Moderators John317 Posted February 20, 2011 Moderators Posted February 20, 2011 The abomination that makes one desolate that was established by Apostate Protestantism on 9/20/01 is the rejection of the blood of Jesus as being essential for salvation. To believe that all religion leads to salvation is an abomination that desolates just as sure as refusing to honor God's Sabbath. Beware of forgetting to look outside of the box. I'm interested in knowing more about this. Please explain what happened 9/20/01 that you have reference to and how was it the abomination that leads to desolation? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
hch Posted February 20, 2011 Posted February 20, 2011 Originally Posted By: hch Matthew 24:15 "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)" If you don't know that the abomination that makes desolate happened on 9/20/01, you have not been watching. I'd like to hear more about this. Could you please explain it, showing your evidence and reasoning in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen White? You seem to be saying that the abomination of desolation was fulfilled in response to the tragic events of 9/11. I think I know what you have reference to, but I'm not convinced that it's true. Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
Moderators John317 Posted February 20, 2011 Moderators Posted February 20, 2011 Do a study of "Prophetic time" in the Spirit of prophecy.Ellen is clear that when she speaks of "prophetic time" she is referring to "the day and the hour of Christ's return." she always links her comments about prophetic time to the dates of the Advent disappointment, Christ's Advent, etc. The quote in 7BC971.7 that is used to prove that prophetic time stopped in 1844 proves no such thing. It is a text out of context that SDA Ministers used to call a pretext. In context, it is very clear that she is referring to prophetic time regarding the day and hour of Christ's Advent not all time prophecies. "Prophetic time" does not refer to the day and the hour of Christ's return but to symbolic time as opposed to real time, or probationary time. In other words, "prophetic time" refers to such time prophecies as the 2300 day prophecy of Daniel 8: 14; to the 70 week prophecy of Daniel 9; to 1, 620 years of Daniel 7: 25; to the 1290 days of Daniel 12: 11; and to the 1335 days of Daniel 12: 12. These are all prophetic times, as Ellen White used that term. I'd like to share several important EGW quotes: Speaking of Rev. 10: 6, Ellen White said, "This time, which the angel declares with a solemn oath, is not the end of this world's history, neither of probationary time, but of prophetic time, which should precede the advent of our Lord. That is, the people will not base another message upon definite time. After this period of time, reaching from 1842 to 1844, there can be no definite tracing of the prophetic time. The longest reckoning reaches to autumn of 1844." (7 BC 971) She here says clearly that the longest prophetic time reaches to 1844, and after that time, there is to be no more time prophecies. Again, she wrote, "The Lord showed me that the message must go, and that it must not be hung on time, for time will never be a test again." 1 SM 188 And, "Time has not been a test since 1844, and it will never again be a test." EW 75 It seems clear to me that Ellen White is saying that time will never again be a test between 1844 and the second coming of our Lord. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted February 20, 2011 Moderators Posted February 20, 2011 ....Daniel's prophecy was to be repeated 2)The times in Daniel 9 as literal time do not show the exact day and hour of Christ's Second Advent, but they do show us where we are on God's timeline 3)The 457 BC decree to rebuild Jerusalem was reissued 31 May 1998 What occurred at this time? Originally Posted By: hch 4)The endtime counterfeit "prince of the Covenant" was anointed 1/20/01 5) he failed on 9/11/01 Could you please explain what exactly happened on these dates? Originally Posted By: hch 6) After 9/11/01 he made a covenant with many for 1-week, 9/17/01 to 9/23/01 7) In the midst of the week 9/20/01, he declare that Christ's sacrifice was worthless. He made a covenant with a foreign people. And declared that he would not honor that covenant if they did not obey his dictates. Don't take my word for it. Please also explain these two dates. Originally Posted By: hch .... the brethren still manifest an attitude of indifference. they take the wait and see attitude that is so foolish. It didn't help the antediluvians and Jesus said that 1/2 of the Virgins are lost because they did not awaken in time. Have you presented your beliefs before the brethren in teh church? If so, what did they say about it? Who are the "1/2 of the Virgins" who are lost? