Jesus is coming sooner than some think!

[Joe_in_RP]

Quote:

We are told that people will break into homes and steal food, etc. because there isn’t any in the stores. That has not happened either.

Its coming.

Quote:

mills. As a part of my job, I was forced to understand the US food supply system, its strengths and weaknesses. Over the years, I became aware of some things that nearly all Americans are completely unaware of. I am going to make a list of statements and then you will see where I'm going.

-- 1% of the US population grows all of the food for all Americans.

-- Nearly all Americans know essentially nothing about where the food they eat every day comes from. How it gets from the ground to them. And they don't want to know about it. It's cheap, as close as their local store, and of high quality. So no worries.

-- The bulk of the food we eat comes from grain. Although they raise a lot of fruits and vegetables in California, Arizona, Florida, Oregon and Washington, those things don't compose the main part of the average diet. Half of what a meat animal is raised on is grain so when you eat meat you are really eating grain. And, of course, we eat grain directly as bread, bagels, doughnuts, pasta, etc. Milk (and milk products like cheese) comes from cows that eat grain. A lot of grain. And the grain they eat is not produced where the cows are located.

-- The lion's share of grain produced in the US is done in a concentrated part of the US Midwest (Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri is the center of this area). The grain is moved to the coasts (where 70% of the population live) by only TWO (2) railroads....-- If a drought such as has lingered over other parts of the US where little grain is grown were to move over the grain-producing states in the Midwest where few people live, it

would seriously damage the food supply of the country and the apples of Washington, the lettuce of California, the grapefruit of Florida and the peanuts of Georgia won't make up the difference because grain is the staff of life and most of it is grown in the Midwest.

Quote:

Rocketing food prices — some of which have more than doubled in two years — have sparked riots in numerous countries recently. Millions are reeling from sticker shock and governments are scrambling to staunch a fast-moving crisis before it spins out of control. From Mexico to Pakistan, protests have turned violent. Rioters tore through three cities in the West African nation of Burkina Faso last month, burning government buildings and looting stores. Days later in Cameroon, a taxi drivers' strike over fuel prices mutated into a massive protest about food prices, leaving around 20 people dead. Similar protests exploded in Senegal and Mauritania late last year. And Indian protesters burned hundreds of food-ration stores in West Bengal last October, accusing the owners of selling government-subsidized food on the lucrative black market. "This is a serious security issue," says Joachim von Braun, director-general of the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), in Washington. In recent weeks, he notes, he has been bombarded by calls from officials around the world, all asking one question: How long will the crisis last?

The forecast is grim. Governments might quell the protests, but bringing down food prices could take at least a decade, food analysts say. One reason: billions of people are buying ever-greater quantities of food — especially in booming China and India, where many have stopped growing their own food and now have the cash to buy a lot more of it. Increasing meat consumption, for example, has helped drive up demand for grain, and with it the price.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1717572,00.html

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Jn 11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.

Jn 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: (herein, is reflected ‘traditional’ resurrection)

Jn 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? (herein, Jesus Christ established NT epistemology re “those who sleep in Jesus” – rendering “die” a euphemism)

>>It is very obvious that Jesus is not denying that those who believe in Him will die.<<

Tenses. John 11:25 “though he were dead” – emphasis upon the existing past tense “were”; meaning, already in the grave...

>>Jesus is saying that those who believe in Him as their Savior will not die the second death;<< [ed.jasd]

Sorry, ...can’t find that in the pertinent text; however, what I do find is, “...whosoever liveth and believeth” – existing present [condition] tense – “shall never (emphatic double negative in the Greek: never, never) die” – [henceforward] future tense.

What happened? Jesus Christ went to the cross for man; that is what happened. In itself, that represents the nexus of the entirety of Holy Writ, or in today’s vernacular – the Biblical Sea change. This very fact should, at least, elicit the question obtaining; which would be,

Is there no further gathering – after that of the First-fruits? I mean, for two millennia there has been no further reaping other that that continuously deposited in the warehouse of death? Is that what the Biblical Sea change, Jesus Christ’s Atonement, effected? Don’t think so...

