Are the three Angels' Messages Dead or Alive?

[hch]

2 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

I can see how that would feel good. I have yet to write my first book. Atleast we know you will eat this month.

Having never been an author, you are probably unaware that Income for US authors falls below federal poverty line. Used to call us starving authors

[hch]

2 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

I have the same Bible, with Strongs and was aware of thi. But "constitution" is  a very vague use of the word in question, and for that reason, we find it listed in strongs very little, only one or two times. So that alone puts your use of it into question. But what I meant is that your theory has not detailed a biblical, hermeneutical explanation of how/why we should all say "constitution" should be used here, with no other word uses acceptable.

Quote

 The momentous issues at stake through neglect of the word of God should be carefully considered. The study of the Bible is worthy of the best mental effort, the most sanctified ability. When new light is presented to the church, it is perilous to shut yourselves away from it. Refusing to hear because you are prejudiced against the message to the messenger will not make your case excusable before God. To condemn that which you have not heard and do not understand will not exalt your wisdom in the eyes of those who are candid in their investigations of truth. And to speak with contempt of those whom God has sent with a message of truth, is folly and madness. If our youth are seeking to educate themselves to be workers in His cause, they should learn the way of the Lord, and live by every word that proceedeth out of His mouth. They are not to make up their minds that the whole truth has been unfolded, and that the Infinite One has no more light for His people. If they entrench themselves in the belief that the whole truth has been revealed, they will be in danger of discarding precious jewels of truth that shall be discovered as men turn their attention to the searching of the rich mine of God's word.  {CSW 32.1}

 

[hch]

1 minute ago, The Wanderer said:

I do have friends who are authors, and I can assure you that Canadians have the same challenge. I hope you are still able to bring in funds other ways too. I believe that you are sincere in what you do here, and would still like to meet you one day if I ever get to your area. What I like about you is your love for God's Word and trying to understand it. I am not trying to "prove you wrong" here, just comparing my opinion with yours. "Comparing notes" I guess is what some people call it. You present interesting challenges, and I always enjoy that!

If I am wrong, I would like for you  or someone to prove me wrong. I have not desire to be in the wrong when my name is reviewed in the court of Heaven.

But if I am right, and whileI was talking to the Lord about that in prayer, a woman called to ask why I believed as I do. After reviewing the preponderance of the evidence with her, I realized that the Lord had just answered my prayer. 

[hch]

3 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

Again, this is a good quote but it does not show from scripture why the use of "constitution" in place of covenant has been used for your theory

Quote

And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries. Daniel 11:21

This requires a word study

 And in his estate <03653>

AV-foot 8, estate 4, base 2, office 1, place 1, well 1; 17 

shall stand up <05975> (8804) QAL

1a3) to tarry, delay, remain, continue, abide, endure, persist, be steadfast 

a vile person <0959> (8737) [antichrist is a vile person]

Daniel 7 when studied in depth, explains that the kings from the earth (7:17) are Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, and Obama

Reagan Head of Gold (Reagonomics)

Bush I Silver

Clinton Brass (Midsection)

Bush II leg of iron that extends into feet of clay (clay churchcraft) he mingled church and state

Obama other leg of iron that extends into feet of clay (clay churchcraft)

When Daniel 11:21 is considered an alternate meaning --

The foot shall remain, a vile person...

The current extension of the iron leg into the foot that is in office (Daniel 2 --the idol only had 2 feet) is Obama, he remains in office beyond his time.

 

[hch]

55 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

Last time i checked my friend, the sea was part of the earth, as in the two together are a whole earth. The second coming of Jesus is a world wide event, and the great final crises will be directed at every person: Rev 3:10

Also, in the Poor Mans Concordance, by Hawker we read regarding use of the word covenant in Daniel 7 as being most accurate:
 

Both OT and NT use of the word covenant are very consistent with one another, and it would definitely throw it all out of context to suddenly stick the word "constitution" into Daniel 7

I agree that the sea is a part of the earth BUT

Quote

7:17    These great beasts, which are four, [are] four kings, [which] shall arise out of the earth. 

Quote

The prophecies of Daniel and of John are to be understood. They interpret each other.{7BC 949.6} 

Quote

Revelation is the supplement of Daniel. {17MR 19.1}

In the prophecy of Revelation 13 the earth and sea are used symbolically to depict the old world and the new world.