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted February 20, 2011 Moderators Posted February 20, 2011 Ellen White wrote: "A young man... called upon us and ... stated that the judgment has now begun among the living... "I listened as he went on, and finally said, you are not exactly in your right mind. "He began to see that he had made a mistake." LDE 21-22 (Letter 66, 1894) "The judgment is now passing in the sanctuary above. For many years this work has been in progress. Soon--- none know how soon-- it will pass to the cases of the living." GC 490 NOTE: She writes here as if no one will know when the judgment passes from the cases of the dead to the cases of the living. Would she have written this if she knew that the ark of the covenant would be discovered at the time the judgment passed from the dead to the living? Ellen White said that time prophecies fulfilled in the past are not to be applied to the future: "There have been one and another who in studying their Bibles thought they discovered great light, and new theories, but these have not been correct. The Scripture is all true, but by misapplying the Scriptures, men arrive at wrong conclusions... Events in the train of prophecy that had their fulfillment away in the past are made future, and thus by these theories the faith of some is underminded." 2 SM 102 She also wrote: "There will always be false and fanatical movments made by persons in the church who claim to be led of God-- those who will run before they are sent, and will give day and date for occurrence of unfulfilled prophecy. The enemy is pleased to have them do this, for their successive failures and leading into false lines cause confussion and unbelief." 2 SM 84 Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
hch Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Originally Posted By: hch Do a study of "Prophetic time" in the Spirit of prophecy.Ellen is clear that when she speaks of "prophetic time" she is referring to "the day and the hour of Christ's return." she always links her comments about prophetic time to the dates of the Advent disappointment, Christ's Advent, etc. The quote in 7BC971.7 that is used to prove that prophetic time stopped in 1844 proves no such thing. It is a text out of context that SDA Ministers used to call a pretext. In context, it is very clear that she is referring to prophetic time regarding the day and hour of Christ's Advent not all time prophecies. "Prophetic time" does not refer to the day and the hour of Christ's return but to symbolic time as opposed to real time, or probationary time. In other words, "prophetic time" refers to such time prophecies as the 2300 day prophecy of Daniel 8: 14; to the 70 week prophecy of Daniel 9; to 1, 620 years of Daniel 7: 25; to the 1290 days of Daniel 12: 11; and to the 1335 days of Daniel 12: 12. These are all prophetic times, as Ellen White used that term. I'd like to share several important EGW quotes: Speaking of Rev. 10: 6, Ellen White said, "This time, which the angel declares with a solemn oath, is not the end of this world's history, neither of probationary time, but of prophetic time, which should precede the advent of our Lord. That is, the people will not base another message upon definite time. After this period of time, reaching from 1842 to 1844, there can be no definite tracing of the prophetic time. The longest reckoning reaches to autumn of 1844." (7 BC 971) Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
hch Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Originally Posted By: hch ....Daniel's prophecy was to be repeated 2)The times in Daniel 9 as literal time do not show the exact day and hour of Christ's Second Advent, but they do show us where we are on God's timeline 3)The 457 BC decree to rebuild Jerusalem was reissued 31 May 1998 What occurred at this time? Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
hch Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Ellen White wrote: "A young man... called upon us and ... stated that the judgment has now begun among the living... "I listened as he went on, and finally said, you are not exactly in your right mind. "He began to see that he had made a mistake." LDE 21-22 (Letter 66, 1894) "The judgment is now passing in the sanctuary above. For many years this work has been in progress. Soon--- none know how soon-- it will pass to the cases of the living." GC 490 Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
Moderators John317 Posted February 21, 2011 Moderators Posted February 21, 2011 .... Here is 7 BC 971 in context. Originally Posted By: EGW This time which the angel declares with a solemn oath, is not the end of this world's history, neither of probationary time, but of prophetic time, which should precede the advent of our Lord. That is, the people will not have another message upon definite time. After this period of time, reaching from 1842 to 1844, there can be no definite tracing of the prophetic time. The longest reckoning reaches to the autumn of 1844. The angel's position with one foot on the sea, the other on the land signifies the wide extent of the proclamation of the message. It will cross the broad waters and be proclaimed in other countries, even to all the world. The comprehension of truth, the glad reception of the message is represented in the eating of the little book. The truth in regard to the time of the advent of our Lord was a precious message to our souls. Ms 59, 1900, pp. 8, 9. ("Jots and Tittles, II," August 16, 1900.) Since EGW begins by saying that it "is not the end of this world's history" there is prophetic time between 1844 and the end of the world's history. But the context is clear "THE prophetic time" relating to the day and hour of Christ's Advent can only be traced to 1844 when Jesus did not come. The prophetic time she speaks of reached to 1844 and not a day beyond. Where do you find that Ellen White speaks of "prophetic time" between 1844 and the end of the world's history? She says clearly, Quote: After this period of time, reaching from 1842 to 1844, there can be no definite tracing of the prophetic time. The longest reckoning reaches to the autumn of 1844. I take "prophetic time" to mean where the Bible mentions a specific period of time that must elapse before Christ shall appear. I believe Ellen White is saying that there will be no such time after the end of the 2300 day prophecy. Christ could have come in the 1850s or 60s and again about 1890. For me that can only mean that there is no more prophetic time that must pass before Christ can come for His church. There are events that must occur, for sure, but no particular lengths of time. That is what she means when she says that we will never again have another message upon a definite period of time. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
