tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post1141980931735915931..comments2024-03-28T08:37:16.470-07:00Comments on Banned by HWA! News and Observations About Armstrongism and the Church of God Movement: Not So Fast! I'm Dreaming!NO2HWAhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02018654662518613623noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-51901945737326694672018-10-16T13:55:51.767-07:002018-10-16T13:55:51.767-07:00Anonymous 9:34am
I have the legal right to call t...Anonymous 9:34am<br /><br />I have the legal right to call the newspaper and tell them why this church, in their town, won't let me attend.<br /><br />In this case it was because the hireling kicked a friend of mine out and he didn't have a good biblical reason to do it so I challenged him on it.<br /><br />You hirelings don't like it when someone has the balls to question you!<br /><br />KevinKevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-42515444010166870682018-10-16T13:50:14.687-07:002018-10-16T13:50:14.687-07:00"""At the risk that I may regret as..."""At the risk that I may regret asking ☺, would you like to elaborate on the dual prophecy?"""<br /><br /> ================================<br /><br />If you believe in a seven thousand year plan, then Jesus did indeed get cut off in the midst of the week. The fourth day of the prophetic week. He also made an end of the old Mt. Sinai covenant.<br /><br />What I find interesting is that most would agree that Jesus died at the end of the 4th millennia, with 2,000 years til the millennium. That's seven thousand years.<br /><br />Now if Jesus was crucified on a Wednesday, then the Sabbath before would have been the 10 day of the 1st month when they picked the lamb. If that pictures a time before creation, then that symbolizes Jesus, the lamb slain before the foundation of the world.<br /><br />Now we have the next week picturing the seven thousand years. Jesus dying on the 14th, a Wednesday, at the end of the day, just as he came to the earth at the end of the four thousand years.<br /><br />He's in the grave for the rest of the symbolic week and rises most likely around sunset at the end of the Sabbath the beginning of the next dsy. The next day picturing the completion of the plan and on into eternity.<br /><br />My wife wants me so I don't have time to proof read, hope it makes sense.<br /><br />KevinKevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-21420207373988184342018-10-16T13:34:54.954-07:002018-10-16T13:34:54.954-07:00"""Anonymous said...
Kevin
If a chu..."""Anonymous said...<br />Kevin<br />If a church group tells you that you are no longer welcome, you should respect that. Their property rights give them the legal right to exclude you from their property. And their right to freedom of association (to choose their friends) also gives them the right to kick you out of their group.<br />As far as I'm concerned, you are violating the informal contract that people enter when joining these groups. You're cheating. My pride wouldn't allow me do what you're doing.<br /><br />October 16, 2018 at 9:34 AM"""<br /><br /> ===============================================<br /><br />That's where you have the problem, it wasn't the church group, it was the hireling in charge.<br /><br />Also, did you not see where I said that I never went back?<br /><br />You sound like a hireling yourself. Running the church of God like a business.<br /><br />As far as I'm concerned you're a..............<br /><br />Kevin McMillenKevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-88635257812978968972018-10-16T11:38:07.443-07:002018-10-16T11:38:07.443-07:00The url to my last post on the Seventy Weeks proph...The url to my last post on the Seventy Weeks prophecy should have been:<br /><br />http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/futurewatch/2defcce0.png<br /><br />Hope this works.Yes and No to HWAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-58838532333329302112018-10-16T09:34:43.135-07:002018-10-16T09:34:43.135-07:00Kevin
If a church group tells you that you are no ...Kevin<br />If a church group tells you that you are no longer welcome, you should respect that. Their property rights give them the legal right to exclude you from their property. And their right to freedom of association (to choose their friends) also gives them the right to kick you out of their group.<br />As far as I'm concerned, you are violating the informal contract that people enter when joining these groups. You're cheating. My pride wouldn't allow me do what you're doing.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-68632300741216389692018-10-16T01:42:38.041-07:002018-10-16T01:42:38.041-07:00Kevin writes:
