After The Rapture

[teamventure]

Matt is a completely different document from Rev - Especially in Content but yes . it contains prophecy as well. Revelations is much more detailed .. and from a different perspective.

First off I should say that I am not a literalist .. folks hate that I know . but they should let up as most of Christianity are not literalists.

While this is good in some ways .. as I don't have to fret over a few contradictions here and there .. does no injury to my foundation .. I do have to decide which is the most authentic .. which is more "Inspired" than other and/or which is perhaps allegory and other factors.

As I said .. I like Revelations and believe there may be some inspiration in there.. but ... this book is distinct from other books in many ways .. in tone and so on .. it is similar to other apocrypha .. of which there is much more .. so one must realize that this kind of writing was a bit of a trend at the time .. in conjunction with messianic tradition.

That said .. some of these folks dreams come true - be it Nostrodamas, Cacey, and others.. Some of the stuff in the OT has turned out to be rather prophetic as well - as did the words of Jesus and .. there are some very interesting corrolations in Revelations.

Revelations was one of the last books that made into Cannon... The reason being that it was disputed by many in the Church at the time.
They tosses Shepherd of Hermes, tossed Epistle of Barnabas (after once being Cannon) .. why would we look at Revelations much differently ? .. and at the same time I think there are reasons to look at Revelations differently.

But .. am I going to Put Revelations on Par with Matt/Mark ? No .. not going to do that. for starters it is way further away from the source ..Mark round 60 AD ... interpreter of Peter .. Matt - uses all of Mark but adds other stuff which is thought to be from another early source(s) - possibly the actual Matt or another disciple - or an associate of one of those disciples. Matt written after the destruction of the Temple around 80-90AD.

While I have some doubts about some books which remain in Canon .. like the Pseudepigrapha - stuff written in Paul's Name by another at a late date such as 150AD .. does not really deserve to be in there .. whereas some of the earlier stuff that is not in there .. perhaps should be .. such as the Gospel of Thomas ? Reads like Jesus to me..

but yes .. I worked in the field - projects and research - bioremediation and other innovative technology .. cleaned up many hydrocarbon contaminated sites. The Band Wagon ran towards CO2 and Global Warming .. while this is an issue .. the bigger issue is Ocean Pollution .. and this is not debated by folks who know the industry.. If we wanted we could turn off the CO2 tap - if we had to type of thing.. say 90% reduction or some ridiculous number that is currently unachievable ... but we could ..given a "New World Order" or some such thing.

What we can't do is filter the Ocean So that is issue #1 - it is not a garbage can .. and has limited capacity to absorb all the waste we throw into it .. including this fertilizer issue. but this rarely gets discussed in favor of the Hollywood discussion of AGW .. Climate Change is a serious issue .. but good luck surviving if we mess up the Ocean Equilibrium .. the "Lungs of the Planet" -- which produces roughly 60% of our Oxygen .. which we need to be in a very tight range to survive.

#2/3 - Industrialization/Poplulation Growth - Take a person from Africa = eating bowl of rice a day - to a first world nation .. and you have just increased the carbon equation for this person by 36. .. so the equivalent of 36 people in Africa in terms of consumption or Resources and subsequent biproducts of consumption ( CO2 +POllution) .. Eating a piece of meat once in awhile and you up the fertilizer loading .. which we are happily dumping into the Ocean both direct and through rivers and streams .. like no tomorrow .. even in first world nations .. still doing this .. "hand up in the air" Hello !! .. is there anybody out there .. other than in the bottom corner on Page 65 of the NY-Times on Sunday .. and the nerdy scientific magasines I like to read ..

We are much better at Persistent Organic Pollutants /Heavy Metals in North America Europe - in the industrializing nations .. not so good ..a very dirty process .. 10 years ago there were 1.4 Billion industrialized .. out of 7 Billion .. meaning a 5.6 left to go .. basically tripling the loading on the surface but much more as industrialization is dirtier per person than the average first world citizen.

10 years later we have roughly 1.8 Billion industrialized .. say double by 2030 getting to 2.8 industrialized. Happy day right .. we only have 4.2 left to go ... Ohhhhh .. noooooo Luke .. you forgot that in this time Population has grown to 8.5 Billion .. so in 20 years we have not made a dent in the non industrialized portion - due to population growth .. and we don't have another 40 years to stop polluting the carp out of the Oceans..

#4 is CO2 - and this is a real issue as well .. just not as important as the first three which get almost no attention.

NGDeal - "We will not export our Pollution problems to other Nations" - Great .. Good Policy.. but but .. then why are you against Pipelines ?????????

Pipeline doesn't increase the carbon equation by one molecule - and in fact it decreases this equation. So one can not argue from the CO2 point. Are you going to use less gas depending on whether the feedstock comes in from Tanker or Pipeline ? OK .. so next year we will use some 20 million barrels of Oil a Day .. every day. and we have to get it from somewhere.

