VARIOUS PROPHECIES ABOUT 2012
Glenn
I'd like to make two points.
There are several prophecies about 2012:
a)the "Mayan Calendar ends in 2012..."
b) Niburu
c) Planet X
d) The dark rift
e) Galactic alignment
f) etc ad infinitum
First, there is NOTHING in the Bible about a Date, or setting a Date.
True, "No man can know the day or hour," but mean the exact time.
There are, however, several prophecies which give time periods, such as
Seven years, 1,290 days or 2,300 days. This significant thing about this
is, that these prophecies contain, or are given with, descriptions
(prophecies) of events which will happen. Once people see these
described events they will know that time period has begun.
Until those described events (prophecies) begin, THERE IS NO WAY TO
PREDICT A DATE! Note the difference between "Knowing" and "Predicting."
The first time period prophecy consists of a Seven Year sequence of
events. (Dan 9:27) The events included in this have not yet occurred,
therefore it must be longer than Seven Years to the End.
2008 plus Seven gives us 2015. The end will NOT come prior to 2015.
Therefore ALL prophecy about the end being in 2012 are false.
Second, the above prophecies (a-f) have nothing to do with prophecies
given in the Bible, by Jesus or prophets who preceded or followed Him.
All the above (a-f) completely ignore human and world events happening NOW!
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel and others gave prophecies of both the coming
of the Messiah, and the end of this world. The first were fulfilled,
therefore we have every reason to accept that the remaining prophecies
will also be fulfilled.
Paul, Peter and John (among others) gave prophecies describing events
leading to and occurring at the end of this world, AND NONE OF THEM
INCLUDE EVENTS PREDICTED IN (a-f) THE ABOVE!
The first point is, that the prediction of the date, 2012, is false. The
second point is, that the events predicted (a-f) are false. The result
is that people are mislead, blinded to what is actually happening.
Ask yourself, "What does Peak Oil have to do with the predictions given
(a-f) above?" Then ask, "What does Peak Oil have to do with Bible
Prophecy?"
"... and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea
and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for
looking after those things which are coming on the earth..." Luke 21:25-26
This prophecy is being fulfilled NOW.
"...distress of nations, with perplexity ... Men's hearts failing them
for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth."
THIS is the reality.
Peak Oil
http://tinyurl.com/62u6ow
Olduvai Theory
http://tinyurl.com/3jf9k2
Malthusian catastrophe
http://tinyurl.com/43oktk
and see:
http://www.dieoff.com/
Jesus said "Watch..." Mark 13:37
Glenn
His witness
--
www.thelittlebookopened.org [Key words:] "The Little Book";
Glenn McClary, servitum, gaedhealic, oldwetdog
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
news:g4trk...@enews1.newsguy.com...
> VARIOUS PROPHECIES ABOUT 2012
>
> I'd like to make two points.
>
> There are several prophecies about 2012:
> a)the "Mayan Calendar ends in 2012..."
> b) Niburu
> c) Planet X
> d) The dark rift
> e) Galactic alignment
> f) etc ad infinitum
>
> First, there is NOTHING in the Bible about a Date, or setting a Date.
> True, "No man can know the day or hour," but mean the exact time.
>
> There are, however, several prophecies which give time periods, such as
> Seven years, 1,290 days or 2,300 days. This significant thing about this
> is, that these prophecies contain, or are given with, descriptions
> (prophecies) of events which will happen. Once people see these described
> events they will know that time period has begun.
>
> Until those described events (prophecies) begin, THERE IS NO WAY TO
> PREDICT A DATE! Note the difference between "Knowing" and "Predicting."
>
> The first time period prophecy consists of a Seven Year sequence of
> events. (Dan 9:27)
Who said this was the "first" time period?
Daniel didn't give the specifications in any order.
And, in fact, this will be the LAST "time period" in the third and final
iteration of the prophecy, which will follow the form 62/1/7.
