What is "the acceptable year of the Lord"?
Doug
from the book of Isaiah a prophecy that refers to "the acceptable year
of the Lord," which Jesus said was fulfilled on that very day.
Luke 4:17-22
And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And
when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to
preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the
brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering
of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
What was special about that particular year? The "acceptable year of
the Lord" was the year that Jesus began his ministry. It has to do
with the beginning of the last of the four periods of seven times in
Leviticus 26, when God would be reconciled to Israel.
Luke 4:20-21
And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat
down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were
fastened on him.
And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in
your ears.
The occasion was during the first year of his ministry, soon after his
baptism by John. It was after the first two sections of the prophecy
of Daniel about the 70 weeks had been fulfilled.
In his prayer of confession, Daniel referred to the covenant.
Daniel 9:4
And I prayed unto the LORD my God, and made my confession, and said, O
Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to
them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments;
At the end of the first two sections of seven weeks and sixty-two
weeks, the Messiah would appear.
Daniel 9:25
Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the
commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the
Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks:
During the 70th week, Daniel said, Christ would "confirm the covenant
with many for one week." [vs. 27]
The word "covenant" refers to all the revelations and promises of God.
Examples are:
* the "everlasting covenant" which is represented by a rainbow
[Genesis 9:16]
* God's covenant with Abraham represented by circumcision,
[Genesis 17:4-10] which was to be established with Isaac [Genesis
17:18-19]
* the Sabbath [Exodus 31:16]
* the Mosaic legislation [Jeremiah 34:13-14]
* the "sure mercies of David" [Isaiah 55:3]
* the regular succession of day and night [Jeremiah 33:20-22]
* etc.
The covenant includes the promises; the promise of the land, which
Abraham did not receive in his lifetime, was the basis for his
confidence in a resurrection. Paul said the covenant had been
confirmed to Abraham. [Galatians 3:17] He used this as the basis of
his argument about the role of the law which was given centuries later.
All the promises of God are included in the covenant that Christ
confirms with the saints in the 70th week; and it includes his
righteous life, that was offered up as a sacrifice to take away the
sin of the world. Daniel said:
Daniel 9:27
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the
midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to
cease,...
The "midst of the week" includes the death of Jesus on the cross, and
the end of the sacrificial system, when the city and temple were
destroyed.
Jesus was baptized during the ministry of John the Baptist. The date
for the beginning of John's ministry was given by Luke.
Luke 3:1-3
Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius
Pilate being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee,
and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of
Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene,
Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto
John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism
of repentance for the remission of sins;
The first year of Tiberius was 14 AD. So we have:
1st year of Tiberius 14 AD
2nd year of Tiberius 15 AD
3rd year of Tiberius 16 AD
4th year of Tiberius 17 AD
5th year of Tiberius 18 AD
6th year of Tiberius 19 AD
7th year of Tiberius 20 AD
8th year of Tiberius 21 AD
9th year of Tiberius 22 AD
10th year of Tiberius 23 AD
11th year of Tiberius 24 AD
12th year of Tiberius 25 AD
13th year of Tiberius 26 AD
14th year of Tiberius 27 AD
15th year of Tiberius 28 AD
The year 28 AD was the start of the 70th week of Daniel's prophecy. It
also began a new sabbatical cycle. It was when Jesus read from
Isaiah's prophecy in the synagogue at Nazareth on a sabbath day. Jesus
said:
Luke 16:16
The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom
of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
The year 28 AD marked the beginning of a new era, the seven times of
the reconciliation of God with his people, when God remembers his
covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Leviticus 26:42
Then will I remember my covenant with Jacob, and also my covenant with
Isaac, and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember; and I will
remember the land.
The 70th week is the week when Jesus confirms the covenant. It began
in 28 AD.
Beginning with the decree of Cyrus, the first two sections of the 70
weeks work out correctly to 28 AD, when the first 7 weeks are 49 leap
years having an extra month. Seven weeks of leap years spans 133
years. The second section is 62 x 7 = 434 years, and together that is
567 years, the time from the decree of Cyrus in 538 BC, to the
beginning of the ministry of Jesus in 28 AD.
Some claim that the fulfillment of the first 69 weeks occurred at the
end of the ministry of Jesus, rather than the beginning of it, but
their interpretations require one or more gaps, and some offer dubious
manipulations of historical dates, or spurious schemes contrived in
order to get the dates to work out to the year of the crucifixion,
which was probably 30 AD.
Daniel said, of the 70th week, "In the middle of the 'seven' he will
put an end to sacrifice and offering." [vs. 27, NIV]
This seems to mean the Mosaic temple sacrifices. They ended when the
temple was destroyed, in 70 AD. So that must be the middle of the
seven, which makes sense, since the first three and a half years were
natural, but the last three and a half years apply to the heavenly
Jerusalem, and so are symbolic. Earth days, earth months, earth years
do not apply to things divine and spiritual. Rather, they are symbols
or types.
The 69th week ended in 28 AD, if one counts from the decree of Cyrus,
538 BC, and if leap years are used in the first section, of 7 weeks.
This avoids invoking a gap between the end of the 70 years of
Jeremiah, and the beginning of the 70 weeks. In fact, Daniel said the
"curse" written in the Law of Moses had been poured out, Daniel 9:11,
which alludes to the curse that is outlined in Leviticus 26. This
consisted of four periods of seven times. In the last of the four
periods of seven times, God would be reconciled to his people.
The beginning of the last of the four periods of seven times, the one
during which God would be reconciled to his people, was the
"acceptable year of the Lord," that Jesus referred to.
If the captivity in Babylon was the first of these four periods of
"seven times," the three sections of the 70 weeks correspond to the
remaining three periods of seven times. There can be no gap in the
curse, as that would imply that God was temporarily reconciled to
Israel. The curse does not lapse, and resume again. Any reconciliation
with God is a permanent one.
The 70 years of Jeremiah, plus the three sections of the 70 weeks, are
the four periods of seven times described in Leviticus 26, and they
are continuous, right to the end of the age, and "the times of
restitution of all things."
Acts 3:20
And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all
things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets
since the world began.
--
Doug
Timothy Sutter
> The 70 years of Jeremiah, plus the three sections of the 70 weeks, are
> the four periods of seven times described in Leviticus 26, and they
> are continuous, right to the end of the age, and "the times of
> restitution of all things."
do you have any opinions on "lost Israel" [714 B.C.]
and 7 "times" of 360 days /convert day to year/
2520 years + 714 B.C. = ca. 1806 A.D.
and the accompanying explosion of material wealth?
any at all?
Ike E 2/1/11
news:o5-dnfWQgtTgmsnQ...@sentex.net...
> At the synagogue in Nazareth, where he had been brought up, Jesus read
> from the book of Isaiah a prophecy that refers to "the acceptable year of
> the Lord," which Jesus said was fulfilled on that very day.
No, He didn't; He said "in YOUR ears," said in reference to the iteration
that was about to take place, NOT in reference to the ultimate conclusion of
all prophecy that is yet to take place.
Caught 'ya.
[snippeth]
> The occasion was during the first year of his ministry, soon after his
> baptism by John. It was after the first two sections of the prophecy of
> Daniel about the 70 weeks had been fulfilled.
Daniel's "70 weeks" were ALREADY fulfilled...once...before Jesus came. They
concluded in the events of the Maccabean Revolt.
What happened next was a totally new iteration.
Caught 'ya again.
> In his prayer of confession, Daniel referred to the covenant.
>
> Daniel 9:4
> And I prayed unto the LORD my God, and made my confession, and said, O
> Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them
> that love him, and to them that keep his commandments;
>
> At the end of the first two sections of seven weeks and sixty-two weeks,
> the Messiah would appear.
Daniel was talking about the ABRAHAMIC covenant, not the new covenant.
Caught 'ya lying yet again.
> Daniel 9:25
> Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the
> commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince
> shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks:
Already fulfilled...once...and it didn't have anything to do with Jesus the
first time, except as a figure for things to come.
Caught 'ya again.
> During the 70th week, Daniel said, Christ would "confirm the covenant with
> many for one week." [vs. 27]
The "70th week" of Daniel was fulfilled in the events of the Maccabean
Revolt.
167 Antiochus take control of the temple and defiles it with the first
"abomination of desolation."
166 Mattathias is slain, setting off the Maccabean Revolt.
164 The temple is cleansed.
160 The Jews defeat the Seleucids, but Judas Maccabeus--the figure for
Christ--is "cut off."
> The word "covenant" refers to all the revelations and promises of God.
> Examples are:
Each one in their own order; but you're changing the order to build your
false case.
Caught 'ya again.
> * the "everlasting covenant" which is represented by a rainbow
> [Genesis 9:16]
> * God's covenant with Abraham represented by circumcision, [Genesis
> 17:4-10] which was to be established with Isaac [Genesis 17:18-19]
> * the Sabbath [Exodus 31:16]
> * the Mosaic legislation [Jeremiah 34:13-14]
> * the "sure mercies of David" [Isaiah 55:3]
> * the regular succession of day and night [Jeremiah 33:20-22]
> * etc.
Except that the covenant to which Daniel referred was the OLD TESTAMENT
covenant, NOT the New one that was yet to come.
Caught 'ya again, fraud.
[snippeth]
> Daniel 9:27
> And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst
> of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,...
This is about the ANTI-COVENANT, fraud, the one that Antiochus "confirmed"
with Jason when Antiochus restored him (which is a FIGURE of things to
come).
Caught 'ya lying again, fraud.
> The "midst of the week" includes the death of Jesus on the cross, and the
> end of the sacrificial system, when the city and temple were destroyed.
JESUS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FIRST ITERATION OF DANIEL (except as a
predictive model), fraud.
[snip the rest of the idiot's dawdle]
You are thoroughly bound up in your satanic lies.
Ike
--
********
Which of the following is the correct way to read Bible prophecy?
A. Immediacy
B. Historicism
C. Dispensationalism
D. Preterism (Full or Partial)
E. Idealism
F. Realized/Sapiential Eschatology
G. All of the above
H. None of the above
Based on an examination of how (not just what) Jesus and the prophets
prophesied, "The Triune Hypothesis" is a guide to reading the Bible
prophetically in all three dimensions of interpretation-the horizontal axis
in time (what was, is, and/or is to come), the perpendicular axis in
application (literal, figurative, and/or spiritual), and the vertical axis
in context (thesis, generality, and/or antithesis).
Topics of discussion include the resurrections, the triune "Last Days," the
Pentecosts, the one-baptism-in-three-parts, the triple application of the
Elijah prophecies, the Temples in Jerusalem, the Abominations of Desolation,
the Triune Israel, the devolution of prophecy, and much more.
Kindle Version:
Print Version:
Facebook: (discussions enabled)
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657386473773
Web: (filtered blog comments enabled)
http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.html
Doug
The whole idea that you outline seems to allude to Herbert W.
Armstrong's "British Israel" theory.
Leviticus 26 lists four periods of "seven times," and they began
during the exile in Babylon, according to Daniel 9:11. The exile was
the first of the four; the three sections of the 70 weeks expound on
the last three.
As for Armstrong's book "The United States and Britain in Prophecy,"
he plagiarized much of it, copying word for word in some parts from
J.H. Allen, "Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright." (1902)
Armstrong did not acknowledge Allen as his source. He did not seem to
think such plagiarism was wrong. Shame on him!
http://www.allen-armstrong.org/
And the whole idea is flawed anyway. The 360-days apply to symbolic
periods; they are found in time periods that describe the heavenly
Jerusalem. Earthly units of time such as earth days, earth months,
earth years etc., do not apply to the heavenly city. They represent
time periods related to the church, which Jesus is building, and apply
to the time after Jesus ascended to heaven.
Using 360 days for a year and applying such calculations to history
has a long record of failed predictions; "by their fruits you shall
know them."
--
Doug
Timothy Sutter
> Timothy Sutter wrote:
> > Doug wrote:
> >> The 70 years of Jeremiah, plus the three sections of the 70 weeks, are
> >> the four periods of seven times described in Leviticus 26, and they
> >> are continuous, right to the end of the age, and "the times of
> >> restitution of all things."
> > do you have any opinions on "lost Israel" [714 B.C.]
> > and 7 "times" of 360 days /convert day to year/
> > 2520 years + 714 B.C. = ca. 1806 A.D.
> > and the accompanying explosion of material wealth?
> > any at all?
> The whole idea that you outline seems to allude to Herbert W.
> Armstrong's "British Israel" theory.
so-called "british israelism" dates to victorian times
and is not an invention of armstrong.
> Leviticus 26 lists four periods of "seven times," and they began
> during the exile in Babylon, according to Daniel 9:11. The exile was
> the first of the four; the three sections of the 70 weeks expound on
> the last three.
this does not have to be taken as successive orderings;
all four of these can be a single "seven times"
==
Leviticus 26:
14 ��But if you will not listen to me and carry out
all these commands, 15 and if you reject my decrees
and abhor my laws and fail to carry out all my commands
and so violate my covenant, 16 then I will do this
to you: I will bring on you sudden terror, wasting
diseases and fever that will destroy your sight
and sap your strength. You will plant seed in vain,
because your enemies will eat it. 17 I will set my
face against you so that you will be defeated by
your enemies; those who hate you will rule over you,
and you will flee even when no one is pursuing you.
<...>
18 ��If after all this you will not listen to me,
I will punish you for your sins seven times over.
21 ��If you remain hostile toward me and refuse to listen to me,
I will multiply your afflictions seven times over, as your sins deserve.
23 ��If in spite of these things you do not accept my correction
but continue to be hostile toward me, 24 I myself will be hostile
toward you and will afflict you for your sins seven times over.
27 ��If in spite of this you still do not listen to me but continue
to be hostile toward me, 28 then in my anger I will be hostile toward
you,
and I myself will punish you for your sins seven times over.
==
see, it doesn't have to be read as if each seven times
is a successive compounding of failure to comply based
on prior punishments.
like as if it is somehow "28 times"
is that what you claim?
"28 times" = some specific number of years,
and Jesus' reading a bioble verse in the
synagogue fulfills part of that 28 times?
> As for Armstrong's book "The United States and Britain in Prophecy,"
> he plagiarized much of it, copying word for word in some parts from
> J.H. Allen, "Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright." (1902)
> Armstrong did not acknowledge Allen as his source. He did not seem to
> think such plagiarism was wrong. Shame on him!
like i said, "british israelism" is not armstrong's invention.
so, why bother saying that it is, and then note a person from
whom you say he plaguiarized?
it may be an opinion, but, an irrelevant one.
> And the whole idea is flawed anyway. The 360-days apply to symbolic
> periods; they are found in time periods that describe the heavenly
> Jerusalem. Earthly units of time such as earth days, earth months,
> earth years etc., do not apply to the heavenly city. They represent
> time periods related to the church, which Jesus is building, and apply
> to the time after Jesus ascended to heaven.
but you are trying to use such "times" to pinpoint
Jesus' earthly ministry, so, are you suggesting
that your idea is flawed?
> Using 360 days for a year and applying such calculations to history
> has a long record of failed predictions; "by their fruits you shall
> know them."
and yet, there has been an unprecedented explosion of material wealth
beginning in the early 1800s which just happen to be 2520 years
after 714 B.C. and 2520 = 7 X 360.
and so, by this fruit, do you know something?
Doug
> Doug wrote:
>
>> Timothy Sutter wrote:
>
>>> Doug wrote:
>
>>>> The 70 years of Jeremiah, plus the three sections of the 70 weeks, are
>>>> the four periods of seven times described in Leviticus 26, and they
>>>> are continuous, right to the end of the age, and "the times of
>>>> restitution of all things."
>
>>> do you have any opinions on "lost Israel" [714 B.C.]
>>> and 7 "times" of 360 days /convert day to year/
>>> 2520 years + 714 B.C. = ca. 1806 A.D.
>>> and the accompanying explosion of material wealth?
>>> any at all?
>
>> The whole idea that you outline seems to allude to Herbert W.
>> Armstrong's "British Israel" theory.
>
>
> so-called "british israelism" dates to victorian times
> and is not an invention of armstrong.
Right.
>
>
>> Leviticus 26 lists four periods of "seven times," and they began
>> during the exile in Babylon, according to Daniel 9:11. The exile was
>> the first of the four; the three sections of the 70 weeks expound on
>> the last three.
>
>
> this does not have to be taken as successive orderings;
> all four of these can be a single "seven times"
>
> ==
> Leviticus 26:
...
>
> see, it doesn't have to be read as if each seven times
> is a successive compounding of failure to comply based
> on prior punishments.
>
> like as if it is somehow "28 times"
>
> is that what you claim?
The phrase "seven times" occurs several times in Leviticus 26, and
alludes to the sabbath cycles, and the yearly sabbath cycles, that are
described in the previous chapter. The NIV translation which you
quoted seems to be trying to promote an interpretation.
The phrase "seven times" also occurs in Daniel, as well as the phrase
"time, times and a half," which is derived from it, being half of
"seven times." Daniel says the exile was a fulfillment of the curse of
the Law of Moses. [Daniel 9:11] The 70 weeks prophecy is thought to be
founded on Leviticus 25 & 26. Meredith G. Kline wrote:
<quote>
It has become increasingly clear that Leviticus 25 and 26 is an
important source standing behind Daniel 9:24 ff. The seventy weeks
prophecy is built on the sabbath-jubilee structure of Leviticus 25
(cf. 26:43). Daniel 9 as a whole follows the covenant administration
pattern of Leviticus 26. The prayer (vss. 4 ff.) corresponds to the
Todah-confession of Leviticus 26:40 f., and the prophecy (vss. 24 ff.)
corresponds to the covenant restitution and renewal of Leviticus 26:42
ff. This last equivalence is reinforced by the connection made between
the seventy weeks and Leviticus 26:43 in II Chronicles 36:21.
</quote>
[Meredith G. Kline, The Covenant of the Seventieth Week, in: The Law
and the Prophets: Old Testament Studies in Honor of Oswald T. Allis.
ed. by J.H. Skilton. [Nutley, NJ]: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1974,
pp. 452-469.] http://tinyurl.com/4ukg9dk
The 70 years of captivity in Babylon, plus the three sections of the
70 weeks, together are the four periods of "seven times" outlined in
Leviticus 26.
1st "seven times" = 70 years of captivity in Babylon, ended 538 BC
2nd "seven times" = 7 weeks, 49 leap years of 13 months, 7 x 19 = 133
years
3rd "seven times" = 62 x 7 = 434 years, ended 28 AD
4th "seven times" = three and a half years of Jesus' ministry, plus "a
time, times and a half"
The "time, times and a half" (along with related periods of 1,335
days, 1,290 days, 1,260 days, and 42 months) are symbolic,
representing the whole age of the church, which is called the
"Jerusalem which is above" and "the heavenly Jerusalem" in the New
Testament. For the portion of the 70 weeks that applies to the
heavenly city, which is the final half of the 70th week, the "time,
times and a half," units of time are not earth days, or earth months,
or earth years, but are symbolic. The time span it represents is not a
literal three and a half years. The nature of the time in the last
half week is different, perhaps because these last three years and a
half apply to the heavenly Jerusalem, not the earthly one. Once Jesus
ascended to heaven, earth days, earth months, and earth years no
longer apply. That is when Jerusalem was lifted up, as Isaiah
foretold. [Isaiah 2:1-3] Isaiah said it would be exalted to the tops
of the mountains; in the New Testament it is in heaven, above all the
earth's mountains. Jesus confirms the covenant for one week, but that
week is partly on earth, and partly in heaven. He confirms the
covenant by sending the Spirit to the church.
In the last half of the 70th week, the promised land is not the
earthly territory of Canaan, but is described "a better country, that
is, an heavenly." [Hebrews 11:16] In the 4th period of "seven times"
of Leviticus 26, God said he will remember his covenant with Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob, and will be reconciled to his people Israel. This
4th period of "seven times" corresponds to the 70th week of Daniel's
prophecy.
The 70 weeks prophecy concerns Jerusalem, but when Christ ascended to
heaven, the units of time in the prophecy were changed. This is
similar with other units applied to the heavenly city, described in
Revelation 21. The dimensions given for it are not literal. The 144
cubits mentioned for the wall, are not meant literally, as John
indicates that the units are angelic cubits. If we compare the hight
of the wall with the height of the city, supposing the 144 cubits
refer to its height, it seems quite out of any reasonable proportion;
the height of the city is about 36,666 times greater than the hight of
its wall! Really, the dimensions of a wall require a height, and a
width, and a length, but here, only one dimension is given. That is
because the wall is spiritual; it represents "salvation." And each
gate in the wall is a single pearl. So, are we to imagine huge oysters
in heaven, where such pearls could grow? No, the pearls are
figurative. So are the units of furlongs, and cubits, when these apply
to a heavenly, and eternal city. And the same applies to the time
periods that refer to the heavenly city. They are not earth days,
earth months, or earth years, but spiritual or figurative. This, I
think, helps to explain why the last half week of the 70 weeks differs
from the previous 69 and � weeks.
Kline pointed out that the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 began with the decree
of Cyrus, and follow immediately after the 70 years of exile. He wrote:
<quote>
The seventy weeks prophecy of Daniel 9 reflects yet another aspect of
the Leviticus 26 forecast of covenant restoration after covenant
breaking as that forecast is taken up and developed in II Chronicles
36. Immediately after the Chronicler has referred to the period of the
exile as seventy sabbatical years (II Chron. 36:21), he makes mention
of the decree of Cyrus issued in the first year of his reign,
officially ending Israel's exile. In these closing words of his
historical work the Chronicler points to the figure of the restorer
who accomplished the Lord's word by Jeremiah concerning the divine
visitation after seventy sabbath years (Jer. 29: 10) and introduced
the post-exilic jubilee-restoration (II Chron. 36:22 f.; cf. Ezra 1:1
ff.). The Chronicler was at the same time recording the fulfillment of
another prophetic word of God. Isaiah too had spoken of the one who
should command the rebuilding of Jerusalem and its temple, even Cyrus,
whom Isaiah designated as the Lord's "anointed" (Isa. 44:28; 45:1).
</quote>
Because the 70 weeks correspond to the last three of the four periods
of "seven times" in Leviticus 26, which is the duration of the curse,
clearly there are no gaps in the 70 weeks. Any gap would mean a lapse
in the curse, and would require a temporary reconciliation of God with
Israel, and a temporary restoration, but the restoration is to be
permanent.
>
> "28 times" = some specific number of years,
> and Jesus' reading a bioble verse in the
> synagogue fulfills part of that 28 times?