The choice is then "Canada or US domestic by Pipeline" or "Nigeria" by tanker. This is a no brainer .. the domestic option is way cleaner for the Environment .. less pollutive and decreases the carbon equation over getting it from Nigeria .. hands down.

Further .. by getting it from Nigeria we incentivize industrialization .. something we should not be doing .. Leave them to their natural subsistance diet .. and in fact help them to maintain this .. but give them contraception..

This is not PC I know -- but, it is what has to be done .. especially the Industrialization part .. remember 36 x the consumption.

The study looked at China who was (11) at the time saying that if China was to realize first world consumption rates .. world resource production would have to double .. and this is Just China.

There you go.

Thanks for the detailed reply.

On the subject of Rev being canonized you answered some of my curiosities of how things went when they made it canan however I have a couple counter points.
1 John, an apostle who walked with Jesus personally recieved these visions.
2 If Rev were less inspired God would have prevented it as he is in control
3 although there are non literal parts to Rev. The fact that it contains a lot of prophecy, there is a lot that can proove it's revelance like the things beginning to unfold, nwo, the mark, and so on.

 

[Heyzeus]

Thanks for the detailed reply.

On the subject of Rev being canonized you answered some of my curiosities of how things went when they made it canan however I have a couple counter points.
1 John, an apostle who walked with Jesus personally recieved these visions.
2 If Rev were less inspired God would have prevented it as he is in control
3 although there are non literal parts to Rev. The fact that it contains a lot of prophecy, there is a lot that can proove it's revelance like the things beginning to unfold, nwo, the mark, and so on.

2) is not true as there are many issues with the Bible .. way bigger than Revelations being accepted into Cannon or not .. If God would allow this then .. so no.
1) John was likely martyred the time the vision of Revelation happened - I tend to agree with this - as there is Simply no mention of John being around anytime in the 4-5 decades between 60AD and John/Revelations. Its a stretch.
3) this does not mean Revelations does not contain prophecy .. but lets not give it more weight than the Synoptic depiction of Jesus.

 

[Davy]

Hmmm. Luke 17 looks post-apocolyptic because it refers to Christ coming back like lightning in the sky which would certainly be the second coming.

The verses you provided speak of one of the two gatherings that will take place along with the fourwinds of heaven reference in Rev.

However, the harpazo gathering Paul talks about is a seperate event.

Shalom!

The subject of those Luke 17 verses I quoted is the 'day' of Christ's 2nd coming. The meaning of post-apocalyptic means AFTER... Jesus' 2nd coming, after the tribulation He forewarned of.

Are you a practicing JEW, into Judaism?

That would be the only way I can understand why you stray away... from the simplicity of the Scripture. The blindness God put upon many of the Jews is still in effect for many of them (Romans 11).

 

[teamventure]

The subject of those Luke 17 verses I quoted is the 'day' of Christ's 2nd coming. The meaning of post-apocalyptic means AFTER... Jesus' 2nd coming, after the tribulation He forewarned of.

Are you a practicing JEW, into Judaism?

That would be the only way I can understand why you stray away... from the simplicity of the Scripture. The blindness God put upon many of the Jews is still in effect for many of them (Romans 11).

It is more fair to agree that distinctions about gathering passeges can be confusing for many regardless of their take on scripture.
Shalom!

 

[teamventure]

2) is not true as there are many issues with the Bible .. way bigger than Revelations being accepted into Cannon or not .. If God would allow this then .. so no.
1) John was likely martyred the time the vision of Revelation happened - I tend to agree with this - as there is Simply no mention of John being around anytime in the 4-5 decades between 60AD and John/Revelations. Its a stretch.
3) this does not mean Revelations does not contain prophecy .. but lets not give it more weight than the Synoptic depiction of Jesus.

I am curious. Let me ask what those bigger issues with the Bible are?

 

[Davy]

It is more fair to agree that distinctions about gathering passeges can be confusing for many regardless of their take on scripture.
Shalom!

If what you are saying were true, then no one would be able to understand the Signs Jesus gave in His Word for the end leading up to His return. So all you would be doing is saying God's Word is nothing but chaos. That is not The Holy Spirit talking those kind of things; repent to Christ.

 

[teamventure]

If what you are saying were true, then no one would be able to understand the Signs Jesus gave in His Word for the end leading up to His return. So all you would be doing is saying God's Word is nothing but chaos. That is not The Holy Spirit talking those kind of things; repent to Christ.

You're wrong. The sings of the times are clear. Some things of scripture need to be sorted out. No one is saying scripture is chaos.

 

[teamventure]

If what you are saying were true, then no one would be able to understand the Signs Jesus gave in His Word for the end leading up to His return. So all you would be doing is saying God's Word is nothing but chaos. That is not The Holy Spirit talking those kind of things; repent to Christ.

