Leaderboard

This is to be a gift to pastors' wives at Campmeeting from the Ministerial Dept. I went around and grabbed a handful of what I thought would be some thought-provoking titles. What was chosen was... A colouring book. The title is, Garden of Eden, by Concordia. The director's secretary saw it, fell in love with it and grabbed it.. She is not a pastor's wife but wanted one, too. I think this was the motivation for the final decision.

Curious minimizing role distinctions every time a women is in the picture. That has been an insidious practice through much of the history of the church since around the 3rd or 4th Centuries. It has adversely effected the translation and interpretation of Scripture and consequently modern church practices. The example I already noted about Phoebe resulting from mistranslation of two key descriptive Greek words about her position and role with the NT church demonstrate that most clearly. Diakonos when used in reference to a man is translated as "minister" or "deacon". For Phoebe it is the most minimizing literal translation as merely a "servant". And the Greek word most clearly about leadership is always translated as such in reference to men, either in noun or verb form. But the one time it is referring specifically and only to a women, it gets translated as "helper", further reinforcing the idea that she was just an ordinary servant. This mistranslation really contradicts the context and meaning of everything else that Paul said of her. As I noted already, he quite clearly instructs the Roman believers to follower her instruction. That makes sense if she was sent by Paul to lead them, not to just deliver a letter and wait tables or other servant/helper tasks. There would have been no question on this if Paul had sent Phillip instead of Phoebe. Never any thought that Paul himself was merely a tent maker, or that Peter was just a fisherman or that Barnabas was just a Bible worker, or that Jesus was just a carpenter.

Sometimes it's how something is said. For instance, talking about veganism to someone whose relatives are having health issues, one could say: 1) being a vegan would really help your relatives... meat is bad and causes all sorts of health problems. vs 2) I've found that eating a vegan diet has really helped *me*.... One doesn't need to be confrontational in order to bring up a subject. And sometimes, when someone talks about an issue they or their family is having, they don't want you to give solutions — they just need someone to listen and be a sounding board...

I guess there's no one to vote for!!

What middle period are you talking about? The vile person king came into the picture starting from Daniel 11:21 and remained alive until the Second Coming depicted in Dan 12:1 ,2. The vile person king, I believe, is also the little horn king of Dan 7, the king of fierce countenance of Dan 8, the prince that shall come of Dan 9:26, the man of sin of 2 Thess 2, and the beast of Rev 13 whose image is the AoD.

I have in my library both Strong';s and Young's. What I have is their concordance. There is a major difference between a concordance and a lexicon. A concordance is not an authority as to the meaning of a word. It is not a dictionary. A concordance is a listing of the manner in which a word has been translated from one language into another language. A lexicon, to a greater or lessor extent is an authority as to the meaning of a word. IOW, it is like a dictionary. I acknowledge that you stated that you used Strong's lexicons and Strong did publish with his concordance a dictionary (lexicon) in the back. I will only say that Both Strong and Young are dated and so old that they cannot be thought to have the greatest value as to the meanings of words. There are better lexicons which make use of our expanded knowledge of the language in the time of Christ. The value of both Strong & Young, in my thinking lies their being a concordance.

Thanks for the advice! Problem solved!

Learning the Gospel message shouldn't require one to have a graduate degree in theology and hermeneutics. The deeper dive one takes into certain subjects, the more likely it is that he/she will find points on which to disagree with others. I'm satisfied to know that we all will be judged in the investigative judgment (if there is such a thing - I currently don't accept that there is); the Second Coming, or the end of the millennium. I don't really know if, in the scheme of things, that it is all that important to know who is judged when.

