The Christian Bible..."Hard Sayings", Things That Make You Say "Hmmmmm"

[WhiteWings]

CHB,

Do you mind I pick the middle ground?  :laughing7:
7th day.

Purely a feeling. Not one verse to back up my claim. Let that be said.
In a normal week the 7th day is the day of rest.
So my thought is that 7th day=Sabbath=day of rest=kingdom of Jesus.
8th day is a new start = kingdom of Father. -> not really a day but (timeless) eternity.

If I look on a Hebrew calendar the year 7000 (start of day 7) is still 231 year away.



Taffy,

I have no clue what you are talking about. Are you sure you replied to my message? :laughing7:
The only thought/answer I have on your message belongs in the 'soul sleep' thread. So I'll leave it at this; to avoid taking this thread off-topic. OT  :Chinscratch: (whoops wrong joke. wrong site....)

[Nathan]

Christ is this very LAST DAY( eighth day as is HE is the First Day , TO DAY, THE Third day, The Seventh day, The Eight DAY, AND THE LAST DAY, also known as the Great DAY...

Something came to mind while reading this.

(Rev.1:11) I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last.  (Rev. 1:8) I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.

(Isaiah 41:4) Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the Lord, the first, and the last; I am he.

I was thinking, does this mean Christ will come in the eighth day?  Most look for Christ in the sixth day, which is in this generation. If it is in the eighth day, that would mean two thousand more years, that is if one believes in the return of Christ?

CHB

\

As it was in the days of Noah . .SO SHALL IT BE IN THE COMING OF THE SON OF MAN . ..

Look up the definition for "Noah" and I think you'll have your answer to that one.

[Molly]

CHB,

Do you mind I pick the middle ground?  :laughing7:
7th day.

Purely a feeling. Not one verse to back up my claim. Let that be said.
In a normal week the 7th day is the day of rest.
So my thought is that 7th day=Sabbath=day of rest=kingdom of Jesus.
8th day is a new start = kingdom of Father. -> not really a day but (timeless) eternity.

If I look on a Hebrew calendar the year 7000 (start of day 7) is still 231 year away.



Taffy,

I have no clue what you are talking about. Are you sure you replied to my message? :laughing7:
The only thought/answer I have on your message belongs in the 'soul sleep' thread. So I'll leave it at this; to avoid taking this thread off-topic. OT  :Chinscratch: (whoops wrong joke. wrong site....)

Take a look at Johannes Kepler and Bishop James Ussher, two scientists who both independently put Adam's creation at around 4000 BC.

[Nathan]

Perhaps Molly, it depends on your sources you choose to follow . .. most that I've come across state that it's been 6,000 years since Adam . .not 4 . . .and then if you adhere to the Jewish calendar, you'll get a different set of numbers as well.

But IF you see it in faith . . .with spiritual eyes . . .you can enter into the Sabbath day regardless of what the natural calendar is saying.

[Molly]

Perhaps Molly, it depends on your sources you choose to follow . .. most that I've come across state that it's been 6,000 years since Adam . .not 4 . . .and then if you adhere to the Jewish calendar, you'll get a different set of numbers as well.

But IF you see it in faith . . .with spiritual eyes . . .you can enter into the Sabbath day regardless of what the natural calendar is saying.

Yes, Kepler and Ussher would agree..around 6000 years have passed since Adam [4000+2009]--putting us in the 7th day.

[Taffy]

CHB,

Do you mind I pick the middle ground?  :laughing7:
7th day.

Purely a feeling. Not one verse to back up my claim. Let that be said.
In a normal week the 7th day is the day of rest.
So my thought is that 7th day=Sabbath=day of rest=kingdom of Jesus.
8th day is a new start = kingdom of Father. -> not really a day but (timeless) eternity.

If I look on a Hebrew calendar the year 7000 (start of day 7) is still 231 year away.