And you need to be more careful before accusing others of sin, a lot more careful than you are being.

 

[Davy]

And you need to be more careful before accusing others of sin, a lot more careful than you are being.

Why, are you going to slap me on the cheek like the blind Pharisees did Jesus?? Are you going to try and stone me like the Pharisees did Apostle Paul??

If the shoe fits, all I can say is, wear it.

 

[Timtofly]

Thank you,and that fake won't be some human man with the spirit of satan,It will be satan himself
,that's the part most don't get

satan is coming to this earth, live and in person,along with his angels and they are super natural

Satan has already been here in person for 2500 years, pulling the strings of Western Civilization.

 

[Timtofly]

Red is just as guilty of turning the US into a quazi Totalitarian police state.

So the Law of God is now quasi Totalitarian police state? Sin is the totalitarian police state. Libertarian is the false theory one can enjoy sin. God's law or any law reinforces the guilt of sin, but that is why it is the knowledge of evil. The best control of man still produces evil results.

The issue is that God's Law, is not a law. It is an economy. When humans attempt to use God's Law, it can only be a law, because God is no where around.

Blue denies we have sin altogether. Humanism is men helping men and both are in the mud. Funny how some humanist can get rich off of that mud, but accuse capitalist of being wrong in accumulating wealth.

 

[Timtofly]

No .. but you should take responsibility for your own musings ..

Once again you run from scripture - in complete denial of the obvious contradiction between your claim that Jesus is equal to the Father and the words of Jesus.

This is just semantics. Any one who attempts to figure out when Jesus is God and when Jesus is man has nothing to back up his own insight. We are not called to figure this out. The church was mired in this controversy for almost 300 years, while Satan was taking over and no one noticed, because they were broiled in nonsensical human observations about whether Jesus was God or man.

It seems the controversy rages on....

 

[Heyzeus]

This is just semantics. Any one who attempts to figure out when Jesus is God and when Jesus is man has nothing to back up his own insight. We are not called to figure this out. The church was mired in this controversy for almost 300 years, while Satan was taking over and no one noticed, because they were broiled in nonsensical human observations about whether Jesus was God or man.

It seems the controversy rages on....

I couldn't agree with you more .. and there should be a double "Like" for posts like this. The God's will do what the God's will do - and humans musing about the nature of their divinity respect to each other - -and "The Most High" - based on some man made doctrine - has done nothing but divert peoples attention away from the main teachings of Jesus.. based on some of the 10 commands - and the Golden Rule.

The Church is still mired in Controversy over this doctrine - not like the years you are referring to however .... Orthodox and Catholic still differ over the Filioque.

Even after Nicene ... it wasn't for another 70 or so years and a few changes along the way - that modern doctrine was formulated .. and it took 300 years after that to persecute other doctrines such as Arianism out. Rome was Arian until 700 AD.

So what did the edict that turn Jesus into "The Father" bring the world ? The 1000 years of Horror. Back then .. the Muslims were the Moderates and the Christians were the extremists ... Full on Evil in every way imaginary .. "Anti" Our Lord and Savior .. in every way imaginable..

So if "God" The Most High .. intervenes in the affairs of humans .. he sure isn't very good at it.

 

[Heyzeus]

So the Law of God is now quasi Totalitarian police state? Sin is the totalitarian police state. Libertarian is the false theory one can enjoy sin. God's law or any law reinforces the guilt of sin, but that is why it is the knowledge of evil. The best control of man still produces evil results.

The issue is that God's Law, is not a law. It is an economy. When humans attempt to use God's Law, it can only be a law, because God is no where around.

Blue denies we have sin altogether. Humanism is men helping men and both are in the mud. Funny how some humanist can get rich off of that mud, but accuse capitalist of being wrong in accumulating wealth.

You are correct ... other than the big straw man up front .. I never said any such thing. I was talking Politics .. Red or Blue makes no difference to the direction we are going.. both sides using Utilitarianist justification for law (Blue being the worst offender here of late but both are really bad in general)

The Left is not Godless .. as most are Christians .. In addition to Utilitarianism - Red also tries to use their version of "God's Law" to influence public Policy.. something that would be abhorrent to Jesus.

 

[Timtofly]

I couldn't agree with you more .. and there should be a double "Like" for posts like this. The God's will do what the God's will do - and humans musing about the nature of their divinity respect to each other - -and "The Most High" - based on some man made doctrine - has done nothing but divert peoples attention away from the main teachings of Jesus.. based on some of the 10 commands - and the Golden Rule.

The Church is still mired in Controversy over this doctrine - not like the years you are referring to however .... Orthodox and Catholic still differ over the Filioque.

