| |
| Writings Discussion Authors Help Search Home |
What prophecy!? (RE: Should We Trust Science?) By: Seth Dillingham on 8/20/2001; 7:08 PM Your message was so long that I couldn't possibly take the time to read and respond to the whole thing. However, this one statement caught my eye and almost made me choke: Smith said: >6. The most strong case of prophetic fulfillment comes from >the possibility of there being a middle east peace treaty very soon. I have two GIGANTIC problems with this statement. Not coincidentally, they line up very nicely with the two halves of the statement. First of all, I can't begin to figure out what prophecy you're talking about. I know my Bible prophecies pretty well, but I can't think of any that speak of peace in Israel before "Armageddon". Second, the nations in the Middle East are preparing to go to war, not to the negotiating table. Don't let your beliefs about Bible prophecy blind you to what is actually happening now. The problem with using Bible prophecy to interpret events -- especially before they've unfolded -- is twofold. First, we never have a perfect understanding of what the symbols in the prophecy mean, so it's impossible to be sure of exactly what it's talking about (again, especially in advance). Second, the prophecies don't include dates, so what you think might be the beginning of a fulfillment could easily turn out to be a big nothing. Seth
RE: What prophecy!? (RE: Should We Trust Science?) By: Smith on 8/23/2001; 3:04 AM Seth Dillingham First of all, I can't begin to figure out what prophecy you're talking about. I know my Bible prophecies pretty well, but I can't think of any that speak of peace in Israel before "Armageddon". You must read more and study more. All these can be cross referenced with other verses in the Bible. Daniel Chapter 9 verse 27 "And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations {will come} one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate." This is well known by nearly all people who study prophecy as being a period of 7 years. That is the man who sets up the abonimation that causes desolation (an image of a god in Israel) will confirm a peace treaty with many for 7 years, but half way through this seven years he will break the treaty ending the sacrificial system. I will give more information on this tomorrow, unfortunately I do not have time tonight. Daniel Chapter 7 verse 25 "'He will speak out against the Most High and wear down the saints of the Highest One, and he will intend to make alterations in times and in law; and they will be given into his hand for a time, times, and half a time." Again, it describes the man who speaks out against the Most High (see previous post on Maitreya and how he declares himself above everything that is worshipped) about making alterations in law and handing over the people of God for 3 and a half years. Revelation Chater 12 verse 14 talks also about how Israel will be taken care of for the 3 and a half years that these events take place. Daniel Chapter 12 verse 7 "...that it would be for a time, times, and half and as soon as they finish shattering the power of the holy people, all these {events} will be completed" Once again. Second, the prophecies don't include dates, so what you think might be the beginning of a fulfillment could easily turn out to be a big nothing. Unfortunately because you did not get the time to read the post you did not catch this statement... I will start by saying, do not consider everyone who believes in such as being involved in cults like much of popular media portrays. Cults are easily identified because they usually revolve prophecy around specific dates. I, nor every other true Christian will do such a thing because it clearly opposes one of the things Jesus stressed in Mark chapter 13 verse 28-32 "Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near. "Even so, you too, when you see these things happening, recognize that He is near, {right} at the door. "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away. "But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father {alone.} Here Jesus clearly states that we will see the time draw near yet not know an exact day or hour. So anyone claiming such can be immediately dismissed. Mathew Patterson I'm sorry, this is a joke, right? I certainly don't see either side willing to seriously work for peace. In fact, I daresay this confict is going to erupt into full-blown war relatively soon. I agree totally and so does prophecy. This is what leads up to the biggest battle in humankind in fact. But first there is a period of peace for approximately 3.5 years before hand. Then all hell breaks loose. Will adress other topics tomorrow when I have more time.
RE: What prophecy!? (RE: Should We Trust Science?) By: Brian Carnell on 8/21/2001; 7:00 PM You must read more and study more. Indeed. Anybody know of a good Bible study class Seth could join? ;-)
RE: What prophecy!? (RE: Should We Trust Science?) By: Seth Dillingham on 8/21/2001; 8:11 PM On Tuesday, August 21, 2001 at 8:16 PM, Brian Carnell wrote: >Indeed. Anybody know of a good Bible study class Seth could join? ;-) It'll have to be on a night other than Wednesday or Friday. Don't tell him, Brian. ;-) I'm going to bow out of this conversation now, you can't win an argument with a fanatic. (Anybody seen Peter lately? Or did he get banned?)
