The taken and the left

[PinSeeker]

Page 4... <chuckles>

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, boy, Revelation 20... all these conversations go here at some point... <chuckles>

But Satan is not bound yet.

He is. Jesus said so, in Matthew 12... "if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.... how can someone enter a strong man’s (Satan's) house and plunder his goods, unless He (Christ) first binds the strong man? Then indeed He (again, Jesus) may plunder his (again, Satan's) house." People are being saved to this day, and this is proof of Satan's having been bound ~ particularly Gentiles; every saved Gentile is proof positive that Satan is "bound," which is to say he is completely unable to prevent the spread of the Gospel to the nations.

Jesus must be here because Satan is bound for the 1,000 year millennium while Jesus is reigning on this earth.

God's millennium is now, since Pentecost and until what Paul says in Romans 11:25-26 is complete. This is how we should see the "thousand years or Revelation 20, not as 1,000 earth years, but as the fullness of God's time in building His Israel, in bringing it to completion. And Jesus is reigning as King over Israel ~ God's Israel, not the physical nation-state of Israel ~ from heaven. But He is with us, just as He told his disciples He would be, to the end of the age, in Matthew 28:20.


Oh yes, and the "great tribulation"... <smile>

Yes, we can know. It is spelled out in Revelation 12 and 13. The "woman" is national Israel which birthed Christ. And the first 3 1/2 years the woman is protected, during which their partial blindness is lifted and they are saved. But the dragon (Satan) goes after Gentile Christians, Rev. 12:17. Chapter 13 is the second half of the Great Tribulation and no one is protected, except the Philadelphian type Christians of Rev. 3. If they haven't died in their sleep, the most blessed way to go I think.

Ugh. <smile>

So Calvinists don't believe in a 7 year Great Tribulation? Noted.

Hmmm, well some Calvinists probably do, but Calvin himself did not. And I do not, not because Calvin didn't, but just because I don't believe Scripture supports a seven, 365-day-period, "Great Tribulation." Seven is a number that indicates a fullness, a complete time period... of unknown length with regard to years... in Scripture. Like, for instance, a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years a day (1 Peter). And like the cattle on a thousand hills are the Lords (Psalm 50); what about hill number 1001 and up? <smile>. The same is true in different contexts regarding the numbers three, ten, twelve, and... one thousand. Again, the Calvinist-Arminian... divide... is really in the area of soteriology, not eschatology.

Then how do you interpret 2 Thes. 2:8-12?

8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

To put it succinctly, I think the key word in there is 'revealed.' When Christ returns, all will be totally revealed, as in exposed, seen for what it is, no longer any doubt about who or what is unrighteous and Who or what is righteous. So, revealed in that sense.

Continued below...

 

[PinSeeker]

Continued from above; page... oh, I've lost count now... <smile>

On salvation, and Paul, and the tribulation (again), and Romans and Ephesians, and... <smile>

I don't agree. National Israel is not yet saved.

It's not about "National Israel." But I do agree that not all of Israel, as Paul means it in Romans 11:26 ~ which consists of all those called by God, Jew and Gentile alike, all God's elect ~ is saved... yet. <smile> God is still building His Israel: "the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in Whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In Him (we believing Gentiles) also are being built together (with believing Jews) into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit." And... the "designer and builder is God" (Hebrews 11:10).

The first 8 chapters of Romans is a study on the difference in periods between the laws of God.

It's a study, 1stCenturyLady, on the... sad state of man.

Actually the first seven chapters, and then in the eighth, after having explained just how bad everything naturally is, Paul begins explaining the absolute gloriousness of what we have been brought from ~ freed from, actually ~ and what we who have received God's mercy and compassion, by His grace, God's elect, defined in Romans 9-11 ~ and have been given in and through Christ Jesus and supernaturally made to be.

And then from Romans 12 on how then we should live ~ as a living sacrifice, using our gifts of grace, having the outward marks of a true Christian, being a good citizen, fulfilling the law through love, not passing judgment on one another or causing others to stumble, and following after the example of Christ.

I mean, all Scripture is great, of course, but Paul's letter to the Romans is the clearest, most complete exposition of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and how we should live in light of it that there is.

From Adam to Moses (Abraham falls in this period, we don't), from Moses to the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost, and after the Day of Pentecost until the return of Christ.