>>In verse 25, Jesus plainly declares that He will raise up the dead<<

Indeed so; however, which of the “dead” is Jesus Christ speaking? But of course, it is those who believed in Christ (the promised anointed) and were presently in the grave, if you will... Those, inclusively, are the ones whom Martha referenced with, “I know that [...] shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.” Note: the specific resurrection referred-to by Martha: the resurrection... (Job 19:25,26) and Jesus Christ’s rejoinder, “...he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:” Having said that,

Jesus Christ then explicated another paradigm – that is, those, henceforth, who “liveth and believeth” in Him – would never be ‘not clothed upon’ – never, without a tabernacle either of earthly flesh or of a house which is from heaven. The animate vitality which derives from man and constitutes the constituent self of one who liveth and believeth in Jesus Christ – will never be found naked – in a state of [doctrinal] insensateness.

>>The death they will never die is the penalty of sin, which Jesus died in our stead.<<

Umm, Jesus Christ did not say “the death you will never die” – but, rather, “you shall never, never die.” Period. [/paraphrased]

I too, am familiar with ‘traditional’ interpolated construction re such as the above. The alternative is a literal reading.

“Thus saith the Lord.”

[jasd]

>>Its coming.<<

Provocative.

What practical applications might be suggested implemented following a reading of the above?

[Aliensanctuary]

Quote:

The Iron-Toothed 4th Beast is no longer on the stage of history at the time the Son of Man arrives on the clouds. He has been replaced by the little horn power. See parallel verses in the 8th chapter. Also compare Daniel 2. The book of Revelation also deals with the same events and time period.

Dan. 7: 10, 11 show that the heavenly court is in session at the same time that the little-horn power is speaking its boastful words.

Where does v. 13 say the Son of Man goes on clouds of heaven?

Quote:

Daniel 7:11

I went on watching: then, because of the noise made by the boastings of the horn, as I watched, the beast was put to death, and its body destroyed and committed to the flames.

Quote:

Daniel 7:13

I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him.

My point is that in Dan 7, the appearance of One like the Son of Man occurs after the destruction of the 4th Beast.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:jasd

1 Thess 4:14 ...even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

"...bring with Him?" ?? What of those who 'sleep in Christ'?

Quote:John317

Notice 1 Thessalonians 4: 13. Paul says, "We don't want you to grieve for those who have died." Does Paul then say they are alive in heaven? No, he says you will see them at the time of the resurrection, when Jesus returns.

Quote:jasd

I reprise: He did exactly that. That is, St Paul “did then say...” – by informing them that when Gd comes – He will bring those that sleep in Jesus – with Him. The inference is readily apparent.

>>No, he did not say that they are in heaven.<<

Though I believe that those who believe(d) and sleep in Jesus Christ are with Him in the heavenlies – with Writ providing the direct inference; more specifically, text used in the above reads only that “...will God bring with him.”

>>Saying that God will bring [to life, as in resurrection] with Jesus those who are asleep [dead] in Christ is not the same as saying they are in heaven.<< [ed.jasd]

Again, man misappropriated the signifier/title Christ. Writ treated ‘Christ’ and the proper-name(d) ‘Jesus’ separately and differently – with each conveying its own inherent significance.

Truth in Writ.

>>If that were the case, He could not possibly have said things like 1 Cor. 15: 18, where Paul makes plain that without the resurrection, the dead have absolutely no hope of life.<<

Why did St Paul limit his hortatory to the signifier/title ‘Christ’? and note:

YLT 1 Cor 1:18 then, also, those having fallen asleep in Christ did perish;

that he utilized the past tense...

>>If they are in heaven now with God, they don't need a resurrection in order to experience the joy of God's presence.<<

Seemingly, except for the Firstfruits, those who died with the promise of the signifier/title ‘Christ’ have their resurrection at the Second Coming – as does Job, chapter 19, verses 25, 26.

>>And if they go to be with Jesus after death, Jesus would not have told us that He is coming back for us so that we can be with him. He has no need to come for us if we go to him at death.<<

Once again, except for the Firstfruits, those who died with the promise of the signifier/title ‘Christ’ remain together with Job. It is those who “sleep in Jesus” that Gd will bring with Him.

