Search Members

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 04 2005,01:48)

Hi R, An interesting search is on where the tree of life is.

Hi Nick,

This could also be like the search for the “Ark of the Covenant” which several have undertaken.

What jumps out at me is that The One Most High hid it and does not want us to have it. Why would anyone wish to thwart His wish and go to great lengths to locate it?

If the location of the tree of life is disclosed within Scripture and we could understand its meaning better by searching there, then I am all for that.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 04 2005,01:48)

Hi reality, But it does not say we go to heaven does it? We meet the Lord in the air. The Father dwells with his people on the new earth according to Revelation.

Yes, Nick, but if “meet him in the air” doesn't mean Heaven, then how does that work. Do you invision that we might just kind of hover like a helicopter?

There is a time span to consider and there appears to be a ceremony taking place and also immortality is bestowed. Could all that be handled just up in the air of the earth? I think a short-range missile could wreck havok in such a situation. If your agree that we could “meet him in the air” why is it so far-fetched that we could travel all the way to one of the Heavens?

Right, the Lord does dwell with his people on the new earth. I mentioned that already.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Reality @ Oct. 03 2005,22:41)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 03 2005,19:57) Reality Thank you reality, But do spirit beings have heavenly bodies? Maybe-like the angels. Do we go to heaven? I don't see it written.[/quote] Hello Nick, I suppose I have more questions than answers, but I'll try to explain what I understand – up to now anyway. I believe that spirit beings are pictured or described in a number of ways.  I expect they must have some type of body/identity in order that one would be determined from another.  I have read that there are cherubim, seraphim, arch-angles etc. each having various qualities differing from one another.  I believe all of these beings would be categorized as spiritual beings and even sons of God.  I think all of them were generated at or near the same time – a very long time ago – and given differing responsibilities spanning various lengths of time and place. It appears that some have been elevated at times while others are demoted.  Even Lucifer was at one time a covering cherum (a rather high position), but he is no longer in that position nor does he continue to be known by that same name. “going to Heaven” could mean several areas.  I think there is evidence of at least 8 realms in Heaven and possibly even more, so one could be carried to varying realms for varying lengths of time.  I actually believe that Enoch is in one of these as well as the Garden of Eden.  Why else would there be cherubim with swords guarding the entrance to it if not?  After Adam and Eve and all the animals were driven from Eden, cherubim with swords were set to guard the entry.  I've never read that they have stopped guarding it. One could be transported to one of the realms of Heaven for a short time and then return to earth.  Some people think they only go there in vision but don't really go there physically.  I don't know for sure, but it makes more sense to me that they actually go there.  I've read a great deal of literature, which speaks of these type trips as being rather common.  It does seem that most if not all of this type travel came to a halt after Messiah left us.  He plans to return, however; and possibly we will someday be able to move about in many realms as well. But my understanding of 'going to Heaven' is not that people are wafted off to Heaven at their death to stay there.  At the end of Revelations, it appears that The Father will come here, so why would we wish our abode to be in Heaven for all time? Reality

Nick, I'm not sure just yet how to add a PS so I'll try it this way and hope it works.

Sorry I missed this part that I had intended to add, because you mentioned you had not seen anything saying we would go to Heaven.

“1Th 4:15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain to the coming of the Lord shall not precede them who are asleep.
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
1Th 4:18 Wherefore, comfort one another with these words. “

It seems to say the alive Saints would rise into the clouds along with the 1st resurrected Saints. There is no mention of just how long they would remain there, but putting other passages together with this, it is clear that they all return to the earth.

I expect the Garden of Eden, Enoch, and the Ark of the Covenant to re-appear on earth as well.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 03 2005,23:34)

Hi reality, There is no room to doubt the veracity of scripture except where man have deliberately altered it. The Holy Spirit will quickly reveal to you that the teachings and bible version of the Mormons is fallacious. It is a good thing to check as it becomes very plain in style and uniformity and harmony that is is man made.

I agree with you on that particular literature. Yet, there are many extant works, which were eliminated from the Bible or were never included at all.

The very idea of a set of canon may come from those who canonized it in the first place. I am not saying that the books of the Bible as they appear today are entirely false, but I also do not believe that those books are all-inclusive of literature available. What I mean is there were many books written and various groups of people preferred some of them more than others.

