| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Ananias917" |
| Date: |
31 Dec 2005 01:28:28 PM |
| Object: |
Re: MISUNDERSTANDING "I AM COMING SOON" |
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 17:19:35 -0800, oldwetdog
<oldwetdog@hotmail.com> spake thusly:
Below, Glenn has specifically said that the Bible
is wrong and I will show you that, since he said
it clearly, in his own words, further down in this
message, that I am quoting and responding to.
MISUNDERSTANDING "I AM COMING SOON"
Has anyone else noticed that Glenn's posts center on
telling us why we shouldn't take various phrases as
they are written?
Has anyone noticed that futurists as a whole spend
a lot of time telling us why we shouldn't take these
time statements as they are written?
Are these some fantastic statements, that require
some great Biblical genius and decades of scholarly
research to understand?
Or does "soon" mean "soon" and "at hand" mean
just what it says?
In Ezekiel 12:17-28, we see that God sent Ezekiel in,
to tell the people to stop claiming the destruction
was a long way off and that it was going to happen
to them, the same generation that it was prophesied
to and that "at hand" and "this generation" meant
just what they said.
Glenn says below that the writers of the NT were wrong.
Was God wrong too, when He told Ezekiel to tell them
that it was going to happen to them, just as Jesus did?
Are we to think that God wanted us to open our Bibles
and reword it, so that even the simplest of terms
should be changed to mean THE EXACT OPPOSITE
of what they say, so that we can take the fantastic
statements and make them physically literal?
Did God want us to believe, as Glenn stated, that
the writers of the NT were WRONG, so that we
can hang on to our own personal doctrines?
Did God want us to take one statement by Peter,
that was obvious exaggeration to make a point
about the church he wrote to being patient in
their waiting for the Lord and redefine all of
the multitude of imminence statements in the
Scriptures by it and assume that this one is literal
and that the multitude of imminence statements
mean the exact opposite of what they say?
Or does God want us to take the statement by Peter
as the obvious exaggeration that it is, since we know
that if God is not bound by time, then that means
that He obviously doesn't have 1,000 year days
either and Peter was just making the point to that
church that they needed to wait patiently, since to
humans, even waiting days makes us impatient? :)
So if you want, spend your time trying to figure out
how to teach people how to redefine words out of
their common sense meaning, as if God wanted to
use Koine Greek, which was the common man's
Greek, because He wanted to confuse the common
man as much as possible and chose the common
man's language of the street, because He wanted
to secretly encode the words to mean the opposite,
so that only the true geniuses of the world could
understand this "Opposite Code" that God invented.
You go ahead and you do that. I guess that way,
you can be like the Roman Catholic Church, who
kept the people down for so long, by telling them
that they needed to have it interpreted by them
and that God never intended the common man
to understand the simplicity of the Gospel.
Hmmmm, maybe we're actually all wrong and none
of us are saved after all? I mean, how many of us did
what the Glenn's of the world want us to do, which is
to come to THEM in order to understand what the
Bible is REALLY saying? I mean it is clear that with
all of the teachings by the futurists, that we need
special codes and understandings of even simple
words, in order to read our Bibles fruitfully.
I don't know. To me, that seems to be the opposite
of what God intended for His word. When I read
this kind of stuff, I feel like I did back when I was
a Roman Catholic. The word couldn't be clearly
understood by us. "This" actually equals "that".
Don't think you can know the truth, without the
teaching we give you, etc..
It seems to me, that Glenn is no different, when
he says what he says. He claims that Jesus is
returning within our life time.
Not "maybe" mind you, but that it is going to happen.
He call this, "the Truth". That's his label for his
teaching. Don't they all have labels, when they
try to convince you that words don't mean what
they say?
Rev 3:11 "I am coming soon."
Well, first, "soon" is not a Definitive Time, but a relative time.
See what I mean?
"I am coming soon" does NOT mean "I am coming in thirty or forty years."
Isn't it amazing how Glenn tells us it's "relative",
but then seems to know for sure what it does
NOT mean?
And relative TO WHAT? He doesn't tell you that
here, but what he means, is relative to what he
calls, "the Truth", which is his claim that Jesus
is returning within our generation today.
Isn't it amazing how the futurists spend their time
telling us how the word "generation" doesn't mean
"generation", but really means, "an age", or "a nation"
and yet, when they want to claim that Jesus is coming
in THEIR life time, all of the sudden, the word means
just what I told them it did, which is, "generation"?
Hmmmmm... :)
And Most Certainly, "I am coming soon" does NOT mean "I am coming in the
lifetime of this generation." In Fact, "I am coming soon" does not mean
"I am coming in AD 70."
Now how can Glenn know that it does NOT mean that,
FOR SURE? He hasn't told us what it is relative TO
yet. That's because he knows that if he said what he
labels as "the Truth" in THIS message, that he would
look the foolish man that he is and he would embarrass
himself. :)
Actually, all "I am coming soon" can mean is "I am coming soon" and
nothing more specific.
Nothing more specific, yet he specifically told us what
it does not mean.
You see, now we've gone from "soon is a relative term",
to "soon doesn't mean any amount of time at all".
Don't be surprised folks, if you end up exactly where
Glenn wants you in the time line. His life time.
Wait for it. He'll post about it. You'll see.
But first, I guarantee that Glenn is going to tell you
how the writers of the Bible were wrong.
Let's take a look see and see what we find below...
<snip>
The supporters of Preterism must insist that those
Early Saints who were incorrect in their expectations
of the return of the Lord in their lifetime were not
wrong after all.
Yup, there it is boys and girls, Glenn says the writers
of the NT WERE WRONG!!!
But of course, he is right. Yes, that's it boys and
girls, don't trust the Bible... TRUST GLENN!!!!!
Do you see what he's telling you here, folks?
He's telling you NOT to believe anything I post,
BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE BIBLE!!!
He is telling you not to believe my posts, because
I declare that the writers of the NT GOT IT RIGHT!!!
HUH?!?!?!
And to do that; they must deny the
Prophecy of Daniel: that the visions were closed and sealed until the
time of the end.
Translation: He means HIS INTERPRETATION of what
the prophecy of Daniel says.
Jesus gave a list of events in answer the disciple’s question, "What
will be the signs of your coming and the end of the age?"
(Note: The "end of the age" and the "end of the World" are concurrent
and synonymous. The Last Days must contain "the Last Day." The Last Day
must include the last Hour. There will be NO MORE TIME after that Last
Hour of that Last Day of those Last Days.)
Now Glenn CLAIMS that they are "synonymous".
Has he PROVED that to be the case? No!
The "last days" does not mean the "end of time".
Nowhere does the Bible say "the end of time".
It is the last days of a specific age. Can Glenn
show you anywhere in which the Bible says that
the "last days" mean "the end of time"? The Bible
specifically says that they mean, "the end of the age".
Why doesn't Glenn just believe what the Bible says?
Oh wait, that's right! Because the writers of
the Bible were wrong, according to Glenn!
He just finished saying that, above!
You see folks, what Glenn doesn't tell you, is that if
he were right, that would mean that there can be no
eternal Kingdom of God. You see, if Jesus meant that
everything comes to an end and there is nothing more
after these events, then how can we be in the Kingdom
for eternity?
<snip list of Bible passages>
You see folks, what Glenn doesn't tell you, is that if
the writers of the NT were wrong about the central
focus of the NT, which besides initial salvation, was
the return of Christ, that means that any passages
he quotes to try to prove his claim that Jesus is
returning in his generation, is just Glenn making
a hypocrite of himself. How can someone quote
the NT to try to prove their point that Jesus has
yet to return, after saying that the writers of the NT
were wrong about that very issue?!
We don't get to pick and choose what to believe.
And while Glenn tries to make what he will claim
is a Scriptural argument, he has already taken
away from himself the ability to quote the Bible,
because he said it is wrong.
All Glenn can offer, is HIS INTERPRETATION,
that, like the RCC, he will claim is the right one
and that you need to believe HIM, to be saved.
After all, hasn't Glenn repeatedly stated that I am
working for Satan? Therefore, he isn't he declaring
that I am not a Christian? That I am not saved?
And why is he saying that about me? BECAUSE
I BELIEVE THE BIBLE!!!
Make no mistake people, he is not saying to believe
THE BIBLE.
He has already stated above, that THE BIBLE
IS WRONG!!!
He is saying to BELIEVE HIM and wants YOU
to declare along with him, THE BIBLE IS WRONG!!!
You see, Glenn has what he calls (caps his)...
"the Truth"
....and that "Truth" is that Jesus is returning within
this generation and that there is no doubt about that.
Not maybe, but definitely, says Glenn and Glenn is
upset, because I have exposed him for what he is.
Glenn is upset because I take at face value, when
the writers of the NT taught that Jesus was to
return, which was within that generation. He knows
they taught this and he knows I have proved it to him.
That's why he has taken this relatively new position
of his, that the writers of the NT were wrong.
This interferes with Glenn's doctrine and since
Glenn knows that I have proved it to him (he admits
that the NT teaches it above), he has made the choice
that he would rather believe himself and his own
doctrine, than to believe the Bible.
Now knowing that Glenn is the most adamant about
Christ not having returned within the generation
that was alive when He walked the Earth and knowing
that it obviously took a lot to prove to Glenn that
the writers of the NT did believe AND TEACH THE
CHURCHES that He was coming within that generation,
what will YOUR choice be?
1) To believe the Bible and that means all of it?
2) To believe your own doctrines and claim that
this isn't a big deal, even though besides initial
salvation, it was the central focus of the teaching
of the Apostles to the churches?
You decide. I have made my choice.
I do know that to disbelieve the Bible and claim that
Jesus is coming, makes a person no different than
those who made the false claims and lead people out
into the wilderness, claiming they had "the Truth".
We wouldn't call them Christians. Why not go to
your churches this weekend and stand up and tell
everyone how the writers of the NT were wrong,
but you guys are right? Well??? Any takers? :)
--
"And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house;
and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the
Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way
as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest
receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."
- Acts 9:17
Evolution =
Unknown chemicals in the primordial past...through...
Unknown processes which no longer exist...produced...
Unknown life forms which are not to be found, but
could through...
Unknown reproduction methods spawn new life...in an..
Unknown atmospheric composition...in an...
Unknown oceanic soup complex...at an...
Unknown time and place.
Dr. Henry Morris
.
|
|
| User: "Bull" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: MISUNDERSTANDING "I AM COMING SOON" |
31 Dec 2005 03:44:09 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:28:28 GMT, Ananias917
<_-_Ananias917_-_@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 17:19:35 -0800, oldwetdog
<oldwetdog@hotmail.com> spake thusly:
Below, Glenn has specifically said that the Bible
is wrong and I will show you that, since he said
it clearly, in his own words, further down in this
message, that I am quoting and responding to.
MISUNDERSTANDING "I AM COMING SOON"
Has anyone else noticed that Glenn's posts center
on
telling us why we shouldn't take various phrases
as
they are written?
Has anyone noticed that futurists as a whole spend
a lot of time telling us why we shouldn't take
these
time statements as they are written?
Are these some fantastic statements, that require
some great Biblical genius and decades of
scholarly
research to understand?
Or does "soon" mean "soon" and "at hand" mean
just what it says?
In Ezekiel 12:17-28, we see that God sent Ezekiel
in,
to tell the people to stop claiming the
destruction
was a long way off and that it was going to happen
to them, the same generation that it was
prophesied
to and that "at hand" and "this generation" meant
just what they said.
Glenn says below that the writers of the NT were
wrong.
Was God wrong too, when He told Ezekiel to tell
them
that it was going to happen to them, just as Jesus
did?
Are we to think that God wanted us to open our
Bibles
and reword it, so that even the simplest of terms
should be changed to mean THE EXACT OPPOSITE
of what they say, so that we can take the
fantastic
statements and make them physically literal?
Did God want us to believe, as Glenn stated, that
the writers of the NT were WRONG, so that we
can hang on to our own personal doctrines?
Did God want us to take one statement by Peter,
that was obvious exaggeration to make a point
about the church he wrote to being patient in
their waiting for the Lord and redefine all of
the multitude of imminence statements in the
Scriptures by it and assume that this one is
literal
and that the multitude of imminence statements
mean the exact opposite of what they say?