“I see the "he" referring...Kevin writes:<br /><br />“I see the "he" referring to both, a dual prophecy.”<br /><br />At the risk that I may regret asking ☺, would you like to elaborate on the dual prophecy?<br /><br />I see the seventy weeks prophecy as a type-antitype telescopic prophecy involving Christ and the Antichrist.<br /><br />Here is my chart on the prophecy: http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/futurewatch/2dbed030.png<br /><br />Do you see the wars waged in the antichrist’s second half years as a type of the holy wars waged by Christ through Israel in Christ’s second half week? Cp. Zech 9:13, Ps 149:6-9.Yes and No to HWAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-24879518859352265782018-10-15T04:27:42.001-07:002018-10-15T04:27:42.001-07:00"""The “he,” of verse 27, is the pr..."""The “he,” of verse 27, is the prince of the people, the nearest antecedent. In the middle of the prophetic week he will bring the sacrifices to an end, until they are restarted in Ezekiel’s temple, and be responsible for the desolations of the last half of the prophetic week. Well, this is the way I see it."""<br /><br /> -------------------------------------<br /><br />I see the "he" referring to both, a dual prophecy. We'll find out one day.☺<br /><br /><br />KevinKevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-42165973745464891542018-10-15T04:24:58.725-07:002018-10-15T04:24:58.725-07:00"""I also don’t hate HWA; which I h..."""I also don’t hate HWA; which I hoped my non de plume, Yes and No to HWA, would suggest.<br /><br />I never said that the HWA came up with the Wednesday crucifixion."""<br /><br /> ---------------------<br /><br />Sorry, I know you didn't. It was the way that I copied anonymous' post when he was writing to you. I should have removed your name.<br /><br />Sorry.<br /><br />KevinKevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-66779946601624384402018-10-15T04:18:57.466-07:002018-10-15T04:18:57.466-07:00"""Anonymous Yes and No to HWA said..."""Anonymous Yes and No to HWA said...<br />Kevin,<br /><br />Hopefully we can agree to disagree on some interpretations. I respect you understanding - I don’t consider you have a closed mind because you disagree with me; but you could be right that I have a closed mind.<br /><br />In regards to Luke 6:1 “sabbath the second first/chief,” it may refer to the count to Pentecost, but there are other proposals; I don’t know what it means."""<br /><br /> ----------------------------------------------<br /><br />Sure we can agree to disagree. About my "closed mind" comment, it wasn't an accusation. It's just that I assume the web page that you posted at, futurewatch was your work, and I've found that most people who put that much work into something are not likely to be convinced they're wrong.<br /><br />Scholars tell us that mia ton sabbaton refers to the first day of the week, why? Because we know the women went to the tomb after the sabbath and the day after the sabbath is the first day of the week, so that proves it, right?<br /><br />Well no, not necessarily. <br /><br />The day after that particular sabbath was wave sheaf day, it began the seven sabbaths count to Pentecost.<br /><br />So the women went to the tomb after the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first of the sabbaths. Or the beginning of the first of the weeks counting to Pentecost.<br /><br />As I said, sure we can agree to disagree, I used to think mia ton sabbaton was a name solely for the wave sheaf day, but I now think it can refer to any time during that first week count to Pentecost.<br /><br />The phrase is used in literature after the bible to refer to Sunday, but I haven't seen anything to prove that prior to Jesus' death that was also the case.<br /><br />You can't use literature written 100 years later to define a word, unless you really want to deck the halls while donning "gay" apparel.<br /><br /><br />Kevin<br />Kevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-5513652254237952632018-10-15T03:48:48.223-07:002018-10-15T03:48:48.223-07:00"""I’ve been compiling a study myse..."""I’ve been compiling a study myself on the subject for several years that <br />I intended to share online, but due to my poor health I haven’t been able to continue or complete it to my satisfaction. In any event, there’s several online sites that evaluate, and in my opinion satisfactorily undermine and disprove, the theory."""<br /><br /> ------------------------------<br /><br />I hope your health improves, thanks for the links I will read them.<br /><br />KevinKevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-83767682097617755892018-10-14T20:50:11.280-07:002018-10-14T20:50:11.280-07:00Kevin,