To make the sea a part of the earth destroys the symbolism.

When the symbolism in Revelation is applied to Daniel 7 (Because Revelation supplements Daniel), the sea is not viewed as a part of the earth but as a prophetic symbol.

To make the sea a part of the earth in Daniel 7, you destroy the symbolism in Revelation 13.

As I have posted here several times and now repeat in other words: Both passages have symbolism--lion, bear, leopard, sea, and earth. Consistency in prophetic interpretation says that the sea is a part of the earth in both or they are separate and distinct symbols in both. They cannot be mixed up in one of these passages and mean something different in the other.

[hch]

1 hour ago, The Wanderer said:

Also, in the Poor Mans Concordance, by Hawker we read regarding use of the word covenant in Daniel 7 as being most accurate:
 

Both OT and NT use of the word covenant are very consistent with one another, and it would definitely throw it all out of context to suddenly stick the word "constitution" into Daniel 7

As near as I can tell online, Poor Mans Concordance, by Hawker was researched and written prior to first publication, which is listed as 1812 and additional works being added in 1820. His commentary is good, but certainly not current (being 200 years) before the endtime events that it is explaining.

Quote

Those who become confused in their understanding of the Word, who fail to see the meaning of antichrist, will surely place themselves on the side of antichrist. There is no time now for us to assimilate with the world. Daniel is standing in his lot and in his place. The prophecies of Daniel and of John [Revelation] are to be understood. They interpret each other. They give to the world truths which every one should understand. These prophecies are to be witnesses in the world. By their fulfillment in these last days they will explain themselves.  {7BC 949.6}  

Much of my commentary is from fulfilled prophecy and some of it from prophecy that is yet to be fulfilled as I understand it based things that have happened within the past 4 years.

Based on God's promise that knowledge is to be increased, commentary from the past 4 years should be more up to date than something that is 200 years old.

[hch]

I caught up. I'm exhausted  

[Martn]

2 hours ago, hch said:

If I am wrong, I would like for you  or someone to prove me wrong.

There is absolutely, positively no way at all to prove to a fundamentalist that his or her ideas are wrong. That goes for fundamentalists of every sort, whether they are religious fundamentalists, political fundamentalists, science fundamentalists, food fundamentalists, flower fundamentalists, or whatever. It's all a fantasy, and people trapped in fantasy cannot be reasoned with, until they come out of the fantasy on their own. Fantasy and honesty cancel each other out. Most people are not honest about facts, even to themselves.

 

[hch]

3 hours ago, Martn said:

There is absolutely, positively no way at all to prove to a fundamentalist that his or her ideas are wrong. That goes for fundamentalists of every sort, whether they are religious fundamentalists, political fundamentalists, science fundamentalists, food fundamentalists, flower fundamentalists, or whatever. It's all a fantasy, and people trapped in fantasy cannot be reasoned with, until they come out of the fantasy on their own. Fantasy and honesty cancel each other out. Most people are not honest about facts, even to themselves.

Then I'll have to rest upon God's promise: 

Quote

Then shall ye call upon Me, and ye shall go and pray unto Me, and I will hearken unto you.  And ye shall seek Me, and find Me, when ye shall search for Me with all your heart. And I will be found of you, saith the LORD: and I will turn away your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith the LORD (Jeremiah 29:12-14)

 

[hch]

40 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

This is quite untrue. Age has nothing to do with truth. The Bible is even older than what i used, and you cannot say this same thing about the Bible. "The past four years" is completely irrelevant to the points I made.

The US Constitution is America's Covenant with the President, the congress, the Supreme Court and the people. Daniel 11 does not specifically say that it is God's Covenant. So in the endtime it can be either or both and I already posted that it was both.

[hch]

44 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

You have stated above  that "tradition" says that "in Daniel 7, it is stated that the sea-beast is symbolic and the earth-beast is literal."  What "tradition" do you refer to?  Who has said this? What or who do you mean when you say "tradition?" Do you have book and page number for reference? And even if "tradition" does say this, what, in your mind, would be so wrong about that?

The sea beasts in Daniel 7 were the kingdoms from Babylon to Rome historically. It has been well documented from Hypolitus of Rome (4th century AD), Martin Luther (1500's), Sir Isaac Newton (1629), and EG White through 1915. But sea-beasts are not earth kings, so what has been accepted as the meaning of the sea beasts is not the meaning of the earth-beasts that heaven sealed until the endtime.

