Understanding the 1000yr Reign?

[skypair]

I haven't stretched anything, you have thought and still stretching. You are a futurist and I am not.

"Stretching" to insist on literal interpretation and literal fulfillments? No, Bob. Stretching the truth is when you interpret scripture in the liberal, allegoric fashion in order to prop up a lie. I'm sure you have heard your kind of baloney on other issues --- like creation vs. evolution.

Evolutionists will take Genesis 1 & 2 and say that it merely describes the process of evolution.

Or they will just ignore the passages altogether -- like you (you still haven't addressed Micah 4:7). Gay "pastors" will not even look at the Pentateuch for all the condemnations on homosexuality.

You got a big problem, the living water is already here..

Not literally -- as in Zech 14 and Ezek 47 -- they're not. These are not talking about "bellies" or "wells" or anything but nature drinking up the water that flows from beneath the throne and gate and then east and west to the seas.

You are living in the past, their last days, were the end of the OT.

No. Even their "last days" have to include the 70th week of Daniel. Don't even bother to look --- you're not going to find a literal (like the preceding 63 weeks were) 7 year period like the one mentioned in Dan 9:26-27 that follows or even precedes Christ's crucifixion. You'll have to fall back on your allegorical approach again though the passage doesn't hint at such fabrications.

I'm offering you the "sop," Bob -- the best part of the meal. Are you still going to deny me?

skypair

 

[EdSutton]

FTR, and since I have no idea from whence your statements come, here, I will comment in blue:

Because I made a mistake. every make one??

Of course. Never said I didn't. [Snipped.]

They were supposed as representives of 3 tribes of Israel, but I do not even know if that was true.

Not true from Scripture, at least, for it says (or implies) nothing about that.

One thing for sure, Jesus was to be born King of the Jews, and these wise men, had a great interest in seeing Him.

This is true.

They were said to be kings, and three in number;

Legend! Or unsupported conjecture, at best, as to number. Neither is said in Scripture. No early Church Father ascribed them as kings. Eastern (Orthodox?) tradition claims the number of twelve Magoi.

they were said to be representatives of the three families of Shem, Ham, and Japhet, and therefore one of them is pictured as an Ethiopian;

Legend again, but why does your 'source' mention only the alleged Ethiopian? Why not the 'fair-skinned Arabian with a white beard', or the the youngest with the brown hair? Think about the (hidden) motives of the one or ones that mentioned this, Brother Bob.

names are given as Caspar, Balthasar, and Melchior,

Legend, again, as there is no known reference to any particular names before around the seventh century.

and their three skulls--said to have been discovered in the twelfth century by Bishop Reinald of Cologne --are exhibited in a priceless casket in the great cathedral of that city."

Interesting that these three (actually mummified bodies, not just skulls) supposedly appeared suddenly in Italy after 1100+ years, at St. Eustorgius church in Milan. Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa I had them transferred to Cologne. Actually, these bodies were returned to Milan in 1903 by the Cardinal of Cologne. ('Wiki' is mistaken, here, in the claim that they are at Cologne, according to a source I've just read.) And the history of these well- traveled?? bodies is questionable, at best. According to some, Empress Helena (Mother of Constantine) 'discovered' them in 'the East' (where exactly, we are not told), took them first to the holy Land, then to Constantinople. From there they were moved to Milan probably in 344 by Eustorgius, when he was named Bishop, and took the bodies along with him, from Constnatinople.

However, we also have the written account of Marco Polo, who claims to have been shown the tombs of the three Magi, in Persia, in the 1270's, with a fairly detailed description of the features of the mummiefied bodies, as well. Kinda' hard for theses bodies to have been in two places at one time, namely Milan and Persia, I'd say.

I just don't know who "they" are.......

I have a thought on that. The same "they" that contribute to many other urban legends, have their finger in this one, as well.

[Sigh!]

Here are a couple of links to some information.

http://mymerrychristmas.com/2005/magi.shtml

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09527a.htm

http://ldolphin.org/magi.html

And since I think you are a fan of 'wiki'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_Magi

And finally, one by the husband of a frequent BB poster on the star.

http://ldolphin.org/birth.html

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

No. Even their "last days" have to include the 70th week of Daniel. Don't even bother to look --- you're not going to find a literal (like the preceding 63 weeks were) 7 year period like the one mentioned in Dan 9:26-27 that follows or even precedes Christ's crucifixion.