Embracing God: Why I'm a Seventh-day Adventist Study 6 - Millennium & End of Sin: The End of the Dragon's Tale Scholars have said there is nothing in Revelation that is not also in the Old Testament. Many of the references are direct and obvious quotes or rewordings. Other phrases and ideas are vague enough that they require detailed knowledge and careful study of the Old Testament. The study of the Dragon in Revelation is one of the primary themes in Revelation. Let’s explore this ancient story carefully! Read Revelation 12:1-2 How is the woman dressed? Does this remind you of any story in the Old Testament? (Genesis 37:9) What is the woman doing? Why? (Genesis 3:15-16) In the second study – about Creation – we saw this ‘first prophecy’ of mankind. How does this story retell the prophecy? How does the Dragon story combine the Genesis curse and the promise? What twist exists in the story of Jesus’ birth that adds something unique to the curse/promise? (Isaiah 7:14) Read Revelation 12:3-4 Who does the Dragon represent? (Rev 12:9) Why is there conflict between the Woman and the Dragon (Genesis 3:15) Who do you think the Woman represents? (Isaiah 54:5-6) How did the second half of Rev 12:4 play out in reality (Matthew 2:7-8,16) Read Revelation 12:5-6 Who was the Son of the Woman? Read Psalm 2 and reflect – what might this section of the Dragon story brought to mind for ancient hearers? Read Revelation 12:7-9 What result did ‘setting his sights too high’ have for Satan? How does this remind you of our first study? (Review Isaiah 14:12-19) What is the Dragon’s goal? (Rev 12:9) Who is Michael? How is Michael vs Satan going to play out? (Daniel 12:1) There’s a lot that can be said (and has been in these studies) about the time between the Fall in the Garden and the Return of Earth to the perfect pre-fall state. As we live through the final hours of this Earth’s suffering, we are experiencing the death throes of the Dragon as he thrashes about – knowing that his time is short (Revelation 12:12). We explored the Victory March last week – as Jesus returns in the clouds of Glory to claim those who have claimed His gift on the Cross – and this week we explore what happens after the Second Coming. In our Third study we saw that the Day of Atonement was key to understanding the meaning and purpose of the Death of Jesus on the Cross. In the middle of that day, there were two goats. The first was sacrificed for the cleansing of the Sanctuary – This first goat represented Jesus who took the weight of the confessed sins of the entire world for all time and died as a sacrifice for us all. The second goat received both hands of the High Priest as all the gathered sin from the cleansing of the Sanctuary was transferred to its head. This act – only on the Day of Atonement – was the final act of removing sin from the Sanctuary – sin which had already been forgiven during the past year of Israel’s confession was now removed entirely from God’s presence. In the Old Testament Sanctuary, the sacrifice of the second goat was the only time both hands were placed on the head of a sacrifice. It was also the only time the sacrifice did not die immediately after receiving the weight of sin upon it. At this point on the Day of Atonement, the High Priest had already purified the people and the Sanctuary. This Goat - representing Satan after the Second Coming – was sent walking with the blood of all the deaths from all offerings of the year upon its head. The first goat paid the price for sin, the second goat took the blame. The entire metaphor holds together here only if that goat, guilty as charged, never returns and ultimately dies. This goat is not purifying anything. He’s not playing any role in forgiveness for sins. He is merely taking what doesn’t belong to God or His people – Sin – away from them both. While the second goat was merely a metaphor, Satan deserves his time in the desert. He is the guilty party for all of sin. He is the tempter, the dragon, that old snake the Devil. He deserves – and will receive – the blame for all sin. Read Revelation 20:1-3 What is this passage describing? What do you think it will be like for Satan? As we saw in last week’s study, there are no humans alive on the Earth after Jesus’ Second Coming. Those who believe in Jesus have gone to the place he prepared for them. Those who do not believe are destroyed by the brightness of His coming. How is this humanless state of planet earth like a bottomless pit for Satan? How long will Satan be in this ‘locked up’ state? (Rev 20:2) Without anyone to deceive – what will Satan do for so long? (go even more mad!) Read Revelation 20:11-15 What happens after the 1000 years are finished? What process occurs for every person who has not accepted Salvation? (Rev 20:12) Then what happens to them? (Rev 20:13-14) How do we know that this judgement and death does not happen to the Saved? (Rev 20:6, 15) What is the difference between the First and Second Death? (John 11:25-26) Conclusion and Call Read Revelation 21:1-4 What is your favourite part of this passage? Do you think this time of eternal peace will mean more to us or God? Why? What do you think this will be like? What excites you most about the new Earth? From the moment sin entered our planet, God had a plan to solve it. We are now living just moments from that plan reaching the second of three major waypoints. The first, and most important, was the Death of Jesus in our place. The second, drawing ever closer, is the promised return of Jesus to claim those who have accepted the gift of eternal life. The third and final waypoint is the one we studied tonight – the end of sin, Satan, death and pain. Forever! A day is coming when God will cleanse and perfectly recreate planet Earth. He promises that He will make His home here with us! Do you want to see this amazing day? Prayer View the full article

But this means that you are forcing upon a text more than what the text is actually saying and that you do not allow the text to speak for itself. An additional note besides the technical language as to when the event of the entrance, the Septuagint also uses the term "within the veil" as a term for the entire sanctuary and does not do what we do, limit to the Most Holy Place.

I know. Jesus seemed to be saying the same thing. "if you are willing to accept it ", John the Baptist was Elijah. He didn't demand or command that we accept it, He just said "if". I always thought that sounded peculiar. As for me, I would believe whatever He said whether I could accept it or not. Maybe He doesn't need 175 years. Maybe He can stop time and do it in 5 minutes. Maybe we are going to go over the very same data but it will take us a thousand years. Maybe He's not judging the dead from behind a curtain. Maybe He and the 24 elders and all the holy angels are watching every minute of every person's life and seeing their thoughts on a giant holographic plasma screen. Because before we annihilate someone that was created in the image of God, we have to be sure of the time that they'll be sustained in the fire before they're consumed. For me, understanding that the time, times, and half a time from Daniel 7 ended in 1798 and the 2300 years of Daniel 8 ended in 1844 are like pure gold keys of understanding. I once wrote a long note on the abomination of desolation that not too many people liked very much. It would have first required an acceptance and understanding of the Adventist historicist position of Daniel 7 and Revelation 12. Most of the people there must have thought that the two prophetic time periods have to be added together to make a seven year end time tribulation. "If you are willing to accept it ", it probably is a good thing to have the choice. Because if Jesus made a big show of it and proved His case with Scripture in front of those men, it would have meant that we were getting the bad ending of the ultimatum - " lest I come and strike the land with a decree of utter destruction.” It might have been too much for them to handle. “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes. And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, I think you are a good guy Joe.

In Daniel, the desolating acts against God's people will be executed by the LH (the Beast) in 3-1/2 or years or 42 months in Revelation. What comes next after the LH's 42-month-war against the saints? This "giving" of the kingdom to the saints will occur when Christ comes again:

No one would EVER try to say that Samuel, Elisha, Elijah or Jeremiah were not in leadership positions. Yet Deborah couldn't be because she was a woman? She was a prophetess just the same as the men.

Yeah, let's have just one world religion - mine!

God created the ability of animals to evolve so it isn't demonic to cross the breeds and produce a new one.