Ugh. Dispensationalism. Ugh. <smile> God is unchanging. Adam caused all the dominoes to fall... <chuckles> As Paul says in Romans 5:12, "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned⁠..." Yes, Paul does go on to say in vers 14 that "death reigned from Adam to Moses," but what he is saying there ~ context, context, context, right... we cannot manufacture our own context ~ is that the folks who lived between the times of Adam and Moses did not have the law yet (which was given through Moses, of course) yet, but even though that was the case, they were still judged for their sin in the same way as all those from Moses to now ~ since death held sway over them, as it does all men even now; death spread to all men, from Adam to now. There are not different dispensations; God does not deal with people differently now than He ever did before. A cursory readying of Hebrews 11 should quickly draw you to that conclusion... we are all saved, from Adam to now, the exact same way, by grace through faith.

Continued below...

 

[PinSeeker]

I think this is the last one... hooray! <smile> Wait... no... <chuckles>

On martyrs, the tribulation (again), Daniel... <chuckles>

I thought you didn't believe in the future martyrs during the Great Tribulation? So why do you agree God knows how many martyrs that will be.

That's not what I said... I wasn't talking about martyrs... except in the sense that we are all martyrs in the sense that Jesus spoke of His true followers in Matthew 10:38-39 being those who "take his/her cross and follow Him," who "lose their lives for His sake." These are His sheep, given to Him by the Father, of which He will lose not one, but raise Him up on the last day. These are God's elect. The elect will be an innumerable multitude, hailing from every tongue, tribe, and people-group... Jew and Gentile alike, all those in Christ.

As for the Great Tribulation it is clear in Revelation 7:14 And I said to him, “Sir, you know.” So he said to me, “These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

All of God's elect will come out of the great tribulation, sure. All will be preserved to the end and come out of it, yes. About Revelation 7... do you believe the folks spoken of in verses 1-8 to be a different group of folks than those described in verses 9-17? Because they are not; there is a difference, but the difference is not the people. Revelation 7 is describing two aspects of one group of people. To be specific:

• verses 1-8 describe the completeness of God's people, that not one has been lost, and that every single one of them are of true Jewish heritage, in the sense that Paul speaks of true Jews of God in Romans 2:28-29.
• verses 9-17 describes the size of this group, verse 9, specifically, "a great multitude that no one could..." (will be able to) "...number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages..."

The reason why I believe it will be 7 years is because I believe Revelation 11, 12 and 13 are about things in the Great Tribulation.

I agree, but you misunderstand the 'seven' there, with regard to the years. Seven is a number used throughout the Bible to denote, or symbolize a completeness of whatever it is in any one particular passage, in this case time. Like, for instance, in Matthew 18, where Jesus is asked how many times a man should forgive his brother, and Jesus says, “I do not say to you seven times, but seventy-seven times." And with that number 77, it's not a hard and fast number, as if to say not 78 or above, but a limitless number of times... so a complete completeness, if you will.

Also Daniel 9:27 is a period of 7 years and is a paradigm, just and Daniel 8 and the 2,300 mornings and evenings are a paradigm.

"a paradigm"... <chuckles> This is a misunderstanding, really, of the relationship from the Old Testament to the New. I don't disagree with the idea of a "paradigm," but it's really what I would call a "type," or a "shadow," of the true reality... which is how God spoke, through the prophets, which includes Daniel, to our fathers of old, but in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son (Hebrews 1:1-2). Yes, dispensational scholars argue that Daniel 9:27 will be fulfilled at the end of the church age, during the great tribulation...I'm well aware. <smile> But this is not the case; Christ's death on the cross ~ which is at the beginning of the church age ~ put an end to any atoning sacrifices of the Old Testament, as we see in Hebrews 10:1-9...

"For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Consequently, when Christ came into the world, He said, 'Sacrifices and offerings You have not desired, but a body have You prepared for Me; in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure. Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of Me in the scroll of the book.’” When He said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second. And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."​

The impact of this cannot be avoided. Daniel 9:27 is about Jesus, in His birth and life on earth, confirming the new covenant, which is brought about by His crucifixion and death on the cross, which ends all sacrifice, as He is the Lamb of God, in the "middle" of Daniel's 70th "week." And again, we should understand this in an intimately similar way to Jesus's exhortation to all of us to forgive seventy seven times ~ notice there is no dash there so it is not actually 77, but conveying the idea of a complete completeness... seventy sevens... so an absolute, complete, limitless forgiveness. When Jesus says that, He is referring directly to Daniel 9:27.

