What does Daniel 8:13,14 mean?

[ryanoneil]

Sorry I have not had time to respond.

I’m not quite sure I get what you are saying here. Are you saying that Jesus already came the second time in the form of the Roman general Titus, who lead the attack on Jerusalem? If this is what you are saying I think you better turn around and take another look.

This is the prophecy!

Oracle on Egypt: See, the LORD is riding on a swift cloud on his way to Egypt; The idols of Egypt tremble before him, the hearts of the Egyptians melt within them. (Isa 19:1)

This is the fulfillment!

In the year the general sent by Sargon, king of Assyria, fought against Ashdod and captured it, the LORD gave a warning through Isaiah, the son of Amoz: Go and take off the sackcloth from your waist, and remove the sandals from your feet. This he did, walking naked and barefoot. Then the LORD said: Just as my servant Isaiah has gone naked and barefoot for three years as a sign and portent against Egypt and Ethiopia, so shall the king of Assyria lead away captives from Egypt, and exiles from Ethiopia, young and old, naked and barefoot, with buttocks uncovered (the shame of Egypt). They shall be dismayed and ashamed because of Ethiopia, their hope, and because of Egypt, their boast. The inhabitants of this coastland shall say on that day, “Look at our hope! We have fled here for help and deliverance from the king of Assyria; where can we flee now?” (Isa 20:1-6)

The Lord came on a cloud, but not physically in the general sent by Sargon. It was the LORD’s judgment that was coming on a cloud and it was carried out by the Assyrians. Everyone automatically assumes that whenever Jesus is spoken of as coming on the clouds, it refers to his second coming in glory.

It does not! It first refers to his coming judgment of the Old Covenant world that would happen within a generation. This is a direct result of Christ ascending to heaven to be presented before the Ancient of Days. The Sanhedrin did not witness this directly. What they witnessed was the earthly evidence of God’s wrath carried out by the Romans. That is how they saw Jesus coming on the clouds. The same is true of Mt 24. It first refers to the end of one age, but it prefigures and forshadows the end of time when Christ comes again in glory.

In otherwords, most people push all of it into the future which is incorrect. All of scripture was initially fulfilled within a generation of Christ in one sense. But we wait for for final fulfillment when Christ comes again in glory.

 

[benidict]

Richard: This might be ok if that was what Jesus said. Luke 23: 43And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise. Jesus says that He will be with him. Jn.19:17Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. But Jesus in Jn.19 says that He has not yet ascended to the Father. So you can believe the Gospel according to ben and say that Jesus was lying and that He really was with the Father three days before or you can believe that uninspired people that put the punctuation in the bible made a mistake. For me it’s a no brainer, but the choice is yours.If we look really closely at this quote by Richard, we see a direct denial of the Trinity… This is what some of us have been contending Adventism does. they pay it lip service until after a person has converted to their faith, then they procede to teach them strange new doctrines that never were taught by the True Church. i am hoping that this is not done intentionally, that they truly are simply making an error, and not being deceitful, which unfortunately seems to be the case. all we can do, is pray that the Holy Spirit enlighten those who have accepted a false view of the Trinity. Peace

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
Believe me barboza21 when you have an experience like that you KNOW.

The thing I say though is that many people can say that. Do you agree that it can’t be true for everyone??

Can’t speak for everyone, I only KNOW it is true for me.

Yes, I believe that Jesus established one church. I just don’t believe that church is the CC.

How come? Do you thinks its your church? and if so, how would you go about proving that? ((this is going to take us in a another direction I know. haha))

Why would I want to prove something that I believe (have faith in). If I had to prove it wouldn’t that make faith irrelavant

God’s church has been with us from the fall of man.
Gen3
15And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

The impersonal pronoun in this v. “it” is applied to “thy seed” and designates that seed as being in the singular. The word “bruised” is translated from the Hebrew “shuph” which means crush. So what we have here is enmity between the seed (many) of Satan and the seed (singular, Jesus) of the woman (God’s church). Satan will bruise our Lord (crucify), but Jesus will crush Satan’s head (eliminate him forever).

(I don’t see how that verse says that God’s Church–the one and only-- has been here since adam and eve. and I’m also not sure if that’s the correct way to interpret that verse. you provide a very different view from what I would say about it. )

Since you don’t provide that differing view, makes it difficult to talk about it.

Please do.

Where does the bible talk about the change?

In Hebrews. revelation. acts. corinthians. isaiah. col. DO you want to go into this topic completely? I know there are many things to talk about… I think we need to choose one though, because we just run around in circles without coming to a conclusion of some kind…

I was merely striving for clarity. I’ll let you chose what to talk about. Within the confines of the thread of coarse.