The seals = 62 years = the Beginning of Sorrows.
The trumpets = the 1 year rise and 3 1/2 year rule of the unholy trinity.
The vials = the now-unknown period of God's rebuke (which were 1,335 days,
but Jesus said "except those day be shortened, no flesh would be left
alive").
> The events included in this have not yet occurred, therefore it must be
> longer than Seven Years to the End.
Duh.
The whole thing will take seventy years, from some point AFTER the Jews
begin to rebuild a temple in Jerusalem.
> 2008 plus Seven gives us 2015. The end will NOT come prior to 2015.
> Therefore ALL prophecy about the end being in 2012 are false.
>
> Second, the above prophecies (a-f) have nothing to do with prophecies
> given in the Bible, by Jesus or prophets who preceded or followed Him. All
> the above (a-f) completely ignore human and world events happening NOW!
Yes, well since NOTHING IS HAPPENING NOW (other than the slow progression to
the Beginning of Sorrows), you can sit down and loosen your sphincter.
> Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel and others gave prophecies of both the coming of
> the Messiah, and the end of this world.
No, they gave prophecies FOR THEIR TIMES, which had IMMEDIATE IMPLICATIONS.
It's only in the REITERATION of these prophecies that the story becomes
clear...
> The first were fulfilled, therefore we have every reason to accept that
> the remaining prophecies will also be fulfilled.
NOWHERE DOES THE WORD SUPPORT SUCH AN ASSERTION.
The WORD says "that which has been is now, and that which is to be has
already become, and God required that which is past."
> Paul, Peter and John (among others) gave prophecies describing events
> leading to and occurring at the end of this world, AND NONE OF THEM
> INCLUDE EVENTS PREDICTED IN (a-f) THE ABOVE!
Ehhhhhh.
The made SEPARATE STATEMENTS about the End of the Age and the End of the
World, which are NOT THE SAME THING.
The end of the AGE comes with the second Advent of Jesus Christ.
The end of the WORLD comes after JESUS HAS RULED FOR A "TIME," AND TROD ALL
ENEMIES UNDER FOOT, i.e. AT THE END OF THE MILLENNIUM.
> The first point is, that the prediction of the date, 2012, is false. The
> second point is, that the events predicted (a-f) are false. The result is
> that people are mislead, blinded to what is actually happening.
As are you by what ISN'T happening...
> Ask yourself, "What does Peak Oil have to do with the predictions given
> (a-f) above?"
Nothing.
When they say "peace and safety," THAT'S when "swift destruction" will come
upon them.
In other words, it's when the world THINKS IT HAS ITS PROBLEMS WORKED OUT
that the REAL TROUBLE (i.e. "tribulation") comes.
AGAIN you are delivering false interpretations of prophecy to lend urgency
to your FALSE CULTIC DOCTRINES.
> Then ask, "What does Peak Oil have to do with Bible Prophecy?"
Nothing.
> "... and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and
> the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking
> after those things which are coming on the earth..." Luke 21:25-26
This is from the BEGINNING OF SORROWS section of Revelation, NOT the LAST
SEVEN YEARS.
The GLOBAL ISSUES make the wicked of the world go looking for GLOBAL
SOLUTIONS, and ONE OF THOSE FALSE SOLUTIONS will be UNIVERSALISM, i.e. a
return to idolatry, AGAINST CHRISTIANITY.
Christians will be run out of the world.
The beasts will implement their own solutions to their worldly problems.
And then God will give them problems they never even CONCEIVED of...
> This prophecy is being fulfilled NOW.
NO, IT'S NOT.
Now go take a shit, 'cause your full of it...
> "...distress of nations, with perplexity ... Men's hearts failing them for
> fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth."
>
> THIS is the reality.
Once again, Glenn prophetically prematurely ejaculates all over himself.
Ike
Randy ®
in article <g4u425$pog$1...@registered.motzarella.org>,
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleb...@msn.com> wrote:
>The WORD says "that which has been is now, and that which is to be has
>already become, and God required that which is past."