But where did the idea that there is a perfect set of 66 books (more or less depending on history) which are inspired and that all others that did not make it into this man-made group are not? I do not believe the section which is now referred to as the Old Testament is any more perfectly gathered than those classified as the New Testament. Historically, I do not see that The Father ever forecast that a perfect package entitled “The Holy Bible” would be the sum total of inspired literature by His choice. He never mentioned such a set of books.

The Holy Bible is just as man-made as The Book of Mormon, but literature does exist (some of it within the pages of The Holy Bible) which was inspired to be written by men – words uttered by angles or the Spirit from The Father.

I am quite sure though that even if one should only have one copy of a modern bible, and if that one trusted The Father to lead him, he would be able to discern His perfect will from that bible.

I am just so pleased that additional early and extant literature has surfaced now in our day.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 03 2005,22:53)

Hi reality, Men may see visions of heaven such as happened with Paul and John. But John was still on Patmos when he saw Revelation. Would we want to return to earth as is our eternal destiny, if we had been in heaven? Surely Eden was on earth as Genesis shows? Surely it may still be guarded and the guards not be visible?

Yes, I've read of visons/dreams and it may be so. These events were recorded a very long time after they happened, and were translated and requoted a number of times by numerous individuals. There is room for doubt as to their word-for-word accuracy today.

After reading volumes of Pseudepigrapha (OT and NT) there seems to be more evidence that individuals were carried to other realms by hosts of Heaven. This was always at the behest of a higher being and never at the whim of the individual. So we could not go there and decide on our own that we preferred to stay rather than return as happened with all accounts I've read up to now. (excepting Enoch- yet God took him so he didn't just decide to go and not return).

Then again the biblical rendition of Paul's vision and that of John on the Isle of Patmos may be exactly as recorded. I tend to doubt it though, because what then would be proof that Joseph Smith of the Mormons did not receive just as valid a vision. Or maybe Muhammed, or maybe Ellen G. White? I don't believe them though. Where is the dividing line to prove one more accurate from the others? I think they need to be borne out by Scripture of two witnesses at least.

Yes, Eden was definitely on earth. There is room to believe that it could still be here only not visible to us. Still, it seems more likely to me that it is hidden in another realm as well as the Ark of the Covenant and Moses' body.

After reading Stephen Hawkings and a few other authors regarding black holes, worm holes etc. it seems entirely possible. At least it makes the intertestamental literature like,”Shepherd of Hermas” and others much more realistic.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 03 2005,19:57)

Reality[/quote] Thank you reality, But do spirit beings have heavenly bodies? Maybe-like the angels. Do we go to heaven? I don't see it written.

Hello Nick,

I suppose I have more questions than answers, but I'll try to explain what I understand – up to now anyway.

I believe that spirit beings are pictured or described in a number of ways. I expect they must have some type of body/identity in order that one would be determined from another. I have read that there are cherubim, seraphim, arch-angles etc. each having various qualities differing from one another. I believe all of these beings would be categorized as spiritual beings and even sons of God. I think all of them were generated at or near the same time – a very long time ago – and given differing responsibilities spanning various lengths of time and place.

It appears that some have been elevated at times while others are demoted. Even Lucifer was at one time a covering cherum (a rather high position), but he is no longer in that position nor does he continue to be known by that same name.

“going to Heaven” could mean several areas. I think there is evidence of at least 8 realms in Heaven and possibly even more, so one could be carried to varying realms for varying lengths of time. I actually believe that Enoch is in one of these as well as the Garden of Eden. Why else would there be cherubim with swords guarding the entrance to it if not? After Adam and Eve and all the animals were driven from Eden, cherubim with swords were set to guard the entry. I've never read that they have stopped guarding it.

One could be transported to one of the realms of Heaven for a short time and then return to earth. Some people think they only go there in vision but don't really go there physically. I don't know for sure, but it makes more sense to me that they actually go there. I've read a great deal of literature, which speaks of these type trips as being rather common. It does seem that most if not all of this type travel came to a halt after Messiah left us. He plans to return, however; and possibly we will someday be able to move about in many realms as well.

But my understanding of 'going to Heaven' is not that people are wafted off to Heaven at their death to stay there. At the end of Revelations, it appears that The Father will come here, so why would we wish our abode to be in Heaven for all time?

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 03 2005,03:55)

Any more thoughts on this forum?

