Bible PROPHECY for the ENDtime

[Dr. Rich]

Overaged, sadly, the verses you gave were NOT the words of Jesus. They are Paul's words. There is a big difference my friend! It is true that without the death of Jesus that the penalty for sin would make it impossible for anyone to be saved, but just like God provided a picture (coloring book style) of how salvation works to Israel by giving them the Atonement, this same picture is how salvation works at the ENDtime. Here it is if you forgot:

First: the High Priest had to become cleansed from sin. Jesus, a our high Priest said that He had become sanctified (John 17:20) so that we also CAN become sanctified.

Second step: (of Atonement) was the Priest Tribe had to become cleansed from sin. The "Saints" (144K) are known as the "Tribe of Priests" (Rev. 5:10) (Rev. 3:4) and they wake up the 10 Virgins (the KOH AT the time of the coming like a thief) and;

Third step: 5 of them become sealed because of the words of the 144k they received (spiritual food) which was given to them by the ONE Bondservant (as Elijah did).

It must be remembered that without the cleansing of the High Priest and the Priest Tribe, it would have been impossible for the corporate Israelites to have their sins cleansed.

And without the cleansing or sanctification of the (1) High Priest (Jesus), (2) Priest tribe (144k) and (3) the wise virgins (from the KOH/SDA Church), it would be impossible for the numberless multitude (Bride) found in Rev. 7:9-16 to become cleansed (sanctified).

[Overaged]

Not one of these texts was spoken by Jesus Christ. They were spoken by someone that claimed to be of Jesus but those are NOT His words they are Paul's words.

When I said I believe the words of Jesus ONLY I meant HIS words, not someone's idea of what He said. Paul NEVER knew Jesus (either in the flesh or in the Spirit), and neither did Luke who was not an eyewitness disciple. Show me where Jesus said these things in John, Matthew or ever Mark (who wrote for Peter) and I'll believe you.

For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the[of] Christ,’ and they will lead many astray. Matt. 24:5.

Why should I take your word, or Paul's word, or EGW's words as the words of Jesus Christ when I have HIS own words that speak for themselves?

As to the 1John text: yes Jesus died for the whole world, as long as they don't remain IN the world but come INTO the Kingdom of Heaven. These two kingdoms cannot co-exist, you must either be in one or the other. If you believe a lie as if it is the truth then you are NOT in the Kingdom of Heaven, no matter how much you 'believe' you are.

I believe all of the verses in all of the Bible; some of which I have quoted above to show that you are in vehement disagreement with much of God's Word. This is your right to do if you so choose; however, you have not even come close to convincing me that any part of God's Word is not applicable to Christians today.

I didn't say that I was Christ; and yet you quote Mat 24:5 which has nothing to do with what we were discussing. But if you really want to tell people that most of the New testament is not in fact inspired; then you preach a very false gospel. The verses I quoted are all supported even in the Old Testament. You haven't a leg to stand on.

[Dr. Rich]

Oh, what I did not point out is the mistaken idea that Jesus' death was the Atonement. Paul and the unknown writer of Hebrews were mistaken and their words have caused mass confusion up until now. Jesus' death was as the Passover Lamb. There was NO cleansing (sanctifying) of anyone for this sacrifice. The Passover Lamb was not sacrificed to remove anyone's sin. However, Jesus' words about Him becoming sanctified were given to His disciples BEFORE His death, therefore His death was also the FIRST STEP in the Atonement process.

I hope this is clear by now.

[Overaged]

Overaged, sadly, the verses you gave were NOT the words of Jesus. They are Paul's words. There is a big difference my friend! It is true that without the death of Jesus that the penalty for sin would make it impossible for anyone to be saved, but just like God provided a picture (coloring book style) of how salvation works to Israel by giving them the Atonement, this same picture is how salvation works at the ENDtime. Here it is if you forgot:

I think I have got the picture now. At first I had a different picture of things here; but now I can see that you not only have a hatred for the Adventist Church; but also for the Word of God. In setting up your own wisdom and "private interpretations;" you null and void large sections of God's Word, under the guise that "It's not the Words of Jesus." There isn't one word in that book that has not come from Jesus. You have utterly failed to even come close to proving otherwise.