[hch]

50 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

The Obama theory, as proposed here excludes several important details that are included in the Bible. This Obama theory is trying to confuse the symbolism regarding  the, so called, "earth beasts," and "sea beasts" of Daniel, chapter 7, The first concern, of course, is that this Obama theory tries to make current-day, and very personal connections, to individuals like Popes or presidents , using the 'sea beasts,' in a wrong sense, while ignoring whatever it is that we could identify with the Bible's use of  the term "earth beasts."  Daniel chapter seven does not identify the earth/sea beasts as two different things that are known as "separate" or "different" entities. They are, one and the same. The "sea beasts" simply expounds upon, or builds upon the information provided about the "earth beasts." One does not need "many hours of study," or to "write nine books", or to convince a certain number of people in order to see the truth in this. We dont need to do such things in order to "qualify" ourselves as having studied this "correctly." We can all take God's Word for what it says, and in this case, that just takes a few minutes.

Your logic is faulty here based on a very superficial study. The same symbolism occurs in Daniel 7 and Revelation 13. The meaning of sea-beasts and earth-beasts must be the same in both passages or the prophetic sequencing of one or the other is destroyed. 

To say sea-beasts = earth kings in Daniel 7 then the prophetic understanding of Revelation 13 is compromised.  To accept the correct meaning of sea-beast and earth-beast in Revelation 13 is to have the pattern that supplements Daniel 7 -- thus it repeats and expands the prophecy with the meaning that was sealed until the time of the end when knowledge increased and Daniel stands in his lot.

[hch]

1 hour ago, The Wanderer said:

We should be no less concerned than was Daniel to understand the truth of these things; but we should also be very concerned about adding any "new light" that would create shadows which cloud out the realities of the Bible prophecy in Daniel 7 and Rev 13.

Unfortunately it is equally unwise to reject "new light" when it should be accepted. But Satan will fight tooth and nail to keep God's people in the dark until it is too late. 

[hch]

1 hour ago, The Wanderer said:

The kingdoms which they [sea beasts], represent, are in fact kingdoms that have already been explained within the context of the "earth beasts" of Daniel, chapter 7. There is no need for, and no mandate for, mixing up different kings/kingdoms in this chapter. We can follow the prophet through the course of events in history, even to the destruction of the fourth beast,  which will be the final overthrow of all earthly governments. That is the point where  the scene changes, for we read, "The saints... shall take the kingdom." Verse 18.

That is obviously an erroneous conclusion. The sea-beasts were explained properly before knowledge increased to point out that they foreshadowed the endtime earth-kings. When correctly followed President Obama is consumed in the burning flames (Daniel 7:11).

[hch]

1 hour ago, The Wanderer said:

"Heaven explains" both the earth and sea beasts as one and the same thing, that will be over thrown by the saints.

Can you imagine it? The saints! despised, reproached, persecuted, cast out; looked upon as the least likely of all people ever to realize their hopes--these shall take the kingdom, and possess it forever! The deception, the cruelty, and the misrule of the wicked shall come to an end. The inheritance and victory of the saints, forfeited because of sin, shall be redeemed. Peace and righteousness shall reign eternally over all the fair expanse of the earth made new. (see Daniel 11:32). That is the good news of Daniel 7! Victory in Jesus!  Obama has nothing to do with Daniel 7.

Heaven does not say that the earth is the sea and the sea is the earth. That is confusion. And a contradiction of Revelation 10 and 13.

I cannot imagine that the God who called Cyrus by name would not know the Name of America's last President. And when God reveals the very message that gives power to the 3rd angel's message, I find it incredulous that so many of God's professed people are blinded by a partial fulfillment of a prophecy that has so much light for our time.

It will not be long before Iran attacks the US and President Obama attacks the Constitution to remain in office beyond his time. Then he will attack God's Covenant and this weary exchange of words will fade into His-story. [But we cannot say that I did not try to warn you and so many others.]

[CoAspen]

Quote

The US Constitution is America's Covenant with the President, the congress, the Supreme Court and the people. Daniel 11 does not specifically say that it is God's Covenant. So in the endtime it can be either or both and I already posted that it was both.

You are simply making things up to suit your own theories! Truly amazing!! I find it incredulous that you do this and think it is truth!