From whence, will Gd bring those who “sleep in Jesus”? Surely, the suggestion that those who died in ‘Christ’; those who sleep in ‘Jesus’; and the remaining, living believers caught up in the air where clouds drift and birds fly – is not the ‘whence’ from which those who “sleep in Jesus” will be brought?

But, we might say, those who are together with Jesus Christ in the air are purportedly taken to a millennium spent beyond Orion’s belt, and not brought – from whence? say what?

(Why are those who “sleep in Jesus” remarked upon separately?)

>>Besides, the Bible is very clear that the dead do not know anything and that humans do not have immortal spirits or souls.<<

Well, I submit that I am textually supported when I say that Writ leaves us with an elliptical view of Biblical “dead”.

[John317]

My point is that in Dan 7, the appearance of One like the Son of Man occurs after the destruction of the 4th Beast.

Seventh-day Adventists believe that the appearance of the Son of Man in Daniel 7 occurs at the time of the beginning of the Investigative Judgment, which happened in 1844 at the end of the 2300 days. That was long after pagan Rome collapsed and had been replaced by papal Rome, the little horn power. Pagan Rome fell in A.D. 476.

[John317]

Though I believe that those who believe(d) and sleep in Jesus Christ are with Him in the heavenlies – with Writ providing the direct inference; more specifically, text used in the above reads only that “...will God bring with him.”

What do you believe are the strongest and clearest Bible arguments or texts for that viewpoint?

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>Saying that God will bring [to life, as in resurrection] with Jesus those who are asleep [dead] in Christ is not the same as saying they are in heaven.<<

Quote:

JASD-- Again, man misappropriated the signifier/title Christ. Writ treated ‘Christ’ and the proper-name(d) ‘Jesus’ separately and differently – with each conveying its own inherent significance.

Truth in Writ.

Please explain your idea in good, clear English.

[Woody]

lol.

Anyway ... back to the topic of the thread.

Jesus is coming sooner then some think.

My answer is ...

I SURE HOPE SO .... (The sooner the better)

[John317]

Agree there.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Though I believe that those who believe(d) and sleep in Jesus Christ are with Him in the heavenlies – with Writ providing the direct inference; more specifically, text used in the above reads only that “...will God bring with him.”

>>What do you believe are the strongest and clearest Bible arguments or texts for that viewpoint?<<

What’s wrong with 1 Thessalonians 4:14? How can the text be more clearly parsed than it has been?

It’s a literal read – in other words, simple English, yes?

Bring is bring. What you suggest is that Gd arrives in Earth’s atmosphere/air - and if you hold to the .Org’s position – He then, together with the gathered redeemed, turns about and heads off for the constellation Orion. Yes?

Where, in the above .Org's narrative can one either find the verb 'bring' or its best exposition?

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Again, man misappropriated the signifier/title Christ. Writ treated ‘Christ’ and the proper-name(d) ‘Jesus’ separately and differently – with each conveying its own inherent significance.

Truth in Writ.

>>Please explain your idea in good, clear English.<<

Perhaps, you’d like to expand upon the point you least understand re the above... We might then,

proceed from there.

[jasd]

Per the topic of this thread:

Re the thread topic: Specifically, who are the some? and when do they believe Jesus will return?

Actually, Writ does not support the idea of the soon (as in the next 10-25 years) return of Jesus Christ.

Notwithstanding, "...he will finish the work, and cut [it] short in righteousness...", there are simply

too many prophecies yet unfulfilled. There is also the matter of

Gd's people first correctly exegeting Writ; that is, without even the mention of its most particular books...

I tend towards the concept of Universalism and look upon a 'near return of Jesus Christ' as a thing of not 'that great' [/qualified] an import in the greater scheme; however, the Xtian (especially the Xtian who believes in a remnant saved) must ask him or herself if the soon return of Jesus Christ might not adversely affect the eternal disposition of those who do not presently believe in Jesus Christ...

:-o

[John317]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Though I believe that those who believe(d) and sleep in Jesus Christ are with Him in the heavenlies – with Writ providing the direct inference; more specifically, text used in the above reads only that “...will God bring with him.”

>>What do you believe are the strongest and clearest Bible arguments or texts for that viewpoint?<<

What’s wrong with 1 Thessalonians 4:14? How can the text be more clearly parsed than it has been?

It’s a literal read – in other words, simple English, yes?

Bring is bring. What you suggest is that Gd arrives in Earth’s atmosphere/air - and if you hold to the .Org’s position – He then, together with the gathered redeemed, turns about and heads off for the constellation Orion. Yes?

Where, in the above .Org's narrative can one either find the verb 'bring' or its best exposition?

A doctrine must be based on the weight of Bible evidence, not on just a single text. The problem with using 1 Thess. 4: 14 to show that people go to be with God right after death is that even most believers in the immortality of soul don't understand the text the way you are using it. I'm sure you can understand that if the verse means what you say, there should be many more Bible texts that support that interpretation.

A standard rule of interpretation is that we let clear verses explain unclear verses. Do you know of a verse that shows your understanding of 1 Thess 4: 14 is the correct one?

For instance, "The dead do not know anything," is a very clear, straightforward, declarative sentence. Are there verses that say that the dead do indeed know something?

What verses can you think of that support the idea of the dead going immediately to heaven? I know of some that are used that way. The question is, when you analyze everything the Bible teaches on the subject, what is the most reasonable conclusion to come to in answer to the question?

I don't believe the Bible teaches two different, contradictory views on the subject. It either teaches that the dead go to be with God after death or it does not. It doesn't teach both. What do you think?

[John317]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Again, man misappropriated the signifier/title Christ. Writ treated ‘Christ’ and the proper-name(d) ‘Jesus’ separately and differently – with each conveying its own inherent significance.

Truth in Writ.

>>Please explain your idea in good, clear English.<<

Perhaps, you’d like to expand upon the point you least understand re the above... We might then,

proceed from there.

How about these:

"man misappropriated the signifier/title Christ."

"Writ treated 'Christ' and the proper-name(d) 'Jesus' separately and differently..."

"with each conveying its own inherent significance."

Pretend your English teacher or newspaper editor has given the sentences back and asked you to make your argument and your sentences clear and plain.

[John317]

Per the topic of this thread:

Re the thread topic: Specifically, who are the some? and when do they believe Jesus will return?

Actually, Writ does not support the idea of the soon (as in the next 10-25 years) return of Jesus Christ.

Do you mean the idea of coming 10-25 years from now? Or that the Bible does not support the idea of Christ's return 10-25 years after the time of Christ?

I believe the Bible definitely teaches that Christ's return could be within 10-25 years from our day. But I agree with you if you mean the Bible does not support Christ's return 25 years after His ascension to heaven.

Quote:

I tend towards the concept of Universalism and look upon a 'near return of Jesus Christ' as a thing of not 'that great' [/qualified] an import in the greater scheme;

What is the Bible evidence for Universalism? I mean taking in everything the Bible teaches on the subject of salvation and the end-time.

Also, what evidence does the Bible give to cause us to believe the return of Christ is "not that great a thing?" For instance see Daniel 2; Matt. 24 and Rev. 19 & 20.

Quote:

however, the Xtian (especially the Xtian who believes in a remnant saved) must ask him or herself if the soon return of Jesus Christ might not adversely affect the eternal disposition of those who do not presently believe in Jesus Christ...

Yes, when Christ does return, most people on earth will be lost. See Matt. 24; 2 Thess. 1 & 2; and Rev. Jesus waits because there are many who haven't made up their minds and many others who haven't even heard the message. But some day that won't be the case. When the whole world has heard and made up their minds, He will come.

[jasd]

>>A doctrine must be based on the weight of Bible evidence, not on just a single text.<<

Granted, a doctrine is a construct comprised of multiple and, mostly, complementing parts. That said, Writ exhorts the Xtian to first determine the foundation upon which he or she intends to and actually builds upon. Thereafter, the materials used for the construct must be inspected as to appropriateness, etc...

>>The problem with using 1 Thess. 4: 14 to show that people go to be with God right after death is that even most believers in the immortality of soul don't understand the text the way you are using it.<<

Bring is bring.