LifeHiscost Posted February 21, 2011 Author Posted February 21, 2011 There are events that must occur, for sure, but no particular lengths of time. That is what she means when she says that we will never again have another message upon a definite period of time. “But watch out for yourselves, for they will deliver you up to councils, and you will be beaten in the synagogues. You will be brought before rulers and kings for My sake, for a testimony to them. And the gospel must first be preached to all the nations. But when they arrest you and deliver you up, do not worry beforehand, or premeditate what you will speak. But whatever is given you in that hour, speak that; for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit.""Mark 13:9-11 NKJV Bold emphasis mine LHC Other than the gospel message reaching every nation, are you aware of any other specific circumstance as needing to occur before Jesus comes? This is not a challenge. I'm not sure that I know the answer to that question. God blesses! Quote Lift Jesus up!!
Moderators John317 Posted February 21, 2011 Moderators Posted February 21, 2011 ....The hour of God's Judgment (IJ) began 22 October 1844 1) 22 October 1844 and 83-years 4-months = 22 February 1928 2) 22 February 1928 and 83-years 4-months = 22 April 2011 ....In John 11:9 and Revelation 14:7 hour <5610> is the SAME word The translators rendered one singular and one plural Yes, it is the same word, but one is singular and the other is plural. Did you study NT Greek? In John 11: 9, the word is nominative, plural, feminine. In Rev. 14: 7, the same word is nominative, singular, feminine. You can't go by the fact that it is the same word. It is the prefixes and suffixes that determine the function and gender of a word. You say you are a student of the word but if you haven't studied the Greek and yet you are making the claim that both of those words are the same and that the translators simply rendered one singular and the other plural without valid cause, you are missing some fundamental facts that you really need to know. You will be better off simply depending on all the translations, every one of which translate John 11: 9 as plural and Rev. 14: 7 as singular. They do it for a good reason, which is that it is the only correct way to translate those words. If you look closely at those texts in the Greek, you will notice that the two words you're talking about are spelled differently. That difference in spelling makes all the difference in the world. It is like the difference between "time" and "times." We add "s" to make it a plural. The Greeks did something akin to that. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted February 21, 2011 Moderators Posted February 21, 2011 Other than the gospel message reaching every nation, are you aware of any other specific circumstance as needing to occur before Jesus comes? This is not a challenge. I'm not sure that I know the answer to that question.God blesses! Great question. I believe the answer is yes. Both the Bible and Ellen White show us that God is waiting for a particular spiritual condition to be reached by the church and also by the world. The Apocalypse refers to it as the earth being ready to be reaped and also describes the bride of Christ as having made herself ready. Christ won't come for a people or a church which is unprepared for Him. See GC 425, 428. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted February 21, 2011 Moderators Posted February 21, 2011 Daniel 7:25 a time <05732> and times <05732> and the dividing <06387> of time <05732> Notice that time and times are the SAME word The translators rendered one singular and one plural I suggest that you take your idea of this to a scholar of the Hebrew/Aramaic languages, perhaps a teacher of Hebrew/Aramaic at the closest university or college. (Daniel 7: 25 is in Aramaic.) The fact is that even though they are the same word (as "time" and "times" is the same word), one of them is singular and the other plural. It is similar to the Greek that I discussed with you in my previous post. Again, you would be better off simply trusting translators who know the biblical languages. Not to do so would be like my not trusting the translator of a story in Chinese and believing instead that I can do a better job even though I know nothing of the Chinese language. Makes no sense at all. In fact, it's insanity. :-) Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted February 21, 2011 Moderators Posted February 21, 2011 ...If hour in Revelation 14:7 were plural like time and times in Daniel 7:25 The HOURS for the Judgment for the dead 22 OCT 1844 to 22 Feb 1928 to 22 April 2011 Rev. 14: 7 is not "hours" but "hour," as in "time." It is most definitely a singular noun. You are doing what a couple of other people on the Adventist Forum have done recently, which is to try to translate Greek without first knowing Greek. The reason all the translations of Rev. 14: 7 have "hour" is that it is the only correct way to translate it. If you don't believe this, take it to a professor of Greek and ask if Rev. 14: 7 should be translated as "hour" or "hours." Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