Baptism does not have the power to do anything to you. What baptism is is an outward sign of our faith in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ and it is that sacrifice that saves us.

Im not saying it keeps you catholic. But when you are baptized, well with a valid holy spirit baptism I should say better, you have the Holy spirit … ‘imprint’ on your soul? Im trying to say that the sign of the baptism doesn’t go away–even ifyou leave the church. Does that kind of make sense?

Bar, baptism does nothing to you or for you. What baptism is is an outward sign of the death of the old man of sin, plunging under the water, and the resurrection to new life through faith in Christ, rising up out of the water.

It is true that William Miller did focus on trying to predict the day of Jesus return and that as we all know was a mistake.

The church that I belong to is built upon Jesus Christ, not a mistake.

Okay, so the person that founded your church focused on doing something that is prohibited by the bible, and from there came your church but its not founded on his mistake. I understand you say your church is built upon Jesus, but your church was founded on a human. correct?

William Miller did not found the Seventh Day Adventist church. I’m not sure what you mean by prohibited. The bible says that we can’t know the day nor the hour. I don’t see where it prohibits speculating on it. But, you are right the very fact that the bible says we cannot know the time of His return should have keyed them to the fact that they were going down the wrong road.

So sorry for taking long to reply. School madness. Please accept my apology. I really do enjoy our long conversations

I understand, my daughter is going through the same madness.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
Ok, let me take Ben’s post first.
Here’s what my commentary says about v.13
Ascended up to heaven. That is, no human being has gone to heaven to learn of “heavenly things” (v. 12). Only the Son of man, who came from heaven, has ever been there, and He alone can reveal them. There is no reference here to Christ’s ascension to heaven following the resurrection.
Came down from heaven. Compare ch. 6:33, 38, 41, 42, 50, 51, 58; see on ch. 1:14.Son of man. Jesus’ characteristic title for Himself, use of which here is evidence that Jesus is still speaking. See on Mark. 2:10.
Which is in heaven. Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 146) for the omission of this clause. If retained, it refers to the timeless existence of Jesus in heaven, His permanent abode. Possibly, however, the phrase was added by a later scribe, and thus at a time when Jesus was once more “in heaven.”

Like you say in the next paragraph, Of course Jesus is God. Do you truly mean it Richard? Because when Jesus tells the thief he will be with him in Heaven, he means with me, God. Jesus is God. Jesus wasn’t lying. Jesus’ physical body wasn’t yet ascended. But Jesus is God. and God is in Heaven. Yeah??

Ya, look bar if you are going to start questioning my faith in the divinity of Christ we can end this dialogue at this post. Jesus wasn’t lying when He spoke to the thief on the cross and He wasn’t lying to Mary when He saw her three days later when He said He hadn’t yet ascended to the Father.

Of coarse Jesus is God, but when you read this v. you see that Jesus nowhere claims that He was with Nathaniel in His physical body. What He does say is “I saw thee”. This attests to Jesus as a seer, a prophet. Heb.1:1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

Why would Jesus need to say he was there with him physically? I dont understand… Jesus saw him when he was under the fig tree. Like benedict said, he was revealing his omni-presence.

You don’t see the difference between seeing Nathaniel under the fig tree and being there with him bodily? Jesus was God but in His human incarnation He put aside His divinity. He was a man and He had to show that it was possible for a man to completely do God’s will.

Heb.2
14Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
15And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
17Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
18For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

This might be ok if that was what Jesus said. Luke 23: 43And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise. Jesus says that He will be with him. Jn.19:17Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. But Jesus in Jn.19 says that He has not yet ascended to the Father. So you can believe the Gospel according to ben and say that Jesus was lying and that He really was with the Father three days before or you can believe that uninspired people that put the punctuation in the bible made a mistake. For me it’s a no brainer, but the choice is yours.

Well we need to clarify: like above. Physical Jesus, human Jesus wasnt yet in Heaven. But Divine Jesus, God Jesus was in Heaven–he has been since the begginng of time… since always and forever. Thats why this makes sense. Yes?

Again Ben says He was there Jesus says He wasn’t. Who do you believe?

Ben and Jesus aren’t disagreeing with each other, if you believe Jesus is true God.

The way I see it they are Jesus says He had not yet risen to the Father. Ben’s statement that The divine Jesus was with God imo makes God a liar.

Of coarse I’m not denying that Jesus will one day keep His promise, just not yet. As for this being a spurius doctrine. If it is then Jesus taught this spurius doctrine. Jn.11:11These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.
12Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well.
13Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.
14Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.

? I don’t know what you mean here…

Ben calls the doctrine of “soul sleep” a spurious doctrine. Just showing here that Jesus taught it.

