From Rapture Ready

Here's a great idea, Ethnikos. Since the prophecy thing doesn't seem to be working out, concentrate of dealing, as decisively as is possible, with problems as they come up in the day to day arena. Remember: Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
 
Wow Ethnikos, you really are beguiled by conspiracy nuts like Deagle and Jones.

Check out the quote in My sig.
 
dafydd said:
Armageddon out of here.What a dingbat Ethnikos is.
Click to expand...
The actual physical Armageddon is almost irrelevant. The world will already be judged at that point. God putting a stop to war by killing the armies is merely the execution of the judgement. The fate of the souls alive on the planet will have already been decided.
The only use for talking about Armageddon is to have people warned ahead of time. There is a certain period of time before the day of doom that will be a wake up for those who will respond. I do not think it is going to be a rapture of the Christians. Since Armageddon is a war, I figured it made sense that the thing alerting us to it would be another war, one that would lead to, a few years later, the ultimate war.
I will have to go back and do some study to see what it is exactly. It calls it the two witnesses in Revelation but it is debatable as to what, or who, that is. I will be sure to post it somewhere when I find out a good answer.
I got in a hurry on the July 11 thing to figure out what may or may not happen, because it was coming up fast. The date is only relevant if you start with the premise that Dec. 21, 2012 is something that correlates with a prophecy in the Bible. David Flynn presented a fairly convincing argument that it just may be. I have previously thought that it did not. There are people jumping on it and writing books about 2012 and seem to think it might be the end. I was listening to Coast to Coast not very long ago and there was a scientist on who was saying all this Mayan calender stuff people are running with is all based on his original research. He said they are all wrong because 2012 is just the end of the ninth cycle, out of thirteen cycles. Of course there are books to be sold, so forget that guy, right?
 
We come back to the fact that Revelation states at its outset that the visions in it deal with "what must soon take place." Because that totally deflates any attempt to set its prophecies in the twentieth - oops! now its the twentyfirst - century, you say you're retranslating those verses.

As to the 2012 nonsense, how can a Mayan prophecy have any relevance for a Christian like you?
 
Ethnikos said:
The actual physical Armageddon is almost irrelevant. The world will already be judged at that point. God putting a stop to war by killing the armies is merely the execution of the judgement. The fate of the souls alive on the planet will have already been decided.
The only use for talking about Armageddon is to have people warned ahead of time. There is a certain period of time before the day of doom that will be a wake up for those who will respond. I do not think it is going to be a rapture of the Christians. Since Armageddon is a war, I figured it made sense that the thing alerting us to it would be another war, one that would lead to, a few years later, the ultimate war.
I will have to go back and do some study to see what it is exactly. It calls it the two witnesses in Revelation but it is debatable as to what, or who, that is. I will be sure to post it somewhere when I find out a good answer.
I got in a hurry on the July 11 thing to figure out what may or may not happen, because it was coming up fast. The date is only relevant if you start with the premise that Dec. 21, 2012 is something that correlates with a prophecy in the Bible. David Flynn presented a fairly convincing argument that it just may be. I have previously thought that it did not. There are people jumping on it and writing books about 2012 and seem to think it might be the end. I was listening to Coast to Coast not very long ago and there was a scientist on who was saying all this Mayan calender stuff people are running with is all based on his original research. He said they are all wrong because 2012 is just the end of the ninth cycle, out of thirteen cycles. Of course there are books to be sold, so forget that guy, right?
Click to expand...

Boys and girls,this is either a loony or a troll.Don't waste your time.
 
TimCallahan said:
We come back to the fact that Revelation states at its outset that the visions in it deal with "what must soon take place." Because that totally deflates any attempt to set its prophecies in the twentieth - oops! now its the twentyfirst - century, you say you're retranslating those verses.
Click to expand...
I have not forgotten that. I have not worked on it for a couple days because I have been busy doing some editing, which is my normal occupation.
The first three verses, I think is not really a part of the Book, but was an attachment to it, by John to explain how he was made aware of what was going to happen right away.
As to the 2012 nonsense, how can a Mayan prophecy have any relevance for a Christian like you?
Click to expand...
It seems to be in agreement with an observable astronomical phenomenon. What to make of that is different. Like I said, as far as I am concerned, we are about nine months into the tribulation. That has nothing to do with 2012 but to the restraints on the forces of destruction being removed.
I had a theory that the people who represent the forces of evil do believe in astrology, and any other pseudo-science they can put to use, to determine auspicious days to commit certain parts of their plans into action. An example would be 8808 for the Olympics, that also was a nice time for for the attack against the ethnic Russians living in Georgia. I have to conclude that my theory about July 11 was flawed, and it could be illustrated by your question, just turned around. Why would the leaders of the forces of Satan use a time period taken from the Bible? Well, that comes from how I was taught, that Satan mimics Jesus. Let's say Jesus' ministry was three and a half years. The logic is that Satan makes what he thinks is a good prediction of when the end might happen, and his twisted mind compels him to make use of the three and a half years before that date to set up his rule of the antichrist. It become Satan's answer to what Jesus did and is a way of mocking God.
So, with this concept already planted in my mind, looking at events happening and what appears to be events soon to happen, I could pull up a prediction of my own to show what is likely for what Satan will do. In this case, it seems to have been an exercise in futility.
 
Ethnikos said:
It seems to be in agreement with an observable astronomical phenomenon.
Click to expand...

Would you care to explain precisely what phenomenon you are referring to ?

Every astronomy sites (and not astrology) I have read regarding 2012 claims that there is nothing extraordinary happening this year.

The easiest way to check by yourself is to download a free astronomy application, set the date to 2012, December the 21st and see how unremarkable it is.
 
Ethnikos said:
I have not forgotten that. I have not worked on it for a couple days because I have been busy doing some editing, which is my normal occupation.
The first three verses, I think is not really a part of the Book, but was an attachment to it, by John to explain how he was made aware of what was going to happen right away.
And your reason for making this assumption about the first three verses of Revelation is . . . ?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
TimCallahan said:
Ethnikos said:
I have not forgotten that. I have not worked on it for a couple days because I have been busy doing some editing, which is my normal occupation.
The first three verses, I think is not really a part of the Book, but was an attachment to it, by John to explain how he was made aware of what was going to happen right away.
And your reason for making this assumption about the first three verses of Revelation is . . . ?
Click to expand...

Well, Ethnikos, here it is July 26th., almost 10 days since I post my question regarding why you think that the first three verses of Revelation really aren't part of the book. I'd really like to hear your reasoning. Just as a point of reference, here are the verses in question (Rev. 1:1 - 3, emphasis added):

THe revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants what must soon take place; and he made it known to his servant John, who bore witness to the word of Gd and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. Blessed is he who reads aloud the words of the prophecy and blessed are those who hear, and whi keep what is writen therein; for the time is near.

It seems to me that the only reason you have decided that Rev. 1:1 - 3 is not really part of the book is to be found in those parts I have italicized; because, if you had to accept them as part of the book, you wold have to agree that (1) it's a failed prophecy and (2) that it can't beused to suppor end-time scenarios in the twentyfirst century.

By the way, if the text of the Bible has such errors as the one you assert for Rev. 1:1 - 3, as well as the translation error you claim for Gen. 3:16, how can anyone accept it as the inspired word of God?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom