And the Bible says this where?

On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 16:32:19 +1000, "Ray M O'Keeffe"
<raymokeeffe@888hotmail.com> spake thusly:

Prophecies for King of the North from Daniel 11 are starting to fall into
place.

They are history and this shows your desperation to make
the Bible all about you. It is well known history. Even
the study notes in my Bible, which is put together by people
who believe Jesus has yet to return, shows the historical
fulfillment of Daniel 11.

And why did you never respond to my rebuttal of your
"rod of iron" post?

Here it is again...


Let us note Ray, that you snipped the passages and
my comments and didn't deal with them. That is not
an honest approach, since it was my message that
you responded to. (:

1000 years reign is the start.

It is "the start"? :)

Now you are creating a whole new doctrine, in an effort to
hang on to the one that has been shown to be in error, Ray.
(:

I respond by saying; "Prove it". Where does the Bible say
that this is, "the start"?

Where does the Bible teach a 1,000 year reign of Christ
on Earth at all, Ray?

It doesn't, as I will demonstrate for you further down in
this message.

Ever watch a doctor or nurse for that matter,
with a syringe and they point it upwards to
have the air come to the top, then push it in
a little bit to eject the air and some fluid?

Ever see or hear of, the methods used in refining,
and how several passes of the process are required
to make things more pure. How dross comes to the
top and is scooped off.

These same principles can be seen in the 1000 years
of peace.

And the Bible says this where? You are just making things
up as you go! Do you seriously think that this
is proper Bible exegesis?!

I'm sure a number of end timers will grab onto what they
perceive as a life preserver thrown to them, while they're
drowning in the obvious errors which have been
revealed about their doctrine, but this is a very poor
attempt to avoid admitting the truth!

The goal is pure Peace, and it says Satan
is bound in chains for this duration and at
the end of that time, he is released one
more time to put ideas into people's heads
to egg them on to war.

Problem. Nowhere does the Bible teach this.

You end timers base this teaching of an physical, earthly
reign of Christ on the following passage...

"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and
judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls
of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus,
and for the word of God, and which had not worshiped
the beast, neither his image, neither had received his
mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they
lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years."
- Revelation 20:4

The Bible does not say that Christ reigns for
a thousand years. Read it carefully. What it
actually says, is...

"...and I saw the souls of *them* that were
beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the
word of God... and *they* lived and reigned
*with* Christ a thousand years."

Note that it talks about how long those who were beheaded
reigned with Christ and not how long
Christ Himself reigned. Since when is Christ's reign
temporary?

"...and THEY lived and reigned WITH Christ a thousand
years." - Revelation 20:4

It does not address when Christ began to reign, nor
for how long Christ reigns, but rather, only the reign
of the beheaded, WITH CHRIST.

If I say that I reigned with King Joey for one year,
does that mean that King Joey only reigned one year?

Better yet, if a woman marries a king who has held
the throne since he was 20 years old and that king
is now 40 years old when they marry and she reigned
with him for 40 years, until he died, does that mean
that her husband the king only reigned for 40 years,
or that SHE reigned WITH him for 40 years?

No, it certainly does not mean that Christ began
to reign at that point. It only discusses when
the beheaded began to reign WITH HIM. As
I will demonstrate later in this message, Christ
was already reigning at this point. You people
have Christ ascending to glory, receiving His
throne and yet, not reigning. Huh??? (:

Revelation 20 does not mention the Second Coming
of Christ.

Revelation 20 does not mention a reign on Earth.
In fact, it doesn't even mention Christ on Earth.

Revelation 20 does not mention a bodily resurrection.

Revelation 20 does not even mention us. It says
that *THEY* lived and reigned with Christ for a
thousand years. Who are *THEY*? Those who
were beheaded for witnessing about Christ.

It does NOT say they were BODILY resurrected.
John said he saw, "THE SOULS of them who were
beheaded for the witness of Jesus".

John does not see them on Earth. His is still
viewing events IN HEAVEN at the point he says
this.

Since none of what the end timers claim is mentioned
in Revelation 20:4, there is no way for them to support
their doctrine with Scripture and not imagination, which,
with all due respect, is all that has been provided to me
thus far.