[wayfinder]

Concerning your statement about twothousand years and the trumpets. It is clear that God never wanted this to take so long, as evidenced by the context of delay. The Bridegroom is delaying His return, the four angels are told to hold (delay) the release of the four winds (four dreadful judgments of God), and in Rev.10 we read what the mighty angel says "there will be delay no longer". Why would God be delaying His return and the restoration of His glory to this world? There is only one logical answer and that is, He is waiting for us to become righteous. In the message to Sardis it is revealed that there are a few who have not soiled their clothes, they will walk with Jesus in white for "they" are worthy, these are the 144,000, of whom it is said, Rev.14:5 "No lie was found in their mouth, they are blameless". The purpose for the seven trumpets are are to wake up the world to listen to the message delivered by the two witnesses, the 144,000, and the Holy People. The trumpets start after the censer is cast down. The censer is cast down after the door to the wedding feast is shut and intercession has ceased for the kingdom of God. I am sure you would agree that this has not happened yet.

[Overaged]

Oh, what I did not point out is the mistaken idea that Jesus' death was the Atonement. Paul and the unknown writer of Hebrews were mistaken and their words have caused mass confusion up until now. Jesus' death was as the Passover Lamb. There was NO cleansing (sanctifying) of anyone for this sacrifice.

I hope this is clear by now.

No. You have confused it even more. Now you accuse God's Word as being "false" and giving people the wrong idea. Your own "private interpretation" seems to be your rule of thumb, and you do not preach a Christian gospel at all.

Heb 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

God's Word does not confuse the gospel in any way shape or form as you say it does. It seems quite clear to me.

BTW, there are not 3 steps to salvation as you demand. Some have 7 steps, some have 2, some have 12; it's all mixed up. There is only one step. Come to Jesus, just as you are.

"If anyone comes to Me; I will IN NO WISE cast them out." (John 6:37)

[Overaged]

Concerning your statement about twothousand years and the trumpets. It is clear that God never wanted this to take so long, as evidenced by the context of delay.

"The context of delay" actually shows the opposite - that God did want, and did plan for the delay.

[Dr. Rich]

Overaged, now you have become personal by your comment that I have a hatred for the Adventist Church and the Word(s) of God. Since I see that you are a dancing Viking, (a pagan practice) I will not hold that against you, but the truth of the matter is that I LOVE my Church and the members of MY Church know I love it. God also knows that I love and abide in the words of God. Please make a special note on this just in case you forget.

[Overaged]

Overaged, now you have become personal by your comment that I have a hatred for the Adventist Church and the Word(s) of God. Since I see that you are a dancing Viking, (a pagan practice) I will not hold that against you, but the truth of the matter is that I LOVE my Church and the members of MY Church know I love it. God also knows that I love and abide in the words of God. Please make a special note on this just in case you forget.

I can only go by what you write here.

[wayfinder]

Originally Posted By: wayfinder

Concerning your statement about twothousand years and the trumpets. It is clear that God never wanted this to take so long, as evidenced by the context of delay.

"The context of delay" actually shows the opposite - that God did want, and did plan for the delay.

Deuteronomy 31:14 Then the LORD said to Moses, "Behold, the time for you to die is near ; call Joshua, and present yourselves at the tent of meeting, that I may commission him." So Moses and Joshua went and presented themselves at the tent of meeting.

15 The LORD appeared in the tent in a pillar of cloud, and the pillar of cloud stood at the doorway of the tent.

16 The LORD said to Moses, "Behold, you are about to lie down with your fathers ; and this people will arise and play the harlot with the strange gods of the land, into the midst of which they are going, and will forsake Me and break My covenant which I have made with them.

17 "Then My anger will be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them and hide My face from them, and they will be consumed, and many evils and troubles will come upon them; so that they will say in that day, 'Is it not because our God is not among us that these evils have come upon us?'

18 "But I will surely hide My face in that day because of all the evil which they will do, for they will turn to other gods.

19 "Now therefore, write this song for yourselves, and teach it to the sons of Israel ; put it on their lips, so that this song may be a witness for Me against the sons of Israel.

20 "For when I bring them into the land flowing with milk and honey, which I swore to their fathers, and they have eaten and are satisfied and become prosperous, then they will turn to other gods and serve them, and spurn Me and break My covenant.

Isaiah 48:9 NAS

"For the sake of My name I delay My wrath, And for My praise I restrain it for you, In order not to cut you off.