Taffy,

I have no clue what you are talking about. Are you sure you replied to my message? :laughing7:
The only thought/answer I have on your message belongs in the 'soul sleep' thread. So I'll leave it at this; to avoid taking this thread off-topic. OT  :Chinscratch: (whoops wrong joke. wrong site....)

yes twas your post in reference to the Kingdom REALM BEING over death...
will the realm over death end...which is Indeed life....mmm :icon_flower:

[Taffy]

Perhaps Molly, it depends on your sources you choose to follow . .. most that I've come across state that it's been 6,000 years since Adam . .not 4 . . .and then if you adhere to the Jewish calendar, you'll get a different set of numbers as well.

But IF you see it in faith . . .with spiritual eyes . . .you can enter into the Sabbath day regardless of what the natural calendar is saying.

:thumbsup: The DAY irespective of it numerical difference = REST...Twas the simple point one was Making

[WhiteWings]

Take a look at Johannes Kepler and Bishop James Ussher, two scientists who both independently put Adam's creation at around 4000 BC.

I think that's already debunked by scholars. Bible scholars not by Darwinist or something similar.
The Bible genealogy is full of big holes.

[Molly]

Take a look at Johannes Kepler and Bishop James Ussher, two scientists who both independently put Adam's creation at around 4000 BC.

I think that's already debunked by scholars. Bible scholars not by Darwinist or something similar.
The Bible genealogy is full of big holes.

Kepler and Ussher were real scientists as opposed to the Darwinist flunkies who, no matter how many millions of generations, still prove that a fruit fly gives birth to a fruit fly. :laughing7:

It's interesting that independently that came to roughly the same date--you have to agree.

[WhiteWings]

Take a look at Johannes Kepler and Bishop James Ussher, two scientists who both independently put Adam's creation at around 4000 BC.

I think that's already debunked by scholars. Bible scholars not by Darwinist or something similar.
The Bible genealogy is full of big holes.

Kepler and Ussher were real scientists as opposed to the Darwinist flunkies who, no matter how many millions of generations, still prove that a fruit fly gives birth to a fruit fly. :laughing7:

The fruit fly evolution story is a hoax. But that's off-topic now. Besides is wrote not by Darwinists.
PC problems right no so I can't access 900MB of my stuff. I have a good article on the subject. For now a few links have to do. Not the best ones but a good start of what I mean.
http://www.marshallgenealogy.org/bible/genjesus.htm
http://www.marshallgenealogy.org/bible/matthew-luke.htm

[Molly]

Take a look at Johannes Kepler and Bishop James Ussher, two scientists who both independently put Adam's creation at around 4000 BC.

I think that's already debunked by scholars. Bible scholars not by Darwinist or something similar.
The Bible genealogy is full of big holes.

Kepler and Ussher were real scientists as opposed to the Darwinist flunkies who, no matter how many millions of generations, still prove that a fruit fly gives birth to a fruit fly. :laughing7:

The fruit fly evolution story is a hoax. But that's off-topic now. Besides is wrote not by Darwinists.
PC problems right no so I can't access 900MB of my stuff. I have a good article on the subject. For now a few links have to do. Not the best ones but a good start of what I mean.
http://www.marshallgenealogy.org/bible/genjesus.htm
http://www.marshallgenealogy.org/bible/matthew-luke.htm

What are those links showing?  That Mathew and Luke give different genealogies?  Sure they are different, one is father, one is mother.     :dontknow:

[WhiteWings]

? Many names show up in both rows.
Still looking for the article.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/PublicStore/pdfs/SampleChapter/10-2-321.pdf

[Molly]

? Many names show up in both rows.

Yes, the important ones.  He is the Lion of Judah.  Both genealogies trace to David.  He is the child of the promise.  Both genealogies trace to Abraham.

Luke takes it all the way back to Adam--the son of God.

[WhiteWings]

To summarize the article. I hope I remember it correctly.
Only names of importance are mentioned.
http://kspark.kaist.ac.kr/jesus/gospel%20comparison.htm
http://lordibelieve.org/time/KingDsr.pdf

EDIT
Finally found the article online.
http://lordibelieve.org/time/WHGreen.PDF

Google for "Primeval Chronology" and you'll get several similar links.

