Russia and Israel, now what?

[dwb001]

dwb001,

The comparison of the events leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD and the books of Daniel and Revelation as well as Matthew 24 is too much to cover in a post. I reluctantly give you one of many presentations by Bruce Gore (who is a Calvinist by the way.)

This morning I read again Matthew 24 and it struck me that Jesus gave many signs and events that no one can miss regarding the coming judgement which lead to the christians leaving the city when they saw the events being played out. Matthew 1-24 if full of signs that are given in chronological order finishing up with Matthew 24:30 that says clearly Jesus will come in the clouds (metaphor for judgement not cumulus elevator) and that wraps up those signs and that ending of the covenant relationship with Israel. The signs are there. And the events described by Josephus fit in with this although he never read the book and was a Jew not a Christian and so not trying to make it fit.

Then in verse 36 he switches to his second coming which will have no signs from God no one can miss as in the previous verses. This an entirely different event and it lays it out so. Towards the end he tells us to be ready or "stay awake" and then goes on to tell us what he expects in detail. This is marvelous and I find it thrilling. What does He say we need to do to be ready? Matthew 24:45-51 tells us being ready is measured in how we treat other people. I have asked futurists what "be awake" means and they do not know. They think world events are signs but I have heard this for 50 years (Israel getting some real estate means within 40 years, a Bible generation (which is not actually in the Bible), so Jesus will come no later than 1972. Guess what? They were wrong. Why? Because there will be no signs from God at all according to Jesus. And what is more, Acts 1:11 tells us he is not coming with a military entourage.

Anyway, you can look into this if you find you have the courage. It is tremendously thrilling and empowering to drop the doom and gloom eschatology. It is thrilling to see that the events Jesus and Daniel and John described came to be fitting the description. Scripture fulfilled is more thrilling than waiting for a prophesy to be fulfilled. But that is just my personal experience.

Why do you place Matthew(a biography) above a personally commissioned by Jesus book?
Just wondering why you trust more to a biography than a direct transcription?
Why not trust that Revelation is literal and Matthew is symbolic?

Jesus personally ordered the creation of only one book in the NT, correct? (Rev 1:19)
John was a faithful recorder of his vision. If you want to argue that John brought in references from the OT then you are saying that John lied about what he was shown. John's job was to write what he saw... not what he understood, believed, was taught.
So either John was a bad choice for the recorder of the vision, or he lied.

Or maybe Jesus and the Angels lied to John and showed him a deceptive vision. Not really in character.

So if John is true and Jesus is true and the Angels that spoke to John are true... Then Revelation is a bit of a special case in the NT.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I said I am off... and you say "No, you are off." Which is it? Wow you can't even accept a concession to the point.
No thanks... but maybe just explain things here.

My apologies. You admit Revelation was written prior to 70AD?

I have not personally attacked you.
Do you have your copy of Josephus out? Tell me what book, chapter and verse you are referencing and I will confirm in my copy of Josephus.

Only the Bible is divided into verses. Other works are not. Do you have a copy of Josephus' works? Do you know anything from what he wrote about that campaign? I am wondering.

And I urge you to look to Rev 22:18-19. You may be altering the intent of the text of Revelation and by the very clear words of Revelation you might be in danger of Hellfire.

No I am not altering Revelation and I urge you to read it carefully. How do you answer the words Jesus said about coming soon in Revelation 22? Just wondering.

Three times in the KJV the term Great Tribulation is used. So that is what it should be called according to you.

IT is not capitalized as a time but used as a time of great trouble said there will be great tribulation or great trouble. It is not a season with a title but a description of times of great trouble. Jesus said there would be a time of great trouble.

That is incorrect. If the OT is referenced it is because the OT is referencing the same events as Revelation.
Funny I don't remember that quote from the Bible.

It is true that the Old Testament refers to the same period of time as the time described in Matthew 24 and Revelation. The bulk of Revelation is already mentioned in the Old Testament, the same events. That is my point. It was the time when the Mosaic covenant is over.

Did the Berean search the scriptures to prove or disprove Paul.
And all I am asking is the same of you. Have you read Revelation as I have asked in the past.
Have you read it with a clean mindset, not trying to interpret anything but reading it as the book was intended to be read?

Of course. That is my point. I have read Revelation without any colored glasses so often I cannot tell you how often.