The above texts show the rational for God to delay His timing and also, using your logic for what God says ahead of time, then one could say that God wanted His people to worship other gods, because He said they would ahead of time. If God's people were ready on time there would be no need for a delay.

[Overaged]

The above texts show the rational for God to delay His timing and also, using your logic for what God says ahead of time, then one could say that God wanted His people to worship other gods, because He said they would ahead of time. If God's people were ready on time there would be no need for a delay.

No. What I said was that God's delays are not in fact "unwanted." They are planned events and experiences; all of which He is in control of, and which He wanted to happen. Your comment re God wanting people to worship other God's is totally out of context to what I said. You stated that God never wanted things to take so long; that He didn't want the delay; and I replied to that only, saying that He actually did want the delay, and had planned for it; as He knows what is for our best good. All of these things recorded for us in Bible history show that God is in control, and that He alone is worthy.

[wayfinder]

OK, I understand what your meaning was. What my point is, God is delaying and you cannot delay an event that has not first had a time set for it to occur. In Matthew 25 Jesus tells His disciples that the Bridegroom did not return as expected because He was delaying His coming. The question to ask then is, why would the Bridegroom delay His wedding? The answer is in the context of the wedding process. In Israel of Jesus day and before, there was a process that had to be followed for the marriage. The bridegroom would go to his father’s (the families lived in the same home) house and made preparations for the marriage. This involved physical preparation of the house up to and possibly including the addition of a room. It was not the privilege of the son to set the date for the marriage, it was the privilege of the father, hence Jesus saying, but of that day and hour no one knows...but the Father (Matthew 24:36). The most important part of this process was that when the father set the day and hour for the marriage and told his son, the son would tell his attendants who would precede him on the way to the brides house. The bride would send her attendants (bridesmaids) out to watch the road that the bridegroom would come to her house on. The reason for all this process was to insure that there would be a wedding. The fact was that if the bridegroom arrived at the brides house and she was not ready the wedding was off, permanently. Understandably the bride could not wear her wedding gown day and night for who knows how long until her bridegroom arrived. So the attendants of the bridegroom would go on ahead and tell the bridesmaids that the bridegroom was on his way. The bridesmaids would go the bride’s house and prepare her to meet her bridegroom, and when he arrived she would be ready. The only reason that the Bridegroom would delay his journey to the bride’s house is if He knew that she would not be ready when He arrived. The account in Matthew 25 says nothing of the readiness of the bride, but does confirm the marriage process used in this context. The bridesmaids have fallen asleep waiting for the arrival of the Bridegroom. The cry at midnight is given by the attendants of the Bridegroom (144,000) this awakens the bridesmaids and only half are ready to prepare the bride. The account in Revelation follows this process from start to finish. Chapter one is the revelation of the time of the marriage, given from the Father to His Son. The Son relays this message to His attendants, though the prophecy given to John. The seven messages to the seven assemblies are given to the bridesmaids (kingdom of heaven) and the wise bridesmaids are prepared. The rest of Revelation describes the process of preparing the bride of Christ, culminating with the marriage supper of the Lamb, (see Revelation 19:7-10)

[Overaged]

Overaged wrote: "The Catholic Church is not totally wrong about everything. Error is most often mixed with truth. The fact remains that all scripture is for all people, all of the time. This would most certainly include the prophecies of Daniel and The Revelation. There is something in every verse of both these Books, for every person of every age. In Daniel 11:32 for eg, we are told: "they that do know their God shall be strong and do exploits..." Why would this not be true for anyone past, present, or future?"

Ok then, name me ONE thing that is NOT wrong with the Catholic Church. The scripture that is for all people is the same scripture that Jesus used to teach and read from. He did not have any New Testament and if you would read the book called "The Spirit of the Church" by Neufeld and Sterling you would then understand the problems with the New Testament.

[Dr. Rich]

Overaged, (or is it overraged?--it's hard to tell with your image swinging the axe around like that) have you ever thought what the consequences would be IF you are/were wrong and God did not inspire some words that are found in the New Testament? The way I see it, is that you would then be calling God a liar, or falsely testifying against God. To me, I take that very serious.

AS for your statement that the bible (aka in your words "God's words") have never caused confusion, then tell me why there are so many different christian denominations in the world?