>
Paul says, in 2 Corinthians 11:24, "Of the Jews five times received I
forty stripes save one." I suppose he could have said, "I received 195
stripes from the Jews." Or even, "I was abused 195 times by the Jews."
But if he had said this, something is lost, though, I think. And
similarly, if you say that the prophecy specifies 28 times of
punishment, something is lost. Especially because "time" is a generic
word. There could be different units of "time" in the different
periods of "seven times." The "seven times" are each unique. That is
shown in Leviticus 26, where the nature of the punishments change for
each of the four periods, and in the last one, God is reconciled to
Israel, and remembers his covenant. That one corresponds to the time
of Jesus' ministry plus the whole age of the church.
>
>
>> As for Armstrong's book "The United States and Britain in Prophecy,"
>> he plagiarized much of it, copying word for word in some parts from
>> J.H. Allen, "Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright." (1902)
>> Armstrong did not acknowledge Allen as his source. He did not seem to
>> think such plagiarism was wrong. Shame on him!
>
>
> like i said, "british israelism" is not armstrong's invention.
> so, why bother saying that it is, and then note a person from
> whom you say he plaguiarized?
>
> it may be an opinion, but, an irrelevant one.
Oh, I was just trying to answer your question, not upset you.
>
>
>> And the whole idea is flawed anyway. The 360-days apply to symbolic
>> periods; they are found in time periods that describe the heavenly
>> Jerusalem. Earthly units of time such as earth days, earth months,
>> earth years etc., do not apply to the heavenly city. They represent
>> time periods related to the church, which Jesus is building, and apply
>> to the time after Jesus ascended to heaven.
>
>
> but you are trying to use such "times" to pinpoint
> Jesus' earthly ministry, so, are you suggesting
> that your idea is flawed?
The last of the four periods of seven times is the 70th week, and it
is divided into periods of three and a half years. The first is the
ministry of Jesus; these are natural years. The last half-week applies
to the heavenly Jerusalem, the spiritual temple, so the times related
to is are given symbolically, not in natural years.
>
>
>> Using 360 days for a year and applying such calculations to history
>> has a long record of failed predictions; "by their fruits you shall
>> know them."
>
>
> and yet, there has been an unprecedented explosion of material wealth
> beginning in the early 1800s which just happen to be 2520 years
> after 714 B.C. and 2520 = 7 X 360.
I think the French Revolution, the settlement of the Americas, the
rise of science and technology, the enlightenment, and the defeat of
Napoleon, etc., were all factors in the production of wealth.
>
>
> and so, by this fruit, do you know something?
--
Doug
Timothy Sutter
> Timothy Sutter wrote:
> > Doug wrote:
> >> Timothy Sutter wrote:
> >>> Doug wrote:
> Right.
it's actually the new king james version,
but what it's promoting i won't say.
but, nevertheless, if seven times can
be viewed as seven literal years,
and also as seven years of days of years
then you get back to the same argument,
and one that you employ when you say
that 62 weeks = 434 years.
you change weeks in to years,
by the day to year principle.
> The phrase "seven times" also occurs in Daniel, as well as the phrase
> "time, times and a half," which is derived from it, being half of
> "seven times." Daniel says the exile was a fulfillment of the curse of
> the Law of Moses. [Daniel 9:11] The 70 weeks prophecy is thought to be
> founded on Leviticus 25 & 26. Meredith G. Kline wrote:
here's the seven times;
==
Daniel 4:16 [and a few others referring to Nebucghadnezzar]
Let his heart be changed from that of a man,
Let him be given the heart of a beast,
And let seven times pass over him.
==
it refers to Nebuchadnezzar.
now, we can symbologize this and say
Nebuchadnezzar is a "type" of some
other "persona"
and these "seven times" stand for some
other period of time than just "seven years"
but, seven years is what we get in the literal sense
as it seems as if Nebuchadnezzar is out of
his mind for seven years.
and now, you come along, and suggest that
one time, and two times, and one half of one time,
stands for....what?
3 and a half years, or something else...
3 and a half years of days of years?
1260 years?
no, you seem to have no real consistency
as to what these "times" represent.
> <quote>
>
> It has become increasingly clear that Leviticus 25 and 26 is an
> important source standing behind Daniel 9:24 ff. The seventy weeks
> prophecy is built on the sabbath-jubilee structure of Leviticus 25
> (cf. 26:43). Daniel 9 as a whole follows the covenant administration
> pattern of Leviticus 26. The prayer (vss. 4 ff.) corresponds to the
> Todah-confession of Leviticus 26:40 f., and the prophecy (vss. 24 ff.)
> corresponds to the covenant restitution and renewal of Leviticus 26:42
> ff. This last equivalence is reinforced by the connection made between
> the seventy weeks and Leviticus 26:43 in II Chronicles 36:21.
> </quote>
> [Meredith G. Kline, The Covenant of the Seventieth Week, in: The Law
> and the Prophets: Old Testament Studies in Honor of Oswald T. Allis.
> ed. by J.H. Skilton. [Nutley, NJ]: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1974,
> pp. 452-469.] http://tinyurl.com/4ukg9dk
> The 70 years of captivity in Babylon, plus the three sections of the
> 70 weeks, together are the four periods of "seven times" outlined in
> Leviticus 26.
> 1st "seven times" = 70 years of captivity in Babylon, ended 538 BC
> 2nd "seven times" = 7 weeks, 49 leap years of 13 months, 7 x 19 = 133
> years
> 3rd "seven times" = 62 x 7 = 434 years, ended 28 AD
> 4th "seven times" = three and a half years of Jesus' ministry, plus "a
> time, times and a half"
the problem here is the lack of
consistency relating to the number 7.
Leviticus 26 just says "seven times"
you say that this refers to time periods,
but that these time periods are all
different, one from another.
one important thing here is the seven times
can be a time period and not just an intensity level.
> The "time, times and a half" (along with related periods of 1,335
> days, 1,290 days, 1,260 days, and 42 months) are symbolic,
> representing the whole age of the church, which is called the
> "Jerusalem which is above" and "the heavenly Jerusalem" in the New
> Testament. For the portion of the 70 weeks that applies to the
> heavenly city, which is the final half of the 70th week,
so, now, 3 and a half -days- are three and a half times...
see, it's the consistency that begins to be elusive.
> the "time,
> times and a half," units of time are not earth days, or earth months,
> or earth years, but are symbolic. The time span it represents is not a
> literal three and a half years. The nature of the time in the last
> half week is different, perhaps because these last three years and a
> half apply to the heavenly Jerusalem, not the earthly one. Once Jesus
> ascended to heaven, earth days, earth months, and earth years no
> longer apply. That is when Jerusalem was lifted up, as Isaiah
> foretold. [Isaiah 2:1-3] Isaiah said it would be exalted to the tops
> of the mountains; in the New Testament it is in heaven, above all the
> earth's mountains. Jesus confirms the covenant for one week, but that
> week is partly on earth, and partly in heaven. He confirms the
> covenant by sending the Spirit to the church.
Isaiah doesn't imply that the "times" are "changed"
how does this correlate with the persona
in Daniel who seeks to "change the times"?
[don't get antsy, i'm not calling
you the person who changes times]
but, see the Daniel quote below...
> In the last half of the 70th week, the promised land is not the
> earthly territory of Canaan, but is described "a better country, that
> is, an heavenly." [Hebrews 11:16] In the 4th period of "seven times"
> of Leviticus 26, God said he will remember his covenant with Abraham,
> Isaac, and Jacob, and will be reconciled to his people Israel. This
> 4th period of "seven times" corresponds to the 70th week of Daniel's
> prophecy.
you still haven't really shown [me] how leviticus 26 actually speaks
of 4 distinct seven time periods and not just a single seven times
you say it, and that's ok, but it can be read as
a single seven times for a single breaking of the
covnenat of marriage between YHWH and Israel.
and, your 4 sets of seven times are not
internally consitent as to time frame.
> The 70 weeks prophecy concerns Jerusalem, but when Christ ascended to
> heaven, the units of time in the prophecy were changed.
it's not clear that "times" as reckoned on
earth by us people on earth have been "changed"
==
Daniel 7:25
He shall speak pompous words against the Most High,
Shall persecute the saints of the Most High, And
shall intend to change times and law. Then
the saints shall be given into his hand
For a time and times and half a time.
==
how are "times" not being "changed" here?
only problem is, 70 years isn't really "seven times"
a "time" seems to be a year
of course, you could read leviticus as "seventy times"
in one place if you feel like it.
but, and also, =Israel's= exile was not ended
with the return from Babylon of =Judah=
Northern Israel was carried off in 714 and never returns,
a small remenant from each tribe seems to be left
behind and moves south, but the rest seems to diaapear.
see, Ezekiel's hair.
two distinct "diasporae"
---
Ezekiel 5
1 "And you, O son of man, take a sharp sword; use it as
a barber's razor and pass it over your head and your beard;
then take balances for weighing, and divide the hair.
2 A third part you shall burn in the fire in the midst
of the city, when the days of the siege are completed;
and a third part you shall take and strike with the
sword round about the city; and a third part you shall
scatter to the wind, and I will unsheathe the sword after them.
3 And you shall take from these a small number, and bind
them in the skirts of your robe. 4 And of these again you
shall take some, and cast them into the fire, and burn
them in the fire; from there a fire will come
forth into all the house of Israel.
---
etc on this bit...
> historical work the Chronicler points to the figure of the restorer
> who accomplished the Lord's word by Jeremiah concerning the divine
> visitation after seventy sabbath years (Jer. 29: 10) and introduced
> the post-exilic jubilee-restoration (II Chron. 36:22 f.; cf. Ezra 1:1
> ff.). The Chronicler was at the same time recording the fulfillment of
> another prophetic word of God. Isaiah too had spoken of the one who
> should command the rebuilding of Jerusalem and its temple, even Cyrus,
> whom Isaiah designated as the Lord's "anointed" (Isa. 44:28; 45:1).
> </quote>
> Because the 70 weeks correspond to the last three of the four periods
> of "seven times" in Leviticus 26, which is the duration of the curse,
> clearly there are no gaps in the 70 weeks. Any gap would mean a lapse
> in the curse, and would require a temporary reconciliation of God with
> Israel, and a temporary restoration, but the restoration is to be
> permanent.
but, it still seems as if Israel and Judah
are two very distinct nations.
and you don't address this at all.
etc.....etc.
> > "28 times" = some specific number of years,
> > and Jesus' reading a bioble verse in the
> > synagogue fulfills part of that 28 times?
> Paul says, in 2 Corinthians 11:24, "Of the Jews five times received I
> forty stripes save one." I suppose he could have said, "I received 195
> stripes from the Jews." Or even, "I was abused 195 times by the Jews."
> But if he had said this, something is lost, though, I think. And
> similarly, if you say that the prophecy specifies 28 times of
> punishment, something is lost. Especially because "time" is a generic
> word. There could be different units of "time" in the different
> periods of "seven times." The "seven times" are each unique. That is
> shown in Leviticus 26, where the nature of the punishments change for
> each of the four periods, and in the last one, God is reconciled to
> Israel, and remembers his covenant. That one corresponds to the time
> of Jesus' ministry plus the whole age of the church.
i don't say there are 28 times, for one thing,
but, you give no real justification for 4 seven times periods
all being of different lengths of actual time.
seven sabbatical years is a very specific time.
if it fits with this, then we should see some consistency.
> >> As for Armstrong's book "The United States and Britain in Prophecy,"
> >> he plagiarized much of it, copying word for word in some parts from
> >> J.H. Allen, "Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright." (1902)
> >> Armstrong did not acknowledge Allen as his source. He did not seem to
> >> think such plagiarism was wrong. Shame on him!
> > like i said, "british israelism" is not armstrong's invention.
> > so, why bother saying that it is, and then note a person from
> > whom you say he plaguiarized?
> > it may be an opinion, but, an irrelevant one.
> Oh, I was just trying to answer your question, not upset you.
it's not "upset" i just don't see why you said what you said.
> >> And the whole idea is flawed anyway. The 360-days apply to symbolic
> >> periods; they are found in time periods that describe the heavenly
> >> Jerusalem. Earthly units of time such as earth days, earth months,
> >> earth years etc., do not apply to the heavenly city. They represent
> >> time periods related to the church, which Jesus is building, and apply
> >> to the time after Jesus ascended to heaven.
> > but you are trying to use such "times" to pinpoint
> > Jesus' earthly ministry, so, are you suggesting
> > that your idea is flawed?
> The last of the four periods of seven times is the 70th week, and it
> is divided into periods of three and a half years. The first is the
> ministry of Jesus; these are natural years. The last half-week applies
> to the heavenly Jerusalem, the spiritual temple, so the times related
> to is are given symbolically, not in natural years.
show some justification for this...briefly if possible
> >> Using 360 days for a year and applying such calculations to history
> >> has a long record of failed predictions; "by their fruits you shall
> >> know them."
> > and yet, there has been an unprecedented explosion of material wealth
> > beginning in the early 1800s which just happen to be 2520 years
> > after 714 B.C. and 2520 = 7 X 360.
> I think the French Revolution, the settlement of the Americas, the
> rise of science and technology, the enlightenment, and the defeat of
> Napoleon, etc., were all factors in the production of wealth.
the greeks were no great big dummies, but they
couldn't support a burgeoning population and fell.
the is still something peculiar abut the explosion
of material wealth "seven times" after 714 B.C.
coupled with the promises made to Abraham -of- explosive
wealth and things of this nature and not -just-
a coming Christ through his "seed"
in some respects, it fits in a rather peculiar manner.
and some 'rabbis' are considerate of the idea that
the prodigal son, in some respects, speaks of "lost Israel"
Doug
There is no need for it as the 7 year cycle was established in the law
of Moses. On the seventh year the land rested.
>
>
>> The phrase "seven times" also occurs in Daniel, as well as the phrase
>> "time, times and a half," which is derived from it, being half of
>> "seven times." Daniel says the exile was a fulfillment of the curse of
>> the Law of Moses. [Daniel 9:11] The 70 weeks prophecy is thought to be
>> founded on Leviticus 25& 26. Meredith G. Kline wrote:
>
>
> here's the seven times;
>
> ==
> Daniel 4:16 [and a few others referring to Nebucghadnezzar]
>
> Let his heart be changed from that of a man,
> Let him be given the heart of a beast,
> And let seven times pass over him.
> ==
>
> it refers to Nebuchadnezzar.
>
> now, we can symbologize this and say
> Nebuchadnezzar is a "type" of some
> other "persona"
>
> and these "seven times" stand for some
> other period of time than just "seven years"
> but, seven years is what we get in the literal sense
> as it seems as if Nebuchadnezzar is out of
> his mind for seven years.
>
> and now, you come along, and suggest that
>
> one time, and two times, and one half of one time,
>
> stands for....what?
>
> 3 and a half years, or something else...
>
> 3 and a half years of days of years?
>
> 1260 years?
No, it is three and a half symbolic years. They are not natural years,
as they imply years of 360 days, which are not natural. Three and a
half real years of 12 lunar months would be about 1,240 days. If an
extra month was included it would be about 1,270 days. If they are
solar years it would be about 1,278 days. None of these are close to
1,260 days. Therefore it is an unreal period, a symbol. And these
numbers all apply to the duration of the church age or the remaining
part of it.
>
> no, you seem to have no real consistency
> as to what these "times" represent.
Which ones? The remaining time of the church is a diminishing period,
and it is represented by diminishing numbers, 1,335 days ==> 1,290
days ==> 1,260 days ==> 3.5 days when the remaining time is very
brief. Time is like that; it tends to run out.
Yes, in four different places.
>
> you say that this refers to time periods,
> but that these time periods are all
> different, one from another.
>
> one important thing here is the seven times
> can be a time period and not just an intensity level.
Yes, and when there are four mentions of the "seven times," they can
be four periods of seven times.
>
>
>> The "time, times and a half" (along with related periods of 1,335
>> days, 1,290 days, 1,260 days, and 42 months) are symbolic,
>> representing the whole age of the church, which is called the
>> "Jerusalem which is above" and "the heavenly Jerusalem" in the New
>> Testament. For the portion of the 70 weeks that applies to the
>> heavenly city, which is the final half of the 70th week,
>
>
> so, now, 3 and a half -days- are three and a half times...
>
> see, it's the consistency that begins to be elusive.
>
The phrase "time, times and a half" presents a pattern. It is similar
to the pattern in the writing on the wall in Daniel 5; 2 mina, 1
shekel, and a pares = a half-mina.
>
>
>> the "time,
>> times and a half," units of time are not earth days, or earth months,
>> or earth years, but are symbolic. The time span it represents is not a
>> literal three and a half years. The nature of the time in the last
>> half week is different, perhaps because these last three years and a
>> half apply to the heavenly Jerusalem, not the earthly one. Once Jesus
>> ascended to heaven, earth days, earth months, and earth years no
>> longer apply. That is when Jerusalem was lifted up, as Isaiah
>> foretold. [Isaiah 2:1-3] Isaiah said it would be exalted to the tops
>> of the mountains; in the New Testament it is in heaven, above all the
>> earth's mountains. Jesus confirms the covenant for one week, but that
>> week is partly on earth, and partly in heaven. He confirms the
>> covenant by sending the Spirit to the church.
>
>
> Isaiah doesn't imply that the "times" are "changed"
>
> how does this correlate with the persona
>
> in Daniel who seeks to "change the times"?
>
>
> [don't get antsy, i'm not calling
> you the person who changes times]
>
> but, see the Daniel quote below...
>
The little horn seeks to change times and laws. The "times" may very
well include the times of Daniel's prophecies, the 70 weeks, and the
"time, times and a half." There have been dozens of flawed
interpretations. Obviously they can't all be right. The little horn
has "eyes like the eyes of a man" so represents a human point of view,
which opposes the divine one.
>
>> In the last half of the 70th week, the promised land is not the
>> earthly territory of Canaan, but is described "a better country, that
>> is, an heavenly." [Hebrews 11:16] In the 4th period of "seven times"
>> of Leviticus 26, God said he will remember his covenant with Abraham,
>> Isaac, and Jacob, and will be reconciled to his people Israel. This
>> 4th period of "seven times" corresponds to the 70th week of Daniel's
>> prophecy.
>
>
> you still haven't really shown [me] how leviticus 26 actually speaks
> of 4 distinct seven time periods and not just a single seven times
Well, the original post in this thread present my view on it.
>
> you say it, and that's ok, but it can be read as
> a single seven times for a single breaking of the
> covnenat of marriage between YHWH and Israel.
>
> and, your 4 sets of seven times are not
> internally consitent as to time frame.
>
No, I say the word "time" can take different values.
Why?
Compare with the end of Zechariah 13.
>
>
>> historical work the Chronicler points to the figure of the restorer
>> who accomplished the Lord's word by Jeremiah concerning the divine
>> visitation after seventy sabbath years (Jer. 29: 10) and introduced
>> the post-exilic jubilee-restoration (II Chron. 36:22 f.; cf. Ezra 1:1
>> ff.). The Chronicler was at the same time recording the fulfillment of
>> another prophetic word of God. Isaiah too had spoken of the one who
>> should command the rebuilding of Jerusalem and its temple, even Cyrus,
>> whom Isaiah designated as the Lord's "anointed" (Isa. 44:28; 45:1).
>
>> </quote>
>
>> http://tinyurl.com/4ukg9dk
>
>> Because the 70 weeks correspond to the last three of the four periods
>> of "seven times" in Leviticus 26, which is the duration of the curse,
>> clearly there are no gaps in the 70 weeks. Any gap would mean a lapse
>> in the curse, and would require a temporary reconciliation of God with
>> Israel, and a temporary restoration, but the restoration is to be
>> permanent.
>
>
>
> but, it still seems as if Israel and Judah
>
> are two very distinct nations.
>
> and you don't address this at all.
>
> etc.....etc.
>
Ezekiel 37 addresses this. It shows that the two houses are joined
together as one as far as prophecy is concerned.
>
>
>
>>> "28 times" = some specific number of years,
>>> and Jesus' reading a bioble verse in the
>>> synagogue fulfills part of that 28 times?
>
>
>> Paul says, in 2 Corinthians 11:24, "Of the Jews five times received I
>> forty stripes save one." I suppose he could have said, "I received 195
>> stripes from the Jews." Or even, "I was abused 195 times by the Jews."
>> But if he had said this, something is lost, though, I think. And
>> similarly, if you say that the prophecy specifies 28 times of
>> punishment, something is lost. Especially because "time" is a generic
>> word. There could be different units of "time" in the different
>> periods of "seven times." The "seven times" are each unique. That is
>> shown in Leviticus 26, where the nature of the punishments change for
>> each of the four periods, and in the last one, God is reconciled to
>> Israel, and remembers his covenant. That one corresponds to the time
>> of Jesus' ministry plus the whole age of the church.
>
>
> i don't say there are 28 times, for one thing,
>
> but, you give no real justification for 4 seven times periods
>
> all being of different lengths of actual time.
The 70 weeks contains three sections; 7 weeks, 62 weeks, and 1 week.
They each can be viewed as "seven times."
In the first section, a "time" is a week of some kind; I say a week of
leap years.
In the second section, a "time" is 62 years, which was the age of
Darius (or Cyrus) when he became ruler of Babylon.
In the third section, a "time" is 1 year.
In this manner the 70 weeks corresponds to the last three periods of
"seven times" in Lev. 26. The first one was the exile in Babylon, and
is identified by Daniel in Dan. 9:11. If you don't think he referred
to Leviticus 26 here, what do you suppose he referred to? And when has
the last "seven times" of Lev. 26 been fulfilled? When was God
reconciled to his people, and when did he "remember" his covenant with
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, if not for the ministry of Jesus and the
whole age of the church? Together they are "seven times" where the
last half-week is symbolic.
Jesus said, heaven is God's throne, and earth is his footstool. The
normal units of time, such as day, month, year, are all earth-bound.
God dwells in heaven, the entire universe. Are we suppose that he
reckons time by the earth's period of rotation, or the monthly orbit
of the moon, or by the earth's orbit around the sun? It would be very
demeaning to God to say that, IMO. And who keeps time by what happens
on his footstool? It would make no sense. So, therefore, days and
months and years that describe God's works are figurative and
spiritual. They are not literal. The periods of time that apply to the
heavenly Jerusalem are of that kind.
Isaiah 55:8-9
For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,
saith the LORD.