I believe you intended to say "preceding 69 weeks" or "preceding 62 weeks", one or the other, here.

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

FTR, and since I have no idea from whence your statements come, here, I will comment in blue:

Because I made a mistake. every make one??

Of course. Never said I didn't. [Snipped.]

They were supposed as representives of 3 tribes of Israel, but I do not even know if that was true.

Not true from Scripture, at least, for it says (or implies) nothing about that.

One thing for sure, Jesus was to be born King of the Jews, and these wise men, had a great interest in seeing Him.

This is true.

They were said to be kings, and three in number;

Legend! Or unsupported conjecture, at best, as to number. Neither is said in Scripture. No early Church Father ascribed them as kings. Eastern (Orthodox?) tradition claims the number of twelve Magoi.

they were said to be representatives of the three families of Shem, Ham, and Japhet, and therefore one of them is pictured as an Ethiopian;

Legend again, but why does your 'source' mention only the alleged Ethiopian? Why not the 'fair-skinned Arabian with a white beard', or the the youngest with the brown hair? Think about the (hidden) motives of the one or ones that mentioned this, Brother Bob.

names are given as Caspar, Balthasar, and Melchior,

Legend, again, as there is no known reference to any particular names before around the seventh century.

and their three skulls--said to have been discovered in the twelfth century by Bishop Reinald of Cologne --are exhibited in a priceless casket in the great cathedral of that city."

Interesting that these three (actually mummified bodies, not just skulls) supposedly appeared suddenly in Italy after 1100+ years, at St. Eustorgius church in Milan. Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa I had them transferred to Cologne. Actually, these bodies were returned to Milan in 1903 by the Cardinal of Cologne. ('Wiki' is mistaken, here, in the claim that they are at Cologne, according to a source I've just read.) And the history of these well- traveled?? bodies is questionable, at best. According to some, Empress Helena (Mother of Constantine) 'discovered' them in 'the East' (where exactly, we are not told), took them first to the holy Land, then to Constantinople. From there they were moved to Milan probably in 344 by Eustorgius, when he was named Bishop, and took the bodies along with him, from Constnatinople.

However, we also have the written account of Marco Polo, who claims to have been shown the tombs of the three Magi, in Persia, in the 1270's, with a fairly detailed description of the features of the mummiefied bodies, as well. Kinda' hard for theses bodies to have been in two places at one time, namely Milan and Persia, I'd say.

I just don't know who "they" are.......

I have a thought on that. The same "they" that contribute to many other urban legends, have their finger in this one, as well.

[Sigh!]

Here are a couple of links to some information.

http://mymerrychristmas.com/2005/magi.shtml

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09527a.htm

http://ldolphin.org/magi.html

And since I think you are a fan of 'wiki'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_Magi

And finally, one by the husband of a frequent BB poster on the star.

http://ldolphin.org/birth.html

Ed

Have you given any scripture to what you have to say about the three wise men, or is what you say legend also??

BBob,

 

[Brother Bob]

"Stretching" to insist on literal interpretation and literal fulfillments? No, Bob. Stretching the truth is when you interpret scripture in the liberal, allegoric fashion in order to prop up a lie. I'm sure you have heard your kind of baloney on other issues --- like creation vs. evolution.

Evolutionists will take Genesis 1 & 2 and say that it merely describes the process of evolution.

Or they will just ignore the passages altogether -- like you (you still haven't addressed Micah 4:7). Gay "pastors" will not even look at the Pentateuch for all the condemnations on homosexuality.

Not literally -- as in Zech 14 and Ezek 47 -- they're not. These are not talking about "bellies" or "wells" or anything but nature drinking up the water that flows from beneath the throne and gate and then east and west to the seas.

Zech 14
16: And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.


No. Even their "last days" have to include the 70th week of Daniel. Don't even bother to look --- you're not going to find a literal (like the preceding 63 weeks were) 7 year period like the one mentioned in Dan 9:26-27 that follows or even precedes Christ's crucifixion. You'll have to fall back on your allegorical approach again though the passage doesn't hint at such fabrications.