 

[benidict]

Richard-You don’t see the difference between seeing Nathaniel under the fig tree and being there with him bodily? Jesus was God but in His human incarnation** He put aside His divinity**. He was a man and He had to show that it was possible for a man to completely do God’s will.ME- this sound very similar to the nestorian and monophytist heresies that were rejected by the Church fathers.

 

[benidict]

Quote: Richard-
Of coarse I’m not denying that Jesus will one day keep His promise, just not yet. As for this being a spurius doctrine. If it is then Jesus taught this spurius doctrine. Jn.11:11These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.
12Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well.
13Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.
14Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.

? I don’t know what you mean here…

Ben calls the doctrine of “soul sleep” a spurious doctrine. Just showing here that Jesus taught it.

---

In Christ Richard Me- Yes Richard. spurious. and I have given you many passages on other threads that adress just this. Im not going to re hash them all here.

 

[benidict]

lets play " are you smarter than a high school graduate." all “scholars” welcome…

 

[benidict]

COLOR=“Red”]Richard-The way I see it they are Jesus says He had not yet risen to the Father. Ben’s statement that The divine Jesus was with God imo makes God a liar.Me- I dont know…lets see…John 1:1 comes to mind. Also I seem to remember Jesus making a quote, somewhere along the lines of…I and the Father are ONE. I also remember Him stating that " Before Abraham was…I AM." When the guards came to take him into custody in the garden. He asked them who they were looking for. They said Jesus of Nazareth…What did he say to them Richard?" I AM."
In all these passages Richard, (need more? I can find them.) Jesus is stating He is the God who spoke in the Old Testament. He is the one who is the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob.
Now we know that God is all knowing. and we also know that God is all present. this fits in with what He stated to Nicodemus, and in other places. Your churches doctrines divide Christ from his father. this is the point of contention. I am not attacking your beliefs Richard. I am going directly for SDA doctrine. and those doctrines are heretical by their nature.
The gospel according to Ben? funny Im not smart enough to write a Gospel. not even a fake one…

 

[barboza21]

Can’t speak for everyone, I only KNOW it is true for me.

I was only asking if you believe there are people that think the holy spirit is talking to them and they are wrong…
simply because many say the HS told them to do sth and many times other people say the HS told them to do just the opposite. Thats all…

Why would I want to prove something that I believe (have faith in). If I had to prove it wouldn’t that make faith irrelavant

Hmm. Well Ihope you’re not–upset that I’m asking you such a question b/c that’s kind of what we’ve been doing… Talking about our faith and their differences. We give bible quotes and say our interpretations to try to get the other one to understan who what when where why and how… Like you said: I will do my best to show you what the bible says.
That’s all we’re doing here. If the word proof upsets you, we’ll say discuss. That’s really all we’re doing and that’s what I meant— just explain to me why you believe what you believe: about why the Adventist religion is the faith talked about in Efesians 4:4-6, and all the other places in the bible… Thanks.

Since you don’t provide that differing view, makes it difficult to talk about it.

(for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent’s head

Christ crushed the serpent’s head by his death, suffering himself to be wounded in the heel. His blessed mother crushed him likewise, by her co-operation in the mystery of the Incarnation; and by rejecting, with horror, the very first suggestions of the enemy, to commit even the smallest sin.

“We crush,” says S. Greg. Mor. 1. 38, “the serpent’s head, when we extirpate from our heart the beginnings of temptation, and then he lays snares for our heel, because he opposes the end of a good action with greater craft and power.” The serpent may hiss and threaten; he cannot hurt, if we resist him.) -Bible Commentary

What do you think?

I was merely striving for clarity. I’ll let you chose what to talk about. Within the confines of the thread of coarse.

Well yes, with the confnements of the thread-- it’d be kinda weird if we started talking in depth about Jesus Divinity on a thread titled What does Daniel 8:13,14 mean?
If I invted you to start another thread about sth else, would you?
And well the reason behind tis thread is because I wanted to tal about the beginning of the Adventist religion… That’s why I chose Daniel 8, I believe that is where it all started, and wanted to go from there…

Bar, baptism does nothing to you or for you. What baptism is is an outward sign of the death of the old man of sin, plunging under the water, and the resurrection to new life through faith in Christ, rising up out of the water.

Baptism is a pretty big deal, its not just getting a forehead shower that says ok, this person believes now… You’re not wrong in what you ssay about the old man but there’s more to that.

20… while Noah was building the ark in which a small group of eight persons escaped through water.
21 That was a type of the baptism that now saves you; this baptism is not a matter of physical cleansing but of asking God to **reconcile us **through the resurrection of Christ Jesus.
We are saved through Baptism…thats all I’ll say to you.I know you believe that far.