Even after Nicene ... it wasn't for another 70 or so years and a few changes along the way - that modern doctrine was formulated .. and it took 300 years after that to persecute other doctrines such as Arianism out. Rome was Arian until 700 AD.

So what did the edict that turn Jesus into "The Father" bring the world ? The 1000 years of Horror. Back then .. the Muslims were the Moderates and the Christians were the extremists ... Full on Evil in every way imaginary .. "Anti" Our Lord and Savior .. in every way imaginable..

So if "God" The Most High .. intervenes in the affairs of humans .. he sure isn't very good at it.

What God is "not good" at is determinism. Since God thought this all out, determinism was the least of His worries. Now we view it from the opposite extreme we would prefer perfect determinism over miserable free will.

Enduring until the end has a forgotten value. We have to put up with our own desires, because it is easier following the crowd, than getting trampled by the crowd.

 

[Davy]

Anarchists = those who hate ALL FORMS of government, even the 'idea' of government (and thus 'all' political parties in the U.S.). Those are allied with Marxism because Marx in his philosophy said that when the 'revolution' is finished, there would be no need for any government.

That of course is a big fat LIE. That lie was to serve as a carrot dangled before the donkeys who were stupid enough to believe him.

The Communist rulers sit over the worker class, and those leaders have access to everything... the poor working class doesn't. And those communist leaders sacrifice their citizens like cattle.

 

[Timtofly]

You are correct ... other than the big straw man up front .. I never said any such thing. I was talking Politics .. Red or Blue makes no difference to the direction we are going.. both sides using Utilitarianist justification for law (Blue being the worst offender here of late but both are really bad in general)

The Left is not Godless .. as most are Christians .. In addition to Utilitarianism - Red also tries to use their version of "God's Law" to influence public Policy.. something that would be abhorrent to Jesus.

How would you define godless? Abortion and free sex is about as godless as one can be. Not that law can force anyone to be like God. If all were like God, no one would break any law, no matter how ridiculous.

 

[Timtofly]

Anarchists = those who hate ALL FORMS of government, even the 'idea' of government (and thus 'all' political parties in the U.S.). Those are allied with Marxism because Marx in his philosophy said that when the 'revolution' is finished, there would be no need for any government.

That of course is a big fat LIE. That lie was to serve as a carrot dangled before the donkeys who were stupid enough to believe him.

The Communist rulers sit over the worker class, and those leaders have access to everything... the poor working class doesn't. And those communist leaders sacrifice their citizens like cattle.

Some anarchist are lawless. Some anarchist see only good as an altruism. Government just brings out the worse in all people. It is not the law. It is control and hypocrisy of such control. People can have laws and be reasonable unlawful without government. So anarchy is not lack of law. Anarchy can be the lack of corrupt government. The question has always been, "Can people govern themselves?" Control and power hungry extremist say, "no."

 

[Davy]

Some anarchist are lawless. Some anarchist see only good as an altruism. Government just brings out the worse in all people. It is not the law. It is control and hypocrisy of such control. People can have laws and be reasonable unlawful without government. So anarchy is not lack of law. Anarchy can be the lack of corrupt government. The question has always been, "Can people govern themselves?" Control and power hungry extremist say, "no."

The Oxford Dictionary definition of 'anarchy' -- A state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.

An anarchist is against ALL authority and/or government.

Without a system of authority THERE CAN BE NO LAW FOR THE PEOPLE.

Authority and law go hand in hand; can't have one without the other. To say the opposite is true is to embrace Marxist philosophy instead, which is a false philosophy that is against even natural law.


The only pure type of government is a kingdom, a Monarchy, a king. Jesus Christ is a Monarch and High Priest, 'King of kings, and Lord of lords'. Only God can be our true Righteous King reigning upon His throne. Because He made man imperfect in this world, we all fall short of ultimate righteous governance. Only king David came close to being perfect in his reign in God's eyes. Even the devil himself knows the best type of government is a kingdom with a monarch, which is why he is coming in the last days to setup a final beast kingdom on earth just prior to Christ's 2nd coming.

 

[Heyzeus]

How would you define godless? Abortion and free sex is about as godless as one can be. Not that law can force anyone to be like God. If all were like God, no one would break any law, no matter how ridiculous.

I have no idea what you mean by "Free Sex" or how this relates to Blue - or God or anything. I agree that Fundamentalists are more Puritan with respect to sex but this is a function of Puritanism and not God.

Abortion is complicated

1) Most of those on the left are Christians - do you not understand this or is your issue that they are not the right kind of Christians ?
2) The Bible is silent on abortion mostly - and the one time it is mentioned directly - God is proscribing it.

3) "The Law" There is a difference between a) having a belief and b) forcing that belief on others through physical violence (Law)
Do you understand this difference ? Do you think Jesus wanted is flock to be forcing man made religious belief on others through physical violence ?

4) When do you think the soul arrives and why ?