For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher
than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
>
>
>>>> Using 360 days for a year and applying such calculations to history
>>>> has a long record of failed predictions; "by their fruits you shall
>>>> know them."
>
>
>>> and yet, there has been an unprecedented explosion of material wealth
>>> beginning in the early 1800s which just happen to be 2520 years
>>> after 714 B.C. and 2520 = 7 X 360.
>
>> I think the French Revolution, the settlement of the Americas, the
>> rise of science and technology, the enlightenment, and the defeat of
>> Napoleon, etc., were all factors in the production of wealth.
>
>
> the greeks were no great big dummies, but they
> couldn't support a burgeoning population and fell.
>
> the is still something peculiar abut the explosion
> of material wealth "seven times" after 714 B.C.
>
Lots of peculiar things have happened in history.
> coupled with the promises made to Abraham -of- explosive
> wealth and things of this nature and not -just-
> a coming Christ through his "seed"
Well, in prophecy, the main focus is not upon ethnic groups, but upon
the people of God, the church. The various ethnic groups sometimes
have roles as types of people who have various roles in the plan of
salvation. Jacob and Esau were "two manner of people" it says in
Genesis 25:23.
A profane person who sneers at God's promise is likened to Esau.
[Hebrews 12:16] And "an Israelite indeed" is a person "in whom is no
guile," Jesus said. [John 1:47]
>
> in some respects, it fits in a rather peculiar manner.
>
> and some 'rabbis' are considerate of the idea that
>
> the prodigal son, in some respects, speaks of "lost Israel"
>
>
>
>
>>> and so, by this fruit, do you know something?
--
Doug
Timothy Sutter
> In this manner the 70 weeks corresponds to the last three periods of
> "seven times" in Lev. 26. The first one was the exile in Babylon, and
> is identified by Daniel in Dan. 9:11. If you don't think he referred
> to Leviticus 26 here, what do you suppose he referred to? And when has
> the last "seven times" of Lev. 26 been fulfilled? When was God
> reconciled to his people, and when did he "remember" his covenant with
> Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, if not for the ministry of Jesus and the
> whole age of the church? Together they are "seven times" where the
> last half-week is symbolic.
This is basically the crux of the whole matter.
The covenant promises made to Abraham
and Isaac and Jacob.
That covenant with Abraham Isaac and Jacob was
not =only= spiritual but also physical. [this is a fact]
so, you have a cryptic cypher which you claim pinpoints
Jesus' minstry precisely as the "acceptible day of salvation" [Judah]
fine, not a problem...
and someone else says that they have a similar cryptic cypher
which pinpoints the remembrance of National Israel and the
fulfillment of =physical= blessings which were
promised unconditionally.
ok, so, YHWH says; somewhat paraphrasing
"i didn't shed my love on you because you
were a great people, but a small people"
and, they felt like crickets in comparison
to the Anakim who went the way of the dinosaur.
chuckle, the Anakim went the way of the dinosaur...
really really big people, disppeared in to history.
so, anyway, it's not a mtter of Israel's personal
greatness that God remembers the everlasting
covenant and makes good on it.
and this sort of dynamic runs all through
the entire saga from Abraham to Jesus.
the -expectation- of physical blessing
as a sign of God's benevolent presence
and "seek first the kingdom of God and -then..."
and all the bits about money that Jesus talks about.
so, i'm not arguing against your attempt at
pinpointing 28 a.d. as the acceptable year
of -salvation-
but, i do see a -relevance- in God remembering
the =physical= aspects of the covenant with Abraham
Isaac and Jacob which were =unconditional= and everlasting.
and the thing is, that =if= this 2520 year offset
of the blessings of physical nature -are- fulfilled
in the present day,
then this speaks well of God being a real and active Personality
in the workings of mankind and not just the vain imaginings
of a particular set of =human beings=
inasmuch as these human beings have a covenant fufilled
in a way that they were not expecting over a span of
several -thousand- years.
no, of course i do not say that the christian -needs-
such a fact to make his or her faith -real- as Christ
takes care of this spiritual aspect,
but, it sure does approach "objective" evidence
that YHWH is precisely who and what the scriptures claim.
so, no, i'm not suggesting that God plays favorites
or is a respector of persons, quite the contrary
as God did -not- play favorites with the "apple of [his] eye"
but held them to a more stringent standard.
i won't go i in to this right now;
---
Zechariah 11:14
Then I broke my second staff Union,
annulling the brotherhood between
Judah and Israel.
---
because that stick gets put back together
somewhere along the line anyway.
but t does clearly show that Israel
and Judah were distinct, though "brothers"
I have some stuff on this, but if
it isn't of interest to you,
i may just post it somewhere else.
OK?
i'm not denigrating your cryptic cypher.
and, i'm not denigrating the
other cryptic cypher either.
one is a spiritual fulfillment
and one physical.
now go ask a jew if s/he thinks that
there is no "ethnic" component to their
understanding of ....certain things.
not to worry,
you should note that, the ethiopian eunuch
who asked philip questions was not spitefully
turned away, but led to a pool of water and baptized.
but then again, we have the Solomom and Bathsheba bit
to consider there as well.
etc.
Doug
> Doug wrote:
>
>> In this manner the 70 weeks corresponds to the last three periods of
>> "seven times" in Lev. 26. The first one was the exile in Babylon, and
>> is identified by Daniel in Dan. 9:11. If you don't think he referred
>> to Leviticus 26 here, what do you suppose he referred to? And when has
>> the last "seven times" of Lev. 26 been fulfilled? When was God
>> reconciled to his people, and when did he "remember" his covenant with
>> Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, if not for the ministry of Jesus and the
>> whole age of the church? Together they are "seven times" where the
>> last half-week is symbolic.
>
>
> This is basically the crux of the whole matter.
> The covenant promises made to Abraham
> and Isaac and Jacob.
>
> That covenant with Abraham Isaac and Jacob was
> not =only= spiritual but also physical. [this is a fact]
>
> so, you have a cryptic cypher which you claim pinpoints
> Jesus' minstry precisely as the "acceptible day of salvation" [Judah]
>
> fine, not a problem...
>
> and someone else says that they have a similar cryptic cypher
> which pinpoints the remembrance of National Israel and the
> fulfillment of =physical= blessings which were
> promised unconditionally.
Which were fulfilled in the days of Joshua.
Joshua 21:43-45
And the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto
their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.
And the LORD gave them rest round about, according to all that he
sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their
enemies before them; the LORD delivered all their enemies into their hand.
There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had spoken
unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.
>
> ok, so, YHWH says; somewhat paraphrasing
>
> "i didn't shed my love on you because you
> were a great people, but a small people"
What scripture are you 'paraphrasing' here? Ezekiel gave a different
reason:
Ezekiel 36:17-23
17 Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land,
they defiled it by their own way and by their doings: their way was
before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman.
18 Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had
shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it:
19 And I scattered them among the heathen, and they were dispersed
through the countries: according to their way and according to their
doings I judged them.
20 And when they entered unto the heathen, whither they went, they
profaned my holy name, when they said to them, These are the people of
the LORD, and are gone forth out of his land.
21 But I had pity for mine holy name, which the house of Israel had
profaned among the heathen, whither they went.
22 Therefore say unto the house of Israel, thus saith the Lord GOD;
I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy
name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went.
23 And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the
heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen
shall know that I am the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be
sanctified in you before their eyes.
>
> and, they felt like crickets in comparison
> to the Anakim who went the way of the dinosaur.
The faithless Israelite spies compared themselves to grasshoppers.
[Numbers 13:33]
Similarly many Christians revere other men, who they regard as
spiritual "giants," and see themselves as inferior in comparison.
Maybe a pope of a saint, or a theologian like Calvin or Luther, or an
American preacher like H. W. Armstrong, or Harold Camping, or you name
it. And people who follow others like that are compared to "locusts"
in some prophecies, alluding to the Israelites in the wilderness who
lacked the faith to enter the promised land.
...
>
> so, i'm not arguing against your attempt at
> pinpointing 28 a.d. as the acceptable year
> of -salvation-
>
> but, i do see a -relevance- in God remembering
> the =physical= aspects of the covenant with Abraham
> Isaac and Jacob which were =unconditional= and everlasting.
The promised land, in the New Testament, is not the earthly Canaan:
"But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore
God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for
them a city." [Hebrews 11:16]
Here, the heavenly city replaces the earthly territory of Canaan, or
Palestine.
Abraham's promised inheritance is expanded, to include the whole world:
Romans 4:13
For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to
Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the
righteousness of faith.
Jesus said, "Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth."
[Matthew 5:5] This quotes one of the Psalms:
Psalm 37:11
But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in
the abundance of peace.
Jesus said Abraham will be included in the kingdom, while Jews who
reject him will be excluded.
Luke 13:28
There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see
Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of
God, and you yourselves thrust out.
What was Abraham promised? That in his seed all nations will be
blessed. Paul called this the gospel. [Galatians 3:8] And that he
would be the father of many nations; he is the father of the faithful.
"...Abraham; who is the father of us all." [Romans 4:16]
Those who are of faith are Abraham's children.
Galatians 3:7
Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the
children of Abraham.
Time, applied to the heavenly city, is not given in natural days,
months, or years, but in symbolic units.
Dimensions, applied to the heavenly city, are not natural; John spoke
of an "angelic" cubit, when he gave the dimension of its wall.
[Revelation 21:17] And for a natural wall, three numbers are needed to
describe it; length, width, and height. Only one dimension is
mentioned for the wall of the holy city; 144 cubits. The wall is
symbolic; it represents "salvation." Isaiah said, "Violence shall no
more be heard in thy land, wasting nor destruction within thy borders;
but thou shalt call thy walls Salvation, and thy gates Praise."
[Isaiah 60:18]
>
> and the thing is, that =if= this 2520 year offset
> of the blessings of physical nature -are- fulfilled
> in the present day,
>
> then this speaks well of God being a real and active Personality
> in the workings of mankind and not just the vain imaginings
> of a particular set of =human beings=
>
> inasmuch as these human beings have a covenant fufilled
> in a way that they were not expecting over a span of
> several -thousand- years.
>
> no, of course i do not say that the christian -needs-
> such a fact to make his or her faith -real- as Christ
> takes care of this spiritual aspect,
>
> but, it sure does approach "objective" evidence
>
> that YHWH is precisely who and what the scriptures claim.
>
> so, no, i'm not suggesting that God plays favorites
> or is a respector of persons, quite the contrary
>
> as God did -not- play favorites with the "apple of [his] eye"
You think that Zechariah 2:8 refers to ethnic Jews?
Zechariah 2:4-8
4 And said unto him, Run, speak to this young man, saying, Jerusalem
shall be inhabited as towns without walls for the multitude of men and
cattle therein:
5 For I, saith the LORD, will be unto her a wall of fire round
about, and will be the glory in the midst of her.
6 Ho, ho, come forth, and flee from the land of the north, saith the
LORD: for I have spread you abroad as the four winds of the heaven,
saith the LORD.
7 Deliver thyself, O Zion, that dwellest with the daughter of Babylon.
8 For thus saith the LORD of hosts; After the glory hath he sent me
unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth
the apple of his eye.
The "Zion" who dwells with the "daughter of Babylon" refers to the
saints, not ethnic Jews. Mount Zion is raised up to heaven, in the New
Testament. This fulfills the prophecy of Isaiah who said Zion and
Jerusalem would be "exulted" above the mountains and hills.
Hebrews 12:22-23
But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God,
the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written
in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men
made perfect,
The Jerusalem Zechariah spoke of is described as "towns without
walls." That would not fit the earthly city, which has a 700 km long
wall running through it, 8 m high, with sniper towers, barbed wire,
etc. It is clearly not the earthly Jerusalem that Zechariah's prophecy
refers to. And God says he is a "wall of fire" around Jerusalem;
"fire" is a metaphor often used for the scriptures. "Is not my word
like as a fire? saith the LORD..." [Jeremiah 23:29]
--
Doug
Timothy Sutter
> Timothy Sutter wrote:
> > Doug wrote:
> >> In this manner the 70 weeks corresponds to the last three periods of
> >> "seven times" in Lev. 26. The first one was the exile in Babylon, and
> >> is identified by Daniel in Dan. 9:11. If you don't think he referred
> >> to Leviticus 26 here, what do you suppose he referred to? And when has
> >> the last "seven times" of Lev. 26 been fulfilled? When was God
> >> reconciled to his people, and when did he "remember" his covenant with
> >> Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, if not for the ministry of Jesus and the
> >> whole age of the church? Together they are "seven times" where the
> >> last half-week is symbolic.
> > This is basically the crux of the whole matter.
> > The covenant promises made to Abraham
> > and Isaac and Jacob.
lest you become confused as to my meaning,
i do not call "National Israel" "jews"
Judah and the associated southern
kingdom's meanderings are "jews"
northern Israel was -not- "jews"
in other words, all "jews" are children of Jacob,
but not all children of Jacob are "jews"
i have a larger piece on this, maybe
i'll add it up here, if i can find it.
=no= this is -not- "replacement theology"
Israel was cast off, but there are no divorce papers...
==
Isaiah 50:1
Thus says YHWH:� Where is the certificate of your mother�s
divorce, Whom I have put away? Or which of My creditors
is it to whom I have sold you? For your iniquities you
have sold yourselves, And for your transgressions
your mother has been put away.
==
and Judah has -never- left, but still
carry the oracles of God.
just as Paul explained.
even -if- at times,
==
Jeremiah 3:8
Then I saw that for all the causes for which backsliding
Israel had committed adultery, I had put her away and
given her a certificate of divorce; yet her treacherous
sister Judah did not fear, but went and played the harlot also.
=
Jeremiah 3:11
Then the LORD said to me, �Backsliding Israel
has shown herself more righteous than treacherous Judah.
==
etc, etc. etc.
if you want to get way down in to all the details of it all,
let's -try- to be brief...
> > That covenant with Abraham Isaac and Jacob was
> > not =only= spiritual but also physical. [this is a fact]
> > so, you have a cryptic cypher which you claim pinpoints
> > Jesus' minstry precisely as the "acceptible day of salvation" [Judah]
> > fine, not a problem...
> > and someone else says that they have a similar cryptic cypher
> > which pinpoints the remembrance of National Israel and the
> > fulfillment of =physical= blessings which were
> > promised unconditionally.
> Which were fulfilled in the days of Joshua.
> Joshua 21:43-45
> And the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto
> their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.
> And the LORD gave them rest round about, according to all that he
> sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their
> enemies before them; the LORD delivered all their enemies into their hand.
> There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had spoken
> unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.
only a prior seminal fulfillment,
and not nearly as grand as to be expected.
more to come;
see, he casts them off, somewhat, for disobediance
just as he said he would do, and this is where
the "seven times" takes shape to reinstitute
the promises, and much more FULLY.
==
Joshua 23:15
Therefore it shall come to pass, that as all the good things
have come upon you which YHWH your God promised you, so
YHWH will bring upon you all harmful things, until He has
destroyed you from this good land which YHWH your God has
given you. When you have transgressed the covenant of YHWH your God,
which He commanded you, and have gone and served other gods,
and bowed down to them, then the anger of YHWH will
burn against you, and you shall perish quickly from
the good land which He has given you.�
==
a predicted loss
followed by a reinstatement of the Promises.
==
Jeremiah 32:41-43
Yes, I will rejoice over them to do them good,
and I will assuredly plant them in this land, with
all My heart and with all My soul.� �For thus says
YHWH: �Just as I have brought all this great
calamity on this people, so I will bring on them
all the good that I have promised them. And
fields will be bought in this land of which you
say, �It is desolate, without man or beast;
it has been given into the hand of the Chaldeans.�
==
==
Jeremiah 33
�Behold, the days are coming,� says YHWH,
�that I will perform that good thing which I have
promised to the house of Israel and to the house of Judah:
� In those days and at that time I will cause to grow
up to David A Branch of righteousness; He shall execute
judgment and righteousness in the earth. In those
days Judah will be saved, And Jerusalem will dwell safely.
And this is the name by which she will be called:
THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.�
�For thus says YHWH: �David shall never lack
a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel;
nor shall the priests, the Levites, lack a man
to offer burnt offerings before Me, to kindle
grain offerings, and to sacrifice continually.��
And the word of YHWH came to Jeremiah, saying,
�Thus says YHWH: �If you can break My covenant
with the day and My covenant with the night, so that
there will not be day and night in their season,
then My covenant may also be broken with David My servant,
so that he shall not have a son to reign on his throne,
and with the Levites, the priests, My ministers.
As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, nor the sand
of the sea measured, so will I multiply the descendants
of David My servant and the Levites who minister to Me.��
Moreover the word of YHWH came to Jeremiah, saying,
�Have you not considered what these people have spoken, saying,
�The two families which YHWH has chosen, He has also
cast them off�? Thus they have despised My people, as
if they should no more be a nation before them.
�Thus says YHWH: �If My covenant is not
with day and night, and if I have not appointed
the ordinances of heaven and earth, then I will
cast away the descendants of Jacob and David My servant,
so that I will not take any of his descendants to
be rulers over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob. For I will cause their captives
to return, and will have mercy on them.��
===
here is some of the promised blessings in type...
==
Deuteronomy 7
14 You shall be blessed above all peoples;
==
===
Deuteronomy 12:20
�When YHWH your God enlarges your border
as He has promised you, and you say, �Let me eat meat,�
because you long to eat meat, you may eat as
much meat as your heart desires.
==
==
Deuteronomy 15:6
For YHWH your God will bless you just as He promised you;
you shall lend to many nations, but you shall not borrow;
you shall reign over many nations, but they shall
not reign over you.
==
"lending to many nations".... who does -that- =today=?
==
Genesis 22
15 Then the Angel of YHWH called to Abraham a
second time out of heaven, and said: �By Myself
I have sworn, says YHWH, because you have done
this thing, and have not withheld your son, your
only son� blessing I will bless you, and
multiplying I will multiply your descendants
as the stars of the heaven and as the sand
which is on the seashore; and your descendants
shall possess the gate of their enemies. In
your seed all the nations of the earth shall
be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.�
Genesis 24
So they sent away Rebekah their sister and her nurse,
and Abraham�s servant and his men. And they blessed
Rebekah and said to her:
�Our sister, may you become
The mother of thousands of ten thousands;
And may your descendants possess
The gates of those who hate them.�
==
Genesis 26
Dwell in this land, and I will be with you and bless you;
for to you and your descendants I give all these lands,
and I will perform the oath which I swore to Abraham
your father. And I will make your descendants multiply
as the stars of heaven; I will give to your descendants
all these lands; and in your seed all the nations of
the earth shall be blessed; because Abraham obeyed
My voice and kept My charge, My commandments,
My statutes, and My laws.�
==
Genesis 27:27-29
�Come near now and kiss me, my son.�
And he came near and kissed him;
and he smelled the smell of his clothing,
and blessed him and said:
� Surely, the smell of my son
Is like the smell of a field
Which the LORD has blessed.
Therefore may God give you
Of the dew of heaven,
Of the fatness of the earth,
And plenty of grain and wine.
Let peoples serve you,
And nations bow down to you.
Be master over your brethren,
And let your mother�s sons bow down to you.
Cursed be everyone who curses you,
And blessed be those who bless you!�
==
all of these promises have not been completely
fulfilled after the desctruction of the first Temple.
Northern Israel was in limbo somewhere and Judea
remained underfoot of the ruling dynasties of the 'beast'
such as Babylon, Medo/Persia Greece and finally Rome.
and this is precisely what the "jews" in Judea were expecting
that YHWH would bring this physical blessing that
would overturn the tables and it -never- came.
etc.
SURE Jesus is the very important blessing itself
but the crucified Christ does -not- filfill
=all= messianic promises either.
there is so much more...
> > ok, so, YHWH says; somewhat paraphrasing
> > "i didn't shed my love on you because you
> > were a great people, but a small people"
> What scripture are you 'paraphrasing' here?
==
Deuteronomy 7:6-11
�For you are a holy people to YHWH your God;
YHWH your God has chosen you to be a people for Himself,
a special treasure above all the peoples on the face
of the earth. YHWH did not set His love on you
nor choose you because you were more in number than
any other people, for you were the least of all peoples;
but because YHWH loves you, and because He would keep
the oath which He swore to your fathers, YHWH has
brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you
from the house of bondage, from the hand of Pharaoh
king of Egypt. �Therefore know that YHWH your God,
He is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and
mercy for a thousand generations with those who
love Him and keep His commandments; and He
repays those who hate Him to their face, to destroy them.
He will not be slack with him who hates Him; He will
repay him to his face. Therefore you shall keep
the commandment, the statutes, and the judgments
which I command you today, to observe them.
=
> Ezekiel gave a different reason:
> Ezekiel 36:17-23
> 17 Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land,
> they defiled it by their own way and by their doings: their way was
> before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman.
> 18 Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had
> shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it:
> 19 And I scattered them among the heathen, and they were dispersed
> through the countries: according to their way and according to their
> doings I judged them.
> 20 And when they entered unto the heathen, whither they went, they
> profaned my holy name, when they said to them, These are the people of
> the LORD, and are gone forth out of his land.
> 21 But I had pity for mine holy name, which the house of Israel had
> profaned among the heathen, whither they went.
> 22 Therefore say unto the house of Israel, thus saith the Lord GOD;
> I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy
> name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went.
> 23 And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the
> heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen
> shall know that I am the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be
> sanctified in you before their eyes.
it's the same -reason-, -not- because of Israel's
'comeliness' or might but because of =YHWH's= faithfulness.
that's what i was pressing, that this is no reason for
a people to puff out their chests and claim personal
greatness but, instead, to PRAISE the virtues of their God.
and when they don't, ... God is not mocked...
> > and, they felt like crickets in comparison
> > to the Anakim who went the way of the dinosaur.
> The faithless Israelite spies compared themselves to grasshoppers.
> [Numbers 13:33]
well, they were much smaller than the Anakim and
is was YHWH who did most of the fighting.
the faithless spies were afraid, and with good reason.
Joshua wasn't afraid because he relied on YHWH.
> Similarly many Christians revere other men, who they regard as
> spiritual "giants," and see themselves as inferior in comparison.
> Maybe a pope of a saint, or a theologian like Calvin or Luther, or an
> American preacher like H. W. Armstrong, or Harold Camping, or you name
> it. And people who follow others like that are compared to "locusts"
> in some prophecies, alluding to the Israelites in the wilderness who
> lacked the faith to enter the promised land.
lucky for us all, for the truely faithful,
this dynamic takes precedence;
==
Revelation 22:8-10
Now I, John, saw and heard these things.