Why would I listen to someone who is incorrect and then learn from that what I should believe?
If I listen to your link will you read Revelation as I recommend?
Will you follow my leader?

I have read it often but have no objection to reading it again. Will you listen to Gore so you understand what you do not agree with? You want me to l listen to someone who is incorrect and then learn from what I should believe. You ask why you should do so, why should I do so?

Is it not possible(in some small way) that I might know what I am talking about and that you may not?
Does the possibility exist that you might be wrong and I am trying to lovingly correct you?

You would need to understand what I believe before you can correct me and what is also true, I believed as you do for decades and understand it quite well. You cannot say that you understand my position so that is a difference between us. I can write what you believe. Can you describe what I believe?

If the answer is no... then I will wash my hands of you and knock the dust off my feet with you.
If the answer is yes... then there might still be hope... and we can move on from there.

I will. Will you?

 

[dwb001]

My apologies. You admit Revelation was written prior to 70AD?

Only the Bible is divided into verses. Other works are not. Do you have a copy of Josephus' works? Do you know anything from what he wrote about that campaign? I am wondering.

I am looking in my copy of Josephus right now. Chapters and verses all over the place.
You don't even own a copy of Josephus do you?
Literally Josephus is open on my desk right now.
Now... what BOOK, CHAPTER, VERSE are you referring to.

I will not even read the rest of your post as you are questioning my honesty.
Show me what you are referencing of be called out for your lies.

No book other than the Bible has chapter and verses... I am looking right now at proof you are a lying.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Why do you place Matthew(a biography) above a personally commissioned by Jesus book?

The gospel of Matthew is not any more a mere biography than the other gospels. Do you believe the epistles were merely letters as well? What is the book of Revelation then? Don't you think that ALL scripture is inspired of of God? Do you reject the words of Matthew because it is a mere biography?

Just wondering why you trust more to a biography than a direct transcription?

Because I think all scripture is inspired. Do you think only Revelation is?

Why not trust that Revelation is literal and Matthew is symbolic?

Because having islands of the world where millions of people live suddenly destroyed makes no sense to be real whereas an earthquake is a normal real event as are wars and famines and bloodshed. Why would God suddenly essentially literally nuke all the islands of the world? Why there are famines and earthquakes makes sense.

Jesus personally ordered the creation of only one book in the NT, correct? (Rev 1:19)

So you admit that you reject the entire NT except Revelation? None of those other books are inspired except that one? It does not even mention the events of the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. How come you believe it happened?

John was a faithful recorder of his vision. If you want to argue that John brought in references from the OT then you are saying that John lied about what he was shown. John's job was to write what he saw... not what he understood, believed, was taught.
So either John was a bad choice for the recorder of the vision, or he lied.

What? Do you think Jesus had to say something completely different than he ever said or he was not talking? Why cannot Jesus have repeated to John what Daniel and other prophets saw and wrote?

Or maybe Jesus and the Angels lied to John and showed him a deceptive vision. Not really in character.

So if John is true and Jesus is true and the Angels that spoke to John are true... Then Revelation is a bit of a special case in the NT.

Not at all. God repeats Himself frequently. Why does it all have to be new to be God inspired? Where is that criteria written down? "There is nothing new under the sun."

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I am looking in my copy of Josephus right now. Chapters and verses all over the place.
You don't even own a copy of Josephus do you?
Literally Josephus is open on my desk right now.
Now... what BOOK, CHAPTER, VERSE are you referring to.

I will not even read the rest of your post as you are questioning my honesty.
Show me what you are referencing of be called out for your lies.

No book other than the Bible has chapter and verses... I am looking right now at proof you are a lying.

That is a personal attack "you are lying" but is not the first. Try you are mistaken. I read Josephus from the internet and some of the pieces can be called chapters but hardly verses as they are segregated into paragraphs, not verses which are a few sentences. Apparently there are different divisions. In chapter 8 in the wars of the Jews Book 6 you can read about the blood being so flowing that it extinguished houses on fire. This is not a description of modern warfare. Rev 14:20

Are you unwilling to listen to Gore who knows more than I do? Are you going to hide behind "you are lying" and so not look into any of these things to see if they be so?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Except... my views are anything but doom and gloom.
It is all victory, power and might of the Bridegroom.