Hopefully we can agree to disagree on some...Kevin,<br /><br />Hopefully we can agree to disagree on some interpretations. I respect you understanding - I don’t consider you have a closed mind because you disagree with me; but you could be right that I have a closed mind.<br /><br />In regards to Luke 6:1 “sabbath the second first/chief,” it may refer to the count to Pentecost, but there are other proposals; I don’t know what it means.<br /><br />I disagree that mia ton sabbaton does not refer to a day; for me it refers to the first day of the week.<br /><br />I disagree with Jerry’s argument and a Wednesday crucifixion.<br /><br />I also don’t hate HWA; which I hoped my non de plume, Yes and No to HWA, would suggest.<br /><br />I never said that the HWA came up with the Wednesday crucifixion.<br /><br />One more thing:<br /><br />Da 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. <br />Da 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, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. <br /><br />I don’t see where in the above verses that Christ was killed/cut off in the middle of a week. Yes, Christ was and the Antichrist will be killed in the middle of a prophetic week (7 years) but these verses do not reveal it.<br /><br />The “he,” of verse 27, is the prince of the people, the nearest antecedent. In the middle of the prophetic week he will bring the sacrifices to an end, until they are restarted in Ezekiel’s temple, and be responsible for the desolations of the last half of the prophetic week. Well, this is the way I see it.Yes and No to HWAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-31915075936422659592018-10-14T18:33:44.194-07:002018-10-14T18:33:44.194-07:00Kevin 8:46 AM said:
Oh brother! I can understand ...Kevin 8:46 AM said: <br /><i>Oh brother! I can understand hating everything Armstrong, but what I don't understand is the ignorance displayed by many who hate him.<br />The Wednesday crucifixion idea didn't originate with herbie, nothing originated with herbie.<br />http://www.giveshare.org/HolyDay/satreshistory.html</i><br /><br />I used “Armstrongist” in reference to the doctrine heavily promoted by him, i.e. the Wednesday crucifixion-Saturday resurrection, not because I’m ignorant about the origins of the doctrine, but because it’s a distinctive doctrine of Herbert Armstrong, which I believe the majority of the organizations originating from his ministry steadfastly observe having learned it of him.<br /><br />Thanks for the Giving & Sharing link. I Ioved the late Richard Nickels’s “Bible Study” newsletters back in the 1990s and other publications of his. He was an honest researcher whose opinions and conclusions I respected.<br /><br />The publication by George Dellinger I’m aware of and have a PDF copy, but don’t know where I acquired it off the internet otherwise I’d post a link. I’ve shared it with a friend of mine who adheres to this doctrine. To me, Dellinger demonstrates it’s a recent doctrine that doesn’t go further back than a couple of centuries whereas the history and tradition for a Friday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection is far more overwhelming in my opinion, going all the way back to the first centuries of the Christian church.<br /><br />I’ve been compiling a study myself on the subject for several years that <br />I intended to share online, but due to my poor health I haven’t been able to continue or complete it to my satisfaction. In any event, there’s several online sites that evaluate, and in my opinion satisfactorily undermine and disprove, the theory.<br /><br /><a href="http://asbereansdid.blogspot.com.au/2013/03/three-days-and-three-nights.html" rel="nofollow">As Bereans Did</a><br /><br /><a href="http://biblelight.net/pasover.htm" rel="nofollow">Was Jesus crucified on Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday?</a><br /><br /><a href="http://godskingdomfirst.org/DayJesusDied.htm" rel="nofollow">What Day Did Jesus Die?</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.wednesdaycrucifixion.com" rel="nofollow"> Wednesday Crucifixion Theory</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-73634519837300360052018-10-14T08:49:53.902-07:002018-10-14T08:49:53.902-07:00"""For me it is a kicker for a Frid..."""For me it is a kicker for a Friday crucifixion. I read the link, but I disagree with Jerry’s argument especially his modern-western reasoning."""<br /><br /> -------------------------<br /><br />So, the actual Greek saying "the third day leads today" means nothing to you?<br /><br />I think your mind is made up and nothing will change it.<br /><br />It does not say "today is the third day"!!!!<br /><br />Good day,<br /><br />KevinKevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-65084198888810794072018-10-14T08:46:09.958-07:002018-10-14T08:46:09.958-07:00"""
Anonymous said...