I'm offering you the "sop," Bob -- the best part of the meal. Are you still going to deny me?

skypair

Why would it say to the "former" sea, if it were not Spiritual and to the souls of those who died in faith? Why would it say to the "hinder" sea, if it were not to follow hereafter even unto us.

You are so far off, you are in La, La, Land.

I offered you the source of "living water" but you turned it away, as the Jews did.

Jhn 4:10Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.

Jhn 4:11The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water?

Jhn 4:14But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

Have you drink of the "living water"? Do you have everlasting life? Were your sins taken away, or are you still in them.

Why do you not believe in Jesus when He says a fountain shall be opened? Why are you as the Jews???

Jer 2:7And I brought you into a plentiful country, to eat the fruit thereof and the goodness thereof; but when ye entered, ye defiled my land, and made mine heritage an abomination.

Jer 2:13For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, [and] hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water.

1Cr 15:34Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak [this] to your shame.


BBob,

 

[EdSutton]

Have you given any scripture to what you have to say about the three wise men, or is what you say legend also??

BBob,

Every actual claim I make as to the Magoi is found in Matt. 2. The only specific claim I made beyond this has to do with the origin of the word, as I previously stated, in an earlier post.

The Bible says nothing about any names, number (Why do you keep saying "three", if not for some tradition?), nationality, tribe, being "kings", or any country of origin. Only, in this, that they were "from the East", and that they persented gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh, saw the star, and followed it when it reappeared, at least to them, in Jerusalem to Bethlehem, to the house where Jesus was. (Scripture does not say they "followed" the star 'from the East' unto Jerusalem.)

What I gave above is the debunking of the associated urban legends around them that are contained in your post, which I think you have unwittingly accepted. Or at least I hope that to be the case.

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

Every actual claim I make as to the Magoi is found in Matt. 2. The only specific claim I made beyond this has to do with the origin of the word, as I previously stated, in an earlier post.

The Bible says nothing about any names, number (Why do you keep saying "three", if not for some tradition?), nationality, tribe, being "kings", or any country of origin. Only, in this, that they were "from the East", and that they persented gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh, saw the star, and followed it when it reappeared, at least to them, in Jerusalem to Bethlehem, to the house where Jesus was. (Scripture does not say they "followed" the star 'from the East' unto Jerusalem.)

What I gave above is the debunking of the associated urban legends around them that are contained in your post, which I think you have unwittingly accepted. Or at least I hope that to be the case.

Ed

ED; In all likelihood they were Persian or Babylonian (Chaldee) astrologers and/or sorcerers, who were practitioners of witchcraft, "familiar spirits", magicians, etc.,

Is this a myth, supposition, scripture, or Ed Sutton doctrine ???

BBob

 

[skypair]

Why would it say to the "former" sea, if it were not Spiritual and to the souls of those who died in faith? Why would it say to the "hinder" sea, if it were not to follow hereafter even unto us.

BBob, you figure it out. Both sources do not use the same wording so SURELY you can figure it out. I know for SURE the Engedi is NOT a spiritual place in Ezek 47. I know for SURE that the waters that will be healed are the Dead Sea and there will be salt banks around the area. And I know for SURE that you are not into studying your craft nor "walking worthy of your vocation," Eph 4:1!

I offered you the source of "living water" but you turned it away, as the Jews did.

That's pathetic, Bob. I have received the living waters and I am offering them to you.

Jer 2:13For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, [and] hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water.

Or perhaps this is YOU. Your "cisterns" are leaky. :laugh: And isn't it interesting that Ezek 47 doesn't mention "living waters."

I am beginning to come to the opinion that you are a discredit to your faith and to your calling, Bob. The living waters you cite are spiritual but the living waters I speak of in the context of Zech 14 and Ezek 47 are clearly literal giving life to trees, fish, etc. AND ARE FUTURE!! But you're not going to believe scripture that contradicts you anyway, are you?