Continued below...

 

[PinSeeker]

Continued from above...

On Israel and salvation (again)...

All seven year periods of time and all having to do with national Israel.

Not the physical nation-state of Israel. God's Israel. In which ethnicity has no bearing and numbering far, far, far more than just the citizens of the physical nation-state of Israel, than just ethnic Jews. See above.

(I say national Israel to distinguish it from spiritual Israel...

I know. <smile> And I agree there is a valid distinguishing between the two, but your "national Israel" did not exist until 1948. But Israel did; Israel came to be way back in Genesis 32:28, and you and I are... well, in Paul's words to the Gentiles in Ephesus (and us by extension) in Ephesians 2:11-22...

"Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called 'the uncircumcision' by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands ~ remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For He Himself is our peace, Who has made us both one and has broken down in His flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that He might create in Himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. And He came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. For through Him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in Whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In Him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit."

spiritual Israel (which includes us).

It includes all Jews of God. From Adam to now. <smile>

Jesus said the generation that sees this will be the last generation. I was born in 1947 and am close to dying, so I'm in that "last generation." So its is very soon, indeed.

Hmmm, "this generation..." Much disagreement on that, for sure... <smile>

Yeah, I'm not sure what it will be, but it is a real mark. Without it you cannot buy nor sell.

<chuckles> See above...

The question of WHO are those sheep "given to Jesus by His Father," the answer is found in John 17 when Jesus prays for His APOSTLES. John uses key words and phrases and just as Jesus prayed for His Apostles who were "given to Him by the Father" he is ONLY speaking about the apostles, not us.

Wholeheartedly disagree. As Jesus says in John 10, "I am the good shepherd..." (referring directly to Psalm 23 here) "...I know My own and My own know Me, just as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold..." (referring to Gentiles, here) "...I must bring them also, and they will listen to My voice. So there will be one flock, one Shepherd."

John 17:20-23 is His prayer about us.

Sure, in the immediate sense, yes, so looking forward in that sense. But all of us, actually looking backwards and forwards. <smile> At the time of His prayer, we had not yet believed, of course. Or been given to Him by the Father and made to be His sheep. But His disciples... and apostles... had.

No where are we predestined as the apostles were. Even in Ephesians 1, after the greeting to the Ephesians, Paul gives his authority to write to them as one of the predestined APOSTLES.

We are all predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son. To not think so puts you far, far outside the... bounds, I guess, of Biblical Christianity. In his letters to the Romans and the Ephesians, Paul is specifically addressing Gentiles. What he's saying of Gentiles is true of the apostles, too, but he's making it crystal clear to all those Gentiles that it doesn't just apply to those of Jewish ethnicity. Paul is surely not saying, "I as an apostle of Jesus am predestined and you are not." That's quite ridiculous. He even says the exact opposite, using collective pronouns like 'we' and 'us' and 'our,' thereby saying in no uncertain terms that Gentiles are included and that he, as an ethnic Jew and as an apostle is in the same boat with us:

"...He chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us for adoption to Himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of His will, to the praise of His glorious grace, with which He has blessed us in the Beloved. In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace, which He lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight making known to us the mystery of His will, according to His purpose, which He set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in Christ, things in heaven and things on earth in Him. In Him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of His glory. In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in Him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, Who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of His glory."

You somehow think Paul is just referring to the apostles and excluding everyone else? Goodness gracious.

Verse 13 starts about the Ephesians who ALSO believed.

<chuckles> The 'also' is obviously in reference to the Christian Gentiles in Ephesus ~ and again, us, by extension ~ being "...sealed..." ~ just as he, Paul, and all other followers of Jesus were ~ "...with the promised Holy Spirit..." again, "...Who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of His glory."

You really have to consider Paul's heart more than you are.

<chuckles> I would say the exact same thing as you, here, 1stCenturyLady.

So you see, Paul is talking about the partial blindness being lifted from whom? Spiritual Israel, or national Israel?

Well, ethnic Jews. So I'm with you on this, but he's including Gentiles with ethnic Jews regarding "all of Israel." So... and you might agree with this, although, if you don't, I'm not sure how you can not see it... "all of Israel" (again God's Israel) is "spiritual Israel," in the sense that they are true Jews of God... "a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God" and is inclusive of all those who believe, regardless of ethnicity. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise." (Galatians 3:28-29).

This is what I like to shout: CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT.