And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship
before the feet of the angel who showed me these things.
Then he said to me, �See that you do not do that.
For I am your fellow servant, and of your
brethren the prophets,
==
because we -know- that we are -not- to
"lord it over one another as the
nations like to do"
but that;
"let the greatest amongst you be the -servant-"
and Peter says;
"not just my feet, but my entire body"
and John says;
"-you- should be baptizing -me-"
etc, etc, etc,
the Holy Spirit -always- points -at- Christ;
==
John 14:26
But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father
will send in My name, He will teach you all things,
and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.
=
John 15:26
�But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you
from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds
from the Father, He will testify of Me.
==
etc.
> > so, i'm not arguing against your attempt at
> > pinpointing 28 a.d. as the acceptable year
> > of -salvation-
> > but, i do see a -relevance- in God remembering
> > the =physical= aspects of the covenant with Abraham
> > Isaac and Jacob which were =unconditional= and everlasting.
> The promised land, in the New Testament, is not the earthly Canaan:
> "But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore
> God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for
> them a city." [Hebrews 11:16]
clearly there is a here and now
physical aspect as well;
==
Matthew 6
�Therefore do not worry, saying, �What shall we eat?�
or �What shall we drink?� or �What shall we wear?�
32 For after all these things the Gentiles seek.
For your heavenly Father knows that you need all
these things. But seek first the kingdom of God
and His righteousness, and all these things shall
be added to you.
==
see, seek the kingdom and his righteousness,
and then, needful tings will be added.
and then Jesus seems to suggest that we pray
for that day when God's will is done on
-earth- as it is in heaven.
==
Matthew 6:10-12
Your kingdom come. Your will be done
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts,
As we forgive our debtors.
==
Revelation 3:12
He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar
in the temple of My God, and he shall go
out no more. I will write on him the name
of My God and the name of the city of My God,
the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of
heaven from My God. And I will write
on him My new name.
> Here, the heavenly city replaces the earthly territory of Canaan, or
> Palestine.
and here again, there is one earth as it is in heaven...
ETC
> Abraham's promised inheritance is expanded, to include the whole world:
yes, yes it is...
but that was -already- made know in the prior promisings.
===
Deuteronomy 12:20
�When YHWH your God enlarges your border
as He has promised you, and you say, �Let me eat meat,�
because you long to eat meat, you may eat as
much meat as your heart desires.
==
> Romans 4:13
> For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to
> Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the
> righteousness of faith.
the law was a -conditional- contract and the physical promises
made to abraham were -unconditional- based on what -faith-
abraham had -already- demonstrated to YHWH.
but these things are not altogether "spiritualized"
sure, there's a spiritual aspect, nobody denies this.
sure the spiritual aspect is of prime
impoortance and nobody denies -that-
-but- God cannot =lie= and God promised things to Abraham
and these Promises have a profound consequence.
but, God is not -mocked- either
and just as God can yank a candlestick from
the presence of the people due to bad faith,
by this same token, the immense =physical=
blessings can be lost in short order as well.
> Jesus said, "Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth."
> [Matthew 5:5] This quotes one of the Psalms:
> Psalm 37:11
> But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in
> the abundance of peace.
well, good golly, =earth= is still in play here
and not just a city -in- "heaven"
> Jesus said Abraham will be included in the kingdom, while Jews who
> reject him will be excluded.
> Luke 13:28
> There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see
> Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of
> God, and you yourselves thrust out.
> What was Abraham promised? That in his seed all nations will be
> blessed. Paul called this the gospel. [Galatians 3:8] And that he
> would be the father of many nations; he is the father of the faithful.
> "...Abraham; who is the father of us all." [Romans 4:16]
> Those who are of faith are Abraham's children.
-grafted- _in to_ a cultivated Olive against nature
from which -some- _not all_ of the "natural branches"
had been stripped out.
> Galatians 3:7
> Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the
> children of Abraham.
exactly which was why, in part, Israel
never fully reaped the promises
-but- for God's own word, God springs to action
and Promises are fulfilled without regard
to anyone 'earning' nor 'deserving' them.
and, there -is- a physical aspect still
in play to the promises made to Abraham.
> Time, applied to the heavenly city, is not given in natural days,
> months, or years, but in symbolic units.
this is still your invention.
> Dimensions, applied to the heavenly city, are not natural; John spoke
> of an "angelic" cubit, when he gave the dimension of its wall.
17 Then he measured its wall: one hundred and forty-four cubits,
according to the measure of a man, that is, of an angel.
and this one person drops to the feet of an angel
Revelation 22:8-10
8 Now I, John, saw and heard these things.
And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship
before the feet of the angel who showed me these things.
9 Then he said to me, �See that you do not do that.
For I am your fellow servant, and of your
brethren the prophets,
this "angel" had dimensions not unlike John's own.
i.e. that of a man and angel a fellow servant...now.
but, in the flow of this, when the measuring is done,
the height length and bredth are all equal, and
==
The city is laid out as a square; its length is
as great as its breadth. And he measured the city
with the reed: twelve thousand furlongs. Its length,
breadth, and height are equal. 17 Then he measured
its wall: one hundred and forty-four cubits,
according to the measure of a man, that is,
of an angel. 18 The construction of its wall was of jasper;
==
the wall was said to be made of Jasper which is a precious
stone and has substance and therefore length width and bredth.
> [Revelation 21:17] And for a natural wall, three numbers are needed to
> describe it; length, width, and height. Only one dimension is
> mentioned for the wall of the holy city; 144 cubits. The wall is
> symbolic; it represents "salvation." Isaiah said, "Violence shall no
> more be heard in thy land, wasting nor destruction within thy borders;
> but thou shalt call thy walls Salvation, and thy gates Praise."
> [Isaiah 60:18]
sure is funny how the children of Israel get
special mention and are even named on the gates.
==
rev 21.
and twelve angels at the gates, and names written on them,
which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children
of Israel: 13 three gates on the east, three gates
on the north, three gates on the south, and
three gates on the west.
==
> > and the thing is, that =if= this 2520 year offset
> > of the blessings of physical nature -are- fulfilled
> > in the present day,
> > then this speaks well of God being a real and active Personality
> > in the workings of mankind and not just the vain imaginings
> > of a particular set of =human beings=
> > inasmuch as these human beings have a covenant fufilled
> > in a way that they were not expecting over a span of
> > several -thousand- years.
> > no, of course i do not say that the christian -needs-
> > such a fact to make his or her faith -real- as Christ
> > takes care of this spiritual aspect,
> > but, it sure does approach "objective" evidence
> > that YHWH is precisely who and what the scriptures claim.
> > so, no, i'm not suggesting that God plays favorites
> > or is a respector of persons, quite the contrary
> > as God did -not- play favorites with the "apple of [his] eye"
> You think that Zechariah 2:8 refers to ethnic Jews?
i think this is what it says it is;
===
Deuteronomy 32:9-11
9 For YHWH�s portion is His people;
Jacob is the place of His inheritance.
10 �He found him in a desert land
And in the wasteland, a howling wilderness;
He encircled him, He instructed him,
He kept him as the apple of His eye.
11 As an eagle stirs up its nest,
Hovers over its young,
Spreading out its wings, taking them up,
Carrying them on its wings,
===
and i do not say that all of Jacob is "jews"
because all of Jacob is not "jews"
all "jews" are of Jacob, but, not all Jacob is "jews"
> Zechariah 2:4-8
> Hebrews 12:22-23
> But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God,
> the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
> To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written
> in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men
> made perfect,
> The Jerusalem Zechariah spoke of is described as "towns without
> walls." That would not fit the earthly city, which has a 700 km long
> wall running through it, 8 m high, with sniper towers, barbed wire,
> etc. It is clearly not the earthly Jerusalem that Zechariah's prophecy
> refers to. And God says he is a "wall of fire" around Jerusalem;
> "fire" is a metaphor often used for the scriptures. "Is not my word
> like as a fire? saith the LORD..." [Jeremiah 23:29]
if this "new jerusalem" is coming -down- -out- of "heaven"
then, it is not -staying- -in- "heaven"
==
Revelation 3:12
He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar
in the temple of My God, and he shall go
out no more. I will write on him the name
of My God and the name of the city of My God,
the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of
heaven from My God. And I will write
on him My new name.
==
no, i haven't said that -this- has happened yet.
that Israel was promised reparations of full blessings
and never quite saw -that- in antiquity, and God cannot lie
leaves open the very distinct possibility that YHWH could
come as a thief in the night and =furnish= one's house
with all manner of -physical- blessings...
but Judah and Israel are =not= identical.
etc. etc. etc.
and but -yes- Cornelius being filled with the Holy Spirit is genuine
even though, Peter and the rest were -astonished-
that the Spirit had actually fallen -on- him.
the Lost Sheep is not -just- "jews"
after all, they were right there at home, in large part.
and like i mentioned, see Ezekiel's hair...
i don't want this post to get so large,,,
so i have -tried- to be brief...
Timothy Sutter
here's some of that other bit;
here's a, somewhat, brief version
of a, somewhat, long story.
just focusing in on
a specific aspect;
what is "jew" and how
does it relate to
"Juda-ism"?
skipping ahead, Abraham's
grandson was named Jacob.
his name was changed to Israel.
Israel had 12 sons.
One son was named "Judah"
Judah means "Praised of YHWH"
so, after about 400 years in bonded
toil in Egypt, Israel is released and
is what shall be called a "nation"
this "nation" is comprised of
twelve smaller subsets called "tribes"
one tribe for each of the sons of Israel.
one tribe called "Judah"
now "Judah" is not just a son
of Israel but an entire tribe
of Israelites.
mind you, there are 11
other tribes of Israelites
who are not "Judah"
anyway, in aggregate, the tribes
get referred to as "ites" that is,
"Judah-ites" "Benjamin-ites"
"Asher-ites" etc-ites.
in hebrew, the term
"Judah-ite" is "Y'hudim"
and this term means "men of Judah"
so, that is what a "Judah-ite"
is, a "man of Judah" of course,
women are "men of Judah" as well.
so, that term is found in the
early writings of the hebrew authors.
"Judah-ite" "Y'hudim" "men of Judah"
alright, so, the entire people of
Israel, Judah included, rejects
YHWH as "King" and Saul and then
David is chosen from among the
people to represent them. so, now,
you have what is called
"The Kingdom of Israel"
oh, by the way, the "Levites" had
no land grant and were travelling
priests. that gets a mention in a bit.
so anyway, there's a lot of a lot of
erecting that cultural totem i spoke
of earlier, the "Baals",
and YHWH splits the Kingdom
of Israel in to two pieces,
The Kingdom of Israel with
capital in Samaria to the north
and the Kingdom of Judah with
capital in Jerusalem to the south.
well, first off, the tribe of the Bejamin-ites
stays south with the tribe of Judah, and the
Levite priests also stay south to have free
access to Jesrusalem and the Temple.
so now, you have a nation called
"Judah" which is populated by
tribes other than Judah-ites.
anyway, the Northern Israel keeps Baal-ing
and YHWH sends the Assyrians to cart them off.
a remnant of each tribe stays south and
the rest are all carted off in to obscurity.
anyway, Judah is now a nation
-and- one specific tribe.
so now, anyone living in Judah
is by default, a "Judah-ite"
and so, a Levite and a Benjamin-ite
and any of the remnant of Israel who
live in Judah are now, defacto "jews"
by the time of the return from Babylon,
much tribal integrity is lost and
all are called "Y'hudim"
not because they became members of
the -tribe- of Judah, but because
they lived in the -nation- of Judah.
which is funny in that Paul says he is
of the tribe of Benjamin, but refers
to himself as a "Jew"
but after Babylon, the actual
Judah-ites began to exert more
dominant role in Temple duties
than was granted under Sinai.
and -this- is the beginning
of so-called "Judah-ism"
anyway, there was an infusion of
Babylonian mysticism and later Persian
philosophies and later pan-Hellenism
and much later Rome, into this "religion"
which the Judah-ites had instituted
after they seized major control
of the Temple.
and there were people all along
who vehemently disagreed with
this influx of "alien" idea
strains into Temple worship.
and in Jesus' day, the Temple was
practically just a barter house for
the purchase of indulgences.
and people were sick
and sick people laid
right outside the
Temple entryway.
anyway, this is a sort of short version.
it is not correct to say that Abraham
was a "jew" or practicing "Judah-ism"
for the very simple fact that "Judah"
wasn't even born yet.
and it is not correct to say that
Moses handed the people "Judah-ism"
from Sinai because Sinai specifies
that priests shall come from
the tribe of Levi.
and Levi-ites and Judah-ites ain't identical.
there was not even a nation
called "Judah" when Moses lived.
etc.etc.etc.
"Judah-ism" pretty much begins
with the return from Babylon.
and no ark of the covenant was present.
no Mercy seat, no smoke
filled temple Holy of Holies.
and Antiochus IV Epiphanes spilled
pigs blood in the Temple and erected
a statue of Jupiter [or Zeus] in ca, 176 BC.
the Maccabbees drove out the greeks but
the religious Judah-ites in Jesus day
were so in bed with the Roman civil
authority that it wasn't funny.
and Jesus and Paul were not
erecting totems to demonic worship.
no.
sure, some 'looked' to the throwing off
of the yoke of the roman civil authority,
but -not- the Temple magistrates.
who were called "Jews"
albeit, not all "Jews" are "Jews"
"Judah-ite" "Y'hudim" "men of Judah"
in case it wasn't obvious, "Y'hudim"
is the word translated as "Judah-ite"
in early old testament stuff,
and then translated as "Jew"
beginning in Esther.
Esther, by the way, is where the first
"traditional" feast -not- ordained by
YHWH in Torah gets its foundation
that being "Purim"
commemorates Haman, a guy who
set out to kill all the jews.
so, is Purim evil?
no one has said this.
but you can begin to see how
a "religion" is beginning to
take form that does not trace
to Sinai, and, in some respects,
seeks to distance itself from Sinai.
like as if, Sinai is
the source of trouble.
some are simply dispersing in among
the greeks and if it's just a bunch
of words, then you can call light "light"
-and- darkness "light" and then claim
it's "light" outside at midnight.
and it's almost preferable to
not even mention the Name...YHWH
so, it's almost as if, after the Macabbees
people are staring into the sky and
pretending to make nice eyes for YHWH
in hopes that they can placate 'that Monster.'
only that Monster ain't a monster at all.
and David seemed to be the only one
who recognized the "tender mercies" of YHWH.
but he's also the one who pleads with
YHWH not to remove the Holy Spirit from him.
so, he knew better cuz he wasn't judging
what he didn't know and hadn't seen using
his sensual fleshly mind but judging spiritual
matters by and in the Spirit.
the valley of dry bones may walk again
but YHWH ain't your enemy.
YHWH is Savior.
-this- little story goes on and on and on.
Timothy Sutter
> here's some of that other bit;
> the valley of dry bones may walk again
> but YHWH ain't your enemy.
> YHWH is Savior.
> -this- little story goes on and on and on.
anyway, back to Jesus;
Jesus chided the 'religious leaders'
of his generation for holding to the
"traditions" of men and laying aside
the command of God.
Jesus said that the 'worship'
of these people was 'vain'
echos Isaiah
---
Matthew 15:1-9 [parallel mark 7]
Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from
Jerusalem came to Jesus, saying, "Why do Your
disciples transgress the tradition of the elders?
For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread."
He answered and said to them, "Why do you also
transgress the commandment of God because of
your tradition? For God commanded, saying,
"Honor your father and your mother'; and,
"He who curses father or mother, let him be
put to death.'
But you say, "Whoever says to his father or mother,
"Whatever profit you might have received from me
is a gift to God"-- then he need not honor his
father or mother.'
Thus you have made the commandment of God of no
effect by your tradition. Hypocrites! Well did
Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:
"These people draw near to Me with their mouth,
And honor Me with their lips, But their heart
is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men."'
Isaiah 29:13
Therefore YHWH said:
"Inasmuch as these people draw near with
their mouths And honor Me with their lips,
But have removed their hearts far from Me,
And their fear toward Me is taught
by the commandment of men,
---
me:
Jesus gave several examples where those
religious had set aside the law of God
in favor of their own traditions.
spoke of "Corban" [previous cite] also
the assertion that making vows by the
Temple meant nothing but that vows made
by the gold in the Temple was binding.
having a form of Godliness but bankrupt.
---
Matthew 23:14-20
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
For you devour widows' houses, and for a pretense
make long prayers. Therefore you will receive
greater condemnation.
"Woe to you, blind guides, who say, "Whoever swears
by the temple, it is nothing; but whoever swears
by the gold of the temple, he is obliged to perform it.'
Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gold
or the temple that sanctifies the gold? And, "Whoever
swears by the altar, it is nothing; but whoever swears
by the gift that is on it, he is obliged to perform it.'
Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gift or
the altar that sanctifies the gift? 20Therefore he
who swears by the altar, swears by it and by all
things on it.
---
me:
and now, considering Paul, these are human
traditions dressed up as a religion and
that's what Paul called "Judaism"
Paul equates Judaism with
"traditions of the fathers"
Paul says he was zealous for
the traditions of his fathers.
---
Galatians 1:13-14
For you have heard of my former conduct in Judaism,
how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure
and tried to destroy it. And I advanced in Judaism
beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation,
being more exceedingly zealous for the
traditions of my fathers.
---
me:
Paul claimed his former life
was as rubbish in light of Christ.
---
Philippians 3:1-11
Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. For me
to write the same things to you is not tedious, but
for you it is safe. Beware of dogs, beware of evil
workers, beware of the mutilation! For we are the
circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit,
rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in
the flesh, though I also might have confidence in
the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence
in the flesh, I more so: circumcised the eighth day,
of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin,
a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee;
concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning
the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
But what things were gain to me, these I have counted
loss for Christ. Yet indeed I also count all things
loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ
Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss
of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may
gain Christ and be found in Him, not having my own
righteousness, which is from the law, but that which
is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which
is from God by faith; that I may know Him and the
power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of
His sufferings, being conformed to His death,
if, by any means, I may attain to the
resurrection from the dead.
---
me:
Paul taught Jesus as Messiah
from Law and prophets
---
Acts 24:14
But this I confess to you, that according to the
Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God
of my fathers, believing all things which are written
in the Law and in the Prophets.
Acts 28:23
So when they had appointed him a day, many came
to him at his lodging, to whom he explained and
solemnly testified of the kingdom of God, persuading
them concerning Jesus from both the Law of Moses
and the Prophets, from morning till evening.
Acts 7:42
Then God turned and gave them up to worship the
host of heaven, as it is written in the book of
the Prophets: "Did you offer Me slaughtered animals
and sacrifices during forty years in the wilderness,
O house of Israel?
Acts 26:21-23
For these reasons the Jews seized me in
the temple and tried to kill me. Therefore,
having obtained help from God, to this day I
stand, witnessing both to small and great,
saying no other things than those which
the prophets and Moses said would come--
that the Christ would suffer, that He would
be the first to rise from the dead, and would
proclaim light to the Jewish people
and to the Gentiles."
---
me:
Paul does -not- call the law
and the prophets "Judaism"
Paul suggested that Christ set aside the
laws erected by the "fleshly mind" of man.
essentially, Paul as did Isaiah and Jesus
suggests that there was an element who took
it upon themselves to set themselves up as
the administrators of -a- 'law' in which they
used and abused The Law and command of God
to tie the people up in ropes and lift not
a finger to free them up from a burden
that -they- had layed upon them and
then even go so far as to blame God.
they offered a 'lisence' and
called it righteousness.
look very carefully at the next bit,
Paul is not denigrating the command
of God so much as he is denigrating
those who would assist in the enslavement
of people to the natural forces,
notice how he says, "puffed up
by his fleshly mind" in verse 18-19 below.
the command of God is -not-
the work of any "fleshly mind"
problem is that in an effort to establish
a righteousnes of their own they used the
command of God to enslave people and
-not- set them free.
neither entering into that freedom themselves.
but kindly do not ever again suggest
that christianity has borrowed -anything-
at all from "Judaism" as the two are as
far from each other as light is from dark.
the truth of the matter is that if
anything may be considered a "heresy"
it is Judaism, as, no longer are they
"chosen -by- God" but -they- have -chosen-
for themseleves a rightoeusness which
-they- have invented.
and "heresy" is a personal choice.
-we- don't -choose- how to be
righteous before God, no, God
chooses us in Christ and sets
aside and perfects us in God's
own craft.
---
Colossians 2:4-9
Now this I say lest anyone should deceive you with
persuasive words. For though I am absent in the flesh,
yet I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your
good order and the steadfastness of your faith
in Christ. As you therefore have received Christ
Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him, rooted and built
up in Him and established in the faith, as you
have been taught, abounding in it with thanksgiving.
Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy
and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men,
according to the basic principles of the world,
and not according to Christ. 9For in Him dwells
all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; 10and you
are complete in Him, who is the head of
all principality and power.
In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision
made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins
of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried
with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised
with Him through faith in the working of God, who
raised Him from the dead. And you, being dead in
your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh,
He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven
you all trespasses, having wiped out the handwriting
of requirements that was against us, which was contrary
to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having
nailed it to the cross. Having disarmed principalities
and powers, He made a public spectacle of them,
triumphing over them in it. So let no one judge you
in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or
a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow
of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.
Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight
in false humility and worship of angels, intruding
into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed
up by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the Head,
from whom all the body, nourished and knit together
by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase
that is from God.
Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic
principles of the world, why, as though living in the
world, do you subject yourselves to regulations--
"Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,"
which all concern things which perish with the
using--according to the commandments
and doctrines of men?
These things indeed have an appearance of
wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility,
and neglect of the body, but are of no value
against the indulgence of the flesh.
---
me:
be all this as it may,
Judaism is -not- the Sinai covenant
and even the prophets who spoke in YHWH's
name, see Isaiah above was of the impression
that -someone- had set Sinai aside, broken
it and invented a thing of their own.
and still, Sinai is -not- the
Promise of God to Abraham.
the just shall live by Faith.
but that Faith will not lead you
into lisence and a repudiation
of God's own way of life.
and, in addressing this, i focus -primarily-
upon the "Judaism" that was in practice during
the time of Jesus and the first apostles.
