Is the Investigative Judgment in the Bible?

[Lysimachus]

Pastor Bohr is pro at proving everything from the Bible. He knows how to back up everything. Then he simply follows up with Ellen White's commentary as a "polish-up", or a "cherry on top" to the presentation.

If Adventists have a hard time with our pastors quoting Ellen White, no disrespect, but it usually reveals that something is wrong with them spiritually inside. They are not right with the Lord.

Adventists should have no problem whatsoever with preachers quoting Ellen White if done so as a followup to scripture.

Otherwise, what did Ellen White write for? To just read privately? Not so.

Ellen White repeatedly said that the testimonies are unread, and unappreciated.

[phkrause]

Adventists should have no problem whatsoever with preachers quoting Ellen White if done so as a followup to scripture.

Otherwise, what did Ellen White write for? To just read privately? Not so.

Ellen White repeatedly said that the testimonies are unread, and unappreciated.

Exactly Lysimachus. She wrote for the Church, not for other denominations from what I understand. If that's the case than why would God of called her to write all this material? To just lie around our homes? I can understand when Pastors only quote EGW and forget to use the Bible.

[Woody]

Quote:

Adventists should have no problem whatsoever with preachers quoting Ellen White if done so as a followup to scripture.

Exactly. The key word here is "followup" and not to the exclusion of scripture.

However - when preaching from the pulpit - only scripture is appropriate.

Quote:

The words of the Bible, and the Bible alone, should be heard from the pulpit (Prophets and Kings, pp. 624-626).

[Lysimachus]

The words of the Bible, and the Bible alone, should be heard from the pulpit (Prophets and Kings, pp. 624-626).

Yes, my dad heard this one before. I remember him explaining this, and it made perfect sense.

The sentence does not say:

"The words of the Bible, and the Bible alone should only and always be heard from the pulpit"

In other words, we need sermons where the Bible and Bible alone are preached. I've heard Pastor Bohr (among many other pastors, including Walter Veith) preach from the Bible and the Bible alone.

We're living in a time when the Church needs specific counsels. Pastor Bohr is giving a lecture series, these are not regular Sabbath sermons. I would be disappointed if he did not bring out her commentary to "confirm" with what is being said in the Bible.

Also, it is healthy at times for Evangelical Christians to hear her authoritative words. They need to know that we have a prophet who spoke with great authority, and said things that are in so harmony with the Bible.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:Bob Ryan

So the one aspect that is glaringly obvious to all - is that parts of the book are sealed and other parts are not.

Dan 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

What is also “obvious” is – that Gd and those who wrest Writ have aught against each other, as Gd sealed the entire book of Daniel – and not just this or that part of it.

Where one thinks he or she has comprehension re this or that aspect of the book is seriously errant in his or her interpretation of it, if it is based upon exegeses before its unsealing.

Example: the time sequences as interpreted by those who wrest the book would have the feet of the image in Daniel 2 much, much longer than the chronological dates provide for the the body of the image itself; that is, of all the preceding kingdoms beginning with Babylon and continuing through Rome – implying that Gd has no sense of proportionality; likewise, with the golden image that expositors suggest was a likeness of Nabuchadnezzar (Dan 3). Again, the proportions of 60 cubits high and 6 cubits wide would yield only a ludicrous figure of a man. Etc.

The expositors who bruit doctrines based on that which was sealed discharge their credibility. They remain arrogantly against the plainly spoken word of Gd and moreover, presume upon Him. Look again, at

Daniel 9 and note that the predicating nexus for the fulfillment of the Seventy-weeks prophecy is lodged with “all Israel”, which was not in view at any time the wresting expositors bruit as the interpretation of Daniel 9. Their 'interpretation' has only Judah in view.

Oh yes, this is simply a bit of incidental that Gd sealed from the perception of those who arrogantly presumed upon His sealing of the book, the entire book – and not a part here and a part there – all helter-skelter like...

More sadly, this sort of errancy is virally carried through to the Apocryphal writings of St John.