Well I do too. Absolutely. <smile>

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

You @PinSeeker are close.

<chuckles>

I agree that it is the opposite to the seal of God. It is not a visible mark/ seal, but an invisible conscientious decision that affirms loyalty and surrender to the authority of either God or the beast.
It is spiritual and not physical. It is intimately connected to the characteristics of each group. Those who have the seal of God the Bible testifies to the fact that they keep the commandments of God, they have the testimony of Jesus which is the Spirit of prophecy, and they have the faith of Jesus. Revelation 12:17; 14:12.
Those who have the mark of the beast have accepted the authority of the beast as their rule and guide and therefore follow the commandments of man rather than of God.
While this is a salvation issue, accepting one or the other isn't the means by which they are justified. All are justified by the blood of the Lamb. That's it. Being justified however doesn't guarantee salvation. When Christ died and gave His blood for a sacrifice, that was for the entire world. That is gospel Truth. But we all know that not everyone will take advantage of that opportunity. Many believe but fall short. They are not sanctified by that truth. They don't allow the Spirit of Life to transform them into the image of Christ. Even though they may believe in Calvary and that Christ is truly the Son of God, they don't surrender to God authority in their life and refuse to obey Him... Christ is their Saviour and they love that idea, but they baulk at surrendering to Him as Lord. Obedience becomes their stumbling stone and they aren't sanctified, they retain their sinful ways though hidden to others, and despite being deacons and elders and pastors and life long members of the church, they willingly accept the mark of the beast because it is easier, it is popular, and it promises security and comfort. That's in the hand. Some will believe the mark is the right thing to accept spiritually. They are deceived, but they sincerely think it a reflection of truth and genuine Christian authority and practise. Of course it centers on worship. But the golden cup that Babylon offers has many attractive allurements to take the wide road.

With you for the most part but... <smile>

...they have the faith of Jesus. Revelation 12:17; 14:12.

Jesus did not need faith. He did not need His assurance of salvation, as we do. He is the object of our faith. We are assured by God and convicted by the Spirit of these things hoped for and unseen. This is what faith is, by definition, as given to us in Hebrews 11:1.

All are justified by the blood of the Lamb.

Well, by the Father, by His grace, because of the blood of the Lamb. He has declared us just. Which may be what you mean...

Being justified however doesn't guarantee salvation.

Absolutely disagree. We can talk about several things in Scripture, but this one jumps immediately to mind: "And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, in order that He might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom He predestined He also called, and those whom He called He also justified, and those whom He justified He also glorified" (Romans 8:28-30) This is what we call the "golden chain of salvation." It cannot be broken. As Paul later says, "The gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable" (Romans 11:29).

​

When Christ died and gave His blood for a sacrifice, that was for the entire world.

Ah, well, yes and no... Yes, in the sense that His sacrifice was sufficient for the entire world. But no, in the sense that only a subset of the whole, so many, but not all, are called by God.

...we all know that not everyone will take advantage of that opportunity.

Well, right, so you're making the point, here... I guess without meaning to... that Christ's sacrifice, His atonement and the benefits thereof, in this sense, was/were limited in scope, so not to all, or the entire world, but only to those to whom the Father chose ~ His elect ~ from before the foundation of the world, to extend this mercy/compassion/grace and who receive His call. As Paul says in Romans 9, God has made everyone and is perfectly just in... well, creating some for noble use (His elect) and others for common use (all others), not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles.

Many believe but fall short.

If they believe, they have faith, which is the assurance of God (Hebrews 11:1). They fall short of His glory now, but one great day... <smile>

They don't allow the Spirit of Life to transform them into the image of Christ.

So then God's predestination to be conformed to the image of Christ is really their own predestination of themselves to be conformed to the image of Christ? I mean that's the unavoidable implication of your statement here. So yeah, no...

Obedience becomes their stumbling stone...

Our obedience is a work of our own and thus is not the means by which we are saved. Our obedience is the direct result of our having been born again of the Spirit... of our hearts being changed from stone to flesh, of being given this new spirit that we have because of being born again of the Spirit.

and they aren't sanctified, they retain their sinful ways though hidden to others, and despite being deacons and elders and pastors and life long members of the church, they willingly accept the mark of the beast because it is easier, it is popular, and it promises security and comfort. That's in the hand. Some will believe the mark is the right thing to accept spiritually. They are deceived, but they sincerely think it a reflection of truth and genuine Christian authority and practise. Of course it centers on worship. But the golden cup that Babylon offers has many attractive allurements to take the wide road.