Do you believe there is a terrible Antichrist coming who will do terrible things to people? Do you believe Christians will be killed at some point? I believe this is history as far as that man is concerned. Do you believe he is to come? If so, that is certainly doom and gloom. You know, if you believe the Great Tribulation is coming, that is gloom and doom by definition. It is called by some the "Great Tribulation" not the "Great Holiday."

My Man is coming power and flame to show who is the true King of kings.

Who will murder in a bloody terrorist attack everyone who is not on his side? Are you rendering yourself blind to this part of your eschatology?

Every event in Revelation is strength and Majesty of the One who loves me like no other.

He does not love you calling people "liars" I assure you.

So maybe that is your problem with Revelation.

Again, the personal attack. It is not that we disagree on an intellectual matter in your mind, it is that I have a personal/character problem. Some THING is wrong with me, not you respectfully disagree with my eschatology. Just think about that kind of approach. Jesus did not call those who disagreed with him nasty names like "something is WRONG WITH YOU."

Do you see Jesus as a beta male?
Is your Jesus not able to defeat the evils of this world?
Do you see Jesus as loving and caring and forgiving only.

My view of Jesus is love, care, forgiveness AND justice, holiness, powerful.

Except, of course, when he comes in a bloody and violent takeover of defenseless people as your eschatology teaches. Or am I mistaken? Is that love and are and forgiveness and justice and holiness and power, to violently attack a people unable to defend themselves? Even the white hats in old movies did not attack an evil opponent who had no defense.

 

[dwb001]

That is a personal attack "you are lying" but is not the first.

So I see that the truth is now a personal attack?
You say no book other than the Bible has chapters and verses. and below you just gave me a chapter to look in... now verse... or paragraph or division number.

Try you are mistaken. I read Josephus from the internet and some of the pieces can be called chapters but hardly verses as they are segregated into paragraphs, not verses which are a few sentences. Apparently there are different divisions. In chapter 8 in the wars of the Jews Book 6 you can read about the blood being so flowing that it extinguished houses on fire. This is not a description of modern warfare. Rev 14:20

How many times have you been to war recently? Do you know how was can turn from clean to bloody in an instant?
Was Josephus using hyperbole?

Are you unwilling to listen to Gore who knows more than I do? Are you going to hide behind "you are lying" and so not look into any of these things to see if they be so?

I will hide behind your previous post. You have already claimed you have read Revelation without bias... but you say that islands disappearing is impossible. So you are saying you have more understanding than God.

God clearly states something and because you don't see how it is possible... you declare the word of God to be metaphor.

Will you read Revelation as a future event... a single vision... read it as if it were true as written. No interpretation or appealing to other books of the Bible... are you able to read it that way? Will you accept Revelation as the Truth AS IT IS WRITTEN?

If you can honestly promise that... on pain of making me a smoothie every month for the first 100 years of Eternity from the Tree of Life. Then I will watch a preterist video.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

dwb001, you tendency to dismiss a challenge to your position by discrediting the messenger is something the scribes and Pharisees did regarding Jesus. They did not like his teaching but instead of refusing his teaching, they decided he was a "glutton and drunkard" (character attack) and so need not listen to anything he had to say. This is like the prophet ignoring what God said through the donkey because it was, after all, a donkey talking. You might want to reconsider this strategy.

 

[dwb001]

Do you believe there is a terrible Antichrist coming who will do terrible things to people? Do you believe Christians will be killed at some point? I believe this is history as far as that man is concerned. Do you believe he is to come? If so, that is certainly doom and gloom. You know, if you believe the Great Tribulation is coming, that is gloom and doom by definition. It is called by some the "Great Tribulation" not the "Great Holiday."

If you don't trust Jesus that is up to you.
I will be in the camp of the Hebrews and you can be in the camp of the Egyptians. The view is different from what side of the river you are on.

Who will murder in a bloody terrorist attack everyone who is not on his side? Are you rendering yourself blind to this part of your eschatology?

I would expect nothing less from my Mighty King.
Do you thing the "nations of the world" have not comited high treason against the King of kings?

He does not love you calling people "liars" I assure you.

I just follow His example. Truth must be the basis of my faith.

Again, the personal attack. It is not that we disagree on an intellectual matter in your mind, it is that I have a personal/character problem. Some THING is wrong with me, not you respectfully disagree with my eschatology. Just think about that kind of approach. Jesus did not call those who disagreed with him nasty names like "something is WRONG WITH YOU."

