Originally posted by debbiejo
Jesus never talked about a secret rapture.........and since then there have been views of a pre, mid, and post rapture ( oh, and that would be the 2nd coming...post).............Mr. Paul strikes again!.......Yeah through in this little verse from 2nd Thess. I think along with other texts taken out of context................edit.........also certain denominations said the secret rapture happened in 1844.
Why is the verse saying "one will be left and the other be left behind?"........maybe the ones left behind are the worthy ones......it never says does it.
The term 'rapture' is not found in the Bible, but the theory is firmly based on scripture. Acceptance of this doctrine is indeed based upon a passage in Paul' s first letter to the Thessalonians.
Originally posted by lord xyz
But I thought they were true. Why would they lie like that. cry
Bible codes have been utterly disproved... I forgot the guys name, but he proved that if you take a large enough book like the Bible you can find any code you are looking for. He went ahead and used Herman Melville's Moby Dick as an example. He put the entire book in computer program like they do with the Bible and he found everything that Bible Code freaks found, from WW1 to the rise of Hitler to the Twin Towers & 9/11 etc. etc. etc.
It isn't hard to claim to have found a secret code after the fact that it has happened. If people insist that the Bible Codes are proof of the Bible being divine in origin than they must also accept that Moby Dick is divine in origin and just about any other 'thick' book.
Originally posted by Robtard
Bible codes have been utterly disproved... I forgot the guys name, but he proved that if you take a large enough book like the Bible you can find any code you are looking for. He went ahead and used Herman Melville's Moby Dick as an example. He put the entire book in computer program like they do with the Bible and he found everything that Bible Code freaks found, from WW1 to the rise of Hitler to the Twin Towers & 9/11 etc. etc. etc.It isn't hard to claim to have found a secret code after the fact that it has happened. If people insist that the Bible Codes are proof of the Bible being divine in origin than they must also accept that Moby Dick is divine in origin and just about any other 'thick' book.
✅
Re: 2007 Rapture?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
http://www.2007rapture.com/vision/I already know what true believers in Jesus Christ are thinking that no person knows the [B]day nor hour
of the catching away (i.e. rapture) of the church. I was very cautious reading the articles from this link because I know that there are many false prophets in these last days. All I ask you to do is to read this women's testimony and judge this prophetic word by the Bible. Prayerfully study every Scripture on the subject of the rapture. Ask the Father God to reveal to you whether this woman's prophecy is true or false.She mentions something that I have never thought of. She states that Jesus said that no one (not even Jesus) knows the day nor hour of the rapture. But here is what she said that riveted my attention: she said that no one knows the day or hour but that Jesus said nothing about year or season. She states that God gave her the year and season but not the day nor hour of the rapture. She said that Jesus will catch away His church in the summer of 2007 (June 21-September 21).
Folks, I am the most Scripturally sound, based, accurate, person that I know. I do not deviate from the Scriptures. But when she said that God gave her the year and season I was somewhat dumbfounded because it was something that I never thought about. I will let you all judge this prophecy by the Bible, for the Scriptures instruct us to judge all prophecies by the Word of God for verification.
I urge all of you to read the whole thing before coming to a conclusion. You always have the option of disregarding this article. But give it equal time.
Originally posted by Robtard
Bible codes have been utterly disproved... I forgot the guys name, but he proved that if you take a large enough book like the Bible you can find any code you are looking for. He went ahead and used Herman Melville's Moby Dick as an example. He put the entire book in computer program like they do with the Bible and he found everything that Bible Code freaks found, from WW1 to the rise of Hitler to the Twin Towers & 9/11 etc. etc. etc.It isn't hard to claim to have found a secret code after the fact that it has happened. If people insist that the Bible Codes are proof of the Bible being divine in origin than they must also accept that Moby Dick is divine in origin and just about any other 'thick' book.
A great example would be within the limitation of Isaiah 52-53 which contain the messianic prophecies of the 'suffering servant'. Ironically in a passage that specifically refers to Christ is encoded the names of all twelve disciples with the words 'The Disciples' (interestingly Judas Iscariot is not encoded there, but Matthias is), the three Marys, Joseph, Jesse, Obed, the priests who had him condemned (Annas and Caiaphas), Passover (when Christ was crucified), 'Let Him Be Crucified' is also found, 'cross', 'pierced', 'the Atonement Lamb' (Jesus as the fulfillment of the Passover), 'bread', and 'wine' (the Last Supper), and still other related words that could see as coincidence. But the what I have written shows an unbelievable amount of reference to Jesus within a very small amount of space which is ironically the most major messianic prophecy in the OT. Even Jewish rabbis have confirmed the validity of the Yeshua Codes I mentioned. Moby Dick has nothing close to that. Also, every messianic prophecy has the name of Jesus encoded within it several times.
You're gibbering. Let's just take one example: "Michael Drosnin used the Masocretic text which lacks many of the codes because of minor errors and a few missing letters." I hate to break your bubble, but there is no "correct" text of the Bible. The Massocretic text is by far the most standard text we have, however, and to throw it out and use another text (and which text do you think would be more appropriate, hm?) is an act of pure desperation.