And please tell me WHY Rev. 2:2 in important, not just that it is. I want to now why you think this verse is important for us today.

[Musicman1228]

Overaged,

Can you definitively say that you know who the author of Hebrews was? Can you positively say that you KNOW that the words Paul wrote were in total the very words of Jesus Christ? Do you KNOW without a doubt who and for what reason that certain writings were included in the New Testament and why others were not?

In the financial world you wouldn't put money in a venture without knowing ALL about who was running it and what your money would be spent doing, would you? You wouldn't but stock in a company without knowing all of the important data concerning PE ratios and such? So why are you so willing to bet your eternal life without KNOWING who it was that is giving you the information upon which you make your bet. You are not alone in this. Most Christians merely 'believe' by 'faith' that they will be saved by the 'grace' of Jesus Christ, yet they don't have the first hint of proof that this is actually a fact.

I believe in the words and teachings of Jesus Christ and Him alone. I have personally found this to be sufficient in my gaining the knowledge and understanding that I need to make a wise (wisdom) choice in what will cause me to be saved or lost. Because of this you say that I and others like me don't love my church (SDA), and worse don't love Jesus. Can you see the difficulty in the logic of this? I make the unrequited statement that I am follower of Jesus Christ and Him alone and yet you accuse me of not loving the very person upon which I base ALL my understanding. I need some help here in understanding how this works. Please advise. Thanks.

[Guest]

have you ever thought what the consequences would be IF you are/were wrong and God did not inspire some words that are found in the New Testament? The way I see it, is that you would then be calling God a liar, or falsely testifying against God. To me, I take that very serious.

Have YOU ever thought what the consequences would be if YOU are/were wrong and God DID inspire the New Testament? By running around telling anyone who will listen that most of the NT is a lie, are you not calling God a liar? Do YOU think there will be no consequences for that?

Not only will you be responsible for loosing your own soul, but also for anyone stupid enough to take your word for something like that. Which is really the only proof you have to offer by the way.

[Overaged]

Overaged, (or is it overraged?--it's hard to tell with your image swinging the axe around like that)

Ahhh YOU Don't like my little Viking, eh? That would make me very Enraged except that I think maybe you envy him a bit as you keep talking about him. LOL, unless you are a "wolf" as I mentioned above, you will have nothing to worry about.

Because you give Catholic reasons for your dismissal of large portions of Scripture; I have reached the conclusion that you must be a Jesuit, out to lay a snare for the unwary among us.

One of the first problems you need to overcome is that of trying to say the Bible is not true. Many before you have tried to do the same; and absolutely no one has even come close to doing so. You need to learn how it is that there actually is no problem with the Bible; the problem is with people.

[Overaged]

I believe in the words and teachings of Jesus Christ and Him alone.

usually, when someone says this kind of thing; that is, if one has to say it, it is not in fact true. The Word "alone" is too often used as a smoke screen to cover up the fact that the person does not in fact hold the Bible to be the final rule of faith. That's as in The Whole Bible, not the hole(y) Bible.

[Musicman1228]

Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich

Overaged, (or is it overraged?--it's hard to tell with your image swinging the axe around like that)

Ahhh YOU Don't like my little Viking, eh? That would make me very Enraged except that I think maybe you envy him a bit as you keep talking about him. LOL, unless you are a "wolf" as I mentioned above, you will have nothing to worry about.

Because you give Catholic reasons for your dismissal of large portions of Scripture; I have reached the conclusion that you must be a Jesuit, out to lay a snare for the unwary among us.

One of the first problems you need to overcome is that of trying to say the Bible is not true. Many before you have tried to do the same; and absolutely no one has even come close to doing so. You need to learn how it is that there actually is no problem with the Bible; the problem is with people.

Your reply indicates that you are participating in 'blind faith'; believing in something without solid proof, just because you want to believe. That's OK with me. The fact is that your idea of confirmation of a concept is just the concept itself; if it sounds plausible it must be right. Data does not matter as long as you have 'faith'.

The idea that Dr. Rich could possibly be a Jesuit is absurd. No matter what a Jesuit believes he is under the strict authority of the Pope to go anywhere and do anything that the Pope says. Dr Rich doesn't even treat his wife that way much less the Pope. Dr. Rich has to have solid proof and evidence before he formulates a belief, this does not apply to a Jesuit under any conditions. The fact that you don't require ANY foundational proof or evidence to support your beliefs makes you more likely to be a person of 'blind faith' than someone who requires evidence from eyewitnesses.