[Molly]

To summarize the article. I hope I remember it correctly.
Only names of importance are mentioned.
http://kspark.kaist.ac.kr/jesus/gospel%20comparison.htm

What I meant was that both mother and father descend from Abraham and David.

And, Luke (mother) takes it all the way back to Adam.

The genealogies are one from each parent, thus, two different genealogies.

[WhiteWings]

To summarize the article. I hope I remember it correctly.
Only names of importance are mentioned.
http://kspark.kaist.ac.kr/jesus/gospel%20comparison.htm

What I meant was that both mother and father descend from Abraham and David.

And, Luke (father) takes it all the way back to Adam.

The genealogies are one from each parent, thus, two different genealogies.

Molly,
All I can do is again point to this article. I have no illusion I can explain it better so I won't try.
http://lordibelieve.org/time/WHGreen.PDF

Of course you don't have to agree. Neither am I saying there are errors in the genealogies. All I'm saying is that quite a few people say that the genealogies are never meant to 'add up'

[Molly]

To summarize the article. I hope I remember it correctly.
Only names of importance are mentioned.
http://kspark.kaist.ac.kr/jesus/gospel%20comparison.htm

What I meant was that both mother and father descend from Abraham and David.

And, Luke (mother) takes it all the way back to Adam.

The genealogies are one from each parent, thus, two different genealogies.

Molly,
All I can do is again point to this article. I have no illusion I can explain it better so I won't try.
http://lordibelieve.org/time/WHGreen.PDF

Of course you don't have to agree. Neither am I saying there are errors in the genealogies. All I'm saying is that quite a few people say that the genealogies are never meant to 'add up'

wow.  Newton calculated the date of Adam's creation, too. :mshock:  I should have figured that.  Most of what Newton wrote was about theology.

Well, rather than read that guy you cited, I would trust Newton and Keppler, because they are both mathematicians, both precise, and when I look up, the earth is still orbiting the sun and when I look down, things I drop still fall.  Seriously, if I had the time, I would read Newton and Kepler on this issue, first.

Calculating over a 5500 year period, three highly regarded researchers are coming in very close to each other, within a period of +- 8 years.  How's that for margin of error?




James Ussher (1581–1656) was Archbishop of Armagh, the highest position in the Irish Anglican Church, a product of the Reformation in England. He was also a noted historian and Hebrew scholar, highly regarded throughout Britain, both by kings and revolutionaries. In 1650 and 1654 he published his magnum opus, The Annals of the World,1 a 1,300-page tome in Latin on a history of the world covering every major event from the time of Creation to AD 70. In this, he calculated the date of creation at 23 October 4004 BC, and this is what he is best known for today.

Ussher's creation date has become a figure of fun. However, it is a well-kept secret that some great scientists also calculated creation dates very close to Ussher's. For example, Johannes Kepler (1571–1630), who formulated the laws of planetary motion, calculated a creation date of 3992 BC. Also, Sir Isaac Newton (1643–1727) is widely regarded as the greatest scientist of all time, but he wrote more on biblical history, and vigorously defended a creation about 4,000 BC.



http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i1/archbishop.asp

[WhiteWings]

When die I'll ask around for you Molly :-)

What about the Hebrew calendar? They are at 5769. Quite serious people too...
All that said your scientics do not contradict with the articles I quoted.
The articles just mention there are overlaps and holes. Those holes have a unknow timespan.
Could be 100 years. But also 0 years. So adding up could give the perfect result or not.
But totally independant calculations are a diffrent matter.
(Civilasations dating back to 5300 BC (and older) are found)

[Molly]

Civilasations dating back to 5300 BC (and older) are found)

Can you give me a link to that?  I'm trying to find the oldest known civilizations.

I'm not talking a bunch of neanderthals in caves making stick figures, either.

I'm talking about modern civilization--homo sapiens sapiens, i.e. Adam.