To ‘bring’ first necessitates understanding that there exists a locative aspect, an originating point,. From whence, if you will. In the case of 1 Thessalonians 4:14, one necessarily eliminates earth proper, one eliminates the atmospheric earth, the near heavens, etc... That leaves only the heavenlies of Gd from whence He might bring with him those who sleep in Jesus – as that is where the Second Coming originates.

Barring that, we are left with the unsustainable thought that Gd pulls into a rest stop somewhere among the galaxies or constellations to pick up those who sleep in Jesus that – He might “bring ... with Him”. That does not compute. Neither, does earth, nor atmospheric earth compute. That, again, leaves the point of origin for those who sleep in Jesus – the heavenlies of Gd.

So, what might we infer? That Gd brings with Him cryogenically, or otherwise, preserved souls, which He resurrects together with those who’ve died in Christ? Abstruse. Simply abstruse.

>>I'm sure you can understand that if the verse means what you say, there should be many more Bible texts that support that interpretation.<<

But, John317, mais oui! but of course! We here deal only with the one text 1 Thessalonians 4:14.

>>A standard rule of interpretation is that we let clear verses explain unclear verses.<<

It is with pleasure that I reprise the following...

By which rule, what rote,

Whose imagined pattern

Structures the cloistered reign

Of illusions and spectre-stuff. —Goethe

Wherewith are shackles slacked

And whereupon foundations laid --

Within a recess beside a brook?

A landslip of crumbs and feathers?

Or past veils of vesicular windows

To the sanctum of the soul?

In quiet expectation awaiting

Gdspeak and His anointing. [/Anonymous]

Whose “standard rule of interpretation”? You often quote EGW: was she inspired or did she follow someone else’s numinous understanding of rote exegesis?

>>Do you know of a verse that shows your understanding of 1 Thess 4: 14 is the correct one?<<

Of course.

>>For instance, "The dead do not know anything," is a very clear, straightforward, declarative sentence.<<

Indeed, the dead do not know anything John317 is presently engaged-in “under the sun”.

>>Are there verses that say that the dead do indeed know something?<<

Jesus Christ preached to spirits, according to St Peter; notwithstanding, wind-chime theologic apologetics...

>>What verses can you think of that support the idea of the dead going immediately to heaven?<<

Am calling it a day. Will get back to these points later. In the meantime, tell me,

wha’happened to the harvest begun with Jesus Christ’s reaping of the Firstfruits? The Firstfruits were alive when taken with Jesus Christ, yes? were they earthly Tabernacles of flesh and blood? So, do you subscribe to the dogmas and doctrines advanced re Jesus Christ, which portray Him as having begun a work (Luke 2:49) only leaving off to otherwise engage in the mundane for seventeen years? If one has that portrait of Jesus Christ, then I can see where one might believe that – likewise, He has presently has left off from the harvest and taken a Sabbatical for two millennia?

Do you believe in that storied narrative of the Good Shepherd?

I don't. And, seemingly, neither do those who gave us the NT.

[John317]

>>A doctrine must be based on the weight of Bible evidence, not on just a single text.<<

Granted, a doctrine is a construct comprised of multiple and, mostly, complementing parts. That said, Writ exhorts the Xtian to first determine the foundation upon which he or she intends to and actually builds upon. Thereafter, the materials used for the construct must be inspected as to appropriateness, etc...

>>The problem with using 1 Thess. 4: 14 to show that people go to be with God right after death is that even most believers in the immortality of soul don't understand the text the way you are using it.<<

Bring is bring.

The way the verse is typically or generally understood is "bring back to life." Paul, then, is simply saying that when Jesus comes, the Thessalonians will get to see their loved ones because there will be a resurrection. He connects this event with the resurrection of Christ, saying that just as God raised up Jesus, so God will raise up the righteous dead. He's saying here, as he did in 1 Cor. 15, that the resurrection of all believers depends upon the resurrection of Jesus.

So then, in verse 14, Paul says his readers will see their beloved dead. But when and how will this take place?

The answer to this question is given in verses 15 to 17.

a) The coming of the Lord occurs when Jesus descends from heaven.