[Guest]

Your reply indicates that you are participating in 'blind faith'; believing in something without solid proof, just because you want to believe.

[Overaged]

Your reply indicates that you are participating in 'blind faith'; believing in something without solid proof, just because you want to believe. That's OK with me. The fact is that your idea of confirmation of a concept is just the concept itself; if it sounds plausible it must be right. Data does not matter as long as you have 'faith'.

The idea that Dr. Rich could possibly be a Jesuit is absurd. No matter what a Jesuit believes he is under the strict authority of the Pope to go anywhere and do anything that the Pope says. Dr Rich doesn't even treat his wife that way much less the Pope. Dr. Rich has to have solid proof and evidence before he formulates a belief, this does not apply to a Jesuit under any conditions. The fact that you don't require ANY foundational proof or evidence to support your beliefs makes you more likely to be a person of 'blind faith' than someone who requires evidence from eyewitnesses.

LOL, I am sorry my friend - "Dr" Rich is indeed giving the same Catholic excuses I get from Catholics about the scriptures. There's not much you can do about that with all your fancy explanations. I have invited the good doctor to be more specific re his query about Rev 2; however, it appears that he has declined. I called him a Jesuit to dramatize the point that he has fallen for Catholic theology re the inspiration of Scripture; and to me, this is the real concern, for they teach the same things in order to bolster their doctrine on "tradition." Dr Rich has made it very plain that he doesn't even care what I think or believe; and that he is going to go ahead with his agenda here anyways. This is exactly in line with papal activities that we can physically observe today. I believe that if Dr Rich is not a Jesuit, then he would make a very good one should he decide to finally go all the way with his line of thinking. Certainly, the Pope would have no objections to what he is currently teaching.

[Overaged]

Why don't you show Overaged some of this solid proof that you are so quick to talk about, but so slow to show.

His "defense" of "Dr" Rich is very emotional; and his appeals anecdotal at best. His "solid proof" has been replaced and degraded by rationalism; which is the enemy of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Rationalism is "the theological doctrine that human reason rather than divine revelation establishes religious truth." And this is what he and "Dr" Rich are calling "solid evidence."

According to Rev 2:2, Jesus "knows [our] works." and He has found some of us; through the type or quality of our works, to be "LIARS." and teaching that large sections of the Bible are "confusing people" and do not contain truth, is to teach a lie.

As we all know, the eclipse of the sun is an event of very significant proportions. It is a bit scary and awesome to watch everything go dark, all at once in the middle of the day. An eclipse of the Bible has been instigated by Dr Rich and his supporters here on this forum. To all Christians; this kind of teaching should be anathema.

1Co 10:12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

[Dr. Rich]

MM, and there you go again proving that one can't argue facts with someone who has faith for their foundation of belief.

[Overaged]

MM, and there you go again proving that one can't argue facts with someone who has faith for their foundation of belief.

Your questions on the nature and purpose of the Bible here have been a heated subject of debate for many years. At the very heart of this debate is the subject of the authority of the Bible; which you are questioning here. The problem of the authority of the Bible is transdenominational, and spans many religions; however, the Catholic Church is the major player in questioning the authority of Scripture. If you want to follow their lead, that is entirely your choice. Your teachings on the authority of the Bible; and the nature of it's inspiration create a strange silence of the Bible in your teachings.

[Dr. Rich]

No, not at all Overaged. We continue to prove that the words of Jesus given to us by His eyewitnesses are totally correct and since Jesus Himself said to abide in His words, that is what we do. If you want to abide in someone else's words, then so be it. If you can't answer the question(s), just say so. That is why we are all here, to learn, right? If I am wrong, all I want is for someone to prove it using the words of Jesus.

A while ago, there was a long post that said that Jesus' ministry was 3 and a half years. Can this be proven by using His words?

As for what Catholic's teach, you will have to be more precise for me to answer your questions because I have never heard a Catholic say that the bible is not correct.

Do you, or don't you believe that knowing the correct understanding of end time prophecy is critical for those who say they are the bond servants for Jesus?