[WhiteWings]

Mmm, tried to lie my way out of it. Caught again  :laughing7:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer

There are several definitions for civilization. If you take writing as the definition then it dates back to 3500 BC
Argiculture takes it back to 5300BC.

[jabcat]

I was asked by PM how the Christian Bible translated these verses   Here's my answer also posted here, as it fits this thread....


Sure.  WW and I have been discussing the translation of The Christian Bible of "The Last Day" here http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=4194.msg46724#msg46724 and looking for input...I've questioned the Christian Bible's translation of it being THE LAST day/age, wondering if that's their interpretation that it's the LAST one, rather than the GREATEST one, i.e., Ages of Ages...just not sure.  But here's what the CB says.

Gal. 1:5  and may God be glorified for the remaining ages [the present age and the Last Age' of the ages!  Amen ["let it be true"]!

Matthew 25:46  Then these will go away into the Punishment of the Last Age [Destruction by the Fire of the Second Death], yet those who were just, into Life in the Last Age."

Romans 16:26  yet now has been made apparent in accordance with the requirement of the God of the ages, and through the Writing of the Prophets, and has been made known to all the pagans to result in obedience by faith,

[Taffy]

I was asked by PM how the Christian Bible translated these verses   Here's my answer also posted here, as it fits this thread....


Sure.  WW and I have been discussing the translation of The Christian Bible of "The Last Day" here http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=4194.msg46724#msg46724 and looking for input...I've questioned the Christian Bible's translation of it being THE LAST day/age, wondering if that's their interpretation that it's the LAST one, rather than the GREATEST one, i.e., Ages of Ages...just not sure.  But here's what the CB says.

Gal. 1:5  and may God be glorified for the remaining ages [the present age and the Last Age' of the ages!  Amen ["let it be true"]!

Matthew 25:46  Then these will go away into the Punishment of the Last Age [Destruction by the Fire of the Second Death], yet those who were just, into Life in the Last Age."

Romans 16:26  yet now has been made apparent in accordance with the requirement of the God of the ages, and through the Writing of the Prophets, and has been made known to all the pagans to result in obedience by faith,

Punishment Unto Correction, Judgment unto life........JUDGMENT is Righteous Judgment,tis a WHITE throne..not a Black one.

[Molly]

Mmm, tried to lie my way out of it. Caught again  :laughing7:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer

There are several definitions for civilization. If you take writing as the definition then it dates back to 3500 BC
Argiculture takes it back to 5300BC.

ha!

But can you date modern irrigation to 5300BC?  A link?

Because God gave Adam modern irrigation farming, too.

You need that for modern civilization, especially in the desert...


When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens- 5 and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth  and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth  and there was no man to work the ground, 6 but streams  came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground...

--Gen 2

[WhiteWings]

BOT (back on topic)

John 6:43,44;  ...You must not be grumbling with one another!  No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me, draws him;  and I will raise him up on the Last Day [the Day of the Last Age].  It has been written in the Prophets, "and they will all be taught by God    [Isa. 54:13].

Just thought about the following. Likely not relevant. But I usually don't care about such futilities :laughing7:

And there was evening [Erev: chaos] and there was morning [Boker: order, clarity], a fifth day. Again a climb in the level of order of life on earth, erev giving way to boker.

If the last day is the daytime part of the day it could also be read as "the last order" or "end of chaos"

[Molly]

BOT (back on topic)

John 6:43,44;  ...You must not be grumbling with one another!  No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me, draws him;  and I will raise him up on the Last Day [the Day of the Last Age].  It has been written in the Prophets, "and they will all be taught by God    [Isa. 54:13].

Just thought about the following. Likely not relevant. But I usually don't care about such futilities :laughing7:

And there was evening [Erev: chaos] and there was morning [Boker: order, clarity], a fifth day. Again a climb in the level of order of life on earth, erev giving way to boker.

If the last day is the daytime part of the day it could also be read as "the last order" or "end of chaos"

yes--that's too cool!!  And an end to those folks who like to create chaos so they can bring their own order out of it.  No more chaos.  No more night.


23And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

24And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.

25And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.

--Rev 21