William Miller did not found the Seventh Day Adventist church. I’m not sure what you mean by prohibited. The bible says that we can’t know the day nor the hour. I don’t see where it prohibits speculating on it. But, you are right the very fact that the bible says we cannot know the time of His return should have keyed them to the fact that they were going down the wrong road.

See, I’ve been wrong all along–I thought he did. I’m sorry. So was it Ms. White?
Well the bible says you shouldn’t be conserned with that… I see that as, don’t do it–prohibited. I guess it depnds on how you see it.

I understand, my daughter is going through the same madness.

 

[barboza21]

Ya, look bar if you are going to start questioning my faith in the divinity of Christ we can end this dialogue at this post. Jesus wasn’t lying when He spoke to the thief on the cross and He wasn’t lying to Mary when He saw her three days later when He said He hadn’t yet ascended to the Father.

Richard, I don’t really see why you might be angry about me ‘questioning’ your faith–but that’s all we’ve been doing since the beginning. i’ve asked you time and time again to clarify things for me… To show me why it is that you believe what you blieve… I’m doing hte same. Showing you with bible verses and expaining the rasns why Catholics believe what they believe. I thought that’s what we’ve been doing all this time. If I have really insulted you–my apologies and you don’t have to write back. I’ll understand. In no way was I trying to judge you or anything like that… i merely wated to discuss with you the things that happened to come up from thread to thread. It’s your decision…

You don’t see the difference between seeing Nathaniel under the fig tree and being there with him bodily? Jesus was God but in His human incarnation He put aside His divinity. He was a man and He had to show that it was possible for a man to completely do God’s will.
? Yes there’s a difference. Seeing Nathaniel under the fig tree as God is different as seeing him as a human person standing next to him? That’s what I’m saying–Jesus saw him as God, no?
I’m confused… I only know that you’re saying Jesus didn’t see him as God would, he saw him as Jesus Human would. Yes? Does that make sense?
So you’re saying Jesus saw him because His human eyesight could see him? Sorry if I’m wrong in what you’re saying…
Heb.2
14Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; ****that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; ****15And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
17Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
18For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.
This is a good verse quotation… It also goes along the lines of Gen 3:15. When I said .for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent’s head.

The way I see it they are Jesus says He had not yet risen to the Father. Ben’s statement that The divine Jesus was with God imo makes God a liar.

So you’re saying that even tough Jesus is God, when he was on Earth he was only ‘using’ His Humanity, and not His Divinity? Is that what you mean?

Ben calls the doctrine of “soul sleep” a spurious doctrine. Just showing here that Jesus taught it.
O. this is crazy. See, I read that verse, and that would be a verse I personaly would use to try to show you that Jesus was merely saying he was ‘asleep’ only meaning actual death. and that that is all Jesus did, not saying and by this I show you that when ppl die, they are asleep. Idk its crazy how we see the same verse and understand completely opposite things. Thats why I said in the other post, not everyone can be right. Sometimes a person may think the HS is guiding them, and sometimes its not the actual HS doing the guidance. If it was, we would all be gathered as one faith, and one body of Christ.–not as Christ’s body divided all over the place because we each believe different things. How sad is that-- Humans try to follow Christ and instead they hurt Him. Do you think somewhat similar?

 

[Richard_Kastner]

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
Why would I want to prove something that I believe (have faith in). If I had to prove it wouldn’t that make faith irrelavant

Hmm. Well Ihope you’re not–upset that I’m asking you such a question b/c that’s kind of what we’ve been doing… Talking about our faith and their differences. We give bible quotes and say our interpretations to try to get the other one to understan who what when where why and how… Like you said: I will do my best to show you what the bible says.
That’s all we’re doing here. If the word proof upsets you, we’ll say discuss. That’s really all we’re doing and that’s what I meant— just explain to me why you believe what you believe: about why the Adventist religion is the faith talked about in Efesians 4:4-6, and all the other places in the bible… Thanks.

There are two criteria in Rev. 12: 17And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. This woman is God’s end time church. This church has two distnct elements 1) It keeps the commandments of God (including the fourth, the Sabbath) and has the testimony of Jesus Christ which is the spirit of prophecy, Rev.19:10. We have this prophet in Ellen White.

Since you don’t provide that differing view, makes it difficult to talk about it.

(for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent’s head

Christ crushed the serpent’s head by his death, suffering himself to be wounded in the heel. His blessed mother crushed him likewise, by her co-operation in the mystery of the Incarnation; and by rejecting, with horror, the very first suggestions of the enemy, to commit even the smallest sin.