If you say something that is provably untrue... what are you called?
Jesus called some of them children of the Devil... and they were the ones who taught the scriptures.

Except, of course, when he comes in a bloody and violent takeover of defenseless people as your eschatology teaches. Or am I mistaken? Is that love and are and forgiveness and justice and holiness and power, to violently attack a people unable to defend themselves? Even the white hats in old movies did not attack an evil opponent who had no defense.

Who says that they have no defence? If that is what you believe then you haven't read Revelation.

Is it right for the white hats to execute a convicted person who is sentenced to death.... or should the prisoner be given a weapon to defend against judgement?

 

[dwb001]

dwb001, you tendency to dismiss a challenge to your position by discrediting the messenger is something the scribes and Pharisees did regarding Jesus. They did not like his teaching but instead of refusing his teaching, they decided he was a "glutton and drunkard" (character attack) and so need not listen to anything he had to say. This is like the prophet ignoring what God said through the donkey because it was, after all, a donkey talking. You might want to reconsider this strategy.

When have I done that?
Have you seen my tagline.... I call myself Balaam's Donkey.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

So I see that the truth is now a personal attack?

Calling another poster a nasty name is not allowed here. I have not reported it but it is not allowed and not what a follower of Christ does. The angel fighting the Devil about the body of Moses did not insult the Devil although he could have and told the truth. And I did not lie.

You say no book other than the Bible has chapters and verses. and below you just gave me a chapter to look in... now verse... or paragraph or division number.

The writings of Josephus that I read on the net did not have verses. The paragraphs were given number but these are way too many sentences to be "verses" which are not whole paragraphs with many sentences.

How many times have you been to war recently? Do you know how was can turn from clean to bloody in an instant?

What? You think someone has to be in a war to know ANYTHING about war? I worked for the Army during a war which is closer to war that you probably have. You been to war?

Now to answer the second question, modern war is fought with explosives. EXPLOSIVES which BURN. Death by sword releases all the blood. Bombing a population burns up the target, including people, like a fire. Do you see the difference?

Was Josephus using hyperbole?

No, they were killing people with the sword but this begs the question, you think Josphus was LYING when he said those who died by the sword and the blood ran out was an exaggeration but God nuking islands with people living upon them is literal??? Really??

I will hide behind your previous post. You have already claimed you have read Revelation without bias... but you say that islands disappearing is impossible. So you are saying you have more understanding than God.

No, I have the same understanding. When the scripture says, "Every valley shall be raised up, every mountain and hill made low; the rough ground shall become level, the rugged places a plain." it does not mean that the whole earth will be level. We know this because the whole earth and not even Jerusalem was made level before the coming of the Lord. So why do you think God is going to nuke all the islands of the world?

God clearly states something and because you don't see how it is possible... you declare the word of God to be metaphor.

Not so, I understand the ways of God and know that God is not interested level geography nor does he hate islands. He actually said the islands will look to him and hope. Hard to do when you are annihilated.

Will you read Revelation as a future event... a single vision... read it as if it were true as written. No interpretation or appealing to other books of the Bible... are you able to read it that way? Will you accept Revelation as the Truth AS IT IS WRITTEN?

It was the future for them same as Isaiah was the future for them. I read it as the future and was in the dark for decades. Then I discovered the matches between real history and its predictions and know WHY it was so. The whole of so many passages opened up to me and I understood more of the parables. So it was written as future to them as Jesus said, written to his servants so that they would know what was about to take place and take courage.

So I read it that way for decades and was in the dark as to what it means. Made no sense. Now it makes perfect sense and is a wonderful book. It is amazing.

If you can honestly promise that... on pain of making me a smoothie every month for the first 100 years of Eternity from the Tree of Life. Then I will watch a preterist video.

I need to find a preterits video that covers it is on video so give me some time. I watched a great many and heard a great many before I saw that this fits scripture. So hold off unless you want to do your own research.

But I am thinking of starting a thread on Matthew 24. Our talks motivated me to read that chapter again. What was interesting is that the first part up until verse 36 is chalk full of signs no man can miss. Signs in the sky, signs on the land, signs between peoples, natural disasters, false Christs (which were very many and led to the death of very many of their followers) and so on. Lots and lots of signs which were also described in vivid metaphor in Revelation. But once Jesus turned to his return, the second question, he said there would be no signs but life would be normal, marrying and raising children to marry. No signs. So he said be ready because no signs would precede his second coming.