Hi,

Yes, I've been reading here, and these are very informative comments. My own beliefs in this area have changed a number of times and are likely to do so yet again – at least to some degree. Hope this won't be too long, but here goes my very rough sketch.

First, I feel there are probably 2 resurrections rather than 2 judgements. There must be at least 2 resurrections, because the 1st one is declared to be the best.

Judgement may not be a momentary declaration. It seems that Judgement is a determination made over the duration of our entire physical lives. Judgement begins at the House of God (the body). We are being judged now.

At Messiah's return, either we will still be alive and will be translated into spirit beings along with those faithful ones who have already died. They first must be resurrected to life. Then it appears they arise (as did Messiah – 1st to physical life and then later the same morning, at time of the Wave Sheaf, he was then translated into spirit and subsequently transported into Heaven to be with The Father).

There seems to be a ceremony (rewards) in Heaven where the gift of Immortality is bestowed on the elect by The Father. Then at a prescribed time, all the Saints return with Messiah to the earth and a War ensues. After the war, the Millennium begins.

At the end of the 1000 year reign, all other deceased are resurrected (2nd Resurrection) to physical life (as humans again) and at this time they are now called and judgement of their lives begins. As they each become repentant and are converted, they too in order are translated into spirit beings and are also granted immortality.

When all is complete, The City of God comes out of Heaven and covers the earth. At this point, all the earth and inhabitants are pure. It is now that Messiah hands all over to The Father who abides with us all – No more sadness – No more tears.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 01 2005,02:19)

Reality[/quote] Hi reality, Good points. Where is the “now I know”?

Hello Nick,

Yes, I should have included that. Here goes.

Genesis 22: 10-12
(10) Then Abraham put forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. (11) But the angel of the LORD called to him from heaven, and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here am I.” (12) He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.” (RSV)

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (t8 @ June 30 2004,09:44)

If God created all things through his Word and if Jesus was the Word made flesh, then yes. If the Father is the vine dresser and if Jesus is the vine and we are the branches, then yes. If the beginning of the creation of God and the firstborn of all creation laid his life down, then he could give life to all creation. If death could come through 1 man, then how much more could life come through one sinless man. It is impossible for God to take the sin of the world on himself. God cannot even look upon sin. If God did take the sin of the world on himself and he had to die (which is impossible) then there wouldn't be anything left. For all things and all life originates in the Father. Too many people think that God is on one side and man on the other and God had to die and bring man back to himself. But that is really rediculous if you think about it. God has a mediator between himself and us, namely Christ Jesus. God through his mediator is redeeming men back to himself. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. John 1:4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men. John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.   Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. John 15:1 “I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. John 15:5 “I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. Romans 5:17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.

Hi again,

I will stop soon and give you a bit of a break, then I hope to continue learning all the more.

I do exactly agree with what you said in this post, but I think there is an additional thought to add regarding what is an adequate or suitable sacrifice. The reason that one sinless human is an adequate sacrifice is because The Father accepted this. In the past, He declared what was acceptable whether it be a lamb, a dove or a lowly pigeon – all His choice – and Messiah's physical life seems enough for Him, so who are we to even question whether it is adequate?

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (t8 @ April 19 2003,04:53)