Yes and No to...<br /> """<br />Anonymous said...<br />Yes and No to HWA 6:51 PM said:<br /><br />A couple of other points where I would disagree with the book: Christ and the Saints will not be on the earth during the Millennium - I disagree with the assumption that if you are going to reign on the earth you will be on the earth; and the Crucifixion was not on a Wednesday and other erroneous explanations of Scripture that support this position.<br /><br />Regarding the Armstrongist doctrine of a Wednesday crucifixion and Saturday resurrection I no longer subscribe to this position either<br />October 13, 2018 at 10:13 PM"""<br /><br /> ---------------------------------------<br /><br />Oh brother! I can understand hating everything Armstrong, but what I don't understand is the ignorance displayed by many who hate him.<br /><br />The Wednesday crucifixion idea didn't originate with herbie, nothing originated with herbie.<br /><br /><br /><br />http://www.giveshare.org/HolyDay/satreshistory.html<br /><br /><br />Kevin<br /><br /><br /><br />Kevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-74757598968126904972018-10-14T08:13:55.472-07:002018-10-14T08:13:55.472-07:00"""Yes and No to HWA said...
Kevin ..."""Yes and No to HWA said...<br />Kevin asks:<br /><br />“What evidence do you have of this?”.<br /><br />The example in my post - Matthew 12:1-2.<br /><br />Luke’s parallel:<br /><br />Lk 6:1 One Sabbath [sabbato - dat sq neut] Jesus was going through the grainfields, and his disciples began to pick some heads of grain, rub them in their hands and eat the kernels. (NIV).<br /><br />Lk 6:2 Some of the Pharisees asked, "Why are you doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath [sabbasin - dat pl neut] ?" (NIV)."""<br /><br />------------------------<br /><br /><br />Luke 6:1 actually says on the second Sabbath after the first. This has confused many people, but when you understand the seven Sabbath count to Pentecost there is no problem. It was the second week/sabbath in the seven week/sabbaths count.<br /><br />The reason for the singular and plural Sabbath is because the Sabbath is a day, and it's also a period of time. We call that period of time a week. For us a week can be from Tuesday to<br />Tuesday, Friday to Friday, but a Sabbaton is always from Sabbath to Sabbath.<br /><br />Technically mia ton sabbaton, first the sabbaths, isn't a day, it's the first week count to Pentecost. <br /><br />As in Acts 20:7, most assume the breaking of bread was on Sunday but mia ton sabbaton merely means the first Sabbath, not the singular day but the first week from Sabbath to Sabbath. So the breaking of bread could have occurred on any day during that first week/sabbaton count to Pentecost.<br /><br />1 Cor. 16:2 same thing. Everyone assumes that Paul is telling them to bring the collection on Sunday. Not so. The harvest began on wave sheaf Sunday and Paul told them that on the first (of seven) week/sabbaton of harvesting to lay up a collection for Judea.<br /><br />They had the whole first week/sabbaton of harvest to set aside a collection for Judea, not just one day.<br /><br />Now to the Greek grammer. Yes I know that the word day is added because greek grammer requires a feminine noun to go with mia. That's why I said greek grammer shouldn't be forced on a hebraism. Sabbaton is a hebrew word brought into Greek, a hebraism.<br /><br />If I'm speaking English and use the Spanish for house casa, do I have to say "she" house just because casa is feminine?<br /><br />Mia ton sabbaton is talking about the first week (from sabbath to sabbath) in the seven week harvest, it is not a day, it is a period of seven days.<br /><br />One other thing about crucifixion week. I'm sure that you dismiss Daniel 9:27 about the midst of the week as proof of Wednesday. Ok, fine.<br /><br />But why did God wait almost four thousand years to send Jesus?<br /><br />Four thousand years, Jesus came and died, two thousand years, Jesus returns, one thousand year millennium.<br /><br />Many will pooh-pooh this seven thousand year scenario but it sure seems correct. If it is, then God waiting until the end of the fourth millennia, the fourth "day" to send Jesus to die. Well, coincidence?<br /><br />How about Jesus' first Feast of Tabernacles during his three and a half year ministry? His brothers told him to go up to the Feast, he said his time hadn't come yet.<br /><br />Then in the midst of the feast he went to the Temple. The fourth day of the Feast is the midst of the feast.<br /><br />Four days, four thousand years. Wednesday being the fourth day of the week?<br /><br />Deny all that you want, it doesn't matter to me. Too much coincidence for me.I<br /><br />KevinKevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-54551198965177492152018-10-14T02:39:12.898-07:002018-10-14T02:39:12.898-07:00Kevin asks:
“What evidence do you have of this?”....Kevin asks:<br /><br />“What evidence do you have of this?”.<br /><br />The example in my post - Matthew 12:1-2.<br /><br />Luke’s parallel:<br /><br />Lk 6:1 One Sabbath [sabbato - dat sq neut] Jesus was going through the grainfields, and his disciples began to pick some heads of grain, rub them in their hands and eat the kernels. (NIV).<br /><br />Lk 6:2 Some of the Pharisees asked, "Why are you doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath [sabbasin - dat pl neut] ?" (NIV).<br /><br />Kevin writes:<br /><br />“Forcing Greek grammer on a hebraism by adding the word day is imo disingenuous.”<br /><br />If you look at the AV “day” is in italics. It is added to give the sense. But grammarians also note “the fact that the numeral is feminine indicates that the feminine noun "day" is to be understood.”<br /><br />Ps 23:1 A Psalm for David on the first day of the week [sabbaton - gen pl neut] The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof; the world, and all that dwell in it. (LXX).<br /><br />First of Sabbaths [sabbaton - gen pl neut] (Mt 28:1) is literal, but may be understood as first of [the] Sabbath which is Sunday, the first day of the week.<br /><br />Psalm 47 (Septuagint) has as its title deutera sabbatou [gen singular neut], "for the second day of the week."<br /><br />Kevin writes:<br /><br />“The kicker for me, that proves a Wednesday crucifixion imo, is the road to Emmaus.”<br /><br />For me it is a kicker for a Friday crucifixion. I read the link, but I disagree with Jerry’s argument especially his modern-western reasoning.<br /><br />Ac 10:30 And Cornelius said, Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing,<br /><br />"The time has come for Cornelius to explain why he summoned Peter to his house. In a few sentences he relates the incident that happened "four days ago at this hour." Strictly speaking, the time between Cornelius' vision and the moment he addresses Peter is only three days. But in first-century Palestine, the people regarded part of a day as a full day. Hence the day of Cornelius vision is the first day [at three in the afternoon]. Peter's vision and the arrival of the messengers from Joppa, the second; the day the travellers left Joppa, the third; the day they arrived in Caesarea, the fourth" (Simon J. Kistemaker, Acts, NTC, p.389).<br /><br />1Sa 30:12 And they gave him a piece of a cake of figs, and two clusters of raisins: and when he had eaten, his spirit came again to him: for he had eaten no bread, nor drunk any water, three days and three nights. <br />1Sa 30:13 And David said unto him, To whom belongest thou? and whence art thou? And he said, I am a young man of Egypt, servant to an Amalekite; and my master left me, because three days agone I fell sick. <br /><br />A poor analogy is “I will be there in a minute”. A minute is sixty seconds. So the timeframe maybe a literal minute but overwhelming it is not. So three days and three nights may also be a literal 72 hours but it is not used that way in the Bible. Three nights and three days, if it was so, would appear to be a better way to describe it.<br /><br />Passover pictures Christ’s sacrifice, the wave sheaf His resurrection - just as the physical harvest begins after the Sabbat so did the spiritual harvest.<br /><br />For an amateur argument that deals with these issues and more see http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/futurewatch/id114.htm - needs some work.Yes and No to HWAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-67855056244808712012018-10-13T22:13:29.634-07:002018-10-13T22:13:29.634-07:00Yes and No to HWA 6:51 PM said:
A couple of other...Yes and No to HWA 6:51 PM said:<br /><br /><i>A couple of other points where I would disagree with the book: Christ and the Saints will not be on the earth during the Millennium - I disagree with the assumption that if you are going to reign on the earth you will be on the earth; and the Crucifixion was not on a Wednesday and other erroneous explanations of Scripture that support this position.