Quote:

Quote:Lysimachus

...that God has lead all these Reformers to build their entire theology on a false hermeneutic.

Yet, they all worshipped and still do, upon the First day of the week... So, has their gravitas legitimized the First day as the Sabbath of the Lord, or is your argument febrile?

Quote:

Quote:Lysimachus

You'd also be surprised to find out what it really means in Daniel 7:12 when it says the lives of the rest of the beasts were "prolonged". Our pioneers did SUCH an excellent job at hammering these points out, and have brought us many solid interpretations.

...whilst all the while neglecting to perceive the verb tense (verse 17) re those four beasts of Daniel 7 – and failing also to notice that immediately following – Gd gave Daniel the vision of the Capricorn Goat of Grecia and the Aries Ram of Persia as marker/signifier for the preceding vision of Daniel 7. What?—for nothing did Gd represent the kingdoms by their Zodiacal signs?—and that He caused blindness to attend the premature expositors with their failure to notice that Gd correlated the kingdoms with their Zodiacal signs?

Is that important?—of course it is - should the honest expositor wish to revisit his currently held dogmas...

[Lysimachus]

jasd,

Do not confuse the sealing of the entire book of Daniel with the "vision" in chapter 8. Daniel 12 is encompassing the entire book of Daniel, Daniel 8 is just dealing with a specific vision.

[jasd]

>>Do not confuse the sealing of the entire book of Daniel with the "vision" in chapter 8. Daniel 12 is encompassing the entire book of Daniel, Daniel 8 is just dealing with a specific vision.<<

Be that as it may, the specific words of Gd in Daniel 12 do not bear that thought out – for the sealing of the book supercedes any and all supposed exceptions; regrettably, support for those ‘exceptions’ cannot be found anywhere in chapter and verse.

So, logic requires that though one may read the text – its understanding can only be relegated to that which is direct; such as, “In the third year of the reign off king...”, that which has been inarguably substantiated by history, etc. One must bear in mind that when Gd sealed the book, no one, even Daniel to whom the visions were given – had or has full understanding of them.

It is a given – that only now in “the time of the end” – that one may with confidence begin to seek for a true exegesis of the entire book of Daniel – else Gd is made as fool by the premature expositor.

Per the vision of Daniel 8: perhaps, it is because the book was sealed that no one knows for certain whether the “little horn, which waxed exceeding great” came forth from another horn or from the antecedent wind of heaven (Dan 8:8). Etc.

[Lysimachus]

>>Do not confuse the sealing of the entire book of Daniel with the "vision" in chapter 8. Daniel 12 is encompassing the entire book of Daniel, Daniel 8 is just dealing with a specific vision.<<

Be that as it may, the specific words of Gd in Daniel 12 do not bear that thought out – for the sealing of the book supercedes any and all supposed exceptions; regrettably, support for those ‘exceptions’ cannot be found anywhere in chapter and verse.

So, logic requires that though one may read the text – its understanding can only be relegated to that which is direct; such as, “In the third year of the reign off king...”, that which has been inarguably substantiated by history, etc. One must bear in mind that when Gd sealed the book, no one, even Daniel to whom the visions were given – had or has full understanding of them.

It is a given – that only now in “the time of the end” – that one may with confidence begin to seek for a true exegesis of the entire book of Daniel – else Gd is made as fool by the premature expositor.

Per the vision of Daniel 8: perhaps, it is because the book was sealed that no one knows for certain whether the “little horn, which waxed exceeding great” came forth from another horn or from the antecedent wind of heaven (Dan 8:8). Etc.

Once again, a sealing of a book does not mean Daniel is no longer supposed to understand the time elements of the vision. He most certainly did not grasp a number of spiritual implications, such as what exactly would transpire in 1844, but in no way are we to gather that because the vision was to be "sealed" up, that this means he was not allowed to understand the starting point of those 2300 days.

It would have been illogical to not continue the auditory explanation in Daniel 9 of the vision given in Daniel 8, for had the vision been completely left off in Daniel 8, it would have been impossible to ever know what the 2300 days belonged to and when it began.