Quote

 [But we cannot say that I did not try to warn you and so many others.]

So self serving, only you have the truth.

 

[hch]

8 hours ago, CoAspen said:

You are simply making things up to suit your own theories! Truly amazing!! I find it incredulous that you do this and think it is truth!

So self serving, only you have the truth.

CoAspen

The problem with truth is that it is not always popular. And that has been the way it was since before Christ's Day. Truth was not popular in Noah's Day or there would have been more people on the ark. Truth wasn't popular in Lot's day or more people would have fled Sodom and everyone who fled would have made it to safety (no looking back).

In our day, we think that we are enlightened and could not possibly be deceived. But if we do not follow the light when it moves, it moves away from us and we are left in darkness.

The challenge is to rightly divide the word of truth to show ourselves approved of God. 

I believe what I believe because I have studied it faithfully since at least 1997 and by faith I believe that I have the Testimony of Jesus telling me that the message I am advocating is true. Not because it is an odd or different message, but because it is the third angel's message on the eve of prophecy fulfilled and it encompasses the first and second angel's message. It has come at the right time and the fourth angel has added his voice to the message.

The preponderance of the evidence is overwhelming. We have but scratched the surface on our discussions here. But it is not evidence that we need for there are those who will explain away the evidence. We need the indwelling of the Holy Spirit to discern not only the time in which we live but to keep our lamps blazing when the world would snuff out our message.

I cannot prove that I am right anymore than I can prove that Jesus is pleading for me in the Investigative Judgment, BUT there will be a time when God's word will be vindicated and all doubts will be removed. Until then we must go forward by faith.

I'm praying for you and many others that I have encountered on the journey.

[hch]

Quote

in Daniel 7, the four beasts are normally considered land beasts, but, they are coming up out of the sea. In verse 16, an angel has arrived to show Daniel the interpretation. This is why there is a change in our thinking in verse 17. Verse 17 is part of the interpretation.
The symbolic beasts are literal nations and the symbolic sea represents a populated part of the earth.
I hope I was clear. [Asked of me by A...]

My reply:

That is very well put. Thank you.
So the only problem that remains is to Reconcile Daniel 7 with Revelation 13.

In Daniel 7 logic would have us to conclude Heaven's interpretation is an interpretation of the vision and not an expansion of it. But within the portion of Scripture that interprets the vision there are some facts that are out of context with the vision:

The origin of the beasts has been changed from sea to earth.
The fourth beast now has brass nails-- not mentioned in the vision.
The beasts are cited as KINGS (a word that occurs in the Bible about 2800 times in either Aramaic or Hebrew and with 5 exceptions it is KING(s) never kingdoms.

Conversely the word kingdom can be rendered reign, realm or kingly.

So Heaven's interpretation that they are KINGS trumps man's understanding that they are kingdoms. But man manipulates the text and reasons that kings are kingdoms and does away with Heaven's interpretation using the vision to interpret the interpretation rather than the interpretation to interpret the vision.

After man has disregarded a plain thus saith the Lord "These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth" (Daniel 7:17) Man disregards the fact that Revelation 13 explains the meaning of the symbolic earth that Heaven cited as the place from which the beasts arose. That piece of information will in turn explain who these kings are in the time of the end when Revelation supplements Daniel and they explain themselves by their fulfillment.

The partial understanding of the 4 kingdoms was correct before knowledge increased. Now the problem is that the partial understanding has become a barrier to a more complete understanding that is revealed in the endtime when Daniel is standing in his lot.

 

Quote

There is need of a much closer study of the Word of God; especially should Daniel and the Revelation have attention as never before. . . . The light that Daniel received from God was given especially for these last days.--TM 112, 113 (1896).

 

Quote

But that part of his prophecy which related to the last days, Daniel was bidden to close up and seal “to the time of the end.” Not till we reach this time could a message concerning the Judgment be proclaimed, based on a fulfillment of these prophecies. But at the time of the end, says the prophet, “many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.” [Daniel 12:4.] {GC88 355.3} 

 

[hch]

It may surprise some folks to learn that Daniel was bilingual. He wrote his book in both Hebrew and Aramaic.

The scholars tell us that chapter 7 is written in Aramaic.

The word that Daniel (the author of the book) used for SEA is yam. Yam is the same word in Aramaic and Hebrew but the meanings differ slightly.