The beheaded are in Heaven, not on Earth and have spiritual
bodies, not physical bodies and this demonstrates that the
victory is in the spiritual world, not the physical world.
The Pharisees were waiting for a physical victory, but guess
what?
Jesus said it was not going to happen.

So tell me Ray, where does this "1,000 year reign
of Christ on Earth" come from? It must come
from YOUR IMAGINATION, since it certainly
does NOT come from Scripture.

Let us see what Jesus said about a physical Kingdom
on Earth, noting that the Pharisees believed in a physical
kingdom and that if we study our history,
we will know this and even their current wait for a
physically ruling Messiah bears this out. The Jews
were the original Biblical end timers. :)

And frankly, the end timers should learn that this is the
whole reason they missed the boat when Jesus
was here. Because they did not see that the Messiah was not
coming to rule physically. They interpret Isaiah 53 as
being about THEM, as a nation. Were
you aware of that? Thus, once again, PRIDE is the cause of
a fall. (:

Yet here the end timers are, waiting for a physical Kingdom,
because it has to be all about THEM and
their pride, ego and vanity get in the way of sound
Scriptural teaching and their enjoyment of the Kingdom, just
as it did for the Pharisees then and the Jews, even today.
And it does for you end timers now. (:

I believe that the end timers also have another reason.
Fear. Fear of physical death. This is why the Rapture is
so popular, which is also not Biblical.

So while they claim to be born again Christians, loving
their fellow man, they are really wanting Jesus to come and
help them escape and they cheer on the destruction of the
planet, so that THEY can live in some fantasy paradise. That
is selfishness and no one who claims
to love their fellow man as Jesus instructed, should be
rooting for the end of the world. (: All they do now, is
basically to say, "To Hell with the world, it's doomed
anyway." and then they wonder why the world
is so bad off. (: This is why even the atheists bring this
up. They see your motivation!

Anyway, enough of that.

So knowing that the Jews, like the end timers today,
awaited a physical Kingdom, why don't we take a look
at what Jesus said to them, since they asked Him directly
about the supposed physical Kingdom that
was supposed to be set up by the Messiah. And there
is no getting around this. This is what Jesus said about
it, period.

Luke 17:20-21

20) And when he was demanded of the Pharisees,
when the kingdom of God should come, he answered
them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not
with observation:
21) Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there!
for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

Now let us look at what happened there.

The Pharisees asked when the Kingdom of God
would arrive and yes, they were asking about a
physical kingdom.

Jesus responds by telling them clearly, that it
would not be a physical kingdom.

He told them that they would not be able to point
at it and say, "There it is!". He said it can NOT
be seen with the eye.

Now given this clear statement by Jesus about
the Kingdom of God not being physical, in response
to those who were demanding to know when it would
come onto Earth, does it not make sense that when
we read other statements which may appear to be
literal, but do not actually say "literal and physical",
that we take them in the light of Jesus'
clear statement in Luke 17:20-21, instead of
automatically taking them as literal and then
trying to find a way to twist Jesus' words in
Luke 17:20-21, trying to make it so that He didn't
say what He clearly did say? Of course it does. :)
We must interpret Scripture in the light of what
Jesus', our Creator, said, period!

So why do you take the Kingdom that Jesus said
is within us and that we would NOT be able to see
and point at and try to make it a physical kingdom
on Earth, where Jesus just begins to reign and only
does so, for a thousand years, before being booted
by Satan? Is that the Jesus YOU worship? (: It
isn't the one I worship, that's for sure!

Is it possible Ray, that you are wrong about this?
Is that even possible? Maybe you should at least
consider the possibility that Jesus knew more about
it than Ray does?

As for the "thousand year" reign, the term "thousand" is
always used symbolically, when dealing with time
and large numbers of people or things, in the Scriptures.
Reference the following examples...

People and things:

Job 9:3; Psalm 50:10; Ecc 7:28

Time and generations:

Deut 7:9; 1 Chron 16:15; Psalm 90:4

There are more examples.

As I said, the Bible clearly states that Christ's reign
is forever...

Luke 1:31-33

31) And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and
bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of
the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the
throne of his father David:
33) And he shall reign over the house of Jacob FOREVER;
and of his kingdom there shall be NO END.

This seems pretty clear to me. So why twist Jesus' simple
statements, in order to make the fantastic
statements of Scripture literal, when Jesus said
otherwise?