Re: What prophecy!? (RE: Should We Trust Science?) By: Matthew Patterson on 8/22/2001; 7:03 AM Peter has gone back to Nitpicker Central because we won't permit his usual shenanigans here anymore. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: What prophecy!? (RE: Should We Trust Science?) By: Mark Morgan on 8/22/2001; 11:20 AM (Anybody seen Peter lately? Or did he get banned?) After repeated attempts to get Peter to understand that I simply
will not tolerate namecalling, I reset Peter's password and wrote him
privately that he should show me he understand the rules, or visit VoU
in read-only mode. He wrote back "I choose
neither."
Really, calling Brian Webber a moron and almost driving away a
poet with insults is the short path to getting on my bad side.
I've never even deleted a post here (except for duplicates),
and I was upset for several days over the whole thing.
I know this is off-topic, but for a bit of history Peter followed
the group here from nitcentral, and Chief Nitpicker Phil Farrand
took the unusual step one day of personally telling Peter to cut it
out. It didn't work.
There are days when I wished there was a non-member-posting
option in Conversant, but I've decided it's for the best.
Someone has been masquerading as Peter at Nitcentral, saying very
ridiculous things. An option they would not have here.
The reason I posted this lengthy statement is I don't want people
to think that I have any real kind of editorial policy. For
example, I've disagreed so far with every single thing Smith has
written, but I'd never stop him from posting it simply because I don't
agree. The only verboten things here are hate,
pornography, libel, copyright infringements...and namecalling.
As you were.
RE: What prophecy!? (RE: Should We Trust Science?) By: Smith on 8/22/2001; 5:58 PM "I'm going to bow out of this conversation now, you can't win an argument with a fanatic." This is somewhat confusing. Originally you said that you were well versed in biblical prophecies but did not know of a location of the prophecy I was citing. So you asked me to provide a location of the prophecy I referred to. In doing as you asked and answering your question, I am now labelled as a fanatic. If I had not answered the question, people would have assumed I had no knowledge of any compatible verses and thus failed a make shift peer review process on this forum. Couldn't win either way. Mark Morgan "For example, I've disagreed so far with every single thing Smith has written, but I'd never stop him from posting it simply because I don't agree." I'm not sure who you were talking about in the bulk of that post, neither does it matter. But this section is encouraging. I sensed that I have outstayed my welcome already, but if you don't object to one asking a few more questions, then all the better. The past few days I have been very busy, so could not ask any further questions in relation to the evolution posts (of all types) tonight. Will try to tomorrow.
RE: What prophecy!? (RE: Should We Trust Science?) By: Mark Morgan on 8/23/2001; 12:25 PM The past few days I have been very busy, so could not ask any further questions in relation to the evolution posts (of all types) tonight. Will try to tomorrow. The only way to outstay your welcome is to call people
names--visit the Bleachers to see
what sort of thing crosses the line with me. Note that there is
some non-inflammatory content on that page, from an entire thread I
didn't want to see continue. For example, ScottN's comments are
harmless.
As for more evolution posts....
...on my end, I feel I've said all I have to say, really. I
haven't ever, ever seen a scientific theory of creationism, and until
one appears, and the results are tested, creationism can stay in
church where it belongs. Your side comments into Biblical prophecy,
while interesting to some, are completely irrelevant to the matter of
whether creationism is an actual science.
You've spent time criticizing a wide range of actual sciences,
but I don't see any evidence that creationism can come up with actual
testable results, with peer-reviewed research to back it up.
Until then, creationism will remain in my mind best kept
completely out of the public schools. The schools issue is the
only reason the topic matters--people are free to believe whatever
they want, but they aren't free to teach their religion to my
children.
And, I stand by my original conclusions from the essay that
started this discussion:
I don't have much to say beyond that.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright Notice | Privacy Policy | Contact | |
 |
|