Jesus maintained that "not a jot nor
a tittle of the Law would be 'done away'
till all was accomplished"
neither Jesus nor John, Jesus' cousin,
commended the religious "Judaists" of
their day for having properly -kept-
the law, but instead castigated them for
-their- casting it aside and bearing no
real "fruit of repentance"
so, more to the point would be to suggest
that "Christianity" more resembled the
'religion' shown to Moses and the
Israelites in the desert.
in fact it is rather pointedly stated in
the letter to the Hebrews that Israel
received the same -message-, only did
not receive it in Faith.
even then, it was said that most simply
wouldn't honor God and an entire generation
fell dead in that same desert.
a desert where they saw the flame of
fire by night and the column of smoke
by day and drank the water from the
Rock and ate the manna that fell
from the sky.
so, there is no evidence that Abraham
was promised anything in accordance with
some Persian system of philosophy that would
not be codified in any real manner for some
800 years -after- Moses and well over
1000 years after Abraham.
with this in mind, it is preposturous
to suggest that Jesus came as fulfillment
of Promises made to Abraham and foretold
by Moses -and- bring an 'offshoot' of the
very sort of philosophical system he
came denouncing.
see, when Paul says "have no confidence
in the flesh" and then runs on telling
people about his familial bloodline:
and John said;
---
Matthew 3:8-10
Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.
And do not think you can say to yourselves,
'We have Abraham as our father.' I tell you
that out of these stones God can raise up
children for Abraham.
The ax is already at the root of the trees,
and every tree that does not produce good
fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire
---
me:
there was a general 'understanding' going
around among those people that 'salvation'
was a birthright.
and Paul is saying;
"no, you are not born into salvation"
salvation is "of the jews" inasmuch
as they carried the oracles of
God with them. sad to say, by
and large, they rejected these
same pronouncements.
and Jesus had already said that you
had to be born of the Spirit, in essence
born a second time, to -be- considered
a Child of God.
so, they're just sayimg that
you can't lay back and say;
"i'm -born- to the purple and therefore
i can call myself "of God" even of my
behaviors don't merit such an identification."
a problem also experienced among
others who called themselves "Christian"
-they- became of the impression that God
had simply transferred the misunderstood
'birthright' of salvation to another people.
and such was not and never the case.
there never was any "birthright of salvation"
only that Jesus, the Savior, would
arise from the seed of Abraham.
with a Seed that God would provide
to bless all the nations
of the earth.
for salvation and the second birth in the Spirit
God sees no distinction between Jew
nor Greek male nor female nor any of
the other assorted human -physical- distinctions.
and this is already stated rather
plainly within the defining texts.
there's probably some more to add to this bit.
Timothy Sutter
before i add any other bits,
one of the teeny weeny little details is that
for all practical purposes, "Northern Israel"
the part that was exiled and lived
and essentially forgot who they were,
became as "gentiles"
you know the ones;
The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up
Zombies
but YHWH still knew who they were and where they were.
and -that- fits in to the new testament.
but even some "jews" had wandered in to "hellenism"
and quite possibly had stopped circumcising and were practically
"greeks"
and the "jews" knew this, and that's part
of why they were very mad at Paul
because Paul was finding -them- and some
confusion broke out about circumcision again.
but did you know that there are people out there
that are discovering "Israelte" memorabilia
-in- ancient greek places?
it's all very strange.
sure, you can -say- it's all ONE thing now under Christ,
but, the ancient thingamahjigs are still out there...
and you talk about "cryptic"
it -is- hard to tell who's who without a program...
you can -say- it doesn't matter,
but the dynamics are still at play.
Timothy Sutter
as a terminological backgraound concerning
BaaL and Astarte a "Baal" means essentially
to rule over and dominate, and Ashtaroth
means literally "star" and comes from this
root word "ashar" which basically means "riches"
the false idols of domination/subjugation
and glorified wealth.
-these- were "evils" in the sight of YHWH.
and YHWH suggested that these false "idols/gods"
be tossed completely from Israel's midst, but
Israel didn't do that, they habitually were
enslaved to these two.
now look at this;
---
Judges 4:4-5
Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth,
was judging Israel at that time. And she would
sit under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah
and Bethel in the mountains of Ephraim. And the
children of Israel came up to her for judgment.
---
this Deborah is the lawgiver
like Moses among the Israelites.
-that's- what a judge is.
one who decides cases and grievances
and administers justice. basically
like the president at that time.
and this in the days when women were barely
above the status of chattle/property in every
other nation on earth.
and Deborah is almost like
the president is in the USA.
so, don't maintain that YHWH sanctified
the "subjugation" of women or anyone
else for that matter.
this is exactly the reverse.
and, before anyone pops up and puffs out their chests
and claims this as some source of national "pride" that
they come from a "tradition" where women are treated
all nice and people are considered equals and stuff,
no, because this is exactly what
the Israelites did not do.
they did not drive these evils from their midst and
they still, to this very day, hold to these false idols
as if they were their true god and cast aside YHWH
as if YHWH, the True and Living God, was a
loathesome thing to be despised.
these 'evils' being this bit;
---
Judges 2:11-13
And the children of Israel did evil
in the sight of YHWH, and served Baalim:
And they forsook YHWH God of their fathers,
which brought them out of the land of Egypt,
and followed other gods, of the gods of the
people that were round about them, and bowed
themselves unto them, and provoked YHWH to anger.
And they forsook YHWH, and served Baal and Ashtaroth.
---
see. it's funny that when Israel did
"evil" in the sight of YHWH what they
were doing was following after the
_false_ "gods" of subjugation
and adoration of riches.
---
Judges 2:2-3
And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants
of this land; ye shall throw down their altars: but
ye have not obeyed my voice: why have ye done this?
Wherefore I also said, I will not drive them out
from before you; but they shall be as thorns in your
sides, and their gods shall be a snare unto you.
---
anyway, the long and short of this is that it is
_exactly_ -false- to accuse YHWH of being the one
who incites "subjugation" and "adoration of riches"
among the people when YHWH considered these
very things to be "evils"
YHWH was -never- the slave driver.
-that- my dear dear chums is a very -human-
evil lifted up to a level of worship
among -you- all.
and evils YHWH suggested that -you-
drive utterly from -your- own midst.
i have some more along these lines.
like Paul said;
"Their god is their belly"
and the funny thing is, 'belly'
is another name for BaaL.
enslaved to your own body...
etc.
Timothy Sutter
and also this, without drowning
the place in scripture quotes,
i just want to mention the camel
and the eye of a needle bit;
long story short;
first off, this young rich guy
walked up to Jesus and asked
him what he must do to have
eternal life.
and Jesus said, "you know the commands"
don't lie don't cheat don't steal
don't do murder blah ...blah...blah.
and the guy said;
"i've done all these what more must i do?"
and Jesus said;
"give it all away"
and the young rich guy walked
away sadfaced because Jesus
suggested he give all his
money away.
and Jesus said,
"it is more difficult for a
man of great riches to enter
in to the kingdom of heaven
than for a camel to pass thru
a very tight squeeze."
and his 'disciples' were
dumbfounded and said;
_Huh?_ then -who- _can_ be saved?
why were they dumbfounded?
because they were being taught
that wealth and riches was a
sign of favor by God.
which is not altogether false because
Abraham was promised great material
wealth as a blessing from God.
-but- the 'favored class' had stacked the deck.
and -they- could dictate just -who-
was 'favored by God'
and, of course, they could convince
you that if you didn't get blessed
with riches, that you were not favored
by God and that it was -your- fault
that harm illness and blight
should befall you.
and so, people became enslaved to
the dictates of this favored class.
a favored class who was worshipping
at the altar of baal and astarte
-while- in the Temple of YHWH.
but i'm sure i ran on before about
how baal and astarte represent an
enslavement to the existing conditions.
etc.etc.etc.
so, for one thing,
Jesus is not saying that having and
enjoying some milk and honey is evil,
but he is saying that when you go so far
as to convince yourself that -you- -invented-
gold and silver and oil and mint and cummin
and that -you- are the arbiter
of who sees finer days, you err.
and this error becomes so
impervious to dissolution,
that you find yourself so ensnared in the
absolute -fear- of losing what -you- have
convinced yourself is your -salvation- from
the cold cruel elements, that you simply
cannot set yourself free from what amounts
to a self imposed slavery where the
slavemaster -must- keep his foot on
the heads of his slaves.
and your 'good' deeds have the
rank stench of an oily rag.
and you die in your estrangement
from the Almighty, who alone
possesses Life.
among other things.
wealth is not the evil,
pretending that wealth makes you
God is a despicable enterprise.
God is not a paranoid fiend.
but the fear of losing your safety
net is one tremendous source of paranoia.
isn't it?
> and so, people became enslaved to
> the dictates of this favored class.
> a favored class who was worshipping
> at the altar of baal and astarte
> -while- in the Temple of YHWH.
and so, when you look in to it,
-this- is part of the enslavement
that Jesus' completed work set the
people free from.
-not- an enslavement to the law and
the evil dictates of a despotic _GOD_
but an enslavement to a favored class
of people who were using the Temple
and magisterial authority to basically
have their own way on top of people's backs.
they -used- a licentious form of 'indulgence'
to sell people the right to walk contrary to God,
and then found the people at fault when they walked
contrary to the dictates of that same favored class.
but thru Christ, -you- can and must work out
your -own- salvation in fear and trembling,
as there is no such payment to be made
outside of the payment Christ has
already accomplished.
etc.
> they -used- a licentious form of 'indulgence'
> to sell people the right to walk contrary to God,
> and then found the people at fault when they walked
> contrary to the dictates of that same favored class.
not that anyone anywhere can sit there and say;
"the gubberment made me beat my kids
and stab my neighbor in the back"
cuz that ain't gunna go over
with the big G O D anyway
if your teeth are set on edge
it is because -you- ate unripened
grapes and drank vinegar.
not like anybody had to twist your arms
so much to get you to eat that either.
the gubberment may get called
to a higher judgement and
reckoned insolvent,
but -you- still fall into a very deep grave
from which you will not find extraction.
with no fingers left to use for pointing.
> but thru Christ, -you- can and must work out
> your -own- salvation in fear and trembling,
> as there is no such payment to be made
> outside of the payment Christ has
> already accomplished.
> but -you- still fall into a very deep grave
> from which you will not find extraction.
> with no fingers left to use for pointing.
what'll -you- do if the grinch
steals christmas and you don't
get your special little toy?
have a hissy fit and throw rocks
from glass houses or sing your
little songs cuz you -really-
do feel all cozy on the inside?
somebody somewhere is bankin'
on you havin' a hissy fit.
cuz you're an empty shell and they'll
beat -you- over the head like a pińata
fulla Ananias' and Sapphira's hold-outs.
Timothy Sutter
> fulla Ananias' and Sapphira's hold-outs.
i'll stop for now...
but this "acceptable year of the Lord" -being- 28 a.d.
seems like a "retro-fitting" akin
to a "bible code" type of game
"let's fit -this- line to -this- date"
and we can do this by force fitting
any number of years we need to accomplish it.
it doesn't really do good bad and is rather somewhat indifferent.
the bible code never actually 'predicts' anything
it looks at past events
searches for words in a scatter of hebrew letters
and says "VIOLA"
"the -bible- predicted it, because the bible
was written out -before- this event took place"
retro-fitting...
tell me how it's not...
Timothy Sutter
> it looks at past events
> searches for words in a scatter of hebrew letters
> and says "VIOLA"
> "the -bible- predicted it, because the bible
> was written out -before- this event took place"
i'm sure i mentiooned somewhere how you
could 'test' this bible code;
yu take 10 random scatterings of hebrew
characters all the same size as Torah
and play your little game with all
ten and if Torah gets more hits, ...
it -still- is a "retro-fitting"
> retro-fitting...
> tell me how it's not...
why should i care that Jesus was alive in 28 a.d.
and we can construe this to be "predicted" by Daniel?
does -this- increase one's Faith?
or is it a 'lure' for "jews"?
good, go lure more jews
Jesus is the messiah and they aught to know it....
i mean, it should be as obvious as the nose on their face...
don't worry, some of my best friends are jews.
Paul was a jew, Jesus was a jew,
TODAY if you should hear his voice
harden -not- your heart as in the rebellion...
yeah yeah yeah,
man's life is spent in =FUTILITY=
speaking of speaking to jaspar brick walls...
look it up, it's in the bible...
Timothy Sutter
==========
The 70th week is the week when Jesus confirms the covenant.
It began in 28 AD.
Beginning with the decree of Cyrus, the first two sections of the 70
weeks work out correctly to 28 AD, when the first 7 weeks are 49 leap
years having an extra month. Seven weeks of leap years spans 133
years. The second section is 62 x 7 = 434 years, and together that is
567 years, the time from the decree of Cyrus in 538 BC, to the
beginning of the ministry of Jesus in 28 AD.
=========
=========
A period of 7,000 days can be used as the unit
for 'sevens' in the first part, giving 49,000 days,
about 133 years or 7 periods of 19 years, for
the first 7 weeks. The 19-year period is a
kind of "week", because there are
7 extra months every 19 years.
What about the first part of the prophecy, consisting of 7 "weeks?"
If the above dates are correct, these might be periods of 7,000 days,
or about 19 years; 7 of these periods would be 49,000 days, or about
133 years. Counting back from the year 407 BC, takes us to 540 BC.
In the sabbatical cycle which began in this year, Daniel received
the vision of the 70 weeks, and Cyrus made the decree to rebuild
Jerusalem, from which the 70 weeks are counted. The date of this
decree is usually given as 538 BC.
==========
retro-fitting
=meaning=
if you were in -Daniel's- day looking forward
and you had 7 weeks and 62 weeks to work with,
that chances that you'd -predict- 28 a.d.
by suggesting 133 years for the first seven weeks
and 434 years for the second 62 weeks are not very high...
?
just out of curiosity,
is there any ancient 'scholar' who did predict
28 a.d. as the coming of messiah based on Daniel?
it looks as if you're trying to fit together
538 b.c. with some date near 30 a.d. [~568 years]
calling 568 years = 69 weeks
of course, 69 x 7 = 483 days
so, somehow you have to rig 69 weeks to = 568 years
and you do this by splitting it into one
7 week period which somehow = 133 years
and one 62 week period which = 434
in a straight day for year cryptic.
if you weren't shooting for 568 years or thereabouts,
you may not pick 7000 days out of a hat like that.
Timothy Sutter
> retro-fitting
> =meaning=
> if you were in -Daniel's- day looking forward
> and you had 7 weeks and 62 weeks to work with,
> that chances that you'd -predict- 28 a.d.
> by suggesting 133 years for the first seven weeks
> and 434 years for the second 62 weeks are not very high...
> ?
> just out of curiosity,
> is there any ancient 'scholar' who did predict
> 28 a.d. as the coming of messiah based on Daniel?
> it looks as if you're trying to fit together
> 538 b.c. with some date near 30 a.d. [~568 years]
> calling 568 years = 69 weeks
> of course, 69 x 7 = 483 days
> so, somehow you have to rig 69 weeks to = 568 years
> and you do this by splitting it into one
> 7 week period which somehow = 133 years
> and one 62 week period which = 434
> in a straight day for year cryptic.
> if you weren't shooting for 568 years or thereabouts,
> you may not pick 7000 days out of a hat like that.
see, there's a biblical precedent for using a day
for a year in Ezekiel's 390 days for each year
and the wanderings in the desert of 40 years for 40 days.
this accounts for the 62 x 7 = 434 part.
but, where is the biblical precedant
for 1000 days for one day? [7000 day week]
you say, the first 7 weeks is 49,000 days, which,
when divided by about =366= days gives you 133 years.
because 7 x 390 = 2730
126 x 360 = 45360
48090 days and so,
you're off by 10 days.
so, it's not an even cryptic.
no longer using the 360 day year and ....
where's the biblical precedant?
what does it have to do with sabbatical
years as described in leviticus 25?
where is 1000 days for a day used?
i've seen a 1000 years is like a day
but not, a 1000 days is like a day.
no compute...
Timothy Sutter
> i've seen a 1000 years is like a day
> but not, a 1000 days is like a day.
==
Psalms 84:10
For a day in thy courts is better than a thousand.
I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God,
than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.
==
this is as close as you may get, and it's backwards...
there's only one instance and it's not exactly a cryptic.
and/but, it still may not lead someone in Daniel's day
to predict 28 a.d. as the time of Christ.
or even in Caesar's day.
Timothy Sutter
> > i've seen a 1000 years is like a day
> > but not, a 1000 days is like a day.
> ==
> Psalms 84:10
>
> For a day in thy courts is better than a thousand.
> I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God,
> than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.
> ==
> this is as close as you may get, and it's backwards...
> there's only one instance and it's not exactly a cryptic.
it doesn't say; "a day is -as- a thousand days"
it says; "a day is -better- than a thousand."
or, a day is "more pleasing" than a thousand...
so, it would be a stretch...
i still call it retro-fitting...
like you need my permission...
Timothy Sutter
> > Psalms 84:10
> >
> > For a day in thy courts is better than a thousand.
> > I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God,
> > than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.
> > ==
anyway, if you want to stretch it, i dug that up.
still a retro-fit...
-now-, i'm done...carry on
Ike E 2/1/11
news:4D558B...@mail.com...
>> it -still- is a "retro-fitting"
>
>
> ==========
> The 70th week is the week when Jesus confirms the covenant.
Nonsense.
Daniel's prophecy was about the events in Israel from the destruction of the
first temple to the end of the Maccabean Revolt.
Antiochus IV Epiphanes [figure for "antichrist"] "confirmed" the "covenant"
he had made with the traitorous priest, Jason [figure for "false prophet"]
when Antiochus re-installed him after Menelaus had suceded him.
The "70th week" was fulfilled as follows.
167 Antiochus attacks Jerusalem
166 Mattathias dies; his son, Judas [figure for "Messiah"] leads the revolt.
164 Temple cleansed.
160 Jews defeat the Seleucids, prophecy over.
Jesus didn't have anything to do with the first iteration of Daniel; that's
a completely separate issue.
Jesus even CONFIRMED the first iteration by observing Hanukah.
Where you people get the notion that the events contemporary to Daniel
directly connect to Jesus Christ when Jesus Himself demonstrated they didn't
is beyond me; but this whole "missing week" theory is bullshit.
Ike E 2/1/11
rambling, lost diatribe, Tim.
Ike
Timothy Sutter
> Timothy Sutter wrote..
> >> it -still- is a "retro-fitting"
> > ==========
> > The 70th week is the week when Jesus confirms the covenant.
> Nonsense.
um, Ike is it?
this statement;
"The 70th week is the week when Jesus confirms the covenant."
is what "Doug" says in the very first post of this thread.
One to which you have already replied.
I'm the one that says "Doug's" cryptic is "retro-fitting"
i'm not going to chastize you for
not paying attention to who is saying what,
because i real;ize that attributions have
been left out in this post,
but, just so you know, i did not say;
"The 70th week is the week when Jesus confirms the covenant."
"Doug" did.
I may look at what -you- say, if i feel like it.
but not at this moment.
Timothy Sutter
i wouldn't call it that.
i did take the time to actually look at "Doug's" bit.
if you consider me a "fool" you may certainly zone me out.
but i was addressing the topic of the post
and not "Doug's" personality.
Ike E 2/1/11
> Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
>
>> Timothy Sutter wrote..
>
>> >> it -still- is a "retro-fitting"
>
>
>> > ==========
>> > The 70th week is the week when Jesus confirms the covenant.
>
>> Nonsense.
>
>
> um, Ike is it?
uh, yeah.
Daniel was talking about the "antichrist" figure in his story, which was
Antiochus IV Epiphanes, not the "Messiah" figure, Judas Maccabeus.
The last week of the first iteration of Daniel.
167 BC Antiochus IV Epiphanes defiles the temple, commits the first
"abomination of desolation."
166 BC Mattathias died; Judas Maccabeus raises the revolt against the
Seleucids.
164 BC The Maccabeans regain control of the Temple and cleanse it,
commemorated at Hanukah, which Jesus observed.
160 BC The Jews defeat the Seleucids, but Judas Maccabeus dies in battle
just before the day of victory.
There is no "70th week" without the first sixty-nine; and the same will be
true in the End of the Age.
<snip>
Doug
> divorce, Whom I have put away? Or which of My creditors
> is it to whom I have sold you? For your iniquities you
> have sold yourselves, And for your transgressions
> your mother has been put away.
> ==
>
> and Judah has -never- left, but still
>
> carry the oracles of God.
>
>
> just as Paul explained.
>
>
> even -if- at times,
>
> ==
> Jeremiah 3:8
> Then I saw that for all the causes for which backsliding
> Israel had committed adultery, I had put her away and
> given her a certificate of divorce; yet her treacherous
> sister Judah did not fear, but went and played the harlot also.
> =
> Jeremiah 3:11
> ==
>
> a predicted loss
>
> followed by a reinstatement of the Promises.
>
> ==
> Jeremiah 32:41-43
>
> Yes, I will rejoice over them to do them good,
> and I will assuredly plant them in this land, with
> YHWH: �Just as I have brought all this great
> calamity on this people, so I will bring on them
> all the good that I have promised them. And
> fields will be bought in this land of which you
> it has been given into the hand of the Chaldeans.�
> ==
>
> ==
> Jeremiah 33
>
> �Behold, the days are coming,� says YHWH,
> �that I will perform that good thing which I have
> promised to the house of Israel and to the house of Judah:
> up to David A Branch of righteousness; He shall execute
> judgment and righteousness in the earth. In those
> days Judah will be saved, And Jerusalem will dwell safely.
> And this is the name by which she will be called:
>
>
> �For thus says YHWH: �David shall never lack
> a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel;
> nor shall the priests, the Levites, lack a man
> to offer burnt offerings before Me, to kindle
>
> And the word of YHWH came to Jeremiah, saying,
> with the day and My covenant with the night, so that
> there will not be day and night in their season,
> then My covenant may also be broken with David My servant,
> so that he shall not have a son to reign on his throne,
> and with the Levites, the priests, My ministers.
> As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, nor the sand
> of the sea measured, so will I multiply the descendants
> Moreover the word of YHWH came to Jeremiah, saying,
> �The two families which YHWH has chosen, He has also
> cast them off�? Thus they have despised My people, as
> if they should no more be a nation before them.
> with day and night, and if I have not appointed
> the ordinances of heaven and earth, then I will
> cast away the descendants of Jacob and David My servant,
> so that I will not take any of his descendants to
> be rulers over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac,
> and Jacob. For I will cause their captives
> ===
Isaiah said Jerusalem and Zion would be raised up to the top of the
mountains, above the hills. [Isa. 2:1-3] We can see that this must
have occurred when Jesus ascended to heaven. In the New Testament
Jerusalem is in heaven, and is called "the heavenly Jerusalem," and
the saints are "raised up together," and "sit together in heavenly
places in Christ Jesus," Paul said.