1Cr 15:34Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak [this] to your shame.[/QUOTE] Oh! I see you beat me to it!! :laugh:

skypair

 

[Brother Bob]

BBob, you figure it out. Both sources do not use the same wording so SURELY you can figure it out. I know for SURE the Engedi is NOT a spiritual place in Ezek 47. I know for SURE that the waters that will be healed are the Dead Sea and there will be salt banks around the area. And I know for SURE that you are not into studying your craft nor "walking worthy of your vocation," Eph 4:1!

That's pathetic, Bob. I have received the living waters and I am offering them to you.

Or perhaps this is YOU. Your "cisterns" are leaky. :laugh: And isn't it interesting that Ezek 47 doesn't mention "living waters."

I am beginning to come to the opinion that you are a discredit to your faith and to your calling, Bob. The living waters you cite are spiritual but the living waters I speak of in the context of Zech 14 and Ezek 47 are clearly literal giving life to trees, fish, etc. AND ARE FUTURE!! But you're not going to believe scripture that contradicts you anyway, are you?

1Cr 15:34Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak [this] to your shame.

Oh! I see you beat me to it!! :laugh:

skypair

I was not speaking of Ezek 47, but rather:

Zec 13:1¶In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.

Zec 14
8: And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.


Do you believe that because I do not believe you on the "end times" doctrine, does that mean that I am lost according to your belief???

BBob,

 

[skypair]

BBob,

I realized even as I wrote what I did that "in a great house, there must be vessels of honor and vessels of dishonor" according to Jesus. But you have a choice in the matter. If what you know today is what you knew 10 years ago and what Christianity knew 300 years ago, you and Christianity aren't growing.

See you tomorrow. I'm off to dinner. :thumbs:

skypair

 

[Brother Bob]

BBob,

I realized even as I wrote what I did that "in a great house, there must be vessels of honor and vessels of dishonor" according to Jesus. But you have a choice in the matter. If what you know today is what you knew 10 years ago and what Christianity knew 300 years ago, you and Christianity aren't growing.

See you tomorrow. I'm off to dinner. :thumbs:

skypair

So, you are the honor and I am the dishonor, I take it?

So, as you wrote it, you knew it was wrong, but continued to write it anyway, is that correct????

Hope you are ready to be a slave for the Jewish people, for they believe your soul is the same as cattle, that they will destroy all of you and me, except some for slavery.

[SIZE=+1]1 The Talmud said Jesus was, along with Balaam and Titus, one of the three greatest enemies of Judaism (Gittin 56b-57a). The New Testament confirms that the Pharisees considered Christ demon-possessed (John 8:48), a charlatan empowered by the devil (Matt. 12:24), a deceiver (Matt. 27:6), a blasphemer (Jn. 10:36), and having an unclean spirit (Mk. 3:30). The Talmud says He was a bastard, son of adulterous Mary (Sanhedrin 106b). He was hung on the eve of Passover because He was a sorcerer and apostate (Sanh. 43a). He was a fool who fell down and worshipped a brick (Sanh. 67a). He was executed by stoning, burning, decapitation, and strangling (Sanh. x.2:90a). Jews are encouraged to lecture against Christ (Sanh. 106b). Christ is in hell, wallowing in boiling hot excrement (Git. 56b-57a).[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]The Talmud recommends persecution of Christians. Christians are heretics (Abodah Zarah 16b), apostates (Shabbethai 116). Christians may be legally thrown into a pit to die (AZ, 26b). Christians deserve death for observing the Sabbath (even though they observe the Noahide laws) (Sanh. 58b) and studying the Old Testament (Sanh. 59a). Christianity is an unforgivable sin, seducing Jews to idolatry (AZ 17a). The testimony of a Christian is unworthy to be admitted to a Jewish court (Shulshan Aruk, Hoshen Mishpat 34,31). Jews are forbidden to return a lost article to a Christian (HM 266,2). Matthew, Luke, Nicodemus, and Thaddeus were executed as heretics ( Jewish Encyclopedia, "Jesus," page 171). Jews should rejoice, dress in white, and eat, drink, and be merry at the death of a Christian. They should hate a Christian with utmost hatred and consider him an enemy (Semahot ch. 2, p. 35).[/SIZE]

http://www.rense.com/general76/noahide.htm


BBob,

 

[Ed Edwards]

ED; //In all likelihood they were Persian or Babylonian (Chaldee) astrologers and/or sorcerers, who were practitioners of witchcraft, "familiar spirits", magicians, etc.,//

//Is this a myth, supposition, scripture, or Ed Sutton doctrine ???//

Not a myth, best we know, it was the way it happened.