Therefore, understanding what Daniel 8 means in the "time of the end" would have been left to endless speculation, thus defeating the very purpose of the prophecy.

Another note to consider is this:

Did Daniel seal up the vision?

He did not.

8:26 And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told [is] true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it [shall be] for many days.

8:27 And I Daniel fainted, and was sick [certain] days; afterward I rose up, and did the king's business; and I was astonished at the vision, but none understood [it].

The angel is telling Daniel to shut up the vision, for it will be many days. But instead of sealing up the vision, he fainted and became ill, and after informing the angel that he did not "understand it", it makes all the sense in the world that the angel decided to wait up before helping him understand the vision before sealing it up.

For Daniel to understand the "mareh of the evening and the morning" (2300 evening-mornings) is absolutely critical in order to provide the finishing touches that would allow God's people after 1844 to fully understand the full meaning of this vision in the "time of the end".

[jasd]

>>Once again, a sealing of a book does not mean Daniel is no longer supposed to understand the time elements of the vision.<<

What Daniel was given to understand is irrelevant to any and everyone since – until the time of the end. One simply cannot make the argument that the ‘time of the end’ encompassed a time when germ theory and travel other than the meanest of means was a reality (1844) with anything more advanced still yet upon or beyond the horizon.

>>He most certainly did not grasp a number of spiritual implications, such as what exactly would transpire in 1844,<<

Unless one can show chapter and verse were it is stated that Daniel 7, 8, and 9 were the exceptions to Gd’s sealing of the book of Daniel – 1844 holds no relevancy other than an excitement for those who would not and presently cannot allow Gd to act upon His own volition; such as, sealing a book.

>>but in no way are we to gather that because the vision was to be "sealed" up, that this means he was not allowed to understand the starting point of those 2300 days.<<

As properly parsed – what Daniel ‘understood’ is not for our ken.

>>It would have been illogical to not continue the auditory explanation in Daniel 9 of the vision given in Daniel 8, for had the vision been completely left off in Daniel 8, it would have been impossible to ever know what the 2300 days belonged to and when it began.<<

I don’t know about the members of the .Org, but I, and I suppose others, take Gd literally at His word – without the hubris of circumvention. Given only the text of Daniel 12:4 – I would not hesitate to proclaim anything wrested re the 2300 days – willful and without veracity.

>>Therefore, understanding what Daniel 8 means in the "time of the end" would have been left to endless speculation, thus defeating the very purpose of the prophecy.<<

No, it would have been left until the time of the end – when the HS should make its understanding known. As per the “very purpose of the prophecy” – that remained sealed until the time of the end – speculation aside.

Another note to consider is this:

>>Did Daniel seal up the vision?

He did not.

8:26 And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told [is] true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it [shall be] for many days.

8:27 And I Daniel fainted, and was sick [certain] days; afterward I rose up, and did the king's business; and I was astonished at the vision, but none understood [it].<<

Whatever Daniel did or did not do vis-à-vis the vision(s) matters not in the least, for it was that Gd told him to seal the entire book – arguments re this or that vision aside.

>>The angel is telling Daniel to shut up the vision, for it will be many days. But instead of sealing up the vision, he fainted and became ill, and after informing the angel that he did not "understand it", it makes all the sense in the world that the angel decided to wait up before helping him understand the vision before sealing it up.<<

The above is rebutted by Daniel himself, “I was astonished at the vision; but none understood [it]. Its syntax includes him as one of the “none” who could not understand [it].

>>For Daniel to understand the "mareh of the evening and the morning" (2300 evening-mornings) is absolutely critical in order to provide the finishing touches that would allow God's people after 1844 to fully understand the full meaning of this vision in the "time of the end".<<

Please, chapter and verse showing that ‘Gd’s people’ were to fully understand the vision ca 1844. That would contravene the directly explicit order to seal the book – that is, the entire book, until the end of time, which would not have been in 1844.