hch Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 This time which the angel declares with a solemn oath, is not the end of this world's history, neither of probationary time, but of prophetic time, which should precede the advent of our Lord. That is, the people will not have another message upon definite time. After this period of time, reaching from 1842 to 1844, there can be no definite tracing of the prophetic time. The longest reckoning reaches to the autumn of 1844. The angel's position with one foot on the sea, the other on the land signifies the wide extent of the proclamation of the message. It will cross the broad waters and be proclaimed in other countries, even to all the world. The comprehension of truth, the glad reception of the message is represented in the eating of the little book. The truth in regard to the time of the advent of our Lord was a precious message to our souls. Ms 59, 1900, pp. 8, 9. ("Jots and Tittles, II," August 16, 1900.) Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
hch Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Originally Posted By: hch ....The hour of God's Judgment (IJ) began 22 October 1844 1) 22 October 1844 and 83-years 4-months = 22 February 1928 2) 22 February 1928 and 83-years 4-months = 22 April 2011 ....In John 11:9 and Revelation 14:7 hour <5610> is the SAME word The translators rendered one singular and one plural Yes, it is the same word, but one is singular and the other is plural. Did you study NT Greek? Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
hch Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Originally Posted By: John317 There are events that must occur, for sure, but no particular lengths of time. That is what she means when she says that we will never again have another message upon a definite period of time. “But watch out for yourselves, for they will deliver you up to councils, and you will be beaten in the synagogues. You will be brought before rulers and kings for My sake, for a testimony to them. And the gospel must first be preached to all the nations. But when they arrest you and deliver you up, do not worry beforehand, or premeditate what you will speak. But whatever is given you in that hour, speak that; for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit.""Mark 13:9-11 NKJV Bold emphasis mine LHC Other than the gospel message reaching every nation, are you aware of any other specific circumstance as needing to occur before Jesus comes? This is not a challenge. I'm not sure that I know the answer to that question. God blesses! Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
hch Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Originally Posted By: hch[quote name='Fact Daniel 7:25 a time <05732> and times <05732> and the dividing <06387> of time <05732> Notice that time and times are the SAME word The translators rendered one singular and one plural I suggest that you take your idea of this to a scholar of the Hebrew/Aramaic languages' date=' perhaps a teacher of Hebrew/Aramaic at the closest university or college. (Daniel 7: 25 is in Aramaic.) The fact is that even though they are the same word (as "time" and "times" is the same word), one of them is singular and the other plural. It is similar to the Greek that I discussed with you in my previous post. Again, you would be better off simply trusting translators who know the biblical languages. Not to do so would be like my not trusting the translator of a story in Chinese and believing instead that I can do a better job even though I know nothing of the Chinese language. Makes no sense at all. In fact, it's insanity. :-) [/quote'] Thank you for both lessons. Greek and Aramaic. I frequently consult multiple versions of the Scriptures. But that poses its own set of problems. Words in the KJV that don't exist in the original text and the translators failed to italicize indicating that they were "added." Words that are translated to fit the translators understanding that are not translated that way any where else in the Bible and where there is no definition of the word to fit the rendition. And lets not forget great translations based on suspect texts. It does make studying more time consuming and does not always clear up the questions. Sometimes I just have to get out Strong's and look up every word and have that ah ha moment. Great example: Daniel 7 "thrones cast down" and "thrones set in place" When various versions are read it is like it is an either or situation. When it is understood, Daniel is saying both. Thrones cast down over church and state = papacy (reformation and 1798) Thrones set in place (1805 and beyond Louisiana Purchase America) Thrones set in place (1844 IJ) Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