Not a supposition, it is the common word in Greek for the Chaldee House of rulers for the Babylonian Empire referring to //astrologers and/or sorcerers//, Wise Men, Shamam, Witch Doctors, are other names of other times for similar //practitioners of witchcraft, "familiar spirits", magicians,//.

Not a scripture, though there are a few interesting scriptures one might read.

Dan 5:11 (Geneva Bible, 1599 Edition):
There is a man in thy kingdome, in whom is the spirit of the holy gods, and in the dayes of thy father light and vnderstanding and wisdome like the wisdome of the gods, was found in him: whom the King Nebuchad-nezzar thy father, the King, I say, thy father, made chiefe of the enchanters, astrologians, Caldeans, and soothsayers,

This says cleary that the "enchanters, astrologians, Caldeans, and soothsayers" were the wise men of the kingdom. In the time of Daniel, Daniel was appointed to be their chief. In the days ripe for the First advent of Jesus, mabye the Greeks also called them 'magi'?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Ed Sutton, probably, it was in blue //Kinda' hard for theses bodies to have been in two places at one time, namely Milan and Persia, I'd say. //

They say in England in during the 17th Century (1601-1700) Commonwealth of Great Britain (1649-1660), that there was enough 'splinter of the real Cross of Jesus' splinters in Britain to deck a Battleship of that time

 

[EdSutton]

So, you are the honor and I am the dishonor, I take it?

So, as you wrote it, you knew it was wrong, but continued to write it anyway, is that correct????

Hope you are ready to be a slave for the Jewish people, for they believe your soul is the same as cattle, that they will destroy all of you and me, except some for slavery.

[SIZE=+1]1 The Talmud said Jesus was, along with Balaam and Titus, one of the three greatest enemies of Judaism (Gittin 56b-57a). The New Testament confirms that the Pharisees considered Christ demon-possessed (John 8:48), a charlatan empowered by the devil (Matt. 12:24), a deceiver (Matt. 27:6), a blasphemer (Jn. 10:36), and having an unclean spirit (Mk. 3:30). The Talmud says He was a bastard, son of adulterous Mary (Sanhedrin 106b). He was hung on the eve of Passover because He was a sorcerer and apostate (Sanh. 43a). He was a fool who fell down and worshipped a brick (Sanh. 67a). He was executed by stoning, burning, decapitation, and strangling (Sanh. x.2:90a). Jews are encouraged to lecture against Christ (Sanh. 106b). Christ is in hell, wallowing in boiling hot excrement (Git. 56b-57a).[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]The Talmud recommends persecution of Christians. Christians are heretics (Abodah Zarah 16b), apostates (Shabbethai 116). Christians may be legally thrown into a pit to die (AZ, 26b). Christians deserve death for observing the Sabbath (even though they observe the Noahide laws) (Sanh. 58b) and studying the Old Testament (Sanh. 59a). Christianity is an unforgivable sin, seducing Jews to idolatry (AZ 17a). The testimony of a Christian is unworthy to be admitted to a Jewish court (Shulshan Aruk, Hoshen Mishpat 34,31). Jews are forbidden to return a lost article to a Christian (HM 266,2). Matthew, Luke, Nicodemus, and Thaddeus were executed as heretics ( Jewish Encyclopedia, "Jesus," page 171). Jews should rejoice, dress in white, and eat, drink, and be merry at the death of a Christian. They should hate a Christian with utmost hatred and consider him an enemy (Semahot ch. 2, p. 35).[/SIZE]

http://www.rense.com/general76/noahide.htm


BBob,

Lovely Anti-everything site, there, Brother Bob.

Check out his 'home page', there, to see what I mean.

Is that also your position and belief, as found in the article, as well?

Oh yeah, it is, isn't it? You are one of those who believes we are still required to "keep the 10 Commandments", if I remember correctly. Oh, I'm sorry! Just part of it, I guess, since the article is decrying millenial teaching, I believe. Or is it?? I really cannot tell, actually, just that Rev. Ted Pike, and Mr. Jeff Rense, seem unhappy about almost everything. "Never saw a conspiracy they didn't like", maybe.