Okay... yeah, I would say the folks you're talking about were never actually called by the Lord. Even though they may have thought they were. These are the people on Jesus's left in the final Judgment (Matthew 25:31-46), who, when Jesus says, "I was hungry and you gave Me no food, I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome Me, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me," they will be genuinely surprised, and will answer, saying, "Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?" But they will... depart... <shudder>

Grace and peace to you.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Post 112

Okay, now I see. It is not just one specific period of time.

You may have already heard this, but I'll highlight the difference between SDA teaching and what the rest of the Church believes, including me.

Do you know what paradigms are? I know this is going to mess with your SDA teaching, but I'll teach you anyway. The 70th week of Daniel 9 is a paradigm of close to 7 years. But it is not referring to the death of Jesus in the middle of the week, nor the death of Steven. It is about the history of the Jews. It already said the Messiah was cut off, and then goes on from there to the prince who is Titus, a Roman general who destroyed the temple in the city of Jerusalem, and THAT is what was meant by "But in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. The destruction of the temple in 70 AD was in the middle of a Jewish revolt from 66 AD to 73 AD. That put a permanent end to this day of the Jews being able to offer sacrifices.

There was another revolt of the Jews in the Maccabeean war with Greece from 67 BC to 60 BC which is what Daniel 8 is about and the 2,300 day prophecy that SDA's misinterpret. The whole chapter 8 is about Greece with Alexander the Great, who died around 32 years old, and then his four generals took over the rulership of Greece, and out of one of the four portions came a little horn which was Antiochus IV Epiphanes who defiled the temple by slaughtering a pig to Zeus on the Jewish altar, who died in 64 BC, again in the middle of the week of years.

Daniel 7 is future, and that little horn will be the Antichrist. Revelation 12 and the first part of chapter 13 is yet another 7 year period, when as prophesied in the Old Testament a new temple will be built in Jerusalem. Rev. 12 shows the woman who birthed Jesus. That is Israel as you see in the geneologies. Also in Rev. 12 it shows the first half of a seven year period (another paradigm), with the last half or 42 months in Rev. 13.

 

[PinSeeker]

Okay, now I see. It is not just one specific period of time.

You may have already heard this, but I'll highlight the difference between SDA teaching and what the rest of the Church believes, including me.

Do you know what paradigms are? I know this is going to mess with your SDA teaching, but I'll teach you anyway. The 70th week of Daniel 9 is a paradigm of close to 7 years. But it is not referring to the death of Jesus in the middle of the week, nor the death of Steven. It is about the history of the Jews. It already said the Messiah was cut off, and then goes on from there to the prince who is Titus, a Roman general who destroyed the temple in the city of Jerusalem, and THAT is what was meant by "But in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. The destruction of the temple in 70 AD was in the middle of a Jewish revolt from 66 AD to 73 AD. That put a permanent end to this day of the Jews being able to offer sacrifices.

There was another revolt of the Jews in the Maccabeean war with Greece from 67 BC to 60 BC which is what Daniel 8 is about and the 2,300 day prophecy that SDA's misinterpret. The whole chapter 8 is about Greece with Alexander the Great, who died around 32 years old, and then his four generals took over the rulership of Greece, and out of one of the four portions came a little horn which was Antiochus IV Epiphanes who defiled the temple by slaughtering a pig to Zeus on the Jewish altar, who died in 64 BC, again in the middle of the week of years.

Daniel 7 is future, and that little horn will be the Antichrist. Revelation 12 and the first part of chapter 13 is yet another 7 year period, when as prophesied in the Old Testament a new temple will be built in Jerusalem. Rev. 12 shows the woman who birthed Jesus. That is Israel as you see in the geneologies. Also in Rev. 12 it shows the first half of a seven year period (another paradigm), with the last half or 42 months in Rev. 13.

It’s all about Jesus, 1stCenturyLady. In just about every story and every narrative in the Old Testament, it’s about Jesus in one way or another… somehow Jesus is represented, sometimes by a person (like Joseph in Genesis, or Moses in Exodus, or David in 1 & 2 Samuel), sometimes by an animal (the ram in the thicket in the story of Abraham and Isaac in Genesis, sometimes by things (like the ark that carried Noah and his family and the animals through the flood in Genesis 6 & 7, the manna God fed the Israelites with and sustained them through their time in the desert, and the rock that Moses struck in the desert that drew water from the stone). And the same is true here in Daniel 9. It’s veiled, but explicit. Even Jesus says the entire Old Testament is about Him:

John 5:46 ~ “For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote of Me.”