And the context of that statement is that men should stand in
awe of God, because He is eternal, therefore nothing is new,
and men will be accountable to Him. This is not a prophetic
formula that requires all prophecy to recur in three (70
yearish) iterations. This is just you latching on to an idea
you think you've "discovered" (invented), then trying to force
everyone else to give you glory for it.
©2008 pulpitfire.com, pulpitfire.net, pulpitfire.org
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself
up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every
thought to make it obedient to Christ. †2 Corinthians 10:5
wax
"Glenn" <gamc...@spiritone.com> wrote
>
> "... and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and
> the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking
> after those things which are coming on the earth..." Luke
> 21:25-26
>
> This prophecy is being fulfilled NOW.
Can you give us a date in history when people did not feel or claim that the
above was happening?
--Wax
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
news:nja6741n4lb93cn1u...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 17:06:58 -0500,
> in article <g4u425$pog$1...@registered.motzarella.org>,
> "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleb...@msn.com> wrote:
>
>>The WORD says "that which has been is now, and that which is to be has
>>already become, and God required that which is past."
>
>
> And the context of that statement is that men should stand in
> awe of God, because He is eternal, therefore nothing is new,
> and men will be accountable to Him.
NO, the context is God's works in the world, and the final statement
declares the triunity of those works, as worked out in history past, history
present, and the future.
Ecc 3:11-15
He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the
world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh
from the beginning to the end.
I know that there is no good in them, but for a man to rejoice, and to
do good in his life, and also that every man should eat and drink, and enjoy
the good of all his labour, it is the gift of God.
I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be
put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should
fear before him.
That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been;
and God requireth that which is past.
> This is not a prophetic
> formula that requires all prophecy to recur in three (70
> yearish) iterations.
1) It IS a prophetic formula that requires EVERYTHING to occur in threes,
and it DOES.
The resurrection "was," "is," and "will be."
Pentecost "was," "is," and "will be."
The "son of Perdition" "was," "is," and "will be."
Baptism is a process of "was" (the waters), "is" (the spirit), and "will be"
(the blood).
Elijah "was," "is," and "will be."
In fact, all prophetic fulfillment "was," "is," and "will be" (linear
formulas and the like being the exception that proves the rule).
2) I never said anything ABOUT "three 70 yearish iterations," dumbass.
> This is just you latching on to an idea
> you think you've "discovered" (invented), then trying to force
> everyone else to give you glory for it.
No, it's an "idea" that is declared and proven throughout the entire Bible
AND human history via Jesus and the prophets.
Too bad Dispensationalists (and strict Historicists, and Preterists, and
Idealists) DON'T PAY ATTENTION to what Jesus and the prophets ACTUALLY
SAID...
Ike
<Kelly>
wrote:
You know, Ike - people might actually listen to you if you weren't so
disgusting and treated people like you treat your wife and daughter.
Or do you say things to them like "prematurely ejaculates" and "Now go
take a shit, 'cause your full of it"? No one's going to give any
credence to your words as long as you treat them like dirt.
Glenn
Two sides of one coin. Two methods of denial: "It never happened, so it
will never happen." And, "We've always had war and plague and floods, so
what's happening now means nothing."
You are practicing denial, and that's all it is: Saying, "Just because
some people have been wrong in the past, that means they will always be
wrong."
Glenn
vernono
Don't tell anyone but due to errors in the Gregorian calendar, we are way
PAST 2012..
Glenn
Not that that matters to me, but I am interested in your source of
information; link please.