I did read that article, BTW, as well as scanned the home page of the 'parent page'.

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

In all likelihood they were Persian or Babylonian (Chaldee) astrologers and/or sorcerers, who were practitioners of witchcraft, "familiar spirits", magicians, etc.,

Is this a myth, supposition, scripture, or Ed Sutton doctrine ???

BBob

I see that Ed Edwards beat me to replying, but basically, he is correct.

In case it was not clear, and re-reading it it may not have been, some of the "sorcerers" are the practitioners of the above sort of things, and I included the "etc."; the (Persian) astrologers are not. That was why I used the "and/or". It is also to be pointed out that there were some who were not strictly astrologers who did practice such things.

The Scriptures are these: Mt. 2:1, 7, 16 (2x); Ac: 13:6, 8. The Greek word here is "magus"; the plural of "magus" is "magoi". The word is rendered as both "wise man", and "sorcerer", in the KJV. The YLT does the best job of rendering this as "Magi" and "magian".

Related Scriptures include Ac. 8:11, where the word here is "mageia". It is rendered as "sorcery". "deeds of magic" is more accurate, as the YLT.

And Ac. 8:9, where the word is "mageuO", rendered in the KJV as "use sorcery". YLT says "using magic". Check out the DARBY, ESV, NASB, and ESV, as well, in these verses.

The word "magoi" is the LXX rendering of the Heb. word (whatever that word actually happens to be, as I don't read Hebrew, at all) in Dan. 2, and I believe, in Jer. 39. This is cited by Thayer.

One other verse that touches on this is found in Esth. 1:13. There, of the wise men (of Persia), it is said that they were those "who understood the times". (NKJV) And they are listed among the educated, in the same verse. I do not know if the LXX renders this as "magoi", as I do not possess a copy of the LXX. But it does seem to fit the other Scriptures cited, and also to give support to them being Persian.

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

Lovely Anti-everything site, there, Brother Bob.

Check out his 'home page', there, to see what I mean.

Is that also your position and belief, as found in the article, as well?

Oh yeah, it is, isn't it? You are one of those who believes we are still required to "keep the 10 Commandments", if I remember correctly. Oh, I'm sorry! Just part of it, I guess, since the article is decrying millenial teaching, I believe. Or is it?? I really cannot tell, actually, just that Rev. Ted Pike, and Mr. Jeff Rense, seem unhappy about almost everything. "Never saw a conspiracy they didn't like", maybe.

I did read that article, BTW, as well as scanned the home page of the 'parent page'.

Ed

This is not the only reading on the belief's of the Jews.

The Talmud recommends persecution of Christians. Which he used the Talmud as part of his research.

I understand the Talmud is second only to the Hebrew Bible!

Are you saying it is untrue that the Jews do not believe that they will destroy all the Gentiles just before the MK?
BBob,

 

[skypair]

I was not speaking of Ezek 47, but rather:


Do you believe that because I do not believe you on the "end times" doctrine, does that mean that I am lost according to your belief???

Of course not, Bob. No more than you think I will turn Jewish. I merely thought you would study these things out and get a blessing of growing in the faith and knowledge of Christ. I thought that others "lurking" would learn the depth of the issues as well.

I realize you weren't speaking from Ezek 47 but I had averred that Zech 14 = Ezek 47, that these living waters gave physical, not spiritual, life. And there is a 3rd such literal river that is both spiritual and physical in yet another kingdom/dispensation --- in Rev 22. Are you going, under the but preponderance of all this evidence, to claim that THIS throne (22:3) too is spiritual? If you do, I would again have to say that you do a disservice to scripture and to your flock.

And I would just say, Bob, "Get into the battle for the Bible with the rest of us Philadelphians!!" Just begin by taking these three passages and convincing yourself that they aren't equal to the spiritual "living water" that Jesus spoke of even though they convey some of the same ideas. And if they are not spiritual, Bob, where do they belong ---- in history or eschatology?