The rest of your post is basically just vague handwaving ("this prophesy is so much better then any of the Moby Dick ones!"😉, so there's really nothing to be said for it. Your bringing up the Dead Sea scrolls is sort of cute, though. You've read them, right? Which of the scrolls do you think gives the secret of the Bible codes? If you mean that you should perform "code analysis" on them instead of the Massocretic, good luck with that. If "a few missing letters" made using the Massocretic a bad idea, then how you could use texts as fragmented as the Dead Sea Scrolls ... the mind boggles.
Originally posted by Gregory
You're gibbering. Let's just take one example: "Michael Drosnin used the Masocretic text which lacks many of the codes because of minor errors and a few missing letters." I hate to break your bubble, but there is no "correct" text of the Bible. The Massocretic text is by far the most standard text we have, however, and to throw it out and use another text (and which text do you think would be more appropriate, hm?) is an act of pure desperation.The rest of your post is basically just vague handwaving ("this prophesy is so much better then any of the Moby Dick ones!"😉, so there's really nothing to be said for it. Your bringing up the Dead Sea scrolls is sort of cute, though. You've read them, right? Which of the scrolls do you think gives the secret of the Bible codes? If you mean that you should perform "code analysis" on them instead of the Massocretic, good luck with that. If "a few missing letters" made using the Massocretic a bad idea, then how you could use texts as fragmented as the Dead Sea Scrolls ... the mind boggles.
Ah, so you haven't read the Dead Sea Scrolls, then. Never mind that they don't contain passages from all of the books of the Torah. They are too fragmented to do the analysis you want to do on them? The Masocretic have bad spelling? Missing letters? My God, if that's enough to throw off analysis, the idea of using the Dead Sea scrolls instead is beyond desperate.
(The idea that they must be more authoritative because they're earlier also deserves comment, but I have a class right now, so later.)
Originally posted by Gregory
Ah, so you haven't read the Dead Sea Scrolls, then. Never mind that they don't contain passages from all of the books of the Torah. They are too fragmented to do the analysis you want to do on them? The Masocretic have bad spelling? Missing letters? My God, if that's enough to throw off analysis, the idea of using the Dead Sea scrolls instead is beyond desperate.(The idea that they must be more authoritative because they're earlier also deserves comment, but I have a class right now, so later.)
Perhaps an example is in order. You say that the Dead Sea Scrolls are older then the Masocretic texts. This is, of course, nothing but the truth. You say that we should use the Dead Sea scrolls to do Bible Code stuff with. Well...
Did you know that the Dead Sea scrolls contain two different versions of Jeremiah? You do now. One of them is essentially the Masocretic text. The other is significantly different; it is shorter, and events happen in different order. So how, exactly, do you propose to perform analysis on the Dead Sea variant of Jeremiah when even the Essenes couldn't agree on what Jeremiah was supposed to look like?
Well, that's probably an exception. Let's use the Dead Sea Scrolls to do analysis on Job! What's that you say? There is no complete copy of Job in the Dead Sea scrolls? The most complete document of Job consists of six small fragments? ... oh.
Deutronomy! I mean, hell, there are over thirty three Deutronomy scrolls in the Dead Sea collection! ... and if you put all thirty-three of them together, the results are still fragmented. Hm.
You've got better luck with Genesis, and phenominal luck with Isaiah; I know that we have a complete copy of Isaiah among the Dead Sea Scrolls, and I think we have a complete copy of Genesis.
Samuel? Interesting scroll. We've got one really big fragment of it, and hundreds of smaller fragments.
Kings? Ezekial? Fragments. Proverbs? Scraps here and there.
Ezra? One tiny scrap? Chronicles? One scrap.
Song of Songs? Well, we have two good copies. And what does "good" mean in the context of the Dead Sea Scrolls? Well, one contains 3:4-5, 7-11; 4:1-7; 6:11-12:7:1-7. The other contains 2:9-17; 3:1-2, 5, 9-10; 4:1-3, 8-11, 14-16; 5:1.
That's the Dead Sea Scrolls for you. My God! We can't use the Masocretic texts because they have "incorrect" words and different spellings, but using fragmented texts where entire pages are missing won't cause any problems? The ELS won't be be thrown off at all by that?
I said that the idea that the oldest documents were necessarily "better" deserved to be commented on. In this case, it's clearly nonsense. The Dead Sea Scrolls, as you probably know, were the religious texts of a Jewish group called the Essenes. They were, essentially, an apocalyptic cult that hung out in the desert. Now, all of the OT books were written before even our oldest fragments of them. There's no questtion of that. Is your theory, perhaps, that when they were first written down, they most closely resembled the Dead Sea Scroll varients, and that all of the Jewish scribes and copyists who weren't part of a fringe issolationist doomsday cult got together and conspired to change them?
Doesn't that strike you as sort of silly?
These are sad forum's.
Well JesusIsAlive. I dont know If I agree with 100% of what you preach. But I follow God. I support God. I support the Christian faith. I know the truth about Jesus. I have Proof of Jesus, his faith. His father. I talk to and have found God in my life.
All I have to say to the christian people is Keep trying. Our job aint over. Hopfully soon some of these people will realize that they make " NO F*CKING SENSE" of anything in life. If you people cant stand united with fellow christian's, and other beliefes. then get the **** out.