I.e., You are disobeying Jesus' direct command on how
He means what He says. The Kingdom of God is WITHIN
us, not "around" us. We will NOT be able to point at it,
which means it wouldn't be something we could SEE
WITH OUR EYES.

And before someone says, "That word should be translated as
'in your midst' and not as 'within' you".

Don't bother, because that isn't true. The word does mean,
"within". Look it up in Strong's.

Also, you would leave yourself with a bigger problem,
since Jesus would be saying (if you are right) that
a physical Kingdom was in their midst and it obviously
wasn't. Therefore, to try to make that claim, is a self
defeating argument. :)

It is at the end of this 1000 years that Jesus starts
his final reign for eternity.

How can that be, when according to you, Jesus has
to step down for a while and let Satan go nuts on the Earth?
If the 1,000 year reign ends and Jesus immediately starts
His eternal reign, then where is the time you are trying to
allot for Satan to rule again?

And how is His reign starting immediately at the end
of His 1,000 year reign a break? It isn't and that means
that His reign did not end, which means it
wasn't a 1,000 year reign, but rather, eternal, which is
what I have been saying all along, which means
that while trying not to, you are actually agreeing
with me and just destroyed your own doctrine! :)

The 1000 years is the start of it, and there will be
people born into this kingdom on earth. There are
many prophecies to be fulfilled including youth over
100 years old, yes youth.

That is a claim, not proof and I'm sorry buddy, but that
doesn't work. The Bible says that Christ's reign is
forever.

Luke 1:31-33

31) And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb,
and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son
of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him
the throne of his father David:
33) And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever;
and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

If He reigns for 1,000 years, that means that after 1,000
years He is not reigning. That means that His reign ends,
whether temporarily or not, after 1,000 years. Since Satan
supposedly takes over again,
He is getting booted by Satan.

In other words, you can't have it both ways. Either
He reigns forever, which means no end to His reign,
for any reason, or He reigns for 1,000 years and then it
ends and Satan does his thing, which is what you had
preached prior to this message and then He reigns again.

You see, when you believe that His reign will be on Earth,
that means that when discussing His reign,
it is an Earthly reign that is under discussion and so,
Luke 1:31-33 must be taken in that light also and thus,
you end up with a contradiction. And now you have
contradicted yourself anyway.

The knowledge which brings eternal life is one
put into practice. The word of God as you say,
is the ruling factor, perhaps the rod of iron you
speak of,

In other words, you are now forced to admit that
based on the following text (which I "unsnipped"
for you), this "rod of iron" quote is not what you
previously claimed. Here it is again for you...

The end timers quote the following passage as proof
that Christ would physically rule Earth, from Earth.

Psalm 2:8-9

8) Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen
for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts
of the earth for thy possession.
9) Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron;
thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's
vessel.

They ask, "Where is He, ruling with a rod of iron?".

They also quote the following passage...

"And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule
all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was
caught up unto God, and to his throne." - Rev 12:5

So where is He doing that, they demand to know?

Well, first of all, look at the passage above.

It says that the child was caught *UP* to His throne.
So where is His throne? IN HEAVEN and NOT on Earth!

Anyway, to get back to the "rod of iron" statements,
the end times teachings that these people get from
books and TV shows and at church, never shows
them the following passages, which are directly
related, since Isaiah spoke of this also.

"But with righteousness shall he judge the poor,
and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth:
and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his
mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he
slay the wicked." - Isaiah 11:4

Note: He will smite the Earth with the rod of
*_HIS MOUTH_* !

And He would slay the wicked with *THE BREATH
OF HIS LIPS*!!! It is HIS WORDS that defeat them!

See also, in Revelation, the following, considering
that even the end timers know about that (they just
don't apply it here when they teach you these things
on these TV shows and in books, etc., because it
interferes with their doctrines)...

"And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with
it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them
with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of
the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God." - Rev 19:15

Note: OUT OF HIS MOUTH goes a sharp sword.

And those who listen to these teachings do not
study their Bibles. They say they are and may even
think they are, but in reality, it is an ignorance of
the Old Testament and a lack of careful consideration
of the texts, even in the NT, that accounts for these
errors in the doctrines that they believe in. They
look at the verse and even just a part of a verse that
they are shown and say, "Yup, there it is right there!"
but they don't REALLY EXAMINE the Bible, to see
the FULL TEACHING OF THE WHOLE BIBLE on
these various aspects of these doctrines.