</i><br /><br />Regarding the Armstrongist doctrine of a Wednesday crucifixion and Saturday resurrection I no longer subscribe to this position either so I’m glad to see someone else bring it up especially since I downloaded the book last night, but as I started browsing it I noted the chapter promoting Armstrong’s 72 hour theory of the duration of Christ’s entombment and winced a little. I’ll put it on my to-read list as I’m currently reading Joe Taylor’s <i>Giants Against Evolution</i> atm. Suffice to say I recall the first time I shared with the family I independently fellowship with about my new understanding about the “three days and three nights” and that I now believe Christ probably died on Friday (Passover) and rose not 72 hours later, but on the third day itself (Wavesheaf Sunday) and the husband would self-righteously assert for months afterwards each time they’d have other guests fellowshiping with us in my presence, “Idk how some Christians believe Christ died on Friday and rose on Sunday when you can’t fit ‘three days and three nights’ in between such!” I would feel at such times he was making a dig at me, but I would refuse to take the bait and respectfully remained silent until the subject matter changed. I appreciate the McLuhan saying more now though having experienced it for myself as I grow in understanding: “I wouldn’t have seen it if I hadn’t believed it!” Since where they’re at currently I once was too and where I am at currently they’ll be too. The timing is up to the Lord who corrects each of us in His time and by a means of His own choosing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-41679551509937363832018-10-13T20:22:03.796-07:002018-10-13T20:22:03.796-07:00"""For example of the latter, there..."""For example of the latter, there were not two Sabbaths in the week Christ died. An appeal is made to Matt 28:1. It was the convention of the time to use the singular and plural interchangeably for the ‘Sabbath’ - the seventh day:"""<br /><br /> ----------------------<br /><br />What evidence do you have of this?<br /><br />Luk 23:56 - And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.<br /><br />So, you think that the women were able to view the tomb where Jesus was laid, return and then prepare the spices all before sunset on what we call Friday?<br /><br />The phrase mia ton sabbaton is a hebraism as I'm sure that you know. Forcing Greek grammer on a hebraism by adding the word day is imo disingenuous.<br /><br />The kicker for me, that proves a Wednesday crucifixion imo, is the road to Emmaus. The Greek is mistranslated. It doesn't say "today is the third day since" the Greek says "the third day leads today".<br /><br />Just as a train engine leads a train, when the caboose appears the engine has passed, so too the third day lead the day they were walking to Emmaus. On that day the third day had already passed.<br /><br />There are a couple translations that have this correct. They say, "the third day has passed".<br /><br />You can read more here:<br /><br />www.a4t.org/Sermons/Brown/11-ennaus.pdf<br /><br /><br />As far as the Saints being in heaven, I completely agree with you.<br /><br />KevinKevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-26027820308525378012018-10-13T18:51:00.844-07:002018-10-13T18:51:00.844-07:00In regards to “The Thread,” which I have a copy al...In regards to “The Thread,” which I have a copy along with Ron’s “The Lonely God” and “Law and Covenant,” it would have been nice to have include the revision of the Holy days in the Ezekielian Torah for the Millennium.<br /><br />This could have included the change in the nature of the Passover from apotropaic to purgative with a public sacrifice of a bull as purification offering; <br /><br />Also the change in the cleansing of the Temple from the seventh month to the first month; which would include the necessity of animal sacrifices for atonement. Compare also the heightened requirements of priestly purification after corpse-contact.<br /><br />A couple of other points where I would disagree with the book:<br /><br />Christ and the Saints will not be on the earth during the Millennium - I disagree with the assumption that if you are going to reign on the earth you will be on the earth; and<br /><br />the Crucifixion was not on a Wednesday and other erroneous explanations of Scripture that support this position.<br /><br />Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath [sabbaton - gen pl neut] day to keep it holy. (LXX).<br /><br />For example of the latter, there were not two Sabbaths in the week Christ died. An appeal is made to Matt 28:1. It was the convention of the time to use the singular and plural interchangeably for the ‘Sabbath’ - the seventh day:<br /><br />(In the OT, the first and last days of Unleavened Bread along with Penrtecost are never called shabbats, not even shabbatons - this convention is carried on in the NT - the first day of Unleavened Bread was on the Sabbath, according to John’s calendar, when Christ died in AD 30).