Thanks
Glenn
vernono
There are many and plenty of arguments.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anno_Domini#Numbering_of_years
Accuracy
According to Doggett, "Although scholars generally believe that Christ was
born some years before A.D. 1, the historical evidence is too sketchy to
allow a definitive dating".[11] According to the Gospel of St. Matthew
(2:1,16) King Herod the Great was alive when Jesus was born, and ordered the
Massacre of the Innocents in response to his birth. Blackburn &
Holford-Strevens fix King Herod's death shortly before Passover in 4 BC,[12]
and say that those who accept the story of the Massacre of the Innocents
sometimes associate the star that led the Biblical Magi with the planetary
conjunction of September 15 7 BC or Halley's comet of 12 BC; even historians
who do not accept the Massacre accept the birth under Herod as a tradition
older than the written gospels.[13]
The Gospel of St. Luke (1:5) states that St. John the Baptist was at least
conceived, if not born, under King Herod, and that Jesus was conceived while
St. John's mother St. Elizabeth was in the sixth month of her pregnancy
(1:26). St. Luke's Gospel also states that Jesus was born during the reign
of the Emperor Augustus and while Cyrenius (or Quirinius) was the governor
of Syria (2:1-2). Blackburn and Holford-Strevens[12] indicate
Cyrenius/Quirinius' governorship of Syria began in AD 6, which is
incompatible with conception in 4 BC, and say that "St. Luke raises greater
difficulty....Most critics therefore discard Luke".[13] Some scholars rely
on St. John's Gospel to place Christ's birth in c. 18 BC.[13]
http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/referenceencyclopedia/g/glad.htm
Of course there are the skipped days and years and inconsistancy of our
counts and Hebrew counts.
Ie: where would we be if we skipped every seventh year as a "holy year" not
to be recorded?
I've never read how many days of numeric date studies does it take to cause
a migraine.
wax
> wax wrote:
>> "Glenn" <gamc...@spiritone.com> wrote
>>> "... and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea
>>> and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear,
>>>and for looking after those things which are coming on the
>>>earth..." Luke 21:25-26
>>>
>>> This prophecy is being fulfilled NOW.
>>
>> Can you give us a date in history when people did not feel or
>> claim that the above was happening?
>>
>> --Wax
>
> Two sides of one coin. Two methods of denial: "It never
> happened, so it will never happen." And, "We've always had war
> and plague and floods, so what's happening now means nothing."
>
> You are practicing denial, and that's all it is: Saying, "Just because
> some people have been wrong in the past, that means they will always be
> wrong."
Actually, I merely asked a simple question, and you avoided
answering.because you know what the answer is. YOU are in deniel.
--Wax
Glenn
Certainly I answered your question: It does not matter that some people
have been wrong in the past. People being wrong in the past has no
effect or bearing on what is happening now...
You prefer to practice illogic, and believe a lie.
Glenn
Again I say that the DATE (Number of years) means nothing to me.
Having said that, I note that the reference you gave only suggests an
error of a year.
> Accuracy
> According to Doggett, "Although scholars generally believe that Christ was
> born some years before A.D. 1, the historical evidence is too sketchy to
> allow a definitive dating".[11] According to the Gospel of St. Matthew
> (2:1,16) King Herod the Great was alive when Jesus was born, and ordered the
> Massacre of the Innocents in response to his birth. Blackburn &
> Holford-Strevens fix King Herod's death shortly before Passover in 4 BC,[12]
> and say that those who accept the story of the Massacre of the Innocents
> sometimes associate the star that led the Biblical Magi with the planetary
> conjunction of September 15 7 BC or Halley's comet of 12 BC; even historians
> who do not accept the Massacre accept the birth under Herod as a tradition
> older than the written gospels.[13]
First, the "Magi" are not servants of God, but servants of Satan, and
Liars. There was no "star." Scripture does not say there was a star, it
says that the Magi claimed that "they saw a star." They were liars. The
conjunction and/or Halley's comet have nothing to do with the birth of
the Messiah.
Then, It does not matter if Jesus was born in AD 3 or BC 4 (an span of
seven years) THAT does not significantly effect the fulfillment of
prophecy, AS THE FULFILLMENT OF PROPHECY IS NOT BASED ON DATES!