Ephesians 2:4-6
But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with
Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly
places in Christ Jesus:
<snip>
>
>>> so, i'm not arguing against your attempt at
>>> pinpointing 28 a.d. as the acceptable year
>>> of -salvation-
>
>>> but, i do see a -relevance- in God remembering
>>> the =physical= aspects of the covenant with Abraham
>>> Isaac and Jacob which were =unconditional= and everlasting.
>
>> The promised land, in the New Testament, is not the earthly Canaan:
>> "But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore
>> God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for
>> them a city." [Hebrews 11:16]
>
>
> clearly there is a here and now
> physical aspect as well;
Of course we all want to be blessed here and now.
Below are some comments by F.B. Meyer (1847-1929), Baptist pastor and
evangelist in England, about the promised land, which hew viewed as a
type of Christians obtaining spiritual promises, and victory over the
enemy.
<quote>
The land is Christ. Canaan is Christ. He is the Land of Promise. Those
mountains are the mountains of His strength. Those valleys are His
humility. Those springs are His joy. Those rivers are His Holy Spirit
Those treasures are His wealth. That land--look at it! It is all
yours. It is Christ in you, and you in Christ--that is Paradise.
Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon - Joshua 1:3
All the land was given, but every inch of it had to be claimed. Israel
had to put her foot down upon the land, whether wilderness or Lebanon,
plain or hill, and say, "This is mine by the gift of God." And as the
right was asserted, God made it good. The land had been covenanted to
them through Abraham, but it awaited conquest and appropriation by the
Israelites. No man was able to stand with them in the lot of their
inheritance.
So Joshua took the whole land, and Joshua gave it - Joshua 11:23
This is almost an exact parallel of the words addressed by Peter to
the crowds on the day of Pentecost: "Having received of the Father the
promise of the Holy Ghost, He hath shed forth this." In His
representative capacity, as the Head of His Church, and the Forerunner
of the great host of the redeemed, it was necessary that Jesus should
first receive from God the Father all that spiritual inheritance which
He was to communicate to those who should afterward believe in His
name: and having received, He is prepared to give. "Ye shall receive
power, when the Holy Ghost is come upon you."
The whole land of spiritual blessing is now in the hand of Jesus. The
prince of this world is cast out. The power of the Anakim is broken.
The seven nations of Canaan and all the power of the enemy is under
His feet. His are the rivers of the fullness of the Holy Ghost, and
His the mountains of fellowship; His the slopes where the vines of
Eshcol ripen and the corn of Canaan goldens; His the green pastures
and the still waters of communion, as well as the rocky defile of
death. Whatever, then, you desire, you must seek at His hand, in whom
it is vested for thee, and me, and every believer: and He will give it.
The land had rest from war. Cease, then, from strife. You will not win
by sore wrestling. The lame take the prey. Learn to take; let Him
cause you to inherit; let Him give according to the division allotted
you in the providence and determination of God. "It shall be given to
those for whom it is prepared." "They that receive the abundance of
grace shall reign."
There remaineth yet very much land to be possessed - Joshua 13:1
This is true in many directions:- Of the Bible. - How many pages of
our Bibles are unpossessed! We have not underlined any verses in them,
or put any marks in the margin to indicate that God has spoken through
them to our souls. They are as clean as when they came from the
printers. It is well sometimes to consider this, and to resolve to
master some unfamiliar portions of God's Word, believing that no word
of God is devoid of power. To many believers the Bible, which God
intended for their possession, is yet an unexplored continent.
Of Doctrinal Truth. - Doctrine groups texts, and compares them.
Doctrine is to isolated texts what natural laws are to particular
facts. We should know the doctrines of the Bible. We should understand
what is meant by Predestination; the unction of the Holy Ghost; and
the Second Advent. How much unoccupied land there is here, which, if
brought under cultivation, would yield grapes, and corn, and other
produce for the refreshment and strength of the soul!
Of Spiritual Experience. - Talk with some deeply-taught saint, and you
will see how little you have traversed of the good land beyond the
Jordan, or know of its blessed extent. To know the length, and
breadth, and depth, and height, of the love of Christ seems given to
but few; but it need not be. There is no favoritism in the Kingdom
which excludes some poor souls from the richer portions, and shuts
them up to barrenness and a northern aspect. Rise, go through the land
in the length and breadth of it; it is all yours; the gift of God in
Jesus Christ; claim and possess it.
</quote>
http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/articles/index.php?view=article&aid=18540
>
> ==
> Matthew 6
>
> �Therefore do not worry, saying, �What shall we eat?�
> or �What shall we drink?� or �What shall we wear?�
> 32 For after all these things the Gentiles seek.
> For your heavenly Father knows that you need all
> these things. But seek first the kingdom of God
> and His righteousness, and all these things shall
> be added to you.
> ==
>
> see, seek the kingdom and his righteousness,
> and then, needful tings will be added.
<snip>
>
>> [Revelation 21:17] And for a natural wall, three numbers are needed to
>> describe it; length, width, and height. Only one dimension is
>> mentioned for the wall of the holy city; 144 cubits. The wall is
>> symbolic; it represents "salvation." Isaiah said, "Violence shall no
>> more be heard in thy land, wasting nor destruction within thy borders;
>> but thou shalt call thy walls Salvation, and thy gates Praise."
>> [Isaiah 60:18]
>
>
>
> sure is funny how the children of Israel get
> special mention and are even named on the gates.
Yes, the wall is called "salvation" and the angels at the gates have
the names of the 12 tribes written on them. Clearly the meaning is
that entering the heavenly Jerusalem is becoming part of the Israel of
God. This is why Paul said, "For we are the circumcision, which
worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no
confidence in the flesh." [Philippians 3:3]
<snip>
> i don't want this post to get so large,,,
>
> so i have -tried- to be brief...
As for the 12 posts that follow, I am wondering what the punch-line
is. The style reminds me of what we used to call a "shaggy dog story."
"...a shaggy dog story is an extremely long-winded tale featuring
extensive narration of typically irrelevant incidents, usually
resulting in a pointless or absurd punchline."
--
Doug
Timothy Sutter
> > i don't want this post to get so large,,,
> > so i have -tried- to be brief...
Doug wrote:
> As for the 12 posts that follow, I am wondering what the punch-line
> is. The style reminds me of what we used to call a "shaggy dog story."
retro-fitting
=meaning=
if you were in -Daniel's- day looking forward
and you had 7 weeks and 62 weeks to work with,
that chances that you'd -predict- 28 a.d.
by suggesting 133 years for the first seven weeks
and 434 years for the second 62 weeks are not very high...
?
just out of curiosity,
is there any ancient 'scholar' who did predict
28 a.d. as the coming of messiah based on Daniel?
Doug
I don't know if any did so or not. But we don't know everything that
they thought in antiquity, do we?
And, we do know John the Baptist must have had some idea when the
Messiah was to arrive.
--
Doug
Timothy Sutter
> >>> i don't want this post to get so large,,,
> >>> so i have -tried- to be brief...
> > Doug wrote:
> >> As for the 12 posts that follow, I am wondering what the punch-line
> >> is. The style reminds me of what we used to call a "shaggy dog story."
> Timothy Sutter wrote:
> > retro-fitting
> > =meaning=
> > if you were in -Daniel's- day looking forward
> > and you had 7 weeks and 62 weeks to work with,
> > that chances that you'd -predict- 28 a.d.
> > by suggesting 133 years for the first seven weeks
> > and 434 years for the second 62 weeks are not very high...
> > ?
> > just out of curiosity,
> > is there any ancient 'scholar' who did predict
> > 28 a.d. as the coming of messiah based on Daniel?
Doug wrote:
> I don't know if any did so or not. But we don't know everything that
> they thought in antiquity, do we?
the Magi appeared because of star charts and not cryptic numerics,
but, apparently, none of the evangelists saw fit to make mention
of Daniel's prophecy in the gospels with respect to something like this;
"and this fulfills what the prophet Daniel hath said,
that the Messiah would appear 538 years hence
from the rebuilding of the Temple"
after all, Jesus -does- mention Daniel with
respect to this "abomination of desolation"
but he mentions no date, and neither does he say;
"Daniel hath predicted the acceptable day of YHWH
and -I- am here in your presence in fulfillment
of Daniel's cryptic numerics"
and, as you mention, Jesus does point at Isaiah,
and say that he is in the presence of people in the
synagogue fulfilling -that- passage.
why doesn't anyone in the Gospels mention
how Jesus fulfills Daniel's numerics?
> And, we do know John the Baptist must have had some idea when the
> Messiah was to arrive.
didn't John leap in the belly of his mommy
when the two mothers were in the same room?
it may be difficult to suggest that John was
plotting out cryptic numerics in the womb.
Timothy Sutter
> > it -still- is a "retro-fitting"
Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> Daniel was talking about the "antichrist" figure in his story,
> which was Antiochus IV Epiphanes, not the "Messiah" figure,
> Judas Maccabeus.
just a moment;
==
Daniel cites Jeremiah in 9:2
In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books
the number of the years, whereof the word of YHWH came
to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish
seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.
==
here are some statements from Jeremiah
concerning these seventy years that Daniel
is going on about;
==
Jeremiah 25:1
The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah,
n the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah
(which was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon),
<...>
Jeremiah 25:11-12
And this whole land shall be a desolation and an astonishment,
and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years.
�ｿｽThen it will come to pass, when seventy years are completed,
that I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation, the
land of the Chaldeans, for their iniquity,�ｿｽ says YHWH;
�ｿｽand I will make it a perpetual desolation.
<...>
Jeremiah 29:10
For thus says YHWH: After seventy years are completed at Babylon,
I will visit you and perform My good word toward you, and cause
you to return to this place.
==
and now, we look at Daniel 9:24-27
==
Daniel 9:24-29
�ｿｽSeventy weeks are determined
For your people and for your holy city,
To finish the transgression,
To make an end of sins,
To make reconciliation for iniquity,
To bring in everlasting righteousness,
To seal up vision and prophecy,
And to anoint the Holy Holy. <--see Ex 26:33***
�ｿｽKnow therefore and understand,
That from the going forth of the command
To restore and build Jerusalem
Until Messiah the Prince,
There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks;
The street shall be built again, and the wall,
Even in troublesome times.
�ｿｽAnd after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, <..>
And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.
Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;
But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end
to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations
shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation,
which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.�ｿｽ
==
now, as far as "iterations" are concerned,
doesn't it -look- like Jeremiah and Daniel
are considering the same "desolation" and
"reconcilliation" at first glance, at least?
seventy weeks and seventy years being somehow related somehow...
> The last week of the first iteration of Daniel.
> There is no "70th week" without the first sixty-nine;
> and the same will be true in the End of the Age.
so, you have this same sort of thing
happening again, and maybe even again?
Antiochus IV whom some decribe as "antichrist"
and....and some unknown figure
who has yet to be "revealed"
***note
==
Exodus 26:33
And thou shalt hang up the vail under the taches,
that thou mayest bring in thither within the vail
the ark of the testimony: and the vail shall
divide unto you between the holy place
and the Holy Holy. ["qodesh qodesh"]
==
Daniel says, "anoint the Holy Holy" "qodesh qodesh"
and Exodus describes the inner room
of the Temple as "qodesh qodesh"
one "iteration" of Daniel may very well
be about the Temple itself...
and sealing up the vision of -Jeremiah-
as "this" prophecy...and not necessarily, "all prophecy"
etc.
and.... etc.
Timothy Sutter
> and Exodus describes the inner room
just as a side remark...
in -some- respects, if you want to get all strung out on it,
-this- prophecy, and all the events surrounding it
-foreshadow-...the resurrection.
that Temple -was- destroyed and
a new one built in its place,
maybe even, in the "middle of the week"
and Jesus is up there saying;
"destroy -this- Temple, and in three days, raise it up"
and people are all muttering and murmuring to themselves;
"oh, how is he going to destroy this thing that
took 46 years to build and raise it up in 3 days?"
and, of course, he was speaking of his body.
and so, 'qodesh qodesh' may very well have
"dual" applications etc.
and now we're back to the nested little dolls again...
one inside the other inside the other inside the other...
Ike E 2/1/11
>> Timothy Sutter wrote..
>
>> > it -still- is a "retro-fitting"
>
>
> Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
>
>> Daniel was talking about the "antichrist" figure in his story,
>> which was Antiochus IV Epiphanes, not the "Messiah" figure,
>> Judas Maccabeus.
>
>
> just a moment;
>
>
> ==
> Daniel cites Jeremiah in 9:2
Which is irrelevant to you, since you have no idea how prophecy works to
begin with.
Tell me: If Jeremiah's prophecies were only about the future, why wasn't
Jeremiah stoned as a false prophet instead of having his prophecies
canonized by the Jews? And if Jeremiah was only about the past (which would
have led the Jews to canonize Jeremiah's prophecies), why was John quoting
them as if they had never been fulfilled at all in Revelation?
Answer: Jeremiah's prophecies were just as true about the past and the
present as they will be about the future--not in a single line (as the
Historicists say), or segments (as the Dispensationalists say), or in the
past (as the Preterists say), or only allegorically (as the Idealists say),
but in three distinct iterations.
(And I document dozens of examples, many straight from Jesus' mouth, in my
new book.)
> and now, we look at Daniel 9:24-27
OK, you have no idea how Daniel works, either, since you have no idea how
prophecy works.
Daniel "was" fulfilled in the events between the destruction of the first
Temple and the end of the Maccabean Revolt.
Daniel "is" fulfilled (backward) in the events from the time Pompey defiled
the second Temple until the end of the Simon bar Kochba Revolt.
Daniel "will be" fulfilled in the End of the Age, in relation to a third
Temple in Jerusalem yet to come that will be even worse than the past two.
(There's that Triunism thing again.)
<snippeth>
> now, as far as "iterations" are concerned,
"Iterations" are precisely how God said prophecy works.
"That which has been is now, and that which is to be has already become, and
God requires that which is past." Ecc 3:15
And in every single instance where Jesus prophesied, He did the same exact
thing, taking prophecies or events of the past and discussing them in
multiple contexts, using the "is now / is coming" dichotomy the same way
Ezekiel used the "an end / the end" dichotomy.
> doesn't it -look- like Jeremiah and Daniel
> are considering the same "desolation" and
> "reconcilliation" at first glance, at least?
Which one? The one that "was" (committed by Antiochus IV Epiphanes in the
first iteration), the one that "is" (committed by the Romans in the second
iteration), or the one that "is to come" (to be committed in the End of the
Age)?
See, you have to define WHICH iteration you're discussing, and in which
context, and in which mode, as all prophecies have three.
The horizontal axis = what was, and is, and is to come, as three distinct
iterations.
The perpendicular axis = literal, figurative, and/or spiritual meaning.
The vertical axis = thesis, generality, or antithesis.
One has to get these things straightened out before one can even begin to
discuss what prophecy means--when, how, and to whom.
> seventy weeks and seventy years being somehow related somehow...
Yep.
"That which is past is prologue."
That's how they related.
>> The last week of the first iteration of Daniel.
>> There is no "70th week" without the first sixty-nine;
>> and the same will be true in the End of the Age.
>
>
> so, you have this same sort of thing
> happening again, and maybe even again?
I don't have anything "happening" at all; I read and interpret prophecy
exactly the same way that Jesus and the prophets handled prophecy--Triunely.
> Antiochus IV whom some decribe as "antichrist"
Yes, Antiochus was the figure for "antichrist" in Daniel's era.
The Caesars of Rome--especially Domitian as a "resurrected" Nero--were the
figures for "antichrist" in John's era.
But both of these only prefigured the "antichrist" to come.
Get it?
The "antichrist" "was," "is," and is "yet to come," with the first two
figures foreshadowing the last (just like everything else in prophecy).
[snip the rest, as one has to know how prophecy works before one can discuss
what's prophesied]
Timothy Sutter
> >> > it -still- is a "retro-fitting"
> > Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> >
> >> Daniel was talking about the "antichrist" figure in his story,
> >> which was Antiochus IV Epiphanes, not the "Messiah" figure,
> >> Judas Maccabeus.
> Timothy Sutter wrote...
> > just a moment;
> > ==
> > Daniel cites Jeremiah in 9:2
> > and now, we look at Daniel 9:24-27
Daniel does cite Jeremiah and begins
to describe similar events.
> > doesn't it -look- like Jeremiah and Daniel
> > are considering the same "desolation" and
> > "reconcilliation" at first glance, at least?
Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> Which one?
Daniel and Jeremiah are contemporaries, and
that means they're alive at the same time.
They prophecy concerning Babylon.
Babylon waltzed in to Jerusalem and
basically destroyed the so-called
"first temple"
that successive events resemble prior events
is not really much of an issue.
that the entire "Image" speaks of succession
is not much of an issue. [Daniel 2]
they -call- Nebuchadnezzar the "Head of Gold"
they don't -call- him the -entire- Image.
etc.
Timothy Sutter
> they don't -call- him the -entire- Image.
what someone may want to look in to is how
YHWH may consider "treaties" and "compacts"
with "the nations" to be acts of "adultery"
etc.
i did a bit on BaaL as "pimp"
and Israel as "prostitute"
a while back.
i mean, in King James version,
the term "whore" is used
to describe the activities of Israel and Judah.
and one of the activities is that
they consider going to Egypt looking
for "protection" -from- Babylon
one of 'her' other "lovers" with whom 'she'
had been commiting adultery against YHWH
'her' 'husband'
many people reading these things immediately
think of sex as if -that- were the major issue
"ooh, PROSTITUTE, they said a word i understand"
but the issue is that YHWH God Almighty
is promising to be -in- the midst of Israel
and BE a loving husband
and instead, Israel is always running off
to the Empire and cozying up to a PIMP
and gets slapped around by -that- PIMP
and then cries and moans and seeks YHWH
and in some instances, actually -blames-
YHWH for being a battered wife
when it was the PIMP whom 'she' fled to
that was always battering 'her'
and YHWH simmering and saying;
"for years and years i extended my open arms to you"
"but, this time, my ears are plugged up to your plaints"
etc. should i say more....?
well, even these +=LIKENESSES=+
have underlying 'meanings'
and Hosea actually =marries=
a "woman of questionable virtue"
as the 'polite' folks like to say.
and that's what "pornography" means...
"i love that whore and i paid her price and married her"
and now she's wearing white linens,
which are the rigteous deeds of the Saints.
oh, it's a really funny story...
"porne" "graphein"
"the writings of a harlot"
and "harlot" has this connotation of "charity"
like i said, it's actually a very funny story...
but, YHWH is =not= a battering husband who beats his wife...
that is =such= a lie and a =slander=
the thing is, that,
in part, it's looking for the "temporal"
amenities and securities
and considering -that- to be your "salvation"
only to find out that that smack has
a kickback and bites you in the backside
and pulls you ever deeper into =misery=
and the gaping jaws of SHEOL won't let go
and crying out to teh empty wind doesn't -always-
demand a response unless actual -fruit- of repentance
is noticed in your outcry and inner heart.
cuz God is -not- a great big fool
that can be mocked perpetually
even -if-
God is a sucker for a good sob story...
etc.
there, chew on that for a while...
Timothy Sutter
and no, the bible is not "pornography"
YHWH is not a harlot...
and neither was Mary... even though
"mary" means "their rebellion"
and don't forget,
"though your sins be as scarlet..."
but "the husband" died
and with it, died something else...
the olde marriage contract....
etc?
Timothy Sutter
it's not always of grand consequence identifying the pimps
they bring you your crack on a silver platter...
and you suck it down like it was your life's blood
yeah yeah yeah, "crack" takes many forms...
it's the "temporal" enslavement that is at issue...
the important thing is The ONLY Savior...
and the REST
the TRUE REST
which that uneasy little crown doesn't seem to bring you...
etc...
rule of thumb...
don't call the only Savior your enemy...
talk about "best interest"
knows it has it...
not just some "dumb dog" who is
greedy for persoanl gain and
sleeps -with- the PIMP
"strange bedfellows" and all that stuff...
etc.
Timothy Sutter
> greedy for persoanl gain and
> sleeps -with- the PIMP
> "strange bedfellows" and all that stuff...
it does seem like this story is all
turned around backwards though,
to some people,
like some people would expect that
a bad husband runs around with prostitutes
but they have Israel/Judah as a 'wife'
running around after Pimps...
and they even call
Israel a peculiar sort of 'whore'
in that 'she' -pays- for services
but Israel is a nation of =men=
and -their- behavior is being likened
to an unfaithful -wife- who runs for
the protection of pimps.
but as i've mentioned, there are
deeper underlying messages in there.
"that YHWH wants to spoil your 'fun'"
"here, sign this peace treaty with the devil"
and then think it -strange- when the Temple is desecrated...
but it's like you -invite- the devil in to your house
and you sit there and -watch- as the devil rapes your children...
and then turn around and say;
"why has GOD done this to me?"
of course there are underlying themes there...
you can make it all personal
and you can make it all national...
the generalized outcome is basically the same.
your Temple is "desolate"
etc
Ike E 2/1/11
>>>> Timothy Sutter wrote..
>
>>>>> it -still- is a "retro-fitting"
>
>>> Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
Either fix your settings, or get a real newsgroup reader. You're totally
screwing up the posts.
>>>> Daniel was talking about the "antichrist" figure in his story,
>>>> which was Antiochus IV Epiphanes, not the "Messiah" figure,
>>>> Judas Maccabeus.
>
>
>>> Timothy Sutter wrote...
>
>>> just a moment;
>
>>> ==
>>> Daniel cites Jeremiah in 9:2
>>> and now, we look at Daniel 9:24-27
>
>> Daniel does cite Jeremiah and begins
>> to describe similar events.
No, Daniel describes the FULFILLMENT of those events; but there
were/are/will be three fulfillments--the one that "was," the one that "is,"
and the one that is "yet to come," each as distinct iterations, which is
precisely how Jesus handled prophecy, too.
>>> doesn't it -look- like Jeremiah and Daniel
>>> are considering the same "desolation" and
>>> "reconcilliation" at first glance, at least?
>
>
>> Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
>
>> Which one?
>
>
> Daniel and Jeremiah are contemporaries, and
> that means they're alive at the same time.
Hardly.