<br /><br />Mt 12:1 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath [sabbasin - dat pl neut] day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungered, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.<br /><br />Mt 12:2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath [sabbato - dat sq neut] day.<br /><br />(Herman Hoeh, in “The Crucifixion was not on a Friday” accused scholars of not knowing that the first sabbath [sabbaton - gen pl neut - see LXX above] of Mt 28:1 was in the plural; they did know it was, hence their translation, and it appears it was Herman Hoeh who did not know the convention as revealed by his wrong interpretation).<br /><br />Having said the above I have always enjoyed listen to and reading Ron Dart, even though I may disagree with him on some points. Yes and No to HWAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-4520045528211072022018-10-13T15:11:38.996-07:002018-10-13T15:11:38.996-07:00"""Anonymous said...
Fellowshippin..."""Anonymous said...<br /><br />Fellowshipping but not joining? I question whether that's possible or even moral. There's unspoken terms and conditions. There's expectations. You're playing games with that group, and things can get ugly if the group puts its foot down.<br /><br />October 13, 2018 at 12:31 PM"""<br /><br /> ---------------------------------------<br /><br />Been doing that for over 23 years. I don't keep it a secret that I won't join either. <br /><br />I've been told by two groups that I'm no longer welcome. That's fine by me.<br /><br />I told the hirelings when told I wasn't welcome that if I wanted to attend I would, that he couldn't stop me. That he could call the police and I would call the local newspaper.<br /><br />Of course, being a Christian I never went because the sheeple are so blind I would be seen as the bad guy instead of the hireling.<br /><br />KevinKevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-67042452803002132582018-10-13T14:32:35.124-07:002018-10-13T14:32:35.124-07:00I think the perfect Christian gathering (do not fo...I think the perfect Christian gathering (do not forsake the gathering of yourselves together...) would be a group of people, or even two or three getting together over a meal and discussing the positives of their Christian living...testimonials of Divine intervention, praising God together in song and, if they want to, to pray for each other and others, the world, whatever. No one person being "in charge", no demands or "musts" (as Dennis put it), no money at all involved. Maybe some scriptures might be brought up for other's take on it. And then departure on a happy and joyful note<br /> Today, everybody tries to be Jesus, preaching to the crowds...but Jesus was teaching spiritual truths about the transition from the law of Moses to the 2 laws of God...from physical to spiritual. The pharisees hated him for who he, in their minds, claimed to be, and ended killing an innocent man, who sacrificed himself for us. Corporate Christianity, to me, is not Christianity. It's a business, to take in money and build bigger and finer buildings. Don't get me wrong. There ARE people who are true Christians. Most of them are known as good people who quietly help people, will "give the shirt off their backs", will be led (by the Holy Spirit) to visit the sick or those in prison, or have strangers over for dinner. You know them by their fruits, their examples of living those fruits. Those people are "the church" and they might not even know each other. They make up the body of Christ. In some cases...ok, most cases...only God knows who they are.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-6468877470317558052018-10-13T12:31:52.858-07:002018-10-13T12:31:52.858-07:00It's my experience that the long term benefit ...It's my experience that the long term benefit of being a member of any group is zero. Short term, one can benefit, but not long term. The Pharisees and Saducees rejecting Christ is an excellent example. Group disciple and conformity kept members in line, even though some knew that the group was wrong. Groups always demand their pound of flesh.<br /><br />Fellowshipping but not joining? I question whether that's possible or even moral. There's unspoken terms and conditions. There's expectations. You're playing games with that group, and things can get ugly if the group puts its foot down.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-45437409983780134272018-10-13T12:18:00.190-07:002018-10-13T12:18:00.190-07:00"""Anonymous said...