Or does God want us to take the statement by Peter
as the obvious exaggeration that it is, since we
know
that if God is not bound by time, then that means
that He obviously doesn't have 1,000 year days
either and Peter was just making the point to that
church that they needed to wait patiently, since
to
humans, even waiting days makes us impatient? :)
So if you want, spend your time trying to figure
out
how to teach people how to redefine words out of
their common sense meaning, as if God wanted to
use Koine Greek, which was the common man's
Greek, because He wanted to confuse the common
man as much as possible and chose the common
man's language of the street, because He wanted
to secretly encode the words to mean the opposite,
so that only the true geniuses of the world could
understand this "Opposite Code" that God invented.
You go ahead and you do that. I guess that way,
you can be like the Roman Catholic Church, who
kept the people down for so long, by telling them
that they needed to have it interpreted by them
and that God never intended the common man
to understand the simplicity of the Gospel.
Hmmmm, maybe we're actually all wrong and none
of us are saved after all? I mean, how many of us
did
what the Glenn's of the world want us to do, which
is
to come to THEM in order to understand what the
Bible is REALLY saying? I mean it is clear that
with
all of the teachings by the futurists, that we
need
special codes and understandings of even simple
words, in order to read our Bibles fruitfully.
I don't know. To me, that seems to be the
opposite
of what God intended for His word. When I read
this kind of stuff, I feel like I did back when I
was
a Roman Catholic. The word couldn't be clearly
understood by us. "This" actually equals "that".
Don't think you can know the truth, without the
teaching we give you, etc..
It seems to me, that Glenn is no different, when
he says what he says. He claims that Jesus is
returning within our life time.
Not "maybe" mind you, but that it is going to
happen.
He call this, "the Truth". That's his label for
his
teaching. Don't they all have labels, when they
try to convince you that words don't mean what
they say?
Rev 3:11 "I am coming soon."
Well, first, "soon" is not a Definitive Time, but
a relative time.
See what I mean?
"I am coming soon" does NOT mean "I am coming in
thirty or forty years."
Isn't it amazing how Glenn tells us it's
"relative",
but then seems to know for sure what it does
NOT mean?
And relative TO WHAT? He doesn't tell you that
here, but what he means, is relative to what he
calls, "the Truth", which is his claim that Jesus
is returning within our generation today.
Isn't it amazing how the futurists spend their
time
telling us how the word "generation" doesn't mean
"generation", but really means, "an age", or "a
nation"
and yet, when they want to claim that Jesus is
coming
in THEIR life time, all of the sudden, the word
means
just what I told them it did, which is,
"generation"?
Hmmmmm... :)
And Most Certainly, "I am coming soon" does NOT
mean "I am coming in the
lifetime of this generation." In Fact, "I am
coming soon" does not mean
"I am coming in AD 70."
Now how can Glenn know that it does NOT mean that,
FOR SURE? He hasn't told us what it is relative
TO
yet. That's because he knows that if he said what
he
labels as "the Truth" in THIS message, that he
would
look the foolish man that he is and he would
embarrass
himself. :)
Actually, all "I am coming soon" can mean is "I
am coming soon" and
nothing more specific.
Nothing more specific, yet he specifically told us
what
it does not mean.
You see, now we've gone from "soon is a relative
term",
to "soon doesn't mean any amount of time at all".
Don't be surprised folks, if you end up exactly
where
Glenn wants you in the time line. His life time.
Wait for it. He'll post about it. You'll see.
But first, I guarantee that Glenn is going to tell
you
how the writers of the Bible were wrong.
Let's take a look see and see what we find
below...
<snip>
The supporters of Preterism must insist that
those
Early Saints who were incorrect in their
expectations
of the return of the Lord in their lifetime were
not
wrong after all.
Yup, there it is boys and girls, Glenn says the
writers
of the NT WERE WRONG!!!
But of course, he is right. Yes, that's it boys
and
girls, don't trust the Bible... TRUST GLENN!!!!!
Do you see what he's telling you here, folks?
He's telling you NOT to believe anything I post,
BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE BIBLE!!!
He is telling you not to believe my posts, because
I declare that the writers of the NT GOT IT
RIGHT!!!
HUH?!?!?!
And to do that; they must deny the
Prophecy of Daniel: that the visions were closed
and sealed until the
time of the end.