Jeremiah died in c. 580 BC, about seven years after the Babylonian captivity
started. Daniel came to the fore about that time. So, no, they were not
"contemporaries."
> They prophecy concerning Babylon.
As it "was," "is," and "is to come."
To Daniel, "Babylon" was the neo-Babylonian empire.
To John, "Babylon" was the Roman empire.
In the End of the Age, "Babylon" will be what is derived from the
prefigurations in the "was" and "is" to form the "is to come."
[snip the irrelevancy]
> that successive events resemble prior events
>
> is not really much of an issue.
FALSE. IT'S THE ENTIRE ISSUE.
When Jesus prophesied, He took singular prophecies and reinterpreted them in
MULTIPLE contexts using the "is now / is coming" dichotomy, just as Ezekiel
used the "an end / the end" dichotomy.
If you ignore how Jesus and the prophets prophesied, you'll get it wrong,
just like every other school of prophetic interpretation in history.
> that the entire "Image" speaks of succession
>
> is not much of an issue. [Daniel 2]
FALSE. Triunism is established in the "succession."
1) Antiochus IV Epiphanes established the "abomination of desolation" in the
"was, which prefaced...
2) The Roman committing the "abomination of desolation" in the "is," when
they set up their standards over the Temple Mount (just as Jesus had
prophesied), which prefaced...
3) The Abomination of Desolation that will be committed in the End of the
Age.
> they -call- Nebuchadnezzar the "Head of Gold"
Again, there is the "was, "is," and "is to come" of the prophecy.
In the first iteration, the figure represented...
1) Babylon
2) Medo-Persia
3) The Macedonians under Alexander
4) The Ptolemiac Empire of Egypt
5) The Seleucid Empire of Syria.
The "toe" that subjected three to combine the kingdoms was Antiochus III
Megas; the blasphemous "little horn" was Antiochus IV Epiphanes, and the
figure for "messiah" that smashed it all was Judas Maccabeus (in preface of
Jesus in the End of the Age).
END OF ROUND 1.
In the second iteration, the figure was spiritual, and represented the false
religious teachings that Jesus put down with the Word of Truth...
1) the head = undisciplined thought.
2) the arms = undisciplined service.
3) the torso = undisciplined desire.
4) the legs = undisciplined decision.
5) the feet = undisciplined belief, which Jesus smashed.
(At the end of Galatians, Paul turns the antithesis around into a thesis,
describing the disciplined Christian wearing the "armor" of a soldier.)
END OF ROUND 2.
The End of the Age will involved the combination of the two, as the
religious nations of the world rise up against Christian, because true
Christians won't go along with the globalists' agenda.
Ike E 2/1/11
[snip the pointless rambling]
> i mean, in King James version,
>
> the term "whore" is used
>
> to describe the activities of Israel and Judah.
That's in the Old Testament; in the New Testament, it describes apostate
churches.
When the two get together--the "Jews who say they are Jews, and are not, but
do lie" and false "Christians" who think they can mingle the Gospel of Jesus
Christ with other faiths--that's when the trouble will start.
[snip the rest of the rambling]
Ike E 2/1/11
own posts?
Ike
Timothy Sutter
> >>>>> it -still- is a "retro-fitting"
> >>> Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> >>>> Daniel was talking about the "antichrist" figure in his story,
> >>>> which was Antiochus IV Epiphanes, not the "Messiah" figure,
> >>>> Judas Maccabeus.
> >>> Timothy Sutter wrote...
> >>> just a moment;
> >>> ==
> >>> Daniel cites Jeremiah in 9:2
> >>> and now, we look at Daniel 9:24-27
> Timothy Sutter wrote
> >> Daniel does cite Jeremiah and begins
> >> to describe similar events.
Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> No, Daniel describes the FULFILLMENT of those events;
if, according to you, Daniel describes the FULFILLMENT
of events that Jeremiah described, then, they must be
talking about the same events.
> Timothy Sutter wrote
> >>> doesn't it -look- like Jeremiah and Daniel
> >>> are considering the same "desolation" and
> >>> "reconcilliation" at first glance, at least?
> >> Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> >> Which one?
> Timothy Sutter wrote
> > Daniel and Jeremiah are contemporaries, and
> > that means they're alive at the same time.
> Hardly.
they were alive in the same period.
> Timothy Sutter wrote
> > that successive events resemble prior events
> > is not really much of an issue.
Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> FALSE. IT'S THE ENTIRE ISSUE.
it's not an "issue" because it is not being questioned.
Timothy Sutter
> > i mean, in King James version,
> > the term "whore" is used
> > to describe the activities of Israel and Judah.
Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> That's in the Old Testament;
gee thanks...
Timothy Sutter
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 21:19:24 -0500
> > just a moment...
> stock at the pump
see, some will agree that gasoline prices
-behave- in the same manner as taxation.
the gas price is, more or less, arbitrarily set.
it could be 70 cents, and still profitable,
but it would undervalue teh commidity itself,
it could be 10 dollars a gallon but
this would cripple certain economies.
so, 'they're searching for this perect price
to set so that it corrctly values an
importatnt commodity.
important, and different.
so anyway,
inasmuch as teh pricing
can behave as taxation,
the pricing could also involve
the consumer and behave as
an investment.
so, or this one strange commodity,
the consumer is an investor.
and that's what they keep saying when
they say that they intend to use the
exhorbitant profits for 'exploration'
even if they already know where most of teh oil is.
so, yo uissue teh consumer of gasoline
a percentile stock holding at the pump.
and in this way, the consumer becomes involved.
no longer just "taxed" without any representation,
teh consumer
is not issued a form of stock sghare holding at the pump
which the consumer may trade and even
remit or redeem for some sort of immediate rebate.
or, keep it, and take a holding in the corporation
and maybe even get a vote on how the monies are spent.
this of course, would have to be
instituted by the oil companies themselves
as a 'proactive' self initiative
cuz, mosty people know that if you
place the oil in the hands of the gubberment,
the price will rise to 15 dollars a gallon.
and it is not a charity at all
-because- it already appears as if
the consumer is being -taxed-
to pay for 'future' oil pricing
sensitivities but only, without
any say in the matter at all.
meaning, teh consumers payment is already
behaving as an investment in future helath
of the oil companies would behave.
so, behaves -like- a tax
but also, behaves -like- an investment
only as of right now
the consumer is not -seeing- any sort of
investment scheduling in his or her
grubby little hands.
but if you place such a 'chit' in his or her,
the consumer/investor's hand
he and she will in all likelihood
shut up about gas prices
because he and or she
will be -involved-
in teh total outcome
and will therefore be 'empowered'
-and- it sort of places a self regulation in
the so-called 'volatility' of the commodity itself,
-and- the oil companies would be free to show
their assistance for hevay industry that is
heavility indebeted to oil pricing indices.
like, for instance, paint manufacturers could show
up front how they may benefit from hevy investment in oil
inasmuch as they use petroleaum
products to make their own products, etc.
stock at the pump,,,etc.
teh problem with "windfall profits tax"
is that it looks -punitive-
as if you are out to -punish-
the spark plugs of your engines.
when all you want is for the consumer
to have some sort of representation
for his or her -virtual- taxation.
and then you ask the Saudis to work
on aleviating poverty in the middle east, ect.
and nobody gets to say that the 'mullahs'
in iran are no better than the shah
inasmcu as they sit on piles of bread,
and still much poverty exists in iran.
etc. etc. etc.
see, some will agree that gasoline prices
-behave- in the same manner as taxation.
the gas price is, more or less, arbitrarily set.
it could be 70 cents, and still profitable,
but it would undervalue the commidity itself,
it could be 10 dollars a gallon but
this would cripple certain economies.
so, 'they're searching for this perect price
to set so that it correctly values an
important commodity.
important, and different.
so anyway,
inasmuch as the pricing
can behave as taxation,
the pricing could also involve
the consumer and behave as
an investment.
so, or this one strange commodity,
the consumer is an investor.
and that's what they keep saying when
they say that they intend to use the
exhorbitant profits for 'exploration'
even if they already know where most of the oil is.
so, you issue the consumer of gasoline
a percentile stock holding at the pump.
and in this way, the consumer becomes involved.
no longer just "taxed" without any representation,
the consumer is now issued a form
of stock share holding, at the pump
which the consumer may trade and even
remit or redeem for some sort of immediate rebate.
or, keep it, and take a holding in the corporation
and maybe even get a vote on how the monies are spent.
and dividends etc.
this of course, would have to be
instituted by the oil companies
themselves
as a 'proactive' self initiative
cuz, most people know that if you
place the oil in the hands of
the gubberment,
the price will rise to 15 dollars a gallon.
and it is not a charity at all
-because- it already appears as if
the consumer is being -taxed-
to pay for 'future' oil pricing
sensitivities but only, without
any say in the matter at all.
meaning, the consumers payment is already
-behaving- as an investment in future health
of the oil companies would behave.
so, behaves -like- a tax
but also, behaves -like- an investment
only as of right now
the consumer is not -seeing- any sort of
investment scheduling in his or her
grubby little hands.
but if you place such a 'chit' in his or her,
the consumer/investor's, hand
he and she will in all likelihood
shut up about gas prices
because he and or she
will be -involved-
in the total outcome
and will therefore be 'empowered'
-and- it sort of places a self regulation in
the so-called 'volatility' of the commodity itself,
-and- the oil companies would be free to show
their assistance for heavy industry that is
heavility indebted to oil pricing indices.
like, for instance, paint manufacturers could
show up front how they may benefit from
heavy investment in oil
inasmuch as they use petroleaum
products to make their own products, etc.
stock at the pump,,,etc.
the problem with a "windfall profits tax"
is that it looks -punitive-
as if you are out to -punish-
the spark plugs of your engines.
when all you want is for the consumer
to have some sort of representation
for his or her -virtual- taxation.
and then you ask the Saudis to work
on aleviating poverty in the middle east, etc.
and nobody gets to say that the 'mullahs'
in iran are no better than the shah
inasmcu as they sit on piles of bread,
and still much poverty exists in iran.
etc. etc. etc.
Timothy Sutter
of gasoline prices -as- taxation.
some of the details in events as they stand
may have shown out how the window is findable.
the "window of elasticity" that is.
-----
<dead url>
Consequently governments look for goods with low elasticity to tax.
Otherwise if high elasticity quantity demanded diminishes (people
switch to cheaper products) and the government might not achieve its
revenue objective. Governments target-Gasoline, Alcohol, Tobacco
whose demand is highly inelastic.
------
just a description of gasoline's 'elasticity'...
> on a mundane note;
> spiking gas prices just
> for the labor day holiday
> is rather cynical.
> it's an artificial supply decrease.
see, in 1998 the gas prices went
down below a dollar a gallon,
so, the _oil companies_ decided to reduce
production so as to decrease supply
and raise the prices.
[go find an old washington post from 98.]
not unfair at all because gas
prices were very very low,
but, 3 years later, some were trying to blame
OPEC for the lessened production and a big
jump in gas prices, and then it was clear
that gas prices were being used as a form
of corporate taxation.
fine, people will agree that
gas price spikes amount to taxes.
a "corporate tax"
no one suggests that gas at or
about around $2.00 is unfair,
-but- taxes are taxes and
this -is- a form of taxation
but people do not have a V-O-T-E
on how these monies are spent.
and that borders on the
tyrannical use of power.
-will- you use those monies to
maintain highways in Mississipi?
no one will be able to mandate that you do so.
clear interstates and bridges and all
that infrastructure stuff is what gubbment
is -mandated- to maintain properly.
you'll lose your arguments about lowering
taxes if you see fit to raise them on a
whimsical gouge time after time after time.
one last bit;
-----
http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/aswani/2g32x3/LR.htm
Consequently governments look for goods with low elasticity to tax.
Otherwise if high elasticity quantity demanded diminishes (people
switch to cheaper products) and the government might not achieve its
revenue objective. Governments target-Gasoline, Alcohol, Tobacco
whose demand is highly inelastic.
------
what i want you to see here is that
they call Gas demand "highly inelastic"
and that means that of you raise the
price of gasoline, consumption does
not decrease.
this sort of nullifies any claim that
gas prices are raised to bring consumption down,
as this is not what is seen in actual
practice nor in theory.
on the contrary, people will line up
at the pump and wait for hours to buy
the precious stuff even if you jack
up the prices by double.
but look, this may even be representationless
taxation for some big people who have no sayso
in the price of gasoline wbut who are just as
attached to gasoline as the common everyday
driver to work type individual.
and so, one arm of Megaglobucorp INC. LTD
is twisting another arm of Megaglobucorp INC. LTD.
so, it's not just to the
detriment of the tiny
little guy
but to the detriment of
the big fat cat as well.
oh, and the fact is that these conglomerates
do owe a great deal to the benefit that
they reap thru American Soverignty so they
can't just say that they are -supranational-
and owe no allegiance to the U.S Gubberment.
they use dollar bills and are
suppported by american military.
within a certain window, the price of
gasoline does not signifcantly
affect consumption.
like, if you raise the price of corn,
people will buy less and lower it
people will buy more,
but basically, within a window, raising
and lowering gas prices has a rather
negligible effect on consumption rates.
i say, "within a window" because of this,
if you were to raise the price to a level
where the increase cut a significant gouge
out of the so-called "bottom line" of the
various ancillary businesses, they wouldn't
be able to buy the gas at all anymore and
there would be a downturn in consumption.
and by "ancillary" i mean just
about everything other than
the oil business.
so, the market itself simply will not
stand up to tremendous increases in gas prices
into that area where bottom lines are reduced to red ink.
having said that, in america, gas
under $2.00 is still quite a bargain.
*but* there's no room to suggest that anyone
is being a benevolent despot with gas prices,
because so much of the economy is dependant
upon what we'll call, "cheap affordable gasoline"
having said all this, you now can demonstrate that
this "window" does exist and that the price of
gasoline can be varied within this range with
no significant increase nor decrease in consumption.
so then, this window, at times, will
represent something of a corporate tax.
if people think the tax is being used
to purchase new steam shovels, they
can see that this is a necessary thing,
-but- if it becaomes obvious that the tax is
being used to buy gold toilet seats and luxury
billion dollar homes for the owners of dummy
fold up concerns that serve no purpose and
provide no product to market, confidence
will fall dramatically and you will be doing
a betrayal to your own concerns by virtue
of your own "greed"
in other words, you don't have the luxury
to be avaricious with oil prices because
such behavior will retun to haunt
you down the road.
seems obvious, that's probably why
i can understand it to a certain extent.
and also, i'd suppose that constructive engagement
with the oil producing nations other than the united states
has worked to such an effect that they are just as
dependant upon american/western goods and services
as we are somewhat dependant upon their production of oil.
so, it's not like those producers can just
fold up their tents and eat date palms
and turn their backs entirely on the west.
the industrialized nations still
dominate heavy machinery and the like.
anyway, i just wanted to mention that cuz
i gotta crappy e-mail wanting me to buy
junk bonds or something and telling me
that gas prices would continue to rise,
and that would make it a good place
to toss money down the toilet.
there's a window of variability in
gas prices that "they" can't go
beyond an "they" know it.
all that really matters is that the perception
of corporate taxation being wasted on gold
toilet seats doesn't become pervasive.
shiny new jack hammers and steam shovels are
a lot easier to swallow than billion dollar
luxury castles to keep up with the Joneses.
and the Pippen-Smythes.
anyway, the problem with "corporate taxation"
is that people have no vote in how those
corporations spend their windfall 'tax' monies.
it makes it difficult for anyone to suggest
that taxes are bad for the economy when
corporate conglomerates are skimming
the cream and spending the money
on who knows what.
the claim is that people know best
how to spend their money, but here you are,
raising gas prices in an artificial
manner so as to levy a tax of your own.
it's not that no one believes that you will
pump the money back in to the economy but
seeing as how no one has any sort of voting
ability as to how you do so, there is no
mandated authority to see that you
re-invest your windfall profits.
i'm not a fan of big government
neither am i a fan of taxation
with no representation.
and -i- am not represented on the board
of directors of MegaGlobuCorp INC LTD.
Timothy Sutter
but it makes a point;
and that point is, that when someone says
that europeans pay more for gasoline per
gallon, they are neglecting to mention
that europeans pay a much higher rate
of -government tax- on that
gallon of gasoline.
look carefully;
===
http://www.s-t.com/daily/07-00/07-01-00/a07bu047.htm
European motorists are long accustomed
to paying as much as four times what
Americans shell out for a tankful of gas,
due to fuel taxes that can add a staggering
80 percent to the retail gas price in the region.
<..>
The difference from one country to the next is due
mostly to government taxes, which in Britain and
France account for more than 80 percent of the
price of gas. Finland had the next highest
fuel tax, at 78 percent, followed by Belgium
and Poland at 75 percent each, the AA said.
This tax bite has left some motorists feeling
passive and powerless. "We can't really do anything
about it. It's in the hands of the government," said
office worker Norah Lydon, who spoke as she filled
her tank in the London suburb of Edgware. An average
27 cents of every dollar that Americans spend at
the pump goes toward tax.
Thus the tripling in world oil prices since
December 1998 has caused gasoline prices to
spike more dramatically in the United States
than in Europe. "It's just not the big deal
here that it is in the U.S. because the price
is masked by tax," said Jeremy Elden, an oil
and gas industry analyst at
Lehman Brothers in London.
===
just to make it clear, if anyone is
intent on making such comparisons
between the US and european gasoline prices;
in a country with an 80% government tax burden
as compared with the US having a 30% government
tax burden we get this:
at $5.00 a gallon with 80% tax
it is $1.00 a gallon for the gasoline
and $4.00 a gallon in government tax
in the US, at $3.25 a gallon and
30% government tax burden
it is $2.28 for the gasoline and $.98 in tax.
so, the european country is actually providing the
gasoline at less than half the price, before taxes,
than the US is providing the same gallon.
but that's not all.
if you say that the lower price before taxes
provided by the eurpean country is the 'market value'
then, the price per gallon for gasoline
in the US should average rougly $1.45
this suggests that the $3.25 per gallon
price being charged is nearly 60% -private- =tax=
when compared to the european country.
meaning, basically, at $1.00 a gallon 'market value'
with 30% governemnt tax raising it to $1.30
the extra $1.95 per gallon is all tax
being levied -by- the industry itself,
for which the US citizenry gets zero in real value.
so, comparing to european gasoline prices does
not favor the oil industry's case for higher prices.
in ffact, it makes it look more
like a private corporate taxation.
so, you can see that the higher price per gallon
for gas in europe is largely a government tax burden.
so, as the United States price per
gallon rises to those levels
of a government tax in europe,
the united states gets no -representation-
for that higher expense.
just a slight update to 2005;
the US federal tax burden on
a gallon of gasoline on average is;
==
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_tax
The U.S. federal gasoline tax as
of 2005 was 18.4¢/gal (4.86¢/L)
---
compared to;
As of 2005 fuel duty in the United Kingdom is:
47.1 pence per litre (83 ¢/L, US$3.13/USgal)
50.9 pence per litre (89 ¢/L) for conventional unleaded petrol
53.27 pence per litre (94 ¢/L) for conventional diesel
==
so, you can see how much of the higher gas price
in britain is directly attributable to government tax.
and that's today.
so, in effect, britain is bringing their
gasoline to market, before taxing at a
much lower cost than is the US.
and so, the higher US prices -function-
in much the same way as a taxing would function.
thing is, in britain the governemnt does stuff
with the taxes and in the US, ...well, it must
be somewhat more obvious by now.
but you can be sure, uncle sam will be paying
for rerigging the oil derricks in the gulf of mexico.
not to worry, there'll be plenty
of whipped cream for your desserts.
but, your vocal cords will be muted.
etc...
Walter wrote:
> Fitting, because they are the ones affecting future
> availability the most. Also fitting for a RICO inquiry.
so, your contention is that the US government
is responsible for higher gas prices.
feel free to support it with any facts.
Walter wrote:
> Damn, I hope someone less obvious buys the executive branch next.
here's some funny things from 1997;
before the fact, it basically says that
claims of the cost of oil -production-
rising, are bogus;
===
http://www.businessweek.com/1997/44/b3551001.htm
The progress already achieved through technology is mind- boggling.
The average cost per barrel of finding and producing oil has dropped
about 60% in real terms over the past 10 years, while proven
reserves are about 60% higher than in 1985 (charts, page 140).
And these official figures far understate the amount of accessible
oil in the ground. Smith Rea Energy Associates Ltd., a London-based
researcher, figures that the world's oil producers could add
350 billion barrels to their proven reserves if they counted
all the oil that has become affordable to recover because of
the latest breakthroughs. That sum is equal to nearly 14
years' worth of worldwide consumption.
===
this tends to indicate that technological advances
have made the cost of finding and refining oil lower
and not and never higher.
another strike against higher prices being
-market driven- and in favor of calling it
a corporate taxation of consumers for
whatever reason.
so, if 'gross manipulation'
of markets is to be denied
then,
the only real alternative is;
'fear driven economy'
and a 'fear driven economy' is not
a spectacle of strength and
'proactive' judgement.
and is more suggestive of
reactionary paranoia.
and paranoia is a disorder which requires attention
for the health and well being of society at large.
Corporate policy is a threat to itself and society.
'fear driven economy'
but also,
the case has been made that the
american consumer is addicted to petrol
drug dealers do not intervene
on behalf of drug addicts.
it still does not look good.
Timothy Sutter
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:22:04 -0500
==
http://www.abcnews.go.com/WN/Story?id=5571606&page=2
just look carefully at this bit;
Rex Tillerson is the chariman of ExxonMobil
from the 'horses mouth' as it were
and not from Timothy Sutter's mouth.
this portion is speaking about
what is done with the 'profits'
by ExxonMobil, and lets just conclude,
the oil industry in general.
==
REX TILLERSON: Well, that's a cash flow question, Charlie,
in terms of how should we manage our cash flow. And that's
important for our shareholders, obviously.
It's important for our future health as well.
The first thing we do is invest in all the projects
that we have available to us and that make sense to invest in.
And the second thing we do is pay all our taxes, pay all our
operating costs, all of our employees and all the people that
do business with us. And then we see what's left over.
And what's left over we try to return efficiently
to the shareholder, because it's their money. <---
So we do that through dividends, and we do it
through share buybacks.
Our shareholders then take all that money,
and they're doing something with it <---
elsewhere in the economy.
==
see, it's exactly as i described it.
most of the 'profits' go
'back to the shareholders'
so, in this case, it -operates- and -behaves-
precisely as if it were a corporate tax.
this is why it would be correct
to include the 'consumer' into
the equation in some manner.