“We crush,” says S. Greg. Mor. 1. 38, “the serpent’s head, when we extirpate from our heart the beginnings of temptation, and then he lays snares for our heel, because he opposes the end of a good action with greater craft and power.” The serpent may hiss and threaten; he cannot hurt, if we resist him.) -Bible Commentary

What do you think?

Jesus’ mother Mary had no part in crushing the head of Satan. That was done totally and exclusively by Jesus. Mary was merely the last in a long line of ancestors all of which were sinners. They went the gammet from kings to harlots.

I was merely striving for clarity. I’ll let you chose what to talk about. Within the confines of the thread of coarse.

Well yes, with the confnements of the thread-- it’d be kinda weird if we started talking in depth about Jesus Divinity on a thread titled What does Daniel 8:13,14 mean?
If I invted you to start another thread about sth else, would you?
And well the reason behind tis thread is because I wanted to tal about the beginning of the Adventist religion… That’s why I chose Daniel 8, I believe that is where it all started, and wanted to go from there…

I see you and Ben have been collaborating. No, I’m not going to start a thread.

Bar, baptism does nothing to you or for you. What baptism is is an outward sign of the death of the old man of sin, plunging under the water, and the resurrection to new life through faith in Christ, rising up out of the water.

Baptism is a pretty big deal, its not just getting a forehead shower that says ok, this person believes now… You’re not wrong in what you ssay about the old man but there’s more to that.

20… while Noah was building the ark in which a small group of eight persons escaped through water.
21 That was a type of the baptism that now saves you; this baptism is not a matter of physical cleansing but of asking God to reconcile us through the resurrection of Christ Jesus.
We are saved through Baptism…thats all I’ll say to you.I know you believe that far.

We are not saved through baptism. We are saved through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

William Miller did not found the Seventh Day Adventist church. I’m not sure what you mean by prohibited. The bible says that we can’t know the day nor the hour. I don’t see where it prohibits speculating on it. But, you are right the very fact that the bible says we cannot know the time of His return should have keyed them to the fact that they were going down the wrong road.

See, I’ve been wrong all along–I thought he did. I’m sorry. So was it Ms. White?
Well the bible says you shouldn’t be conserned with that… I see that as, don’t do it–prohibited. I guess it depnds on how you see it.

From wikipedia:
The Seventh-day Adventist Church had its roots in the Millerite movement of the 1830s and 1840s, during the period of the Second Great Awakening, and was officially founded in 1863. Prominent figures in the early church included Hiram Edson, James Springer White and his wife Ellen G. White, Joseph Bates, and J. N. Andrews.

Here’s what the bible says about Jesus second comming.

Matt24
35Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
36But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

This merely says that we do not know the day nor the hour. In most of Matt 24 Jesus gives us a whole bunch of signs that will occur just prior to His return, why?

42Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
Ya, look bar if you are going to start questioning my faith in the divinity of Christ we can end this dialogue at this post. Jesus wasn’t lying when He spoke to the thief on the cross and He wasn’t lying to Mary when He saw her three days later when He said He hadn’t yet ascended to the Father.

Richard, I don’t really see why you might be angry about me ‘questioning’ your faith–but that’s all we’ve been doing since the beginning. i’ve asked you time and time again to clarify things for me… To show me why it is that you believe what you blieve… I’m doing hte same. Showing you with bible verses and expaining the rasns why Catholics believe what they believe. I thought that’s what we’ve been doing all this time. If I have really insulted you–my apologies and you don’t have to write back. I’ll understand. In no way was I trying to judge you or anything like that… i merely wated to discuss with you the things that happened to come up from thread to thread. It’s your decision…

Here’s what you asked.
“Like you say in the next paragraph, Of course Jesus is God. Do you truly mean it Richard?” I can see no valid reason to ask this question. It has nothing to do with the posts and as far as I’m concerned is designed to cast doubt on my personal faith in my Savior. To be fair to you this may not have been your intention, but it sure came off that way to me. I would ask that you be a little more careful as to personal faith references.

You don’t see the difference between seeing Nathaniel under the fig tree and being there with him bodily? Jesus was God but in His human incarnation He put aside His divinity. He was a man and He had to show that it was possible for a man to completely do God’s will.
? Yes there’s a difference. Seeing Nathaniel under the fig tree as God is different as seeing him as a human person standing next to him? That’s what I’m saying–Jesus saw him as God, no?
I’m confused… I only know that you’re saying Jesus didn’t see him as God would, he saw him as Jesus Human would. Yes? Does that make sense?
So you’re saying Jesus saw him because His human eyesight could see him? Sorry if I’m wrong in what you’re saying…
Heb.2
14Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; 15And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
17Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
18For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.
This is a good verse quotation… It also goes along the lines of Gen 3:15. When I said .for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent’s head.