hch Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Originally Posted By: hch ...If hour in Revelation 14:7 were plural like time and times in Daniel 7:25 The HOURS for the Judgment for the dead 22 OCT 1844 to 22 Feb 1928 to 22 April 2011 Rev. 14: 7 is not "hours" but "hour," as in "time." It is most definitely a singular noun. You are doing what a couple of other people on the Adventist Forum have done recently, which is to try to translate Greek without first knowing Greek. The reason all the translations of Rev. 14: 7 have "hour" is that it is the only correct way to translate it. If you don't believe this, take it to a professor of Greek and ask if Rev. 14: 7 should be translated as "hour" or "hours." Thank you again. I accepted your explanation and really do appreciate the tutoring. When I study, I consider the obvious. Then I look at the possibilities. When I encounter a "dead end" rather than to avoid that road, I check it out to be sure it is a dead end. And sometimes I find out that the "dead end" sheds more light on the study than the obvious. When William Miller applied the day for a year to the 2300-days in Daniel 8:14 "knowledge increased." And as we near Christ's Advent we must avail ourselves of all the information that God has stored in His word to be prepared. The character of Jesus cannot be reproduced in His people if they are not yielded to the leading of the Holy Spirit. Those that are easily satisfied with a superficial understanding of the Scriptures are in danger of being unprepared when the final test comes upon us. I still have a mystery. Since a prophetic hour based on a 1000-year day fits Revelation 17, is that a coincidence? A dead end that will lead no where? Or a valid application that may extend to other areas of study? If I fail to check it out thoroughly, a piece of the big picture might get missed. If it fails to make sense in the big picture, it gets set aside until it does make sense or is proven to be worthless trivia. It is dangerous to let others do our thinking for us. Look at the Jews that rejected Jesus. He did not fit their concept of the Messiah and the religious leaders that should have been turning the people to Him turned them away. When I stand before God to give an account of myself in that DAY, He will not ask me if I believe what others have told me? But "How readest thou?" And by God's grace, I will be one that studied to show myself approved of God a workman that needs not to be ashamed. And even though some things were Greek to me, He will know that I gave Him my time, my means, my family, my job, and myself. But of course He already knows that. Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
Moderators John317 Posted February 22, 2011 Moderators Posted February 22, 2011 I can be persuaded by argument and evidence that I have been wrong on these questions and have no trouble changing my mind about them if I'm convinced of it by evidence. So don't let my disagreement with you keep you from sharing what you believe to be true. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted February 22, 2011 Moderators Posted February 22, 2011 ...I frequently consult multiple versions of the Scriptures. But that poses its own set of problems. Words in the KJV that don't exist in the original text and the translators failed to italicize indicating that they were "added." Words that are translated to fit the translators understanding that are not translated that way any where else in the Bible and where there is no definition of the word to fit the rendition. And lets not forget great translations based on suspect texts. Yes, it is definitely a good idea to compare multiple good translations. When you do this with 4 or 5 very dependable translations, in most cases you will be able to tell accurately what the text is saying. I have over 60 different English translations, and I enjoy studying all of them. In most editions of the KJV, the words not in the original occur in italics. Generally those words are necessary in order for the sentecne to make sense, or sound right, in English. A good rule of thumb is that if you find that almost all your translations agree on a particular translation of a verse, they are probably right and you should not think that you can improve on it by making changes. There are very few exceptions to this rule. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted February 22, 2011 Moderators Posted February 22, 2011 Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
hch Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 I can be persuaded by argument and evidence that I have been wrong on these questions and have no trouble changing my mind about them if I'm convinced of it by evidence. So don't let my disagreement with you keep you from sharing what you believe to be true. Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
hch Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 A good rule of thumb is that if you find that almost all your translations agree on a particular translation of a verse, they are probably right and you should not think that you can improve on it by making changes. There are very few exceptions to this rule. Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
hch Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 John317 had not heard back form you in a while on this topic. Must have lost interest? http://clubadventist.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/425907/Re_Egypt.html#Post425907 Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.