>
> The Gospel of St. Luke (1:5) states that St. John the Baptist was at least
> conceived, if not born, under King Herod, and that Jesus was conceived while
> St. John's mother St. Elizabeth was in the sixth month of her pregnancy
> (1:26). St. Luke's Gospel also states that Jesus was born during the reign
> of the Emperor Augustus and while Cyrenius (or Quirinius) was the governor
> of Syria (2:1-2). Blackburn and Holford-Strevens[12] indicate
> Cyrenius/Quirinius' governorship of Syria began in AD 6, which is
> incompatible with conception in 4 BC, and say that "St. Luke raises greater
> difficulty....Most critics therefore discard Luke".[13] Some scholars rely
> on St. John's Gospel to place Christ's birth in c. 18 BC.[13]
>
> http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/referenceencyclopedia/g/glad.htm
>
>
>
> Of course there are the skipped days and years and inconsistancy of our
> counts and Hebrew counts.
>
> Ie: where would we be if we skipped every seventh year as a "holy year" not
> to be recorded?
>
> I've never read how many days of numeric date studies does it take to cause
> a migraine.
>
I can allow that the correct, or EXACT date can not be known... We can
not know if it is 2008, or (if Jesus was born in BC 3/4) 2012...
The point is, that the DATE is not significant in the fulfillment of
Bible Prophecy.
What is significant, is recognizing prophetic events and comprehending
that these events is the fulfillment of End Time Prophecy.
Glenn
His witness
Mistylein
>
> I'd like to make two points.
>
> There are several prophecies about 2012:
> a)the "Mayan Calendar ends in 2012..."
> b) Niburu
> c) Planet X
> d) The dark rift
> e) Galactic alignment
> f) etc ad infinitum
>
> First, there is NOTHING in the Bible about a Date, or setting a Date. True, "No man
> can know the day or hour," but mean the exact time.
>
> There are, however, several prophecies which give time periods, such as Seven years,
> 1,290 days or 2,300 days. This significant thing about this is, that these prophecies
> contain, or are given with, descriptions (prophecies) of events which will happen.
> Once people see these described events they will know that time period has begun.
Which one and place do we find the 7 years thingy??
And why do you not explore that 2300 (days) thing when it
is to be (evenings and mornings)
It is only in the KJV Bible that it says (days) All other versions says
"evenings and mornings".
>
> Until those described events (prophecies) begin, THERE IS NO WAY TO PREDICT A DATE!
> Note the difference between "Knowing" and "Predicting."
Most Bible prophesies have a starting date to begin with.
I know of only one that does not have a starting date nor and
ending date, nor how many days it will last.
That one we call an on going Prophecy.
It has been in effect now from the third day to today.
>
> The first time period prophecy consists of a Seven Year sequence of events. (Dan 9:27)
> The events included in this have not yet occurred, therefore it must be longer than
> Seven Years to the End.
Bunk!
There is not one thing in the 70 years prophecy that causes it to
be chopped up as you are trying to do.
It is only the Messiah that is cut off not the Prophecy.
>
> 2008 plus Seven gives us 2015. The end will NOT come prior to 2015. Therefore ALL
> prophecy about the end being in 2012 are false.
Liars figure! But figures do not lie!
>
> Second, the above prophecies (a-f) have nothing to do with prophecies given in the
> Bible, by Jesus or prophets who preceded or followed Him. All the above (a-f)
> completely ignore human and world events happening NOW!
More bunk!
>
> Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel and others gave prophecies of both the coming of the Messiah,
> and the end of this world. The first were fulfilled, therefore we have every reason to
> accept that the remaining prophecies will also be fulfilled.
If you take one prophecy at a time you will find that most all prophesies
have been fulfilled. But first do not ignore the Starting dates of each
one.
>
> Paul, Peter and John (among others) gave prophecies describing events leading to and
> occurring at the end of this world, AND NONE OF THEM INCLUDE EVENTS PREDICTED IN (a-f)
> THE ABOVE!