Well, I don’t see how this has anything to do with a woman crushing Satan’s head.

The way I see it they are Jesus says He had not yet risen to the Father. Ben’s statement that The divine Jesus was with God imo makes God a liar.

So you’re saying that even tough Jesus is God, when he was on Earth he was only ‘using’ His Humanity, and not His Divinity? Is that what you mean?

Yes, If He used His divinity for anything, it would have invalidated His propitiation for us. IOW Satan would have yelled foul.

Ben calls the doctrine of “soul sleep” a spurious doctrine. Just showing here that Jesus taught it.
O. this is crazy. See, I read that verse, and that would be a verse I personaly would use to try to show you that Jesus was merely saying he was ‘asleep’ only meaning actual death. and that that is all Jesus did, not saying and by this I show you that when ppl die, they are asleep. Idk its crazy how we see the same verse and understand completely opposite things. Thats why I said in the other post, not everyone can be right. Sometimes a person may think the HS is guiding them, and sometimes its not the actual HS doing the guidance. If it was, we would all be gathered as one faith, and one body of Christ.–not as Christ’s body divided all over the place because we each believe different things. How sad is that-- Humans try to follow Christ and instead they hurt Him. Do you think somewhat similar?

I’m having a hard time following this part. You do see that Jesus is calling death sleep don’t you? Another thing Jesus calls Lasarus forth out of the grave not down from heaven. And don’t you think that Lasarus would have said something about heaven and being in the presence of God? I think that I would have been a little miffed at being called out of God’s presence back down to this sinful earth. Well, the fact is Lasarus was never in heaven because he was dead.

 

[BTTG]

Antiochus cannot be the “little horn”

Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the eighth king in the Seleucid dynasty of what later became Syria. In 168 BC he was influenced by liberal Jews to desecrate the temple. He first set up a statue of the Greek god Zeus. A few days later he offered unclean animals on the altar. He also robbed the temple. If this were all we knew about him and we did not read Daniel 8 carefully, we might wonder if he were the little horn. After all doesn’t the chapter say that after 2300 days the sanctuary would be cleansed (v.14) implying a desecration?
The chapter also says, “Therefore the he goat [Greece] waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones [led by the four who had been generals under Alexander] toward the four winds of heaven. And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.” (Dan. 8:8, 9)
I’ll mention just two other problems with Antiochus being the little horn.
First, in Daniel 8, the ram is described as “great” (v.4), the goat that followed was “very great” and the horn that grew from littleness became “exceeding great” .
Compared to Medo-Persia and then Greece, Antiochus was not great at all , certainly not exceedingly great. His father, Antiochus III, is barely a blip on the screen of history, yet he was much more successful than his son in holding back the advance of the Romans. Antiochus IV Ephiphanes was a repeated looser faced with the rising power of the developing Roman Empire. As we have discussed, the power that dominated the Middle Ages does fit the picture.
Secondly, just three years after the desecration by Antiochus, the conservative Jews “cleansed” or restored the temple at Jerusalem with the building of a new altar. The problem is that this cleansing did not happen after even half of 2300 literal days and clearly not 2300 years (Dan. 8:14 ).
The little horn is another identity.???
written with love

 

[benidict]

Richard- see you and Ben have been collaborating. No, I’m not going to start a thread. ME= No Richard, we have not. any corrospondence you see between us, is on this thread.

 

[BTTG]

To find the answer to what does Dan. 8:14 mean, lets read on to verse 26 - (Dan 8:26) And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days.

• the “vision of the evening and the morning which was told” is the period of 2,300 days***

vs 27- Daniel fainted, sick for days, and states that “no one understood it”, the vision of the 2,300 days*** until Gabriel appears to Dan. in Ch. 9.

Ch 9 is about 11 years later after Daniel first had the vision of the 2,300 days*** ( the first year of Darius)

Here in Dan 9 , Dan. is praying to God and asking for forgiveness to his people, vs 19 " for Your city and Your people".

vs 21 - 22 - Gabriel appears to Dan, whom he had “see in the vision at the beginning” , the vision of the 2,300 days***

vs 23 - now Gabriel is going to make Dan. “understand the vision”, the start of the 2,300 days***

vs 24- Seventy weeks ( must be 490 years), as we all know that the 70 week prophecy is not literal weeks , but prophetic time of a day for a year.

vs 24 - are determined, or “cut off”… 70 weeks ( 490 years) are cut off from the
2,300 days/ which is actually 2,300 years

vs 24 - “for your ( Daniel’s ) people” ( Jews) and “for your holy city” ( Jerusalem) - see vs 19 for " your city" and “your people”.