 

[dwb001]

dwb001, you tendency to dismiss a challenge to your position by discrediting the messenger is something the scribes and Pharisees did regarding Jesus. They did not like his teaching but instead of refusing his teaching, they decided he was a "glutton and drunkard" (character attack) and so need not listen to anything he had to say. This is like the prophet ignoring what God said through the donkey because it was, after all, a donkey talking. You might want to reconsider this strategy.

And you don't even know the story you are quoting.
The prophet did not ignore what God was saying through the donkey...
Please reread Numbers 22... you get the point all muddled up.
When did God speak through the donkey? God allowed the donkey to speak.
Or was Balaam beating God and riding on God? The donkey spoke for itself.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

If you don't trust Jesus that is up to you.

Ah again the character attack, the ad hominem. What this is saying is this, if I do not believe YOUR eschatology, well then I do not trust JESUS. Your theology and the theology of Jesus are one and the same. I do not say that of you. You need to watch this ad hominem form of response.

I will be in the camp of the Hebrews and you can be in the camp of the Egyptians. The view is different from what side of the river you are on.

Another personal attack. I tell you it tells me that you cannot defend your position intellectually and have to resort to attacking my faith and character. You do not really believe what you say you believe or you would not respond that way.

I would expect nothing less from my Mighty King.

Who does exactly what you tell him to do? Or what you decide he has to do? Or what you have decided to believe he does?

Do you thing the "nations of the world" have not comited high treason against the King of kings?

What did they do? Please be specific and I want scripture, please. I think you are MISTAKEN.

I just follow His example. Truth must be the basis of my faith.

Well, it is better to trust in the truth and not what you think is the truth. They are not the same. If you trusted you would be able to defend your position without attacking my character personally.

If you say something that is provably untrue... what are you called?

You never heard of different versions of old books? How about "mistaken." You ever mistaken? Shall those who find your verbal mistakes jump to calling you a liar? Would that be OK?

Jesus called some of them children of the Devil... and they were the ones who taught the scriptures.

He also told his disciples to do as these taught but not as they do. Get it? Their teaching was correct.

Who says that they have no defence? If that is what you believe then you haven't read Revelation.

OK, how are the people Jesus and entourage attacking with supernatural weapons defending themselves. Can you please point out where they are defending themselves, with what weapons in the New Testament?

Is it right for the white hats to execute a convicted person who is sentenced to death.... or should the prisoner be given a weapon to defend against judgement?

War is not a court of law with a judge. And there was a trial for the Jews who rejected Jesus and they were judged guilty and told punishment was coming. They had 40 years to repent.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

And you don't even know the story you are quoting.
The prophet did not ignore what God was saying through the donkey...

You did not read what I wrote. The religious men of Jesus day decided to call him nasty names so they could dismiss what he taught. I said it would be as if the prophet would have done so.

Please reread Numbers 22... you get the point all muddled up.
When did God speak through the donkey? God allowed the donkey to speak.

You are not serious are you? God "allowed the donkey to speak?" where is that in the Scripture? Is God actively prohibiting animals from speaking all these millennia and only that donkey got lucky. Really? You believe that is what God is doing?? I think you need to read the story.

Or was Balaam beating God and riding on God? The donkey spoke for itself.

Donkeys do not speak the language of men. There is no evidence that they can think and speak to man if only God would allow it now and again.

 

[dwb001]

Calling another poster a nasty name is not allowed here. I have not reported it but it is not allowed and not what a follower of Christ does. The angel fighting the Devil about the body of Moses did not insult the Devil although he could have and told the truth. And I did not lie.

And that would be a problem with the ToS.
But Jesus and the Apostles used some rather spicy language.

The writings of Josephus that I read on the net did not have verses. The paragraphs were given number but these are way too many sentences to be "verses" which are not whole paragraphs with many sentences.

And now you admit that you were wrong about chapter and verse references. I didn't say how long a verse needs to be... that is your artificial restraint.

What? You think someone has to be in a war to know ANYTHING about war? I worked for the Army during a war which is closer to war that you probably have. You been to war?

I am Mennonite.

Now to answer the second question, modern war is fought with explosives. EXPLOSIVES which BURN. Death by sword releases all the blood. Bombing a population burns up the target, including people, like a fire. Do you see the difference?