The dead in Christ will rise prior to other events connected with His coming.

c) Those who are then alive and in Christ along with the resurrected dead in Christ shall together meet the Lord in the air (vv. 16, 17), indicating that the Lord Himself will remain in the air and call the saints to His side.

Verse 17 says clearly that this is how they will see their beloved dead and be forever with the Lord (and of course with their beloved dead as well).

"And so...." , which means, "And in this way [as Paul just described it] WE shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words." Why? Because this is how you will be reunited with your loved ones who have died (cf. 18, 13).

I don't see how this makes sense if Paul and the the people who died, as well as his readers, have already been together all these thousands of years in heaven with God, even before and without a resurrection.

[jasd]

>>I know of some that are used that way.<<

And, are they used correctly?

>>The question is, when you analyze everything the Bible teaches on the subject, what is the most reasonable conclusion to come to in answer to the question?<<

There is a saying that to cross the river one must leave the stone one stands upon. It is likewise with texts, some or most are time sensitive/relevant.

>>I don't believe the Bible teaches two different, contradictory views on the subject.<<

Why not? I daresay you’ve don’t participate in animal sacrifices, do you? And, do you stand on shod feet all night long after eating matzo and roasted lamb?

There are at minimum three classes of people involved in restoration to eternal glory. Taking your tack, why does Gd treat those dead in Christ differently from those who will be raptured, that is, translated? The simple answer would be – because their circumstances differ. Likewise, with those

who sleep in Jesus.

>>It either teaches that the dead go to be with God after death or it does not. It doesn't teach both. What do you think?<<

Simply put, I think it is the last-parrot-on-the-Orinoco-teaching. It is nonBiblical.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Again, man misappropriated the signifier/title Christ. Writ treated ‘Christ’ and the proper-name(d) ‘Jesus’ separately and differently – with each conveying its own inherent significance.

Truth in Writ.

Quote:

John317

Please explain your idea in good, clear English.

Quote:jasd

Perhaps, you’d like to expand upon the point you least understand re the above... We might then,

proceed from there.

>>How about these:

"man misappropriated the signifier/title Christ."<<

Howabout it? It was a Biblical devise to introduce the Anointed, the Messiah, the Christ. Title only. It has since,

been ‘misappropriated’ to become not a title but a proper name. Should one not bear that salient fact in mind when expositing text?

>>"Writ treated 'Christ' and the proper-name(d) 'Jesus' separately and differently..."<<

I don’t think comment upon the above is required.

>>"with each conveying its own inherent significance."<<

Title: President. Proper name: George W Bush. Inherent (perhaps, you find intrinsic more agreeable), significant, differences? But, of course!

>>Pretend your English teacher or newspaper editor has given the sentences back and asked you to make your argument and your sentences clear and plain.<<

Ugg, John317 ...English. jasd grunt. jasd snort.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Re the thread topic: Specifically, who are the some? and when do they believe Jesus will return?

Actually, Writ does not support the idea of the soon (as in the next 10-25 years) return of Jesus Christ. [ed.jasd]

>>Do you mean the idea of coming 10-25 years from now? Or that the Bible does not support the idea of Christ's return 10-25 years after the time of Christ?<<

I mean the next immediate years – from now. I believe the above underlined shows the antecedent still in view.

>>I believe the Bible definitely teaches that Christ's return could be within 10-25 years from our day.<<

Absolutely not. Some of the prophecies of Daniel (among others) have yet to be fulfilled.

>>But I agree with you if you mean the Bible does not support Christ's return 25 years after His ascension to heaven.<<

I mean the next immediate years – from now. I believe the above underlined shows the antecedent still in view. That said,

What is your take on the Apostle’s belief that they were in the last days? Did they mean the last days of an age? or present-earth’s last days?

Quote:

Quote:jasd

I tend towards the concept of Universalism and look upon a 'near return of Jesus Christ' as a thing of not 'that great' [/qualified] an import in the greater scheme;

>>What is the Bible evidence for Universalism? I mean taking in everything the Bible teaches on the subject of salvation and the end-time.<<

That is the stuff of dissertations. Suffice it to say, in short, that when Gd states that His hand is not short that it cannot save... well, the way the .Org interprets that is – Gd’s hand is INDEED short. Regrettably, much too SHORT – as in SHORT, and Satan exercises more fervor than does Gd.