>
> The first point is, that the prediction of the date, 2012, is false. The second point
> is, that the events predicted (a-f) are false. The result is that people are mislead,
> blinded to what is actually happening.
They are also blind to applying the prophesies to the last
2,000 years of History.
>
> Ask yourself, "What does Peak Oil have to do with the predictions given (a-f) above?"
> Then ask, "What does Peak Oil have to do with Bible Prophecy?"
"Do not hurt the oil" I think Rev 6 maybe.
M,
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
news:e05809f6-19e4-4958...@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
[snip]
> You know, Ike - people might actually listen to you if you weren't so
> disgusting and treated people like you treat your wife and daughter.
???
You know, Kelly, that is a pretty asinine statement considering you don't
even KNOW my wife and daughter.
> Or do you say things to them like "prematurely ejaculates" and "Now go
> take a shit, 'cause your full of it"?
Well, YOU SHOULD KNOW, since you're the one who said "if you weren't so
disgusting and treated people like you treat your wife and daughter."
I mean, it's a SIN to "bear false witness, and you first DECLARED that you
KNOW how I "treat" my wife and daughter, and THEN you asked how I treat
them. You seem to be VERY confused about what you think you know and what
you think you don't know.
> No one's going to give any
> credence to your words as long as you treat them like dirt.
Hmmmmm.
You mean like Jesus lambasting the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians in
His day?
If I were to tip-toe AROUND the liars, as the weak-livered do, THEN my words
WOULDN'T have any credence (like the mamby-pamby preachers who make up the
majority these days). But if I go toe-to-toe with them, then I am LENDING
CREDENCE to my words, as per Ezekiel 3:8-9...
Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy
forehead strong against their foreheads. As an adamant harder than flint
have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks,
though they be a rebellious house.
You seem to be one of those "sensitive" types who thinks HOW something is
said is more important than WHAT is said.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Ike
<Kelly>
<xeickleberrybo...@msn.com> wrote:
> You know, Kelly, that is a pretty asinine statement considering you don't
> even KNOW my wife and daughter.
Nope - just an observation about your "filthiness and silly talk,
[and] coarse jesting, which are not fitting".
> > Or do you say things to them like "prematurely ejaculates" and "Now go
> > take a shit, 'cause your full of it"?
>
> Well, YOU SHOULD KNOW, since you're the one who said "if you weren't so
> disgusting and treated people like you treat your wife and daughter."
>
> I mean, it's a SIN to "bear false witness, and you first DECLARED that you
> KNOW how I "treat" my wife and daughter, and THEN you asked how I treat
> them. You seem to be VERY confused about what you think you know and what
> you think you don't know.
>
> > No one's going to give any
> > credence to your words as long as you treat them like dirt.
>
> Hmmmmm.
>
> You mean like Jesus lambasting the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians in
> His day?
>
> If I were to tip-toe AROUND the liars, as the weak-livered do, THEN my words
> WOULDN'T have any credence (like the mamby-pamby preachers who make up the
> majority these days). But if I go toe-to-toe with them, then I am LENDING
> CREDENCE to my words, as per Ezekiel 3:8-9...
>
> Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy
> forehead strong against their foreheads. As an adamant harder than flint
> have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks,
> though they be a rebellious house.
>
> You seem to be one of those "sensitive" types who thinks HOW something is
> said is more important than WHAT is said.
No, I'm one of those people who believes that *what* is said is just
as important. And I'm gonna bet that *what* you said ("prematurely
ejaculates" and "Now go take a shit, 'cause your full of it"), you
wouldn't say in front of or to your daughter and that you wouldn't do
it because you wouldn't want her to know her dad uses "filthiness and
silly talk, [and] coarse jesting, which are not fitting".
vernono
"this generation" means THE generation of the one reading it.
How's that?
Glenn
>
> How's that?