And we can see it in Luke 24, to, in Jesus’s post-resurrection encounter with the two men on the road to Emmaus: Luke 24:27 ~ “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.” And then Luke 24:32 ~ “They said to each other, ‘Did not our hearts burn within us while He talked to us on the road, while He opened to us the Scriptures?’”

I do agree, though, that the events around 70 A.D are in view in Daniel 9, though…

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Brakelite]

Okay, now I see. It is not just one specific period of time.

You may have already heard this, but I'll highlight the difference between SDA teaching and what the rest of the Church believes, including me.

Do you know what paradigms are? I know this is going to mess with your SDA teaching, but I'll teach you anyway. The 70th week of Daniel 9 is a paradigm of close to 7 years. But it is not referring to the death of Jesus in the middle of the week, nor the death of Steven. It is about the history of the Jews. It already said the Messiah was cut off, and then goes on from there to the prince who is Titus, a Roman general who destroyed the temple in the city of Jerusalem, and THAT is what was meant by "But in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. The destruction of the temple in 70 AD was in the middle of a Jewish revolt from 66 AD to 73 AD. That put a permanent end to this day of the Jews being able to offer sacrifices.

There was another revolt of the Jews in the Maccabeean war with Greece from 67 BC to 60 BC which is what Daniel 8 is about and the 2,300 day prophecy that SDA's misinterpret. The whole chapter 8 is about Greece with Alexander the Great, who died around 32 years old, and then his four generals took over the rulership of Greece, and out of one of the four portions came a little horn which was Antiochus IV Epiphanes who defiled the temple by slaughtering a pig to Zeus on the Jewish altar, who died in 64 BC, again in the middle of the week of years.

Daniel 7 is future, and that little horn will be the Antichrist. Revelation 12 and the first part of chapter 13 is yet another 7 year period, when as prophesied in the Old Testament a new temple will be built in Jerusalem. Rev. 12 shows the woman who birthed Jesus. That is Israel as you see in the geneologies. Also in Rev. 12 it shows the first half of a seven year period (another paradigm), with the last half or 42 months in Rev. 13.

Your paradigm has not made a dent in SDA eschatology. You have often said you grew up as an adventist. You haven't mentioned to my knowledge at what age you moved away, whether it was your choice or your parents. Whatever it was, my guess is you were asleep during Sabbath classes that dealt with Daniel 9. The reasoning and integrity and biblically sound 'paradigm' that links Daniel 9 to Daniel 8 giving the 70 weeks its specific start time as part of the larger time period of 2300 days is simply too intrinsically sound to entertain other narratives. There are numerous SDA books and journals and studies and video presentations going back numerous decades that describe in clear succinct detail why we believe the above is beyond question. One presentation, offered by Clifford Goldstein called 1844 Made Simple of available everywhere online on both written and video format....

1884 Made Simple by Clifford Goldstein

Chia sẻ video của bạn với bạn bè, gia đình và mọi người trên thế giới

youtube.com

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Your paradigm has not made a dent in SDA eschatology. You have often said you grew up as an adventist. You haven't mentioned to my knowledge at what age you moved away, whether it was your choice or your parents. Whatever it was, my guess is you were asleep during Sabbath classes that dealt with Daniel 9. The reasoning and integrity and biblically sound 'paradigm' that links Daniel 9 to Daniel 8 giving the 70 weeks its specific start time as part of the larger time period of 2300 days is simply too intrinsically sound to entertain other narratives. There are numerous SDA books and journals and studies and video presentations going back numerous decades that describe in clear succinct detail why we believe the above is beyond question. One presentation, offered by Clifford Goldstein called 1844 Made Simple of available everywhere online on both written and video format....

1884 Made Simple by Clifford Goldstein

Chia sẻ video của bạn với bạn bè, gia đình và mọi người trên thế giới

youtube.com

I went to public elementary school through 2nd grade and then begged my parents to send me to our SDA 1-8 school, then on to Broadview Academy through my junior year. I graduated from public high school my senior year, then a few years later went to Southern Missionary College, now upgraded to a university for one semester, then my father died. One thing that separated me from other Adventists was I only wanted to study the Bible, and though I had heard stories about EGW, I never studied what she wrote.

