjustments to allow for the different calendars. If this latter argument is true it would make it around 350 years (apparently.) Anyway, the point is that theologians seem to be divided between a date in the 1400's - I've read 1446 and 1495 as possible dates - and a date 200 years before - around 1295.

Whichever it was, the Hebrew slaves were in Egypt for 430 years beforehand.

Now take 1521 from 2008 we have approximately 487 years from Abraham's birth to Moses birth. This information came from Encyclopedia of religious knowledge 1838 which I have in my possession, a book that I trust in.

Well that's up to you, but, unless you've made a typo with the date, that book is nearly 200 years old. There have been others written since then, and other discoveries made.

Now concerning the dating of the creation!

When was Adam created is not important concerning time.

But this whole thread is about the need for us to understand God's timetable - and unless we do, it seems we won't be able to understand Biblical events. You have started this timetable with the "fact" that Adam was born in 4004 BC - a specific date, and I wondered how you arrived at it.

Adam was to live forever in the garden.

Do you have any evidence, or references, to back that up?

Adam lived 930 years before he died.

True - but don't forget that the Israelites used, and still use, I think, a lunar calendar. So the dates and lengths of the years are going to be slightly different from ours.

So the question may arise, how long did Adam and Eve live in the garden before they sinned? Your guess would be as good as mine.

I don't know; we're not told. I don't think, personally, it is that important.

Its obvious Dinosaurs were outside the garden, and God did not bring these reptiles to him.

I've no idea - nor do I know what dinosaurs have to do with the OP.

 

[shturt678]

Rev.8:7-9:21 is the main vision of Revelation, and the whole N.T., where the Trumpets are blasting ear deafening blasts for those very very few that can 'hear' them (preliminary judgments), ie, especially the 5th and 6th Trumpets at this very moment. Rev.13, 17, and 18 reveal that the dragon is compelled to work only through his agencies, the two beasts, the great harlot until the end of the symbolic 1,000 years that began at the Cross and end at Rev.20:7. Rev.8:7-9:21 just expounds IIThess.2:11, 12 for those that comport with IIThess.2:9-10. There are "7" distinct endings of the world for those that think Revelation is to be viewed chronologically. Sorry have to confess sin, I'm lol at you folks viewing this between insane and fallacious. I wouldn't lol so hard if you would just view between fallacious and out to lunch. Have to go and ask God to forgive me as lol too much.

 

[LaSpino3]

Strong in Him, Let me retract the following, "The first man Adam was created by God about 4004 B.C

When Adam sinned and tossed from the garden, the clock began to tick, 4004 B.C.

Date of creation, unknown

You wrote, "The book I stated is 200 years old

Phil replies, "True! But other books in my possession support this teaching. Also, because liberal thinking has invaded the church and most all doctrines, dates etc., are being questioned, or challenged; and in my estimation a great deal of this new information/doctrine as far as I am concerned is bogus. I based this on 30 years of research

I don't use the internet to gather info, I have a wonderful library of books on hand, most pre-date 1850 and these have stood the test of time.

You wrote, "Whichever it was, the Hebrew slaves were in Egypt for 430 years beforehand

Phil replies, "Not exactly, Ex.12:40 when referring to the 430 years begins from Abraham's entering Canaan until the Israelites began their Exodus."

I wrote, "Adam was to live forever in the garden."

You asked, "Do you have any evidence, or references, to back that up

Phil replies, Gen.3:22-24, Ver.22, "And the LORD God said, behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he (Adam) put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Ver.24, "So He (God) drove out the man (Adam and Eve,) and he (God) placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."

Hope this clears the air,

Phil

 

[Strong in Him]

Strong in Him, Let me retract the following, "The first man Adam was created by God about 4004 B.C

Ok.

When Adam sinned and tossed from the garden, the clock began to tick, 4004 B.C.

Yes but how do you know?

You wrote, "The book I stated is 200 years old

Phil replies, "True! But other books in my possession support this teaching.

Ok.
I've got nothing against 200 year old books - obviously, because the Bible is a lot older. I'm just saying that there have been discoveries made in the last 200 years; in language and archaeology, for example.

Also, because liberal thinking has invaded the church and most all doctrines, dates etc., are being questioned, or challenged; and in my estimation a great deal of this new information/doctrine as far as I am concerned is bogus. I based this on 30 years of research

Well I don't know what liberal thinking you are referring to; nor do I know enough about dates etc being challenged, so I can't really comment. But I would be very wary about calling some of our eminent Bible scholars and theolgians bogus, and also wary of anyone else who does so without giving evidence, examples of their "bogus" teaching and explanations about why it is considered to be so.

I don't use the internet to gather info,

I do sometimes - it gives me access to very many books and resources, most of which I do not, and could never, possess. But on this occasion, I looked up "dates of the Exodus" in two commentaries which I have; one is the IVP Bible commentary and one is the Everyman Bibl;e Commentary on the book of Exodus.

You wrote, "Whichever it was, the Hebrew slaves were in Egypt for 430 years beforehand

Phil replies, "Not exactly, Ex.12:40 when referring to the 430 years begins from Abraham's entering Canaan until the Israelites began their Exodus."

The NIV, RSV, Amplified, 1599 Geneva Bible, New American Standard Bible - and probably a few others - all say that the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years. That means from the time that Jacob and his family went down to Egypt to buy food in the famine, to the time that Moses led them all out. As Scripture says, 70 of Joseph's family went into Egypt; the Lord was with them, they prospered and multiplied and at the time of the exodus there were 600,000 men plus their wives and families. You don't get those sorts of numbers quickly - even if every women had 6 pregnancies in her life and gave birth to sextuplets each time.

I wrote, "Adam was to live forever in the garden."

You asked, "Do you have any evidence, or references, to back that up

Phil replies, Gen.3:22-24, Ver.22, "And the LORD God said, behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he (Adam) put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Death entered the world when sin did, so after men sinned, from that time onwards they would die. If Adam had eaten from the tree of life after he sinned, he would live forever in a sinful state.
But that's not the same as saying that God's original plan was that man would live forever. It could have been, God could have created humans without the ability to choose - and then they would never have sinned - but he didn't.

Hope this clears the air,

"clearing the air" implies that there has been reconciliation after a quarrel, and on my part, there has been none. As for clearing things up, or clarifying, I'm afraid I still challenge some of your dates, and don't understand the thread at all.

 

[LaSpino3]

Sorry you don't understand the tread! But all history has a start point, a middle, and an ending. My tread concerns the beginning and the middle; the end is still ahead of us.

It's no different than any other history. But what it boils down to is; Christian's can believe the approximate dates I stated, or, that the earth is much older as taught by evolutionist; or they can believe the teaching of liberal Christian scholars who claim that the earth was created, BUT it evolved over time, giving a much older age than that which I pointed out.

I chose #1 because I believe God, and not men!

Just though of another choice. That men lived on the earth before Adam and Eve but were destroyed. It's called the Gap theory!

Phil LaSpino