Therefore, the start of the 70 weeks is the start of the 2,300 days.

…to be continued

written with love

 

[BTTG]

…continued fro previous post.

Now the 70 weeks ( 490 years) are the start of the 2,300 days ( 2,300 years- the prophetic time mentioned in Dan 8:14 and 26).

The start of the 70 weeks is when… Dan 9:25 - " know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the command to restore and build Jerusalem…"

The decree as mentioned in Dan 9:25 can be found in Ezra 6:14 and the year was 457 BC.

… to be continued.

 

[barboza21]

There are two criteria in Rev. 12: I wouldn’t know how to explain it myself… so: here’s This Rock for you from CAtholic.com:: The Woman in Revelation 12 is part of the fusion imagery/polyvalent symbolism that is found in the book. She has four referents: Israel, the Church, Eve, and Mary.

She is Israel because she is associated with the sun, the moon, and twelve stars. These symbols are drawn from Genesis 37:9–11, in which the patriarch Joseph has a dream of the sun and moon (symbolizing his father and mother) and stars (representing his brothers), which bow down to him. Taken together, the sun, moon, and twelve stars symbolize the people of Israel.

The Woman is the Church because, as 12:17 tells us, “the rest of her offspring” are those who bear witness to Jesus, making them Christians.

The Woman is Eve because she is part of the three-way conflict also involving her Seed and the Dragon, who is identified with the ancient serpent (the one from Eden) in 20:2. This mirrors the conflict in Genesis 3:15 between Eve, the serpent, and her unborn seed—which in turn is a symbol of the conflict between Mary, Satan, and Jesus.

Finally, the Woman is Mary because she is the mother of Jesus, the child who will rule the nations with a rod of iron (19:11–16).

Because the Woman is a four-way symbol, different.aspects of the narrative apply to different referents. Like Mary, she is pictured as being in heaven and she flies (mirroring Mary’s Assumption). Like the Church, she is persecuted by the Devil after the Ascension of Christ. Like Israel, she experiences great trauma as the Messiah is brought forth (figuratively) from the nation. And like Eve, it is her (distant) seed with which the serpent has his primary conflict.

Conversely, portions of the narrative do not apply to each referent. Mary did not experience literal pain when bringing forth the Messiah, but she suffered figuratively (the prophecy that a sword would pierce her heart at the Crucifixion). Eve did not ascend to heaven. And the Church did not bring forth the Messiah (rather, the Messiah brought forth his Church).

Before this you said 1.you did believe that Jesus founded 1 tru church. 2.You just didn’t believe the CC was it. 3.ANd you said your church was founded on Jesus. So you do think the Adventist Church was the one that JEsus founded… Eph 4:5 one lord one faith one baptism… ?
And I’m not judging you Richard–I want to clarify. This is sth I truly don’t know your answer to. nd I would like to know that’s why I’m asking.

Jesus’ mother Mary had no part in crushing the head of Satan. That was done totally and exclusively by Jesus. Mary was merely the last in a long line of ancestors all of which were sinners. They went the gammet from kings to harlots.

She didn’t do these things directly, but indirectly, through her Son. It was Jesus who directly crushed the serpent’s head from the cross and Jesus whom the serpent directly struck on the cross. Yet Mary cooperated in these events.

She, not anyone else, was the person who agreed to become the human channel through which Christ would enter the world in order to crush the serpent’s head (Luke 1:38). She herself was wounded when the serpent struck Jesus. Simeon had prophesied to her that “a sword will pierce through your own soul also,” a prophecy fulfilled when Mary saw her Son hanging from the cross (John 19:25–27).

Thus Jesus directly crushed the serpent and was directly struck by the serpent, while Mary indirectly crushed it and was indirectly struck by it, due to her cooperation in becoming the mother of Christ.

it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent’s head
Are you saying she wasn’t sinless?

I see you and Ben have been collaborating. No, I’m not going to start a thread.

Collaborating?? Untrue. I asked him a couple questions, and agreed with what he said on his post. And I didn;t mean if you would want to start another thread about Christ’s divinity. That was only an example. It could be about anything else. If you don’t want to its fine. I was only asking. Its not like its going to be me and ben ‘collaboratin’ against you. NO. Just a thread like this one started. It just so happened more people have started posting.
We are not saved through baptism. We are saved through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
Okay… so do you think 1 Peter 3:21 was symbolism?

From wikipedia:… was officially founded in 1863. Prominent figures in the early church included Hiram Edson, James Springer White and his wife Ellen G. White, Joseph Bates, and J. N. Andrews.
Might I ask, was it EGW that officially founded it or Edson or Bates or was it like in a group? thanks
Here’s what the bible says about Jesus second comming.