Q: Everything has an origin, why doesn't God? A: God is eternal and eternity doesn't have an origin, only finite things have an origin. Eternity is the origin. This is very hard for many to accept because being finite we do not understand infinite. But infinite is a different reality to finite, so you cannot use finite thinking and apply it to infinite. Q: Couldn't you argue there is no God and the universe has always existed? A: Yes, in the same way you could argue that a house has always existed and the builder never existed, but is a figment of ones imagination. Q: If God was loving and forgiving, why were Adam and Eve not forgiven? A: Because God made Man with a free will, which means that God would respect our will and not over-ride our decisions. If we didn't have free-will, we would be a race of robots and God desires that he has sons and daughters that are free and choose him freely. Now maybe Adam and Eve were forgiven or maybe not, but that depends on how they lived the remainder of their lives. Same goes for us. Q: Why did God create Adam and Eve to be so gullible if he wanted them to stay “good” and not taste from the tree of knowledge? A: Because God needed to test Man to see if Man would choose him or choose him not. This was and is a fundamental process that all eternal creatures of God have to go through. First we are created, then we are tested to see if we choose Godly character. All of God's creatures that have been created and tested and have chosen God, live forever. Sounds fair enough to me. If a creature chooses not to follow God, then why should they be forced to live with God forever against their so-called free-will. Q: Where do angels come from? A: Angels were created by God who created all things. Q: Angels have been alive before humans and sound incredibly similar to medieval folkore, do they not? A: Yes they do. If Angels exist and have interacted with humans in the past, then it seems logical that their memory would be folklore or the stuff of legends today. Look at the legend of Hercules. He is said to have a god as his Father (Zues) and his Mother was from earth (Gaiea). Now read Genesis 6:4: There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. Q: Why does it seem as though God is eager to take credit for human achievement even though he created the problem being solved in the first place. A: God never created the problem, he allowed the possibility of the problem to honour our free-will. If there was no option but God, then our free-will to choose him would be a farce. Now if a person chooses to serve God (the problem being solved as you say), then of course God is very happy, because that is one more person that will live with God forever. Don't forget however that if man had obeyed God in the first place, then there wouldn't be a problem. But man didn't. Q: If God created everything, then logically he created Satan. So you worship the creator of Satan? Isn't that worse than worshipping Satan himself? A: God created all that is good because he is light and there is no darkness in him. Now if a person has a free-will and they choose to reject God, then what should God create for those people in order to exist seperate from God.  Well if God is light, then maybe those who reject light have darkness. If God is love, then those that reject love can have hate. If God is eternal, then maybe those who reject eternity will perish. So is darkness a created thing or really just the lack of light? Is hate a created thing or just the lack of love? It makes sense that if a creature such as Satan rejects God, then they reject love, light and wisdom. So why is Satan called the Prince of Darkness and why is he called the Father of Murderers (hate) and why was he cut away from God's everlasting life? Because he was the first creature to reject God. Therefore all those who reject God are following in Satans footsteps. So God didn't create Satan to fall. God gave his creatures free-will to choose him or reject him and God gives the lack of himself to those that reject him. They are cut away from God because it is what they choose. The scriptures are clear that God created Satan perfect in the beginning and it was Satans choosing that resulted in Satan sinning. Now if God didn't allow free-will then we would just be robots and true love wouldn't exist. Whats the point in creating creatures that have no choice and what pleasure is there for God when those creatures say to him, “I love you”, when it is just the response of a program. As mentioned before, to have eternal life and Godly character, you must first be created and secondly you must choose God. If you choose to rebel against the God who is the source of all good, then we shouldn't be surprised at the outcome because God is the only source of all good.

Hello T8,

I continue to read and learn at this great site. After going into too many various directions, I decided to go back to the earlies Biblical topics I could find here, and start reading all of them from that point on. These are very good and most happen to teach what I already understand to be true.

I got to this interesting one, which also rings true. There is just one area where there is another view, which may be possible, but I'm not possitive yet.

I am looking at this area of your post:>>
Q:[/b] Why did God create Adam and Eve to be so gullible if he wanted them to stay “good” and not taste from the tree of knowledge?
A: Because God needed to test Man to see if Man would choose him or choose him not. This was and is a fundamental process that all eternal creatures of God have to go through. First we are created, then we are tested to see if we choose Godly character. All of God's creatures that have been created and tested and have chosen God, live forever. Sounds fair enough to me. If a creature chooses not to follow God, then why should they be forced to live with God forever against their so-called free-will.<<

I actually think that The God Most High does know all things, but the fact that He knows all does not take away our ability to choose. The being who needs to know the outcome of a test is the Mediator, because he does not know everything.

This would explain the scene where Abraham is obeying the voice that directed him to sacrifice Isaac. Just as he was at the final stage, The Great Angel (or messenger) interrupted him and told him not to hurt the lad. Since Abraham could not have heard the voice of The God Most High, he heard the messenger instead. It was the messenger who needed to know and that is why the messenger said, “Now I know … “

I think it is the same with us that The Father already knows which way we will choose, but since he has called and given us to the anointed, then that being needs to learn our choice.

It is much like a parent of children today. Suppose a mother places her children in a room full of other children. The room is filled with lots of toys for them to play with, and in the midst of the room is a bright red truck. The mother tells her children to leave that truck alone and not to play with it. Then she leaves the room.

She may not know what the other children will do, but she likely does know which of her own children will obey her. The fact that she knows this does not take away the children's choice.