[jasd]

>>I see everybody when they speak of God, they WRITE his NAME, 'GOD'. But now every time one from the context would think, perhaps the fellow means 'God', he replaces the NAME with an image of his imagination he so revers he dares prefer it above THE NAME, LORD GOD?!<<

Goes to deference. At one time the COI were required to name the name of Gd; however, a time came when they no longer remembered/knew His name and decided that, no matter, His name was ineffable. Okay, deference is good enough for me. Where one used the tetragrammaton YHWH, YHVH, or some other variation thereof – I’ve deferred to the Jewish practice sans the hyphen. Ipso facto,

Gd or GD.

[Lysimachus]

Whatever Daniel did or did not do vis-à-vis the vision(s) matters not in the least, for it was that Gd told him to seal the entire book – arguments re this or that vision aside.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

surely do wish the topic title would be changed...every time I see it, I keep thinking it reads, "Is the Investiture in the Bible?" Makes me have visions of little Pathfinders in robes and togas..

oh well... back to topic...

[Overaged]

Ellen White repeatedly said that the testimonies are unread, and unappreciated.

She also said that the Bible comes first.

[Nic Samojluk]

Lysimachus wrote:

“It is impossible for God's "time of the end" people to have even the remotest clue when the 2300 starts and ends during the "time of the end", unless they have a reference point to commence the date.”

I agree! Nevertheless, I am amazed that we Adventists have consistently ignored the fact that the starting point for the 2300 prophecy is right there in chapter 8: The Battle of Granicus between Alexander the Great and Medo-Persia which took place in 334 BC.

If we ignore this, the angel’s reference to the ram and the goat makes no logical sense. In so doing, we also ignore the prophecy found in Ezekiel 37 which predicted the rebirth of the nation of Israel.

And we Adventists ignore what Paul said about the Jews. He predicted that they would be grafted in again. The notion that a few Jewish converts to Christianity fulfill this prediction makes no sense to me, and much that it fulfills the prophecy found in Ezek. 37.

11Then he said to me: “Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel. They say, ‘Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off.’ 12Therefore prophesy and say to them: ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says: O my people, I am going to open your graves and bring you up from them; I will bring you back to the land of Israel. 13Then you, my people, will know that I am the LORD, when I open your graves and bring you up from them. 14I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I the LORD have spoken, and I have done it, declares the LORD.’”

When Hitler was killing the Jews by the millions, nobody would have predicted that the Jews would return to the promised land and become a nation again. We Adventists fail to see the amazing fulfillment of this prediction. God did promise in the Old Testament that whenever the Israelites would repent and turn to God after they had been dispersed from the land of promise, he would bring them back.

This promise was fulfilled more than once. We need to read the history of how the Jews claimed to God for mercy as they were mercilessly killed by the Germans. The Lord did hear their prayers, and brought them back to the Promised Land one more time. How can we Adventists ignore this? I believe that Ellen White would have seen this as a fulfillment of prophecy—but we don’t! Why?

Because we are stuck with our misunderstanding of what happened in 1844. We also ignore the prediction found in Rev. 10 where the angel stated that the result of the swallowing of the little book would result in a sweet taste in our mouths but bitter in the stomach.

This suggests to me that we would be wrong both in the date and the event. We have persistently twisted this to mean that we were right on the date but wrong only on the event, thus forgetting that the end result would be bitter—not bittersweet!

Why do we act this way? Why are we blind to what is patently clear in Scripture? Because we are unwilling to admit that Ellen White was not infallible. God used her to build our church, and we concluded that she must be infallible in spite of her voluminous dependency on other authors.

We erroneously concluded that if she was right so many times, she must be right every time. We turned her writings into the final interpreter of Scripture. We placed her writings above Scripture. We made the same mistake the Israelites made following the signal victory of Gideon against their enemies.

The Lord used King David in a wonderful way, but he did not become sin free. He did make a big mistake in spite of his divine inspiration. The same can be said about Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and Samson. God has used in the past imperfect people. We need not place Ellen on a pedestal too high from where she will eventually fall.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Whatever Daniel did or did not do vis-à-vis the vision(s) matters not in the least, for it was that Gd told him to seal the entire book – arguments re this or that vision aside.