Translation: He means HIS INTERPRETATION of what
the prophecy of Daniel says.
Jesus gave a list of events in answer the
disciple’s question, "What
will be the signs of your coming and the end of
the age?"
(Note: The "end of the age" and the "end of the
World" are concurrent
and synonymous. The Last Days must contain "the
Last Day." The Last Day
must include the last Hour. There will be NO MORE
TIME after that Last
Hour of that Last Day of those Last Days.)
Now Glenn CLAIMS that they are "synonymous".
Has he PROVED that to be the case? No!
The "last days" does not mean the "end of time".
Nowhere does the Bible say "the end of time".
It is the last days of a specific age. Can Glenn
show you anywhere in which the Bible says that
the "last days" mean "the end of time"? The Bible
specifically says that they mean, "the end of the
age".
Why doesn't Glenn just believe what the Bible
says?
Oh wait, that's right! Because the writers of
the Bible were wrong, according to Glenn!
He just finished saying that, above!
You see folks, what Glenn doesn't tell you, is
that if
he were right, that would mean that there can be
no
eternal Kingdom of God. You see, if Jesus meant
that
everything comes to an end and there is nothing
more
after these events, then how can we be in the
Kingdom
for eternity?
<snip list of Bible passages>
You see folks, what Glenn doesn't tell you, is
that if
the writers of the NT were wrong about the central
focus of the NT, which besides initial salvation,
was
the return of Christ, that means that any passages
he quotes to try to prove his claim that Jesus is
returning in his generation, is just Glenn making
a hypocrite of himself. How can someone quote
the NT to try to prove their point that Jesus has
yet to return, after saying that the writers of
the NT
were wrong about that very issue?!
We don't get to pick and choose what to believe.
And while Glenn tries to make what he will claim
is a Scriptural argument, he has already taken
away from himself the ability to quote the Bible,
because he said it is wrong.
All Glenn can offer, is HIS INTERPRETATION,
that, like the RCC, he will claim is the right one
and that you need to believe HIM, to be saved.
After all, hasn't Glenn repeatedly stated that I
am
working for Satan? Therefore, he isn't he
declaring
that I am not a Christian? That I am not saved?
And why is he saying that about me? BECAUSE
I BELIEVE THE BIBLE!!!
Make no mistake people, he is not saying to
believe
THE BIBLE.
He has already stated above, that THE BIBLE
IS WRONG!!!
He is saying to BELIEVE HIM and wants YOU
to declare along with him, THE BIBLE IS WRONG!!!
You see, Glenn has what he calls (caps his)...
"the Truth"
....and that "Truth" is that Jesus is returning
within
this generation and that there is no doubt about
that.
Not maybe, but definitely, says Glenn and Glenn is
upset, because I have exposed him for what he is.
Glenn is upset because I take at face value, when
the writers of the NT taught that Jesus was to
return, which was within that generation. He
knows
they taught this and he knows I have proved it to
him.
That's why he has taken this relatively new
position
of his, that the writers of the NT were wrong.
This interferes with Glenn's doctrine and since
Glenn knows that I have proved it to him (he
admits
that the NT teaches it above), he has made the
choice
that he would rather believe himself and his own
doctrine, than to believe the Bible.
Now knowing that Glenn is the most adamant about
Christ not having returned within the generation
that was alive when He walked the Earth and
knowing
that it obviously took a lot to prove to Glenn
that
the writers of the NT did believe AND TEACH THE
CHURCHES that He was coming within that
generation,
what will YOUR choice be?
1) To believe the Bible and that means all of it?
2) To believe your own doctrines and claim that
this isn't a big deal, even though besides initial
salvation, it was the central focus of the
teaching
of the Apostles to the churches?
You decide. I have made my choice.
I do know that to disbelieve the Bible and claim
that
Jesus is coming, makes a person no different than
those who made the false claims and lead people
out
into the wilderness, claiming they had "the
Truth".
We wouldn't call them Christians. Why not go to
your churches this weekend and stand up and tell
everyone how the writers of the NT were wrong,
but you guys are right? Well??? Any takers? :)
Isn't it amazing how much hate christians like
yourself can spew while they argue over the
saintliness of a little god who thought the world
was flat?
-
Omne vivum ex ovo
-
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