I mean, you're right to this extent --- Jesus spoke of spiritual living waters when He inaugurated His spiritual kingdom at the first advent. But Zech 14, Ezek 47, and Rev 22 don't speak of that at all! They speak of 2 earthly kingdoms to come so far as I can tell --- Christ's kingdom and God's kingdom, literal physical kingdoms on literal physical earth.

And then you can wonder why the waters in Rev 22 have to heal the nations in God's kingdom. :laugh: And so I will show you Rev 7:17 -- and so on and so on like we always do! :laugh:

skypair

 

[Brother Bob]

Of course not, Bob. No more than you think I will turn Jewish. I merely thought you would study these things out and get a blessing of growing in the faith and knowledge of Christ. I thought that others "lurking" would learn the depth of the issues as well.

I realize you weren't speaking from Ezek 47 but I had averred that Zech 14 = Ezek 47, that these living waters gave physical, not spiritual, life. And there is a 3rd such literal river that is both spiritual and physical in yet another kingdom/dispensation --- in Rev 22. Are you going, under the but preponderance of all this evidence, to claim that THIS throne (22:3) too is spiritual? If you do, I would again have to say that you do a disservice to scripture and to your flock.

And I would just say, Bob, "Get into the battle for the Bible with the rest of us Philadelphians!!" Just begin by taking these three passages and convincing yourself that they aren't equal to the spiritual "living water" that Jesus spoke of even though they convey some of the same ideas. And if they are not spiritual, Bob, where do they belong ---- in history or eschatology?

I mean, you're right to this extent --- Jesus spoke of spiritual living waters when He inaugurated His spiritual kingdom at the first advent. But Zech 14, Ezek 47, and Rev 22 don't speak of that at all! They speak of 2 earthly kingdoms to come so far as I can tell --- Christ's kingdom and God's kingdom, literal physical kingdoms on literal physical earth.

And then you can wonder why the waters in Rev 22 have to heal the nations in God's kingdom. :laugh: And so I will show you Rev 7:17 -- and so on and so on like we always do! :laugh:

skypair

You are living in the past. I suspect that I have studied the Bible much longer than you have. I base my belief on the eschatology of Jesus Christ, which in no way includes your belief of the "end times".

BBob,

 

[skypair]

You are living in the past. I suspect that I have studied the Bible much longer than you have. I base my belief on the eschatology of Jesus Christ, which in no way includes your belief of the "end times".,

Actually, it is YOU that admits to "living in the past" --- the eschatology that was "believed until the past 300 years" I think you said.

Mine lives in the day when we have SEEn God's promises being fulfilled to ISRAEL for 60 years! We can even look into Zech 10 and take note of the development of the situation as we see it today! And it is ALL so that they may receive the kingdom God promised them since Abraham.

Back 300 years ago -- or even 70 years ago -- all this would seem to have been forgotten by God or apply to someone else. But at this point in time, I think people that believe the Bible can see what's really coming. :thumbs:

Again, I would encourage you to question the disconnect you have between physical and spiritual "living waters" and what the implications of you being wrong are. There's really no need to go any further than those passages until you are convicted of you error.

skypair

 

[EdSutton]

This is not the only reading on the belief's of the Jews.

The Talmud recommends persecution of Christians. Which he used the Talmud as part of his research.

I understand the Talmud is second only to the Hebrew Bible!

Are you saying it is untrue that the Jews do not believe that they will destroy all the Gentiles just before the MK?
BBob,

I do not know the particulars (nor do I particularly care to) of Talmudic Judaism. But I do recognize thinly veiled Anti-Semitism. And the site from which you excerpted qualifies. The usage of the term "the Jews" shows this, exactly, for it is intended to be a characterizing of a people in an "us" vs. "them" scenario.

The Lord Jesus Christ was a Jew. The apostles that wrote in the NT were all Jews, wiht the possible exception of Luke (being an Apostle, that is). The prophets that wrote in the OT were all Jews. In fact, with no more than a very few exceptions, namely Luke in the NT, perhaps the author of Job in the OT and perhaps a couple more OT authors, every individual who wrote Scripture was a Jew. None of the writers of Scripture said anything, anywhere, about destroying all the Gentiles just before the Kingdom Age.

Ed