>>In Daniel 12, yes. In Daniel 8, no.<<

That sort of thinking is against Gd’s expressed will.

>>It is impossible for God's "time of the end" people to have even the remotest clue when the 2300 starts and ends during the "time of the end",<<

Is it stated that the ‘people of Gd’ must always know and understand beforehand what Gd had declared from the beginning?

>>unless they have a reference point to commence the date.<<

Which reference point may not be known, even now...

>>That reference point is given in Daniel 9.<<

Ignis fatuus? Please make the case that though Daniel's subject [of concern] was the prophecy of Jeremiah - the angel Gabriel just bounced in and started pontificating about a prior vision?--that of chapter 8. That relationship cannot be shown from text.

>>Simple as pie. <<

Not ‘shoo-fly pie’, yes?

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:Lysimachus

The angel is telling Daniel to shut up the vision, for it will be many days. But instead of sealing up the vision, he fainted and became ill, and after informing the angel that he did not "understand it", it makes all the sense in the world that the angel decided to wait up before helping him understand the vision before sealing it up.

Quote:jasd

The above is rebutted by Daniel himself, “I was astonished at the vision; but none understood [it]. Its syntax includes him as one of the “none” who could not understand [it].

>>Depends on which translation.

NIV

27 I, Daniel, was worn out. I lay exhausted for several days. Then I got up and went about the king’s business. I was appalled by the vision; it was beyond understanding.

ESV

27 And I, Daniel, was overcome and lay sick for some days. Then I rose and went about the king's business, but I was appalled by the vision and did not understand it.

YLT

27 And I, Daniel, have been, yea, I became sick [for] days, and I rise, and do the king's work, and am astonished at the appearance, and there is none understanding.

He may very well have been referring to himself in the way he expressed it.<<

Indeed, it is as I said.

>>The same Angel Gabriel comes back to "give him understanding". Understanding of what? Obviously the prior vision.<<

Why obviously?—years had passed, and the subject of Daniel’s prayer in Chapter 9 lay with Jeremiah’s prophecy.

>>A plain sense reading of the texts allow for this. Pastor Bohr breaks these points down exegetically. Did you watch the videos?<<

No. My good computer is on loan. I’ve only the one, which will not play videos.

>>For Daniel to understand the "mareh of the evening and the morning" (2300 evening-mornings) is absolutely critical in order to provide the finishing touches that would allow God's people after 1844 to fully understand the full meaning of this vision in the "time of the end".<<

Please, chapter and verse showing that ‘Gd’s people’ were to fully understand the vision ca 1844. That would contravene the directly explicit order to seal the book – that is, the entire book, until the time of the end, which then existing and subsequent facts attesting, would not have been in 1844.

>>You were the one stating that only God's people can understand it in the "time of the end". The nature of our argument is whether the 2300 days were sealed up in Daniel 8.<<

Which is proved by the words of Gd in Daniel 12:4; that is, the book – meaning the book – the entire book.

>>My argument is that it is impossible for God's people to understand when the 2300 days commence during the "time of the end" if no starting reference is provided. Thus, it is impossible for "shutting up the vision" to mean what you think it means.<<

Faulty hermeneutics. Sealing is sealing – for closing up understanding and/or for surety. Anyway, how is the relationship between the 2300 days and the Seventy-weeks prophecy established in Writ?

It isn’t – by Biblical text, anyway.

[jasd]

>>When Hitler was killing the Jews by the millions,<<

In part, my heritage is German – as is my son’s – so, pardon me should I place some particulars re a 'holocaust' upon the third rail, as it were... for it distresses me to see such untruths promulgated sans remark. As some would have it, “Truth is Important.”