Aramaic = sea

Hebrew = sea  321, west 47, westward 21, west side 4, seafaring men 1, south 1, western 1; 396 

The American Presidents that are identified in Daniel came up in the west.

There are several other words in the vision in Daniel 7 that are exactly the same in Aramaic and Hebrew, but that also have slightly different meanings that would be known and understood by this bilingual author.

[hch]

48 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

I am not as well-versed as you my friend; I still need specific books and page numbers of these "sources" where you say "it is well-documented."  Most of all; I am interested in detailing it from the Bible first, and as our guide, and then secondary writings can be used as supplemental to build upon Bible truth. Hope you are getting more rest than I am tonight.

Can Bible truth become tradition? Jesus' triumphant entry into Jerusalem is now celebrated yearly as Palm Sunday.

You asked me "What "tradition" do you refer to? "

The historical truth is that the beasts from the sea depict the kingdoms in Daniel 7 (Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Imperial & papal Rome). The tradition is that these historical kingdoms that are understood from the vision are used to interpret the interpretation rather than using Heaven's interpretation to explain the vision. The tradition is what you have presented to me to counter my position that Heavens interpretation explains the vision.

Where in the Bible does it say that the vision interprets the interpretation rather than the interpretation explaining the vision? I would ask of you my friend, "Do you have book and page number for reference [that states that a vision should be used to explain its interpretation]?"

You asked me "And even if "tradition" does say this, what, in your mind, would be so wrong about that?"

Quote

 It is not enough to know what others have thought or learned about the Bible. Everyone must in the judgment give account of himself to God, and each should now learn for himself what is truth.  {Ed 188.1} 

Quote

The student of the Bible should be taught to approach it in the spirit of a learner. We are to search its pages, not for proof to sustain our opinions, but in order to know what God says.  {Ed 189.1} 

So as a "learner" do we learn what God says from the interpretation that God gives in the Bible to explain a vision or do we apply our understanding of a vision to the interpretation and teach what we think the vision means?

[JoeMo]

hch,

You keep making references to PRESIDENT Obama as some sore of a beast or antichrist.; and that he will do something to bring about the end of the age prior to Jan 2017.  Does it have to be PRESIDENT OBAMA?  I'm reading a book now that says it won't be PRESIDENT Obama that brings about these events, it will be U.S. Ambassador to the UN Obama or Secretary General of the UN Obama who will do this.  (Not that I accept that theory any more than I accept yours.)

[hch]

8 hours ago, JoeMo said:

hch,

You keep making references to PRESIDENT Obama as some sore of a beast or antichrist.; and that he will do something to bring about the end of the age prior to Jan 2017.  Does it have to be PRESIDENT OBAMA?  I'm reading a book now that says it won't be PRESIDENT Obama that brings about these events, it will be U.S. Ambassador to the UN Obama or Secretary General of the UN Obama who will do this.  (Not that I accept that theory any more than I accept yours.)

JoeMo,

As I read Daniel and Revelation, President Obama will be in office when Christ Comes and he will be consumed by the brightness of His glory.

[hch]

     The great error with churches in all ages has been to reach a certain point in their understanding of Bible truth and there stop. There they anchored. They ceased to "Go forward," as much as to say, "We have all-sufficient light. We need no more." And they refuse light.  {1888 826.2}  
     After the message of warning was given, a confederacy was formed that would not receive the message. They kept themselves barricaded, fearing that if they should evidence that they did receive light there was a trapdoor ready to let them through into some dangerous pit. The richest treasures of truth were opened before them. Every mind needed the jewels and gems that were revealed, but by confederating together they were deceived and their stakes were set fast. Thus have the nominal churches dealt with the message from heaven.  {1888 826.3}  
     The Lord loves His people, and would lead them step by step onward under the banner of truth, the third angel's message.  {1888 826.4}

[hch]

If you have been following the events in Syria, you will know that Sec of State Kerry gave an ultimatum to Iran and Russia in May 2016 that they must have a plan in place by August 2016 to get rid of President Assad. They did not do as they were told. Since then their bombing of Aleppo has increased and the US and Russia have broken off talks. The situation has worsened and Iran will go to war with the US before January 20 2017.  

[Martn]

12 hours ago, hch said:

The situation has worsened and Iran will go to war with the US before January 20 2017.  

We'll hold you to it.