Matt24 35-36
This merely says that we do not know the day nor the hour. In most of Matt 24 Jesus gives us a whole bunch of signs that will occur just prior to His return, why?
42Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

I completely agree. But I was talking about the bible says acts 1:7
It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority
I think we agree though that it was wrong for miller and all his followers that were so focused on trying to find out the end times. Thats not what Christianity is all about. ITs more about just being ready. not being ready *and *expecting him on a certain day in the future. So we can agree on this topic? and be done with it I think? Let me know, it might be the first ting we actually officially agree on. Yay.

 

[barboza21]

Here’s what you asked.
“Like you say in the next paragraph, Of course Jesus is God. Do you truly mean it Richard?” I can see no valid reason to ask this question. It has nothing to do with the posts and as far as I’m concerned is designed to cast doubt on my personal faith in my Savior. To be fair to you this may not have been your intention, but it sure came off that way to me. I would ask that you be a little more careful as to personal faith references.

No it trly wasn’t my intention. I asked you because at times it sounded like you contradicted yourself. but now i knw why. NOW i know you meant that when christ was on earth he was only human. not divine. --i certainly dont agree with it, but now i understand what you meant. and im sorry it came out the way you took it, i don’t want to try to put doubts on your faith–i just want to clarify.

Well, I don’t see how this has anything to do with a woman crushing Satan’s head.

[Heb.2
14Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; 15And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
17Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
18For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.
Yeah, Jesus destroyed the devil through His crucifixion, and Jesus Himself suffered. :the seed of the woman (JC) will crush the devil, and the devil will hurt his heel.
/COLOR]

Yes, If He used His divinity for anything, it would have invalidated His propitiation for us. IOW Satan would have yelled foul.

I understand what you’re saying. So i guess when Jesus performed miracles, it wasn’t JEsus doing it–but the father? even though Jesus is 100% God, bc Jesus was only Human on Earth? and so He left His Divinity in Heaven? Is that how you take it?

I’m having a hard time following this part. You do see that Jesus is calling death sleep don’t you? Another thing Jesus calls Lasarus forth out of the grave not down from heaven. And don’t you think that Lasarus would have said something about heaven and being in the presence of God? I think that I would have been a little miffed at being called out of God’s presence back down to this sinful earth. Well, the fact is Lasarus was never in heaven because he was dead.

Yes well he called it sleep because it looked like h was alseep. then when they didn’t get it, he said he is dead. and no he didn’t bring him back from heaven because people hadn’t yet resurrected and gone to heaven. This doesn’t happen until jesus is crucified. and risen. When he rises, so does those who had died since waaaay before, and those worthy go to heaven. Matt 27:52 tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.
We had already talked about this…

 

[Peter_John]

Hi,
I know that the Adventist movement was kind of first funded through Miller. However, he had false profecies. I am not sure what really happened. I would like to know what Daniel 8:13-14 really means.

Thanks to all!

If this is the verse I think, I once read a very convincing analysis that argued the count took it right to the day of Christ’s crucifixion – the end of all sacrifices. it was one convincing argument in a book that otherwise was not full convincing, so i am not sure if I still have it, and I am also not sure if this was the verse to which it referred.

 

[barboza21]

(by the way, when you’re baptized in the Catholic Church, you know that… ‘sign’ of the baptism doesn’t go away–even if you leave the church? ") )

Originally Posted by Richard Kastner
Baptism does not have the power to do anything to you. What baptism is is an outward sign of our faith in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ and it is that sacrifice that saves us.

This is what I meant. Didn’t meant to confuse you.

An indelible spiritual mark . . .

*Incorporated into Christ by Baptism, the person baptized is configured to Christ. Baptism seals the Christian with the indelible spiritual mark (character) of his belonging to Christ. No sin can erase this mark, even if sin prevents Baptism from bearing the fruits of salvation.83 Given once for all, Baptism cannot be repeated.

*Incorporated into the Church by Baptism, the faithful have received the sacramental character that consecrates them for Christian religious worship.84 The baptismal seal enables and commits Christians to serve God by a vital participation in the holy liturgy of the Church and to exercise their baptismal priesthood by the witness of holy lives and practical charity.85

*The Holy Spirit has marked us with the seal of the Lord (“Dominicus character”) "for the day of redemption."86 "Baptism indeed is the seal of eternal life."87 The faithful Christian who has “kept the seal” until the end, remaining faithful to the demands of his Baptism, will be able to depart this life "marked with the sign of faith,"88 with his baptismal faith, in expectation of the blessed vision of God - the consummation of faith - and in the hope of resurrection.