>
>
No, not the generation reading it. (Many generations have read it.)
No, the meaning of "generation," like all words, are determined by the
speaker or writer, in context.
In Mat 24, the disciples asked about the signs of His return and the end.
Jesus answered their question about the signs of His return and the end.
Then, he said that "This generation shall not pass, till all these
things be fulfilled."
"All these things" are the events He described in verses 7-8, 9-13,
15-21, 29-31.
"This generation" in that context is NOT the generation He was speaking
to, but IS the generation who begins *to see* the events He described.
The generation He was speaking to DID all pass away, but the events of
15-21 and 29-31 (and many other prophecies) have not yet been fulfilled.
The events of verses 7-8 *are* being fulfilled not; as are Rev 6-1-6,
20:7-8 and others.
www.thelittlebookopened.org/main/about/signs.html
vernono
I can take any 40 year period and see that all of those things are
fulfilled.
People can argue over and over about maybe will come. A little, very
little, analysis shows over and over.
AND you are not even given tomorrow.
BTW generation is practically a synonym for forty years.
wax
"Glenn" <gamc...@spiritone.com> wrote
>>>> "Glenn" <gamc...@spiritone.com> wrote
>>>>> "... and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity;
>>>>> the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them
>>>>> for fear, and for looking after those things which are
>>>>> coming on the earth..." Luke 21:25-26
>>>>>
>>>>> This prophecy is being fulfilled NOW.
>>>> Can you give us a date in history when people did not feel or
>>>> claim that the above was happening?
>>>>
>>>> --Wax
>>> Two sides of one coin. Two methods of denial: "It never
>>> happened, so it will never happen." And, "We've always had war and
>>> plague and floods, so what's happening now means
>>> nothing."
>>>
>>> You are practicing denial, and that's all it is: Saying, "Just because
>>> some people have been wrong in the past, that means they will always be
>>> wrong."
>>
>> Actually, I merely asked a simple question, and you avoided
>> answering.because you know what the answer is. YOU are in deniel.
>>
>
> Certainly I answered your question: It does not matter that some
> people have been wrong in the past. People being wrong in the past has no
> effect or bearing on what is happening now...
>
> You prefer to practice illogic, and believe a lie.
I did not ask you if people had been wrong or not in the past.
You quoted Luke 21:25-26 and then added, "This prophecy is being fulfilled
NOW." I asked, "Can you give us a date in history when people did not feel
or claim that the above was happening?"
You did not answer the question. As I said, you know the answer. You know
that there has always been those saying that the prophecy is being
fulfilled.
Your argument that it does "not matter that some people have been wrong in
the past" is absurd. I live in California and have experienced several
severe earthquakes. Whenever somebody tells me that we are going to have
an earthquake on a particular date, I bet that we don't. I have never lost.
Someday somebody may predict an earthquake, bit the odds are in my favor.
The odds also say that you are wrong.
--Wax
Glenn
That is exactly what your question is about.
>
> You quoted Luke 21:25-26 and then added, "This prophecy is being fulfilled
> NOW." I asked, "Can you give us a date in history when people did not feel
> or claim that the above was happening?"
They may have believed it, but I don't know that, and I can not give any
date.
Can you prove that people believed, felt or claimed that Luke 21:25-26
was being fulfilled in their lifetime? Show me your proof.
>
> You did not answer the question. As I said, you know the answer. You know
> that there has always been those saying that the prophecy is being
> fulfilled.
That is your point, right? That some people have believed that specific
prophecy (Luke 21:25-26) was being fulfilled in their lifetime.
Great, I understand your point.
The problem is, that you don't understand how stupid your point is.
My point is that your question is based on ignorance and stupidity.
As I said, it does not matter that people were wrong in the past, or
what people believed in the past.
>
> Your argument that it does "not matter that some people have been wrong in
> the past" is absurd.
No, it is accurate. Peoples wrong beliefs does not change either the
prophecy or the present events which do fulfill prophecy.