So while the end timers think they have some proof,
the "rod of iron" and "the sword" is the word of God.
That is what the Bible says and that is what the Bible
teaches us.

Hebrews 4:12-13

12) For the Word of God is living and powerful and
sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to
the dividing apart of soul and spirit, and of the
joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts
and intents of the heart.
13) Neither is there any creature that is not manifest
in His sight, but all things are naked and opened to
the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.

The fact is Ray, that no matter how your belief is shown to
be in error, you will try to hang on to it, even if it means
doing some more Scripture shuffling and twisting and
rearranging of your man made doctrine, you simply will not
let it go, because it JUST HAS TO BE ALL ABOUT RAY, RIGHT?!

but one thing is for sure it is God's ways
and methods for living, which promote
good health and long life.

What do people that will live forever need to worry about
"good health" for? You see, once again,
you have Scripture contradicting itself, even within the
Scriptures that the end timers quote, as I will demonstrate
further down.

During that 1000 years the youth dying at just
over 100 will be considered a curse. We still have
accountability for our actions, we still can choose
to do things within the vastness of free will which
does not sow evil.

So in other words, now according to you, those who have been
raised to eternal life, now end up dying again and have to
face another judgment. Gotcha. Boy, you are REALLY
twisting up a STORM there, Ray! (:

In other words, you are forced to acknowledge that this "rod
of iron" is not what you thought it was, but you want to
hang on to your "Earthly rule" claim anyway.
The fact is, that it is symbolic.

You see, the end timers have claimed that this scenario
meant no more death. It would be our new bodies and
we would live forever on a new Earth. In fact, they quote
the following passages...

"There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old
man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die a
hundred years old; but the sinner being a hundred years old
shall be accursed." - Isaiah 65:20

And...

"And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes;
and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow,
nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the
former things are passed away." - Revelation 21:4

You see, the problem is, in their end times studies
that their end times teachers show them, they have
never looked at these two passages together. They
contradict each other, if we take them literally.

Tell me Ray, if there will be no more death, then how
will the child "die a hundred years old"?

How is that going to happen, Ray?

You see, now you've buried yourself in even deeper.
Now you're stuck saying that we will be resurrected
and get these new bodies, only to die again and to
have Satan boot Christ off His throne and have things
deteriorate again.

Oh, but hey Ray, how does that work with the, "no more
death" and "wipe away their tears" things, Ray?

You see Ray, if I knew that Christ was going to be booted
off the throne in 1,000 years and I was
going to die all over again, thereby seeing God break
His word about "no more death" (which you apply physically),
then I'd be crying up a storm!

And don't tell me that you don't believe Christ is going to
be booted by Satan, because if He is reigning
and then He isn't and Satan takes over again (poor
hundred year old children! <pout>), then that is exactly
what's happening!

So now, which is it Ray? Which scenario do you wish
to believe in? As I said above, you have Scripture
contradicting itself.

So to say the son of man (Jesus) rules forever
in Daniel, does not take away from the fact of
the first 1000 years of that being the peace refining,
when those born during that millenium will be tested
again, and some of them will gather for war, a second
Armageddon. But this one is over quick in Rev 20?
Where simple lightning consumes them.

First of all, Daniel says not one word of what you're
claiming he does.

So let me get this straight. Now you have them gathering
for a "SECOND ARMAGEDDON"?!?!?!

THE BIBLE DOES NOT TEACH THIS!!!

There is no, "SECOND ARMAGEDDON" in Scripture!

And as I said, you cannot have it both ways. Here you are
forced to admit that Daniel says that He receives His reign
when He ascends and not when He descends
to Earth, which the Bible never says that He does, for any
reign and yet, you try to talk AROUND the FACTS.

When Christ takes His throne (already has), He reigns
forever, Ray. Forever!

Now, as to WHEN He reigns, what does Daniel say,
when discussing the four empires (and does not
mention any break)?

"And IN THE DAYS OF THESE KINGS shall the God
of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be
destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other
people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all
these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever."
- Daniel 2:44

Thus, His reign would be set up IN THE DAYS OF
THESE KINGS" and not thousands of years after that.

And Christ's reign IS eternal (Luke 1:31-33)!