-unless- you would admit that it is -only-
to be used to benefit heavy 'industrial',
'corporate' investors
and not and never the 'consumer' -as- an 'investor.
which the consumer -is- only all [he] sees is the 'tax'
why cannot you include the -consumer- in as an investor?
and then, in -some- manner, at least hand [him]
some sort of 'efficient' promissory note for
a buy back of [his] 'investment'
otherwise, it -does- look purely
like a taxation with zero representation.
which is daggone unAmerican
the bottom line is,
they do return profits
-to the shareholder-
only most drivers are -not- shareholders
so, -they- never get to pump
-their- 'efficient return'
-back- into the economy
"stock at the pump"
as Rex Tillerson says;
"it's their money"
-whose- money?
"the shareholders"
but now, the shareholder
is not widespread so as to include the consumer [himself]
and only includes a much smaller segment of 'investors'
-even- though, the consumer who
pays an -arbitrarily- set higher price
-is- acting in much the same way as an investor.
why is that too difficult to comprehend?
> as Rex Tillerson says;
>
> "it's their money"
>
> -whose- money?
>
> "the shareholders"
but this is -exactly- the same argument
that the so-called "supply siders"
use with regards to -government- taxation.
they say;
""""it's -their- money, they know better how to spend it"
and viola, -more- government revenue is the result
of -lower- government taxation a la "voodoo economics""""
-if- the =voodoo= is applicable to government taxation
the voodoo -must- be applicable to 'corporate taxation'
in other words,
somehow,
corporate america will see -greater profits-
if they return some of this profit to teh consumer
in the form of some sort of stockholding transfre.
etc.
> > as Rex Tillerson says;
> > "it's their money"
> > -whose- money?
> > "the shareholders"
> but this is -exactly- the same argument
> that the so-called "supply siders"
> corporate america will see -greater profits-
> if they return some of this profit to teh consumer
> in the form of some sort of stockholding transfre.
anyway, i appreciate the candid answer.
that's very big of you. seriously.
it seems as if you may as well institute
gasoline rationing with gasoline at a
shorter cost to the consumer.
i.e. lower the price, and sell [him] less gas.
then you got gas for teh next 750 years easy
and you aren't overburdening the
consumer with a heavy industrial tax
and less soot in the atmosphere
by force of mandate and not
happhazzard social engineering experiments
to cause the consumer to use less gas
all on his own.
sure, you can say that teh heavy industrial
'partners' of teh oil industry, who enjoy
the corporate taxation from the consumer
to their coffers
will make it up to the consumer by providing
lower priced goods and services,
but, this remains to be seen.
> > as Rex Tillerson says;
> > "it's their money"
> > -whose- money?
> > "the shareholders"
> but this is -exactly- the same argument
> that the so-called "supply siders"
> corporate america will see -greater profits-
> if they return some of this profit to teh consumer
> in the form of some sort of stockholding transfre.
anyway, i appreciate the candid answer.
that's very big of you. seriously.
it seems as if you may as well institute
gasoline rationing with gasoline at a
shorter cost to the consumer.
i.e. lower the price, and sell [him] less gas.
then you got gas for teh next 750 years easy
and you aren't overburdening the
consumer with a heavy industrial tax
and less soot in the atmosphere
by force of mandate and not
happhazzard social engineering experiments
to cause the consumer to use less gas
all on his own.
sure, you can say that teh heavy industrial
'partners' of teh oil industry, who enjoy
the corporate taxation from the consumer
to their coffers
will make it up to the consumer by providing
lower priced goods and services,
but, this remains to be seen.
> as Rex Tillerson says;
> "it's their money"
> -whose- money?
> "the shareholders" <-- heavy industrial investors
> -now- can anyone see the nature of the taxation?
=please=
before there's a great big dump
of gasoline into the Boston Harbor
as this would be a terrible pollution,
-cut- the corporate tax on the consumer.
or give them -some- sort of =representation=
on how that profit is to be spent.
a binding -vote- of some sort would be nice.
> and, America doesn't want that.
the end
for now...
Timothy Sutter
note <--- arrows
> The following is an excerpt from a 10-K405 SEC Filing,
> filed by ULTRAMAR DIAMOND SHAMROCK ... on 3/31/1999. <--- 1999
> ===
Outlook
The Company's earnings depend largely on refining and retail
marketing margins. The petroleum refining and marketing industry
has been and continues to be volatile and highly competitive.
The cost of crude oil purchased by the Company as well as the
price of refined products sold by the Company have fluctuated
significantly in the past. As a result of the historic volatility
of refining and retail marketing margins and the numerous factors
which affect them, it is impossible to predict future margin levels.
Crude oil prices began falling in late 1997 and fell sharply
throughout 1998, ending the year on average approximately
$7.00 per barrel lower than their starting point. Economic
weakness in Asia and South America, weather-related demand
disruptions in North America and virtually no tightening of
crude oil supplies by OPEC and key non-OPEC countries led to
the decline in crude oil prices. Adjusted for inflation, crude
oil prices are near historic lows and gasoline prices have never
been lower. During 1998, the low crude oil prices were discounted
for the near month, motivating refiners to run at full capacity.
With weather-related demand disruptions, including the warm winters
in the first and fourth quarters and the heavy rains in California
in the first quarter, the excess production created an oversupply
of finished product inventories. As a result, inventory levels
throughout the year pushed the limits of storage capacity leading
to lower pump prices and severe pressure on refining margins.
The Company's composite crack spread for 1998 fell by more than
a $1.00 per barrel. Should crude oil prices continue to fall in
1999 from the December 31, 1998 levels, the Company will be required
to further reduce the carrying value of its crude oil inventories in
1999.
As 1999 begins, these same factors continue and crack spreads
are at record lows. An unusually warm winter in the Northeast
for the second year in a row has caused growing distillate
inventories which threaten to drive margins even lower.
In January 1999, several independent refiners and fully-integrated
major oil companies announced plans to reduce production while <----
other companies and refineries announced plans to bring forward
refinery maintenance turnarounds in an effort to reduce inventories
and the oversupply situation.
In February 1999, the Company announced
production cuts of nearly 10%, or 40,000 barrels per day,
spread throughout its Mid-Continent Refineries. With announced
production cuts totaling nearly 250,000 barrels per day throughout
the United States, the decline in finished product values may slow
and begin to improve. However, crude oil prices, which remain
discounted to the near month, will continue to motivate refiners
to utilize incremental capacity so long as storage capacity
is available.
Margin recovery depends primarily on a tightening of crude oil supplies
and a return to more normal pricing conditions. The elimination of the
near month discount in crude oil would significantly reduce utilization
rates and would give the oversupplied finished products market a chance
to stabilize. Beginning in 1999, domestic crude oil producers have
already begun shutting-in marginal wells and have reduced drilling
activities. The key to tightening crude oil supplies still rests
with OPEC, Mexico, Venezuela and Norway, which together supply
the vast majority of worldwide crude oil. Once supplies are
tightened, refining and retail margins may begin to recover.
===
see, the oil business purposefully reduced production,
so that "retail margins" would 'recover.
i.e. they purposefully reduced production of refined
petroleum products, gasoline, to artificially spike
demand and raise prices.
the only thing that bothered me, was, that
several years later, they were blaming OPEC.
Timothy Sutter
is designed to involve John Q. in
the 'futures investment' scheme
where gas prices are artificially
high =for a specific purpose=
of making -other- fueling sources more
attractively competetive in price range.
so, that John Q. doesn't -just- bear the burden
of a 'tax' [corporate or gubbment] with
and be -forced- into the role of a =de facto= 'investor
excepting that he gets no actual 'return'
in the way normal 'investors who share
in the burden up front,
sees a return upon success.
cut it -is- like 'taxation without representation'
in the long run -if- no sort of benefit ever
lays itself at John Q.'s doorstep...
even if, his little greenstamps
do nothing but give him a -vote-
on the board of directors meetings
and teh Petroleum CEO's can
-campaign- for parliamentary support
from the public as opposed to just
backrooming their will on the public
or re-public as it were....
it's well short of "nationalization" of petrobiz
but involves the public is the decision making...
in some manner
so, they may, at least, stray from the sense
of being dictated to...
and beee cuz, the =behavior= of these little
15-25 cent per qallon price spikes
is just like vacuuming tax monies up out of John Q.'s
pockets and he, then, isn't spending that in other vital areas,
but is, burning it on an open flame...
but also, i can comprehend how heavy industry can get
a 'jolt' of so-called 'liquidity from a quick, and
temporary spike in gas prices
and -not- from unca sam taxes becuz of the 'necessary'
redundant bureaucracies that tend to suck value
-away- from the 'need'
and -then- when gas prices spike
John Q. says, "oh' heavy industry needs
a shot in the arm" -but- with "stock at the pump"
type of 'representation',
the public also gets more 'visibility'
of precisely where the spike is -going-
and not get the sinking -feeling- that some big whig
is throwing thousand dollar logs on his own personal luxury...
the public is, at least, -treated- like a participant
and maybe even -sees- that his or her own livelihood
has been enlivened -by- the spike...
=if= of course, -that- be the -reality-
on -not- that big whig is splurging...
in a 'bad' way...
cuz right now, for some reason, apparently,
there's a lot of frozen popsickles in the ice box
getting freezer burned....
that's the scuttlebutt, at least...
Timothy Sutter
supply already refined and basically "pump ready"
but, the price is getting jacked up now,
with regards to all this middle east scare tactics.
no matter how you slice it dice it and cut it apart,
it -behaves- like a tax.
and all of that goes straight to the profit margin.
only thing is, when the "fear" subsides...
John Q. doesn't get a -refund-...
and =you=- guys keep saying that taxes are bad for the economy
and you even -know- that this is taxing behavior
and,..... you're doing it -anyway-
sort of -like- a "crackhead" who just
can't manage to put the pipe down
cuz it keeps "calling" to him,,,
"pick me up, smoke me, i'm really soo good for you"
and then their teeth start falling out...
Timothy Sutter
there are people who -hate- the
christian "product"
albeit, their hatred is "blind rage"
and pick 'it' up and start 'selling' some strange facsimile
with this hideous tactic that would drive most people away
only, you run from someone browbeating you,
and in to the arms of the devil.
sort of like that Diotrophes person...
sitting -in- the congregation browbeating people
and putting them out...
but if you run -away- from Christ...
...they'll find you by the side of the road
stuck in a ditch, commiserating with those
who were browbeating you ten minutes ago...
only, you'll -fear- the touch of the Savior's hand...
=now= who do you 'blame?'
who cares, a ditch is a ditch...
Ike E 2/1/11
[snippeth]
> if, according to you, Daniel describes the FULFILLMENT
> of events that Jeremiah described, then, they must be
> talking about the same events.
That's "events" in MULTIPLE CONTEXTS, not one set of events.
1) What did their prophecies mean in the history of Israel (which got their
books canonized)?
2) What did their prophecies mean in the intermediate of history of
Christianity?
3) What do their prophecies mean for the End of the Age?
These are THREE DISTINCT ASPECTS of their prophecies.
>>> Daniel and Jeremiah are contemporaries, and
>>> that means they're alive at the same time.
>
>> Hardly.
>
> they were alive in the same period.
THEY WERE NOT!
Jeremiah was DEAD by 520 BC; Daniel was just starting to prophecy in 520 BC,
being among the Babylonian captives of 587 BC.
>>> that successive events resemble prior events
>
>>> is not really much of an issue.
>> FALSE. IT'S THE ENTIRE ISSUE.
>
>
> it's not an "issue" because it is not being questioned.
Dumb as a post: HOW to approach prophecy is the PRIMARY issue, or one comes
to erroneous issues, as have the Historicists, and Dipsysensationalists, and
Preterists, and Idealists, etc, etc, etc.
You have to know HOW Jesus and the prophets approached prophecy before you
can know WHAT the prophesied, and how it applied in each contexts.
METHODOLOGY FIRST; everything else derives from that.
And the methodology of prophecy is TRIUNISM.
Ike E 2/1/11
Notice how the goofball cut off ALL of the important stuff to focus on his
one point that was erroneous to begin with.
In the OLD Testament, the "whoredom" concept was applied to apostate Israel;
in the NEW Testament, it was applied to apostate Christianity. In the End of
the Age, it will be both together, hand-in-hand.
They're RELATED concepts, but they're also TRIUNE concepts.
(There's that Triune methodology thing again.)
Timothy Sutter
> >> > i mean, in King James version,
> >> > the term "whore" is used
> >> > to describe the activities of Israel and Judah.
> > Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> >> That's in the Old Testament;
> Timothy Sutter wrote..
> > gee thanks...
Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> Notice how the goofball cut off ALL of the important stuff
> to focus on his one point that was erroneous to begin with.
==
2 Chronicles 21:12-14 King James Version
And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet,
saying, Thus saith the LORD God of David thy father,
Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat
thy father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah,
But hast walked in the way of the kings of Israel,
and hast made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem
to go a whoring, like to the whoredoms of the house
of Ahab, and also hast slain thy brethren of thy
father's house, which were better than thyself:
Behold, with a great plague will the LORD smite thy people,
and thy children, and thy wives, and all thy goods:
==
there are several places where Israel as a nation
commits 'infidelity' with other nations, and being
married to YHWH, some of these 'infidelities' are
"covenants" and in breaking the covenant of YHWH
with these other nations.
at any rate, King James does use the term "whore"
in referring to teh -nations- of Israel and Judah.
Timothy Sutter
> > if, according to you, Daniel describes the FULFILLMENT
> > of events that Jeremiah described, then, they must be
> > talking about the same events.
Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> That's "events" in MULTIPLE CONTEXTS, not one set of events.
they're describing similar events in and around
the time of the Babylonian captivity and the
destrcuction of the first Temple.
> >>> Daniel and Jeremiah are contemporaries, and
> >>> that means they're alive at the same time.
> >> Hardly.
> > they were alive in the same period.
Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
> THEY WERE NOT!
> Jeremiah was DEAD by 520 BC; Daniel was just starting to prophecy in 520 BC,
> being among the Babylonian captives of 587 BC.
==
http://julianspriggs.com/daniel.aspx
Other prophets at the same time
Jeremiah was about twenty years older than Daniel,
and was taken to Egypt after fall of Jerusalem.
Daniel probably heard Jeremiah preach in Jerusalem
before 605 BC. Daniel was reading from Jeremiah
in Dan 9:1 about the seventy years exile. Ezekiel
was also in exile, but with the Jews by the River
Chebar outside the city of Babylon. It is not
known whether Daniel knew about Ezekiel.
==
===
http://www.truthnet.org/Daniel/Introduction/
Daniel in relation to the other prophet
Daniel was a contemporary of Ezekiel and Jeremiah
all three being in Jerusalem when Daniel and his
friend were taken captive to Babylon. In 605 B.C.
Daniel, was a young man probably about 14 to 15
years of age. In 605 B.C., (Jeremiah 1:1-2)
Jeremiah was in his 22nd year of ministry called
as youth probably near the age of 14, making him
about 36 years of age. Ezekiel was thirty
in 597 B.C., making him 22-years old in
605 B.C.(Ezekiel 1:1-2).
===
==
http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/oldtesta/oldtes10.htm
Daniel was a young man who was carried away as a captive
to Babylon about eight years before Ezekiel came there.
At the beginning of the book Daniel was just a youth
(probably in his teens). Jeremiah and Ezekiel
were also living at this time
==
Timothy Sutter
> commits 'infidelity' with other nations, and being
> married to YHWH, some of these 'infidelities' are
> "covenants" and in breaking the covenant of YHWH
> with these other nations.
> at any rate, King James does use the term "whore"
> in referring to teh -nations- of Israel and Judah.
and the -relevance- of this -is- is it's relationship
to Leviticus 26 and then Ezekiel 16
Leviticus 26 which was spoken of in
the very first post of this thread. [Doug]
=
Leviticus 26:6-7 ; 17
I will give peace in the land, and you shall lie down,
and none will make you afraid; I will rid the land
of evil beasts, and the sword will not go through your land.
You will chase your enemies, and they shall fall
by the sword before you.
;
I will set My face against you, and you shall be defeated
by your enemies. Those who hate you shall reign over you,
and you shall flee when no one pursues you.
=
Ezekiel 16:26 ; 28-34
You also committed harlotry with the Egyptians,
your very fleshly neighbors, and increased your
acts of harlotry to provoke Me to anger.
You also played the harlot with the Assyrians,
because you were insatiable; indeed you played
the harlot with them and still were not satisfied.
Moreover you multiplied your acts of harlotry as
far as the land of the trader, Chaldea; and even
then you were not satisfied. “How degenerate
is your heart!” says the Lord GOD, “seeing you do
all these things, the deeds of a brazen harlot.
“You erected your shrine at the head of every road,
and built your high place in every street. Yet you
were not like a harlot, because you scorned payment.
You are an adulterous wife, who takes strangers instead
of her husband. Men make payment to all harlots, but you
made your payments to all your lovers, and hired them
to come to you from all around for your harlotry. You
are the opposite of other women in your harlotry, because
no one solicited you to be a harlot. In that you
gave payment but no payment was given you,
therefore you are the opposite.”
==
and then it, EZ 16, goes on to say how Israel's
"lovers" will abuse her and strip her bare etc.
now, if this is speaking of =NATIONS=
it isn't referring to two NATIONS actually having
"illicit sexual intercourse for pay"
=but= some sort of =POLITICAL= arrangements...
and =now= the set up is there for =why=
these NATIONS popped up to make Jerusalem
a =desolation= in the first place...
and so, the -relevance- is underlying cause
which is not some sort of whimsy.
how ever one wants to consider "7 times" is
only now becoming an issue...
of course the POLITICAL environment is at issue
and like it or no
the political envirnments of teh ages
have some small bit of concern with the
"spiritual" environment of people's minds...
et cetera et cetera et cetera...
Timothy Sutter
> have some small bit of concern with the
> "spiritual" environment of people's minds...
> et cetera et cetera et cetera...
in short, Israel and Judah are taking YHWH's -gifts-
and using them, -not- to Magnify the Presence of YHWH
but to curry political favor with other nations
in the very -likeness- of -bestial- behavior that
was/is the hallmark -of- earthly, worldly "wisdom"
which is Cynically Pragmatic, 'demonic' even, [James 3:15]
the very abomination which brings desolation...
anytastegifts
> Timothy Sutter wrote:
> > Doug wrote:
>
> >> The 70 years of Jeremiah, plus the three sections of the 70 weeks, are
> >> the four periods of seven times described in Leviticus 26, and they
> >> are continuous, right to the end of the age, and "the times of
> >> restitution of all things."
>
> > do you have any opinions on "lost Israel" [714 B.C.]
>
> > and 7 "times" of 360 days /convert day to year/
>
> > 2520 years + 714 B.C. = ca. 1806 A.D.
>
> > and the accompanying explosion of material wealth?
>
> > any at all?
>
> The whole idea that you outline seems to allude to Herbert W.
> Armstrong's "British Israel" theory.
>
> Leviticus 26 lists four periods of "seven times," and they began
> during the exile in Babylon, according to Daniel 9:11. The exile was
> the first of the four; the three sections of the 70 weeks expound on
> the last three.
>
> As for Armstrong's book "The United States and Britain in Prophecy,"
> he plagiarized much of it, copying word for word in some parts from
> J.H. Allen, "Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright." (1902)
> Armstrong did not acknowledge Allen as his source. He did not seem to
> think such plagiarism was wrong. Shame on him!
>
> http://www.allen-armstrong.org/
>
> And the whole idea is flawed anyway. The 360-days apply to symbolic
> periods; they are found in time periods that describe the heavenly
> Jerusalem. Earthly units of time such as earth days, earth months,
> earth years etc., do not apply to the heavenly city. They represent
> time periods related to the church, which Jesus is building, and apply
> to the time after Jesus ascended to heaven.
>
> Using 360 days for a year and applying such calculations to history
> has a long record of failed predictions; "by their fruits you shall
> know them."
>
> --
> Doug
>
> http://www.sentex.net/~tcc/
You know in your heart what is acceptable. Smiling is an acceptable
look. Friendliness is an acceptable act. Sharing is an acceptable
deed. Praying is an acceptable conversation. Doing acceptable things
daily gives you an acceptable year...
Peace and Love in Him
anytastegifts.biz - inspirational gifts for us all
Ike E 2/1/11
>> >> Timothy Sutter wrote...
>
>> >> > i mean, in King James version,
>> >> > the term "whore" is used
>> >> > to describe the activities of Israel and Judah.
>
>> > Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
>
>> >> That's in the Old Testament;
>
>> Timothy Sutter wrote..
>
>> > gee thanks...
>
> Ike E 2/1/11 wrote:
>
>> Notice how the goofball cut off ALL of the important stuff
>> to focus on his one point that was erroneous to begin with.
[snip the irrelavent citation in light of what I just told the goofball]
> there are several places where Israel as a nation
> commits 'infidelity' with other nations, and being
> married to YHWH, some of these 'infidelities' are
> "covenants" and in breaking the covenant of YHWH
> with these other nations.
What did I just write, goofball?
"In the OLD Testament, the "whoredom" concept was applied to apostate
Israel;
in the NEW Testament, it was applied to apostate Christianity. In the End of
the Age, it will be both together, hand-in-hand.
"They're RELATED concepts, but they're also TRIUNE concepts.
"(There's that Triune methodology thing again.)"
The point went right over your head, as usual: CITING what the Old Testament
says as if the concept doesn't also apply to OTHER things (present and
future) renders your point moot.
> at any rate, King James does use the term "whore"
> in referring to teh -nations- of Israel and Judah.
That whooshing sound was the point going right over your noggin.
THREE CONTEXTS of the "whoredom" concept in the Bible.
1) Apostate Israel (Old Testament)
2) Apostate Christianity (New Testament)
3) The coming combined global apostasy (including BOTH a false "Israel" and
a false "Christianity")
Like most every other prophecy of the Bible, the concept is TRIUNE.
Ike
Timothy Sutter
> commits 'infidelity' with other nations, and being
> married to YHWH, some of these 'infidelities' are
> "covenants" and in breaking the covenant of YHWH
> with these other nations.
> at any rate, King James does use the term "whore"
> in referring to teh -nations- of Israel and Judah.
and the -relevance- of this -is- is it's relationship
;
Ezekiel 16:26 ; 28-34
the political envirnments of teh ages
peterra...@gmail.com
______________________
goofball?