>>Also, what evidence does the Bible give to cause us to believe the return of Christ is "not that great a thing?" For instance see Daniel 2; Matt. 24 and Rev. 19 & 20.<<

I couched my statement by tying it to the beliefs of a [tending] Universalist and I amplified that by noting that it was [/qualified]; moreover, I related it to the greater scheme. That is not to say,

that anyone trumps me in my vision of the nature of the calamities that will befall earth’s inhabitants. Remember, I am the one who suggests that Daniel 2 depicts the literal, physical intervention of alien or unnatural beings into the affairs of man – so much so that “men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking upon those things which are coming on the earth:” (Lu 21:26) Otherwise, ...in the greater scheme.

Quote:

Quote:jasd

however, the Xtian (especially the Xtian who believes in a remnant saved) must ask him or herself if the soon return of Jesus Christ might not adversely affect the eternal disposition of those who do not presently believe in Jesus Christ...

>>Yes, when Christ does return, most people on earth will be lost.<<

That may be so; however, is that THE END?

>>Jesus waits because there are many who haven't made up their minds and many others who haven't even heard the message.<<

You’ve made the condition and time for Jesus’ return incumbent upon man. I think it more reasonable to assume that Gd will come in His own good time – depending mostly, upon His previously given word. Gd will not circumscribe His word.

The Parousia depends upon fulfilled promises as scribed in Writ: not upon man’s heart-condition at any particular time.

>>But some day that won't be the case.<<

Indeed.

>>When the whole world has heard and made up their minds, He will come.<<

He will come when the time has come. That time has already been set; regardless, your or my heart’s condition.

[jasd]

Re: .Org

I employ .Org or .org in uncomplimentary fashion. It is a mild chide or chastisement on my part.

A .org is an entity of the State. It is an unnecessary move motivated to an extent by venal considerations.

By incorporating the Body of Jesus Christ - it is rendered unto Caesar. Simply and irrefutably put. Error on the part of those who seek to enlighten others re things Biblical.

Major error. A thing of Babylonish proportions.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Bring is bring.

>>The way the verse is typically or generally understood is "bring back to life."<<

First, “typically or generally” gives you Sanctified Sunday Sabbath.

Second, bring is bring and resurrection is resurrection.

>>Paul, then, is simply saying that when Jesus comes, the Thessalonians will get to see their loved ones because there will be a resurrection.<< [ed.jasd]

Indeed. Those, whom Gd wills, from Adam to Jesus, will be resurrected. Some to glory. Some to shame.

However, the sentence, in its entirety, leaves room for honest, unprejudiced dialogue.

>>He connects this event with the resurrection of Christ, saying that just as God raised up Jesus, so God will raise up the righteous dead.<<

Again, St Paul language does not focus upon the resurrection of Jesus Christ in text, per se. Instead, his use of the modifying adverb houtos directs his reader to the active “we believe”.

Logically, our attention is next turned to the question of “bring”. Text turns upon the locative aspect of “bring”.

(it might be well to note that an adverb will modify all verbs preceding it – but not as used by St Paul in this text))

>>He's saying here, as he did in 1 Cor. 15, that the resurrection of all believers depends upon the resurrection of Jesus.<<

No, he is saying that if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, likewise [we believe], them also which sleep in Jesus will Gd bring with Him.

>>c) Those who are then alive and in Christ along with the resurrected dead in Christ shall together meet the Lord in the air (vv. 16, 17), indicating that the Lord Himself will remain in the air and call the saints to His side.<<

Don’t forget the third division – those who sleep in Jesus.

>>Verse 17 says clearly that this is how they will see their beloved dead and be forever with the Lord (and of course with their beloved dead as well).<<

No, John317, verse 17 states that those who are alive at the Parousia will be raptured to meet their loved ones in earth’s atmosphere.

>>I don't see how this makes sense if Paul and the the people who died, as well as his readers, have already been together all these thousands of years in heaven with God, even before and without a resurrection.<< [ed.jasd]

The principal division addressed in verse 17 are those who remain alive. Today, that is us.

Bring: from whence?