Kevin of 6:27
..."""Anonymous said...<br />Kevin of 6:27<br />You asked me what is the real truth and the real gospel.<br />Well, first let me clarify that I do not attend any church, mainstream or otherwise. Having said that, I believe that the real truth is Jesus Christ and God is Love. The Gospel, to me, is the promise of receiving the Holy Spirit, which was made possible after Jesus' resurrection, to everyone who asks and believes. The new commandments of love God (we love God because He first loved us) and love humans from the love He gives us by and through His Holy Spirit. THAT is the gospel. His indwelling. A one on one relationship made possible by Jesus Christ. The fruits of that Spirit are produced, not by us, but by the Holy Spirit dwelling in us. <br />It has nothing to do with the laws of Moses, which have been "finished" when Jesus died. It has nothing to do with prophecy. It has everything to do with a heart and mind relationship with God through the Holy Spirit. When you read the new covenant from Acts on with this spiritual understanding in mind, the Bible takes on a whole new meaning.<br />I've answered your question to the best of my ability. I am not a scholar, a church member, or anything. I'm just a lowly commoner who has witnessed and experienced many miracles (yes, they still occur) in my life and others, and I have a personal relationship with my Creator. Jesus made that possible. <br />The fruits from such a relationship are spiritual and real. That's all.<br /><br />October 13, 2018 at 10:22 AM"""<br /><br /> -----------------------<br /><br />Thank you for your answer.<br /><br />KevinKevin McMillennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-59596078056080909632018-10-13T11:01:05.144-07:002018-10-13T11:01:05.144-07:00Connie, I agree with you for the most part. I hel...Connie, I agree with you for the most part. I helped start a free thinkers group here in Sedona and the Verde Valley. A couple dominant leaders pretty much control it now, not maliciously or corruptly, but every group has to have some one or some few dominant individuals to remain a cohesive unit. Dues are not enforced. You can attend and pay nothing, but that does not appeal to us and some of the events they sponsor seem pointless to us. Besides that, on our limited income, we have to watch the gas we have to buy to attend anything, so we've pretty much backed away. If we can't be all in, there doesn't seem to be a point anymore.Allen Dexternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-1284142844655897412018-10-13T10:22:36.316-07:002018-10-13T10:22:36.316-07:00Kevin of 6:27
You asked me what is the real truth ...Kevin of 6:27<br />You asked me what is the real truth and the real gospel.<br />Well, first let me clarify that I do not attend any church, mainstream or otherwise. Having said that, I believe that the real truth is Jesus Christ and God is Love. The Gospel, to me, is the promise of receiving the Holy Spirit, which was made possible after Jesus' resurrection, to everyone who asks and believes. The new commandments of love God (we love God because He first loved us) and love humans from the love He gives us by and through His Holy Spirit. THAT is the gospel. His indwelling. A one on one relationship made possible by Jesus Christ. The fruits of that Spirit are produced, not by us, but by the Holy Spirit dwelling in us. <br />It has nothing to do with the laws of Moses, which have been "finished" when Jesus died. It has nothing to do with prophecy. It has everything to do with a heart and mind relationship with God through the Holy Spirit. When you read the new covenant from Acts on with this spiritual understanding in mind, the Bible takes on a whole new meaning.<br />I've answered your question to the best of my ability. I am not a scholar, a church member, or anything. I'm just a lowly commoner who has witnessed and experienced many miracles (yes, they still occur) in my life and others, and I have a personal relationship with my Creator. Jesus made that possible. <br />The fruits from such a relationship are spiritual and real. That's all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com