“The real background of the Nuremberg Trials was exposed by the American Judge, Justice Wenerstrum, President of one of the Tribunals. He was so disgusted by the proceedings that he resigned his appointment and flew home to America, leaving behind a statement to the Chicago Tribune which enumerated point by point his objections to the Tiials (cf Mark Lautem, Das Letzte Wort iiber Nurnberg, p. 56). Points 3 - 8 are as follows.

[...]

6. Ninety percent of the Nuremberg Court consisted of biased persons who, either on political or racial grounds, furthered the prosecution's case.

[...]

Concerning Point 6, that ninety percent of the Nuremberg Court consisted of people biased on racial or political grounds, this was a fact confirmed by others present. According to Earl Carrol, an American lawyer, sixty per cent of the staff of the Public Prosecutor's Office were German Jews who had left Germany after the promulgation of Hitler's Race Laws. He observed that not even ten percent of the Americans employed at the Nuremberg courts were actually Americans by birth. The chief of the Public Prosecutor's Office, who worked behind General Taylor, was Robert M. Kempner, a German-Jewish emigrant. He was assisted by Morris Amchan. Mark Lautern, who observed the Trials, writes in his book: "They have all arrived: the Solomons, the Schlossbergers and the Rabinovitches, members of the Public Prosecutor's staff..." (ibid. p. 68). “

It is from this milieu that the number 6,000,000 – supposedly comprising the extent of a genocide was agreed upon and promulgated as convenient; that is, after having the number 9,800,000 first bruited and subsequently abandoned for its sheer lunacy.

The denouement of the Nuremberg Trials was to a large extent the result of confessions extracted by torture and other massive abuse of normal or otherwise accepted jurisprudence.

Ain not just in Denmark that stinketh the herring.

One, having regard for truths and holding to a 6,000,000 number as representative of a holocaust, must revisit the matter, as for one among many reasons – there were more European Jews who signed up for German reparation monies after the War – than were in Europe prior to the War. Truly Biblical in scope!

Ain not just in Denmark that stinketh the herring.

>>nobody would have predicted that the Jews would return to the promised land and become a nation again.<<

You might want to consider the contrarian point of view...

Read Arthur Koestler’s book, “The Thirteenth Tribe” (online) wherein he notes that approx 92 percent of today’s Jews are not bloodline Jews descending from Jacob/Israel. The American Shephardim refer to them as Ashkenazim or Oriental Jews and maintain a reticent rapprochement with them for matters of necessity – believing America to be the Jerusalem of prophecy.

>>We Adventists fail to see the amazing fulfillment of this prediction. God did promise in the Old Testament that whenever the Israelites would repent and turn to God after they had been dispersed from the land of promise, he would bring them back.<<

2 Sam 7:10 Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; ...

The above text has Nathan quoting Gd to King David – when the Davidic Kingdom was still comprised of the 12 Tribes. The subject addressed was all the COI, which would later become known as the two sisters – Ephraim/Israel and Judah (Jews).

Nathan prophesied that all the sons of Jacob/Israel were appointed to dwell elsewhere – than in old Canaanland.

>>We need to read the history of how the Jews claimed to God for mercy as they were mercilessly killed by the Germans.<<

Again, please revisit the matter for veracity of content. For instance: did you know that in the 30s – International Jewry declared war on Hitler Germany?—that defines ‘Partisan’ war, which constitutes, in the main, terrorism dressed in civilian apparel...

>>The Lord did hear their prayers, and brought them back to the Promised Land one more time.<<

Nathan told King David that his people would reach an appointed land – and be moved no more.

>>How can we Adventists ignore this?<<

Surprised?—why?—they even ignore Gd (Dan 12:4).

[jasd]

>>Or should I have written, JCMNGWUSALGIA or better still JCMNGW_S_LG__ sans the vowels? Would that be preferable or deferrable? Would that be a more sacred ‘image’ of his NAME, or, of HIM?<<

I think it preferable when not actually knowing Gd’s name – and rather than simply vocalizing a string of descriptives – one simply do as the Jews (who were and still are closer to the matter than you or I) and enunciate Lord/Adonai or write G-d with the hyphen/vowel point, or as I – who emulates the precedent and consonantal YHWH – write Gd without a vowel point. It is easily ascertainable.