This is only a possibility howeve
r, but it sort of explains how The Father can know all things, yet trials must come – these not only for the benefit of the messenger/anointed but for each of us as well, for often we do not know what we ourselves may do in a given situation until it happens to us.

It seems to also explain how that Messiah could not tell his disciples exactly when those events in Matt. 24 might occur. Instead he said only His Father Knows.

Just a possibility, I guess. Back to more interesting reading.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 27 2005,20:33)

Hi R, Can anyone who has not become a child of God rightly call Him Father? When Jesus spoke to his disciples in Lk 11 about prayer to the Father and seeking the Spirit he was speaking only to them and not those of the world. The only begotten Son of God has always had a higher place than all others under God but his anointing only occurred at his baptism by the Spirit on earth. He was a vessel for God as Spirit. Angel means messenger. Archangels or sons of God have higher roles and individual names. They were before the creation of the world as Job 38 shows us. The amazingly glorious Son of God was before them and they were created through him. Pronunciation is a diversion and a tangential path. If someone addressed us by another form or with an accent we would not shun them. God is not a fastidious perfectionist in His relations with men. He knows we are weak ignorant vessels and He treats us fairly and kindly.

Hello Nick,

I want to respond in parts, and I hope this works.

You said:

Hi R,
Can anyone who has not become a child of God rightly call Him Father? When Jesus spoke to his disciples in Lk 11 about prayer to the Father and seeking the Spirit he was speaking only to them and not those of the world.

+++++
Thanks for your response.

I think I view this somewhat differently. First, I think we are told that we are first chosen and then we can proceed to learning about our Creator and all the many truths He has for us. During this process, we would likely come to view Him as Our Father where we might not have before.

Next, It seems that Scripture is recorded for our inspiration and to learn from. If the reference you mention was only for those he was speaking to at the moment, then would there be a need for it to be written? What is the purpose of Scripture? Andy why read it if it is not for all? How can we even come to Him without first hearing (seeing) His Word?

Additionally you said:

The only begotten Son of God has always had a higher place than all others under God but his anointing only occurred at his baptism by the Spirit on earth. He was a vessel for God as Spirit.

Angel means messenger. Archangels or sons of God have higher roles and individual names. They were before the creation of the world as Job 38 shows us. The amazingly glorious Son of God was before them and they were created through him.

++++
At one time I believed exactly what you said here. Later I found that Messiah was *chosen* from among his comrades *because* he (Messiah) loved righteousness and hated evil. This is quoted in both what is now the Old Testament and also in the now called, New Testament in Hebrews.

It would have been unfair for The Father to have chosen him if he had possessed some high advantage in comparison to his brethren from whom he had been selected.

But this all occured some time before all of this physical earth and humans were created. That is clarified at Deuteronomy 32:8 in the RSV. I don't see this as a critical understanding, however.

I do agree with almost all that you say.

Later you said:

Pronunciation is a diversion and a tangential path. If someone addressed us by another form or with an accent we would not shun them. God is not a fastidious perfectionist in His relations with men. He knows we are weak ignorant vessels and He treats us fairly and kindly.

++++
Here we are in total agreement.

I'll be back soon, but must run for now.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 27 2005,19:56)

Hi R, The view from heaven differs from man's view. Few want to seek and so few will find. The door is open but few find it. Few lepers were healed in the time of Elisha.

Hi again,

But this is exactly the point I am trying to make. If the view from Heaven is different from ours, how can we apply the prophecy? I mean how can we determine which are the candlesticks, lampstands, witnesses, olive trees?

Not trying to be difficult, just cannot seem to understand these, yet, but hope it will come.

Thank you for trying.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 27 2005,05:55)

Sure Reality, “assemblies” may be better. They met in one another's houses at the beginning and in my view that is still a valid expression of the Body of Christ. Peter wanted to build buildings on the mountain after the transfiguration. That idea has continued but that expresses only our faith in our human leadership and their predecessors

Hi Nick,

Here I am with another nit-picky problem.

I do agree that assemblies is an accurate term for the physical group who followed Messiah's Way after he left this earth. There is also a good example of these individuals as being the composition of 'the body'.

These could also be termed the 'spiritual temple', I think. The problem for me arises when I attempt to use this analogy in areas of prophetic writing that we suppose is meant for us (the temple, the body, the ecclesia etc.). According to what I can understand about this body of believers, The Father knows those who are His.