And is this when He descends to Earth, as they believe, or
when He ascends to Heaven? What does Daniel say?

Ancient of Days = God the Father
Son of Man = Jesus Christ

Daniel 7:13-14

13) I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like
the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven,
and came *_TO_* to the Ancient of days, and they
brought him near before him.
14) And there was given him dominion, and glory,
and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages,
should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting
dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom
that which shall not be destroyed.

Note that He received His Kingdom when He ASCENDED.
He was not waiting to one day receive it. Take a look.

The Father (Ancient of Days) is in Heaven and it says
that He came *_TO_* the Ancient of Days and received
His dominion and glory, etc. and it says that His
dominion *IS* an everlasting dominion, thus proving
that it is a present tense statement at the time of
His ascension and that it is EVERLASTING. It is
NOT some 1,000 year reign. You can't have it both
ways. It can't be forever and end, even if temporarily
since it says that it is "everlasting" at the time He
receives it, which IS WHEN HE ASCENDED.

We should also take a look at Stephen's response,
when they were stoning him...

Acts 7:55-56

55) But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up
steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and
Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56) And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the
Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

Face it Ray, you are making things up and adding to the
Bible, in order to save YOUR MAN MADE DOCTRINE,
rather than bowing to the Lord and submitting yourself
to His word!

When your doctrine doesn't fit the Bible and it most
certainly does not, a born again Christian changes
his doctrine to reconcile with the Scriptures. He/she
does not try to change the Scripture to suit his/her
doctrine!

Shame on you, Ray! SHAME ON YOU, RAY!!!

--

Pastor Dave
1st Century Church of Christ

The end timers believe in a literal, physical
New Jerusalem. But is that what Scripture teaches?
No, it doesn't! So what is the New Jerusalem? It
is amazing what the end timers miss, especially
since it is stated clearly that the New Jerusalem
is the bride of Christ, the church.

Revelation 21:1,9-10

1) And I saw a new heaven and a new earth. For the
first heaven and the first earth had passed away.
9) And one of the seven angels who had the seven
vials full of the seven last plagues came to me and
talked with me, saying, Come here, I will show you
the bride, the Lamb's wife.
10) And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great
and high mountain and showed me that great city, the
holy Jerusalem, descending out of Heaven from God

"Doc" <bushelsofbushrot@HellsHereNow.com> wrote in message
news:djv9js0eqs@enews2.newsguy.com...

"o�Y���Ƕ�( Xa Ta Zac Xa Ta Amac )T" <stargatedecember2012@yahoo.ca> wrote
in message news:1130561603.778721.121850@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

Looks like World War III is closer than we think, peoplez !!

HOOROO

UNCLE WALLY

============

Furious Blair takes aim at Iran

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,17065654%255E663,0
0.html

29oct05

LONDON -- Tony Blair for the first time held out the prospect of
military action against Iran last night after it called for the
destruction of Israel.

A furious British Prime Minister condemned comments from the hardline
leader of an Islamic state the US claims is developing nuclear weapons
of mass destruction.
Describing his "revulsion", and in terms reminiscent of the early
build-up to the war on Iraq, a visibly angry Mr Blair said European
countries would be holding talks with the US and other allies about a
possible response.

He said Iran was making a "very big mistake" if it thought the world
would ignore such comments because it was distracted by other events.

"To anybody in Europe knowing our history, when we hear statements like
that made about Israel it makes us feel very angry, it's just
completely wrong," he said. "And it indicates and underlines, I am
afraid, how much some of those places need reform themselves."

Mr Blair made no direct reference to military action, which Britain had
previously always insisted was not on the agenda.

"Ask yourself: A state like that, with an attitude like that, having a
nuclear weapon?" he said.

=================================================

Before we slit our wrists, I think we might consider that Ahmadinejad is
trying to please the ultraconservative elements in Iran which largely
helped him win what many political observers thought was an "upset"
election result.

Uhh... no excuse I'm afraid. If you don't want to be a pariah in the eyes of
the world, it's best not to go around threatening to wipe other countries
off the map. I'm not saying he should risk his powerbase by saying e.g. he
loves Israel and would like to help them wipe out Palestine, but COME ON!

After years of a moderate political leadership and some
more "liberalized" policies-- but with the usual powerful
ultraconservative religious influence of Kh