However, don’t let me constrain you from doing as you wish. Mine is an idiosyncrasy – my own druther.

>>That would be snobbishness; but not when four at most or two at least ineffables as were ineffables ineffable.<<

You may also perceive as you wish. My action is my own idiosyncrasy with no burden upon you, yes?

>>Seen the fact - not ou Eber's but - of literal written language, that the Hebrew use of only consonants presupposes the vowels were BETTER remembered than the written down consonants else that language would instead have been written in vowels without consonants, it is clear those supposed enlightened are those enveloped in darkness.<<

Again, mine is to do as I wish – placing no constraint upon your own druther(s). Use as many vowels as it pleases you.

By the way, in my approx 7 years on these forums – no one has expressed a negative re my use of Gd without a hyphen/vowel point.

Anyway, is it true that by the early 1800s spoken Hebrew was a dead language?—and had to be subsequently reinvented? Using, matter-of-fact, a fair smattering of German. Moreover, the vowel points presently used are but centuries in use rather than millennia? So many variants...

Yet, arguments re Biblical Hebrew are so adamant, yes?--mine also. ;-)

Disabuse me should I err.

[Nic Samojluk]

jasd wrote:

“It is from this milieu that the number 6,000,000 – supposedly comprising the extent of a genocide was agreed upon and promulgated as convenient; that is, after having the number 9,800,000 first bruited and subsequently abandoned for its sheer lunac.”

So, according to your estimate, how many Jews did Hitler kill? Can you share with us the correct figure?

“2 Sam 7:10 Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; ...”

Do you accept the theory that God’s promises and warnings are contingent on human response? Does the story of Jonah mean anything to you?

“Nathan prophesied that all the sons of Jacob/Israel were appointed to dwell elsewhere – than in old Canaan land.”

Did God promise to bring back to the land of promise every member of the Jewish race, or just a remnant?

“Again, please revisit the matter for veracity of content. For instance: did you know that in the 30s – International Jewry declared war on Hitler Germany?”

How many Germans did the Jews annihilate? Were they gassed in concentration camps?

“Nathan told King David that his people would reach an appointed land – and be moved no more.”

Are God’s promises unconditional?

[jasd]

First, no discourtesy intended by my late response to your post; I’d gone to the coast for Mother’s Day weekend and to escape the inland valley heat. Lucky me.

Second, I am not interested in rehashing* the seemingly fraudulent, but merely in ameliorating the Blood Libel charged against the German peoples.

*“In 1919, commiserating, Martin Glynn, Governor of the State of New York publicized in North America the "holocaust of six million Jews and eight hundred thousand Jewish children caused by "the tyranny of war and lust for Jewish blood" in Poland and Ukraine, while The New York Times and other Jewish media reported that Jews were burned alive by the thousands in synagogues in Ukraine...” [ed.jasd]

A recognizable cant against an earlier ‘enemy’?

So, with those disclaimers aside... my response to your post:

Quote:

Quote:jasd

It is from this milieu that the number 6,000,000 – supposedly comprising the extent of a genocide was agreed upon and promulgated as convenient; that is, after having the number 9,800,000 first bruited and subsequently abandoned for its sheer lunacy.

>>So, according to your estimate, how many Jews did Hitler kill? Can you share with us the correct figure?<<

No one can share with you the “correct figure” for Jews whom “Hitler killed”. Who knows?—however, a Professor of the Hebrew University at Jerusalem a few years back posited the number 400,000. I’ve seen what appear to be reasonable numbers that proffer up to 1,300,000 who died. Otherwise, no one knows – even Elie Wiesel, whose claims to have witnessed babies being burned alive and other such fantasia, which since, have been quietly and embarrassingly dropped from the more enduring narrative – does not know.

However, staying with the 6,000,000 figure...: “In 1995, the plaque outside Auschwitz was changed to read 1.1 million deaths rather than 4 million, but [...] 6 million minus 3 million is still 6 million.” Yes?—No?—tricky?