Is it even up to us to define who is or is not a member of this invisible (to us) group? That makes many glitches in applying prophecy.

I shall continue to read the older messages here and see if this may have been discussed elsewhere.

Thank you,

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 18 2005,00:22)

Hi, The witnesses are called “lampstands” and as trettep has pointed out, these are identified as churches in Rev 1.20 ” ..and the seven lampstands are the seven churches” The letters to the churches are in fact addressed to the angels of those churches. Rev 2.5 says ” Remember, therefore, from where you have fallen and repent and do the deeds you did at first. Or else I am coming to you, and will remove your lampstand out of it's place unless you repent” So the threat here is to the angel responsible for the church and it threatens to take the church from it's place? What does this mean?

Hi,

The entire concept of 'churches' being referenced here is a huge problem for me.

I just finished reading an extrordinary post by T8 in the thread called, 'Physical Fellowship'. I couldn't agree with it more – especially the part that describes 'churches' as denominations. I see them as corporations in most cases.

Anyway, they can hardly be what Messiah intended in his conversations during his last days on earth. He mentioned that in the synagogues or tabernacles that men have power of other men, but that it should not be so with 'us' (meaning his spiritual body, I think).

The whole notion of churches, as we know them, came into being many years after Messiah spoke. But in any event, at his death the veil was rent from top to bottom which had, up to this point, separated Jew from Gentile and kept the Holy of Holies to only a few and then only on certain days (Atonement).

This all makes the wording about the 7 'churches' in Revelations all the more difficult for me to grasp.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 26 2005,20:04)

Reality[/quote] Hi R, The use of “three and a half”[1260 days] is symbolic too in scripture relating to half the seven year tribulation and the lack of rain in the time of Elijah. So it probably relates to years rather than days just as one day can be as 1000 years to God[2Peter and Ps]. “Sackcloth” is also used to describe eclipses of sun and moon again relating to the signs mentioned in Matthew and Revelation.

Hi again, Nick.

On this part, I cannot quite see how the instance of 3 and 1/2 days leans more to the symbolic years more than the literal days all because in other places, the 3 and 1/2 days means years rather than days.

There is the instance where Messiah is in the grave for 3 days and nights, which parallels Jonah in the belly of the fish for 3 days and 3 nights.

I imagine we all agree that this was not years, but days.

By using the same reasoning though for other instances where we see examples of events lasting 3 days, 3 years or in some cases 3 months or 3 Sabbaths, we cannot assume that it must all be 3 days and nights simply because those major events involving Messiah in the grave and Jonah in the fish all spoke of literal days rather than years.

I hope I am not sounding too confusing to you, because I am finding it difficult to express all of this accurately.

And then possibly I've misunderstood you to be saying that the Revelations notations for 3 and 1/2 days for the bodies in the street must instead be years because other incidents lasting 3 and 1/2 days does turn out to be years instead.

I'll re-read all of that again after a rest from it.

Thank you for your explanation even if I have misunderstood it for the time being.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 26 2005,20:04)

Reality,Sep. wrote: Hi Nick, How can “witnesses” also be “prophets”? What do they have to prophesy about?

Hi Nick,

I just want to reply so you will know I've read and considered what you wrote. At this point, I cannot say whether witnesses can also be prophets or not. I never thought about this, so I'll need more time in this area.

Reality

[Reality]

Hello again Is. 1:18.

I located that older post back in “Biblical Discussions” then to page 11 of 16 and under the topic “The Third Temple”. Here is an except which I find interesting.

Quote

Daniel 9:27) 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 [desolator]. **We know that Messiah has come and that the sanctuary has been destroyed. I don't know about a flood in Israel…but perhaps this fast forwards into the future. And till the end of which war? And what desolations? Can Israel be said to be desolated now? They certainly have had desolations. Who is this that brings an end to sacrifice and offering…and what sacrifice and offering if the Temple is clearly destroyed? Does anyone know or are we holding to the common understanding that the Temple shall be rebuilt again? This passage says nothing about rebuilding and neither did Jesus. One who makes desolate on the wing of aborminations. Consummation poured out on the desolator. One thing to take into consideration against my idea is that the Mosque has been there for quite sometime now. But it is there, and that after the destruction of the temple. Any other insights, you guys?