Now, some 50 odd years later, because of America voting in 2 Communist Presidents!!! and even the TV news are now all leftist, I realized Hebrews 10:25 was time to spend as much time with Christians as I could, so filled up my entire weekends. I went back to SDA on Saturday's, and loved it. It felt so familiar, and I enjoyed the hymns I remembered as a child. I went at 9:00 am so I could attend the Adult Sabbath School. What I knew NOT to do was talk doctrine. I know how Adventists love to debate. I didn't want to hurt anyone's faith this close to the end because of Romans 14: Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. 23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin. The only thing I would talk about was what God was doing in my life. God does many miracles in my life, and I would always tell of the latest one. I thought seeing as EGW did a supernatural feat of holding out a huge dictionary for 30 minutes, they would appreciate God is still the same, yesterday, today, and forever. Then one Sabbath (yes, I have always believed the Sabbath has not changed to Sunday), but do go to church on Sundays, and two elders were waiting for me to come. They kicked me out because of the miracles God does in my life. They must have believed it is the devil. Though I doubt the devil wouldn't want to take credit for them if he did them. Can you imagine the devil increasing my love for God, and despising the devil? Anyway, I still see a few of the ladies that I love a couple times a month. But I'm not welcome there anymore. And I miss the vegetarian pot lucks!

 

[Brakelite]

I went to public elementary school through 2nd grade and then begged my parents to send me to our SDA 1-8 school, then on to Broadview Academy through my junior year. I graduated from public high school my senior year, then a few years later went to Southern Missionary College, now upgraded to a university for one semester, then my father died. One thing that separated me from other Adventists was I only wanted to study the Bible, and though I had heard stories about EGW, I never studied what she wrote.

Now, some 50 odd years later, because of America voting in 2 Communist Presidents!!! and even the TV news are now all leftist, I realized Hebrews 10:25 was time to spend as much time with Christians as I could, so filled up my entire weekends. I went back to SDA on Saturday's, and loved it. It felt so familiar, and I enjoyed the hymns I remembered as a child. I went at 9:00 am so I could attend the Adult Sabbath School. What I knew NOT to do was talk doctrine. I know how Adventists love to debate. I didn't want to hurt anyone's faith this close to the end because of Romans 14: Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. 23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin. The only thing I would talk about was what God was doing in my life. God does many miracles in my life, and I would always tell of the latest one. I thought seeing as EGW did a supernatural feat of holding out a huge dictionary for 30 minutes, they would appreciate God is still the same, yesterday, today, and forever. Then one Sabbath (yes, I have always believed the Sabbath has not changed to Sunday), but do go to church on Sundays, and two elders were waiting for me to come. They kicked me out because of the miracles God does in my life. They must have believed it is the devil. Though I doubt the devil wouldn't want to take credit for them if he did them. Can you imagine the devil increasing my love for God, and despising the devil? Anyway, I still see a few of the ladies that I love a couple times a month. But I'm not welcome there anymore. And I miss the vegetarian pot lucks!

Over the 30 years I've been an adventist, (in now 73) o have also been blessed through some wonderful miracles of providence and protection. I am never to shy to share those experiences, and have never been asked to stop. That said, i have been to a few adventist churches and never returned. We are all human, and some more human than others... sadly. Sorry for your experience. And, you could have done a lot worse than southern.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Over the 30 years I've been an adventist, (in now 73) o have also been blessed through some wonderful miracles of providence and protection. I am never to shy to share those experiences, and have never been asked to stop. That said, i have been to a few adventist churches and never returned. We are all human, and some more human than others... sadly. Sorry for your experience. And, you could have done a lot worse than southern.

You sharing miracles as an Adventist is one thing. Me sharing miracles as a non-Adventist is quite another. Especially when some of those miracles happened in church on a Sunday!

 

[PinSeeker]

You sharing miracles as an Adventist is one thing. Me sharing miracles as a non-Adventist is quite another. Especially when some of those miracles happened in church on a Sunday!

Not to interrupt, but, well, not knowing exactly what you or @Brakelite are actually referring to with regard to your personal experiences, I might challenge the assertion that what you experienced, whatever it was or is, was or is actually a miracle... an extraordinary ~ 'extraordinary' suffices, but I might add 'supernatural' here, just to make it clearer ~ event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs. An example might be worth discussing...

Grace and peace to you, 1CL.