> I live in California and have experienced several
> severe earthquakes. Whenever somebody tells me that we are going to have
> an earthquake on a particular date, I bet that we don't. I have never lost.
> Someday somebody may predict an earthquake, bit the odds are in my favor.
First, I don't set dates.
Second, All prophecy is fulfilled by human and world events.
Third, you don't comprehend the difference between "predict" and "Prophecy."
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
>> You know, Kelly, that is a pretty asinine statement considering you don't
>> even KNOW my wife and daughter.
> Nope - just an observation about your "filthiness and silly talk,
> [and] coarse jesting, which are not fitting".
Oh, there's no "silly talk" or "coarse jesting" to ANYTHING I say...
It's deliberately evocative and to-the-point, just like Jesus, Paul, and
John.
And you STILL haven't explained what this has to do with my wife and
daughter, nitwit, and your claim to know something about people YOU'VE NEVER
MET.
> Or do you say things to them like "prematurely ejaculates" and "Now go
> take a shit, 'cause your full of it"?
Actually, they chuckle at the irony and dry wit, which you seemed to miss.
And the "prophetically prematurely ejaculating" statement PERFECTLY FITS
Glenn's ridiculous "Chicken Little, the sky is falling" proclamations about
prophecy (which is the SAME garbage I've heard from these fools for the last
40+ years).
Guess you don't have much of a sense of humor.
Good thing the boys did...
>> Well, YOU SHOULD KNOW, since you're the one who said "if you weren't so
>> disgusting and treated people like you treat your wife and daughter."
>
>> I mean, it's a SIN to "bear false witness, and you first DECLARED that
>> you
>> KNOW how I "treat" my wife and daughter, and THEN you asked how I treat
>> them. You seem to be VERY confused about what you think you know and what
>> you think you don't know.
One notices that you didn't address the point.
>>> No one's going to give any
>>> credence to your words as long as you treat them like dirt.
>
>> Hmmmmm.
>
>> You mean like Jesus lambasting the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians in
>> His day?
>
>> If I were to tip-toe AROUND the liars, as the weak-livered do, THEN my
>> words
>> WOULDN'T have any credence (like the mamby-pamby preachers who make up
>> the
>> majority these days). But if I go toe-to-toe with them, then I am LENDING
>> CREDENCE to my words, as per Ezekiel 3:8-9...
>
>> Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy
>> forehead strong against their foreheads. As an adamant harder than flint
>> have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their
>> looks,
>> though they be a rebellious house.
>
>> You seem to be one of those "sensitive" types who thinks HOW something is
>> said is more important than WHAT is said.
> No, I'm one of those people who believes that *what* is said is just
> as important.
It IS important, and THAT'S why I SAID IT...
> And I'm gonna bet that *what* you said ("prematurely
> ejaculates" and "Now go take a shit, 'cause your full of it"), you
> wouldn't say in front of or to your daughter and that you wouldn't do
> it because you wouldn't want her to know her dad uses "filthiness and
> silly talk, [and] coarse jesting, which are not fitting".
Hon, my daughter is a college graduate and has the intelligence to
UNDERSTAND (and either moan or bemoan) my frequently obtuse and non-linear
humor.
It's a shame that you don't get it, because the people around Jesus did,
even when He obliquely called them bastards (which they immediately picked
up on). [Jn 8:39-45]
I would suggest you get out of "Ozzie and Harriet" mode and start reading
the Bible WITH A LITTLE MORE BALANCE.
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
[snip]
> No, it is accurate. Peoples wrong beliefs does not change either the
> prophecy or the present events which do fulfill prophecy.
There ARE NO "present events which do fulfill prophecy," you dolt, at least,
not the LITERALISMS YOU keep relying on.
(Now, in terms of movement TOWARD the final resolution of matters in regards
to attitudes and corrupt religious thought, well, that's ANOTHER matter
entirely...)
Ike