Hope that came out correct. There is also another very interesting conversation that seems connected called, “End Time Prophesies” back in April 6-8th. I will return there and read more, but the above was notable.

Oh, by the way, the area where I was reading from Revelations 11 is from the RSV (my favorite at the moment).

Reality

[Reality]

Hi Nick,

This makes reasonable sense to me except that I am still left with how 'symbolic' 2 witnesses could lie dead in the street for 3 and 1/2 days.

Still, they are identified in symbolic terms at verse 4. First at verse 3 they are said to prophesy for 1260 days while being clothed in sackcloth. That sounds rather like physical beings.

Then at verse 4, these 2 are identified as being the 2 olive trees and the 2 lampstands which stand before the Lord of the earth. That sounds symbolic rather than like actual physical beings.

By the time you get to verse 7, they sound once more like physical beings who can prophesy and can be killed.

Definitely by verse 9, they are spoken of as being literal physical beings. I have read notions that the reason they lie dead in the street in public view is because so many doubted that Messiah was raised from the dead because no one saw it. So the idea is to have them lie there in view until they are resurrected as shown at verse 11. That part doesn't sound like trees or lampstands but individuals.

Thank you for your notes. I'm back to reading more.

Reality

[Reality]

Hello Is 1:18,

Yes, I agree that a temple or tabernacle is necessary for the prophecy to be valid.  I am questioning whose temple/tabernacle is being referenced.  

I'm continuing to read past messages here, where I feel I am learning a great deal.  One in particular mentioned that the temple could already be established in the designated area – that being a mosque.  I will try to relocate that post, because it made perfect sense to me.  I believe it was written by someone with the handle “Cube” or maybe “Rudy”.  When I relocate it, I'll send you a copy to see what you may think.

Still reading for now.  

Thank you lots for your notes.

Reality

[Reality]

Quote (Rudy @ April 10 2005,12:36)

James 3:  6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell… …8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. We all operate according to the gift given us by God, we are not our own, He works in us to will and to do of His good pleasure. Their ministry is the first half of the tribulation.  Seals 1-7 and Trumpets 1-6.  This brings us to the middle of the Tribulation and the abomonation of desolation! Satan kills them through the Beast. They will be killed Rev. 11:8 “where our Lord was crucified”, Jerusalem.  The Beast will set his image up in the Temple claiming to be God.  The witnesses will be claiming otherwise so when they are killed the whole world (almost) will be deceived and think that the beast is the Almighty.

Quote

They will be killed Rev. 11:8 “where our Lord was crucified”, Jerusalem.  The Beast will set his image up in the Temple claiming to be God.  The witnesses will be claiming otherwise so when they are killed the whole world (almost) will be deceived and think that the beast is the Almighty.

Hi,

I'm new here and am still reading all I can.  These are most interesting topics, and I have much more to read so I may be missiing quite a bit in my questions.  Hopefully, it will not be too long before I can catch up on the may posts, which are thought provoking.

Also, I am not up to speed on how to post, so this may come out very different from what I've intended, but here goes.

From the quote above (I hope I did that right), I am wondering about the Temple mentioned.  I once had this exact same belief, but then some ideas no longer seem to fit when I examine some of it piece-by-piece.

Going back a bit to the time that Messiah was slain, when he said, “It is finished”, I think he did not mean that all he would ever do in future was finished, but only that up to that point he had done all that he had been sent to do for that time.

At that time, there was darkness on the earth at mid-day, there was a violent earthquake which opened graves so that people emerged, the temple veil was rent from top to bottom leaving the Holy-of Holies open so that individuals did not need to approach through Levitical Priests.  Instead the Messiah had now become the High Priest of the Melchizedecian priesthood.

In my thinking, this made the physical temple obsolete from this point on.  It may be that it was not until Pentecost that the new temple (which temple we are) was begun, but in any event, it seems that the Levitical temple in Jerusalem was obsolete for some time even before 70 AD.

I do not know of any other temple (sanctioned by God at least) being of significance by the time the Two Witnesses are on the scene.  My problem is that I cannot reconcile this part of the account about a physical temple so the account of the Two Witnesses is difficult for me to understand.

More than likely, I've overlooked something.  Could you please help clear this part up for me?

I'll continue to read all I can in hopes to catch up on the interesting topics I've found at this site.

Thank you.

Reality

[Author]

Posts