Who said anything about explosives? You are now adding to the book of Revelation so that would add the plagues of Revelation to your life. Rev 22:18

No, they were killing people with the sword but this begs the question, you think Josphus was LYING when he said those who died by the sword and the blood ran out was an exaggeration but God nuking islands with people living upon them is literal??? Really??

I never met the man so how do I know if he was a pathological or occasional teller of porky pies.
Where are you getting nukes from now?

No, I have the same understanding. When the scripture says, "Every valley shall be raised up, every mountain and hill made low; the rough ground shall become level, the rugged places a plain." it does not mean that the whole earth will be level. We know this because the whole earth and not even Jerusalem was made level before the coming of the Lord. So why do you think God is going to nuke all the islands of the world?

What nukes? The mechanism seems to be an earthquake... Rev 16:19. I think it because God said it.

Not so, I understand the ways of God and know that God is not interested level geography nor does he hate islands. He actually said the islands will look to him and hope. Hard to do when you are annihilated.

So you know the ways of God better than what God says.
You have more perfect understanding then the words of God.
I ain't touching that.

It was the future for them same as Isaiah was the future for them. I read it as the future and was in the dark for decades. Then I discovered the matches between real history and its predictions and know WHY it was so. The whole of so many passages opened up to me and I understood more of the parables. So it was written as future to them as Jesus said, written to his servants so that they would know what was about to take place and take courage.

Matches are used to burn things... You want to burn Revelation?
Maybe things became clear because you stopped trusting in the impossible nature of God and trusted in the changeable nature of mans ideas.

So I read it that way for decades and was in the dark as to what it means. Made no sense. Now it makes perfect sense and is a wonderful book. It is amazing.

Same for me from the other perspective. It was a wonderful moment when the lights came on and I saw what my Bridegroom will do when He comes back.

I need to find a preterits video that covers it is on video so give me some time. I watched a great many and heard a great many before I saw that this fits scripture. So hold off unless you want to do your own research.

The video you linked was preterist... wasn't it?

But I am thinking of starting a thread on Matthew 24. Our talks motivated me to read that chapter again. What was interesting is that the first part up until verse 36 is chalk full of signs no man can miss. Signs in the sky, signs on the land, signs between peoples, natural disasters, false Christs (which were very many and led to the death of very many of their followers) and so on. Lots and lots of signs which were also described in vivid metaphor in Revelation. But once Jesus turned to his return, the second question, he said there would be no signs but life would be normal, marrying and raising children to marry. No signs. So he said be ready because no signs would precede his second coming.

Please don't... Public embarrassment is so painful and i wouldn't want that on anyone.

 

[dwb001]

You did not read what I wrote. The religious men of Jesus day decided to call him nasty names so they could dismiss what he taught. I said it would be as if the prophet would have done so.

I don't read a lot of what you write... I only read the stuff that makes sense.

You are not serious are you? God "allowed the donkey to speak?" where is that in the Scripture? Is God actively prohibiting animals from speaking all these millennia and only that donkey got lucky. Really? You believe that is what God is doing?? I think you need to read the story.

My exact quote is not in scripture. But is my impression from the text and my time as a farmer.
I did read the passage before responding.
I took my response directly from the Bible... did you read the story before you posted this?

Donkeys do not speak the language of men. There is no evidence that they can think and speak to man if only God would allow it now and again.

That one did. Evidence is in Numbers 22... are you now saying that Numbers is wrong too.
Is there any part of the Bible you agree with?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

And that would be a problem with the ToS.

If would be if I reported you. Stop calling my nasty names.

But Jesus and the Apostles used some rather spicy language.

Be specific. Who did they call a liar but the Devil?

And now you admit that you were wrong about chapter and verse references. I didn't say how long a verse needs to be... that is your artificial restraint.

Come on. A verse is not 15 sentences long.

I am Mennonite.

And? So you do not participation war but insist I had to know anything. How come you do not participate in war if you were never in one?

Who said anything about explosives? You are now adding to the book of Revelation so that would add the plagues of Revelation to your life. Rev 22:18

What??' I said modern war uses explosives. Do you think the nations in the world are going to resort back to horses and swords as described in Revelation? I mean you are the one who thinks these wars are future, not me.

I never met the man so how do I know if he was a pathological or occasional teller of porky pies.
Where are you getting nukes from now?

Do you think about the details of Revelation? Do you just blindly think armies will march on Jerusalem with horses and swords? I mean how do you see this playing out?