Quote:

Quote:jasd

2 Sam 7:10 Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; ...

>>Do you accept the theory that God’s promises and warnings are contingent on human response?<<

Indeed, should they have been qualified as conditional “promises and warnings”. However, there is that rare occasion where the unconditional has/have been contingent upon ‘repentence and mercy’.

>>Does the story of Jonah mean anything to you?<<

Goes to my above ‘repentence and mercy’. However, it seems that we, the hoi polloi, are bound up with the character and decisions of our leaders – notwithstanding our own merits or lack thereof.

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Nathan prophesied that all the sons of Jacob/Israel were appointed to dwell elsewhere – than in old Canaan land.

>>Did God promise to bring back to the land of promise every member of the Jewish race, or just a remnant?<<

Read the text... bearing in mind the numberless progeny of the COI - asking, "In that small slip of Canaanland!?-where existed 15,000,000 at the time of David..."

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Again, please revisit the matter for veracity of content. For instance: did you know that in the 30s – International Jewry declared war on Hitler Germany?

“Judea declares War on Germany” Daily Express, March 24, 1933, Britain – later picked up elsewhere...

>>How many Germans did the Jews annihilate?<<

Directly?—or indirectly?

"I will crunch Germany." - Roosevelt (1932)

"Our Jewish interests demand the final destruction of Germany." - W. Jabotinski, founder of "Irgun Zwai Leumi" (January 1934)

"We will force this war upon Hitler, if he wants it or not." - Winston Churchill (1936 broadcast)

"Its our task to mercilessly declare war to Germany, the public enemy number one." - Bernhard Lecache, President of the Jewish World League (9. November 1938)

"Hitler doesnt want war but he will be forced to it, and in fact soon. England has the final say like in 1914." - Zionist Emil Ludwig Cohn "Annalen"

...ad infinitum.

The war in the European Theatre began in September 1939.

>>Were they gassed in concentration camps?<<

The question assumes the validity of the implied “gassed in concentration camps”. Make your best case.

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Nathan told King David that his people would reach an appointed land – and be moved no more.

>>Are God’s promises unconditional?<<

Indeed, some are – where they are not qualified with normal qualifiers. Having said that, the unconditional promises of Gd must be accepted as unconditional – else one engages the practice of eisegesis; or interjecting the notion that this or that passage is or is not chronological; or basing one’s doctrine upon obvious and horrendously errant metrics.

MENE MENE TEKEL UPARSIN/PERES = 1000, 1000, a fiftieth part of a thousand, a half thousand = 2,520 = seven times curse of Leviticus 26, and elsewhere = There is a span of 2520 years (seven Biblical 'times') from the purported ‘downfall’ of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, that is, from 745 BC to AD 1775-6 = the Declaration of Independence = who has heard such a thing?—can a nation be born in one day?

[Samie]

Is the Investigative Judgment in the Bible?

Frankly, my answer would be "No". But why? Because, the Bible says it as after a man dies that judgment is meted out:

Quote:

Hebrews 9:27-28 27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

But how is judgment meted out?

The Bible stipulates that only those whose names are in the book of life could be in the New Jerusalem:

Quote:

Revelation 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

All others will be cast into the lake of fire:

Quote:

Revelation 20:15 15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire

.

Christ our Lord Himself tells us names of overcomers will remain written in the book of life:

Quote:

Revelation 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

Therefore, there is a time when a name is decided upon whether to blot his name from the book of life or not. This is that judgment occurring after a man dies.

After a person dies, I would surmise, heavenly intelligence would scan the dead person's data files housed in his own personal hard disk, the human brain. The split second WiFi style scanning merely determines whether there is any bad sector in the human hard disk. The presence of a bad sector means the person is not an overcomer. If a bad sector is detected, the command "DELETE" is issued and carried out, and the dead person's name is deleted from the book of life. If no bad sector is detected, the dead person's name is retained, having been written there because of the death of Christ our Lord on the cross.