What nukes? The mechanism seems to be an earthquake... Rev 16:19. I think it because God said it.

Please show the verse that says earthquakes are killing almost everyone? What about the blood running so think in the city? God did not say it. You just think it. What about thinking about what God said about being loving and kind and merciful to others? Don't you believe those verses as strongly such that you do them?

So you know the ways of God better than what God says.

No, I know that as God says them.

You have more perfect understanding then the words of God.
I ain't touching that.

Do not accuse me falsely. You need to read about not bearing false witness against others. It is forbidden by God. Don't you believe it as strongly as you believe earthquakes wipe out people?

Matches are used to burn things... You want to burn Revelation?

huh?

Maybe things became clear because you stopped trusting in the impossible nature of God and trusted in the changeable nature of mans ideas.

Please stop accusing me of bad character. You are bearing false witness against me.

Same for me from the other perspective. It was a wonderful moment when the lights came on and I saw what my Bridegroom will do when He comes back.

I guess you do not think about justice and anyone else.

The video you linked was preterist... wasn't it?

Please don't... Public embarrassment is so painful and i wouldn't want that on anyone.

They why do you keep falsely accusing me. Won't that be embarrassing?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I don't read a lot of what you write... I only read the stuff that makes sense.

OH that is not good when you decide to falsely accuse me of what I did not say.

My exact quote is not in scripture. But is my impression from the text and my time as a farmer.
I did read the passage before responding.
I took my response directly from the Bible... did you read the story before you posted this?

I do not need to. I know it by heart. You misread what I wrote. The donkey saw the angel and stopped. The prophet did not get it but the donkey saved him. Let us move on. You did not read what I wrote and falsely accused me.

That one did. Evidence is in Numbers 22... are you now saying that Numbers is wrong too.
Is there any part of the Bible you agree with?

Huh? I do not agree with you. I agree 100% with the Bible. I just do not believe what you think of it. They are not the same.

 

[dwb001]

If would be if I reported you. Stop calling my nasty names.

I have not called you any names. Nasty or otherwise. I may have described your character but no name calling here.

Be specific. Who did they call a liar but the Devil?

I said spicy language... please don't twist my words.

Come on. A verse is not 15 sentences long.

It can be... My decision in my house. You can limit a verse size in your house.

And? So you do not participation war but insist I had to know anything. How come you do not participate in war if you were never in one?

You are not making much sense in your sentence structure.

What??' I said modern war uses explosives. Do you think the nations in the world are going to resort back to horses and swords as described in Revelation? I mean you are the one who thinks these wars are future, not me.

Could be... how do you know they won't? Is it possible? Bayonets are still a thing... why?

Do you think about the details of Revelation? Do you just blindly think armies will march on Jerusalem with horses and swords? I mean how do you see this playing out?

Well... John was writing a vision... but reality will be very recognisable as the same thing.
I don't know. Do you?

Please show the verse that says earthquakes are killing almost everyone? What about the blood running so think in the city? God did not say it. You just think it. What about thinking about what God said about being loving and kind and merciful to others? Don't you believe those verses as strongly such that you do them?

Where did I say earthquakes kill everyone? We were talking about islands being removed.
You have no idea how much mercy I am showing on these forums.

No, I know that as God says them.

Do not accuse me falsely. You need to read about not bearing false witness against others. It is forbidden by God. Don't you believe it as strongly as you believe earthquakes wipe out people?

Show me where I have falsely accused you of anything?

huh?

Please stop accusing me of bad character. You are bearing false witness against me.

I don't think I am... from what you have shown me... maybe you have another side... but the one on display today is not a "good character".

I guess you do not think about justice and anyone else.

Justice is evil being punished... and you have a problem with that?
We all deserve destruction by God... Thank God for His mercy.

They why do you keep falsely accusing me. Won't that be embarrassing?

What FALSE accusations? Please show me where I made a mistake.

 

[dwb001]

OH that is not good when you decide to falsely accuse me of what I did not say.

I do not need to. I know it by heart. You misread what I wrote. The donkey saw the angel and stopped. The prophet did not get it but the donkey saved him. Let us move on. You did not read what I wrote and falsely accused me.

Of WHAT? What did I falsely accuse you of??????

Huh? I do not agree with you. I agree 100% with the Bible. I just do not believe what you think of it. They are not the same.

Agreed.