[continued from previous message]   
      
   > > > I was really referring to the "seven years" reference. Where did that   
   > > > come from? And why would God try force people to believe a lie, as   
   > > > found elsewhere in 2 Thessalonians?   
   > >   
   > > This is in reference to that.   
   >   
   > No, vs. 7 has nothing to do with either seven years or a lie sent by   
   > God.   
      
   God did not force anyone to believe a lie. And it does have everything to do   
   with sin ruling the world in that 7 year period. You have read and heard   
   about it often enough to know that.   
   >   
   >   
   > > > > > > There is so much answers that God holds in his hand, but how are   
   those   
   > > > > > > that oppose him going to hear? They can’t, they are not willing   
   and so   
   > > > > > > they have not the ears to hear.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > Why do you believe that?   
   > > > >   
   > > > > That is made most obvious by the atheist, but the same thing is   
   occurring   
   > > > > with those that believe there is a God, but they are more interested   
   in the   
   > > > > affairs of this world that they have no time for God, and or they   
   don’t   
   > > > > want him messing with the sins they enjoy. Some are bitter towards him   
   > > > > because he didn’t jump to their commands or demands.   
   > > >   
   > > > Any examples of this?   
   > >   
   > > Sure, this thread, as well as the attitudes of all atheists.   
   >   
   > So there was an atheist in this thread who's bitter because God didn't   
   > jump to their commands? That sounds more like a theist trope than   
   > actual reality.   
      
   There is many, and they mostly come from religious backgrounds.   
   >   
   >   
   > > > > > > > > > > Yet Jesus gave us the signs, and when they are all   
   > > > > > > > > > > happening at the same time, with an increasing ferocity   
   and the   
   > > > > > > > > > > nations   
   > > > > > > > > > > are   
   > > > > > > > > > > all lined up as specified for a future war of MAJOR   
   proportions.   
   > > > > > > > > > > There   
   > > > > > > > > > > is not much left to be fulfilled before Jesus comes in the   
   air.   
   > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > War, not peace, is the norm for cities and states in ancient   
   times   
   > > > > > > > > > and   
   > > > > > > > > > even in the modern world. Any "signs" of Jesus' supposed   
   return have   
   > > > > > > > > > long since occurred, without any end of the world to go with   
   them.   
   > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > Nope, for a prophecy to be fulfilled all aspects of it must   
   happen.   
   > > > > > > > > Only   
   > > > > > > > > partial aspects that fit near the defined prophecy, will they   
   > > > > > > > > protected   
   > > > > > > > > those   
   > > > > > > > > that were aware, were not the actual fulfillment.   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > Presumably, Isaiah's "prophecy" was written before Damascus was   
   > > > > > > > rebuilt.   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > You have had that discussion with others about that prophecy, but   
   you   
   > > > > > > dismissed the words of the Bible to accept a supposition of man   
   who had   
   > > > > > > not   
   > > > > > > the ears to hear what was written.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > What was the name of the person with whom I supposedly had this   
   > > > > > discussion? I don’t recall who all, but it was only a few months   
   back.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > For instance, if you see the city of Damascus totally   
   destroyed in   
   > > > > > > > > > > one   
   > > > > > > > > > > night, as described in the Bible, I don’t see what else   
   is left   
   > > > > > > > > > > before   
   > > > > > > > > > > the   
   > > > > > > > > > > Tribulation. Plus there is a viable chance that that is   
   the trigger.   
   > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > Some scholars see the destruction of Damascus as a prophecy   
   which was   
   > > > > > > > > > fulfilled by the destruction of Damascus by Assyria in the   
   8th   
   > > > > > > > > > century   
   > > > > > > > > > BCE. No "time of tribulation" in the modern world needed for   
   any of   
   > > > > > > > > > it.   
   > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > Some mistaken ones did, no doubt, but the prophecy never   
   occurred to   
   > > > > > > > > the   
   > > > > > > > > full   
   > > > > > > > > discription of it such as to it was fully there when night   
   fell and   
   > > > > > > > > the   
   > > > > > > > > next   
   > > > > > > > > morning it was gone, plus it will never be inhabited again was   
   not   
   > > > > > > > > fulfilled.   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > So where does the Bible say that Damascus would never be   
   rebuilt, or   
   > > > > > > > that it fell over night?   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > You were given those scriptures before, would there be any   
   difference if   
   > > > > > > you   
   > > > > > > heard them again?   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > When did that supposedly happen?   
   > > > >   
   > > > > They were mentioned as you were arguing about them.   
   > > >   
   > > > As I was arguing about them? You said it had happened *before* that!   
   > >   
   > > Your arguing has been the same for decades. All during that time you were   
   > > shown things you totally dismissed, at least publicly.   
   >   
   > Any examples? And note that "it was in this thread" or some other   
   > broad generalization won't be sufficient.   
      
   Has this thread gone on for decades?   
   Has your argument changed?   
      
   >   
   >   
   > > > > > > Aren’t you diametrically opposed to the Bible, what it is   
   > > > > > > and what it stands for. the Bible is for understanding, not a   
   point of   
   > > > > > > argument.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > I'm opposed to people not properly understanding the Bible, which is   
   > > > > > true about most Christians.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > Interesting, and why would you declare such a thing?   
   > > >   
   > > > Maybe I wasn't clear enough: Most Christians don't understand the   
   > > > Bible properly -- that's what I'm opposed to. An example would be   
   > > > Jesus predicting that his generation would see his return after his   
   > > > death -- Christians twist that to mean it wasn't the *generation* that   
   > > > would see it, but [t]he Jewish *race* that would see it.   
   > >   
   > > It was spoken to the Jews at that time, and about the definition in use at   
   > > that time.   
   >   
   > Christians bend over backward to get the definition they want to use.   
      
   Some so-called christians do that, even the prideful ones. And the lazy ones   
   us AI,   
      
   When they do so they are not listening to God, don’t care about what He   
   thinks., and a variety of other reasons.   
   >   
   >   
   > > Those who cared to know would find out and learn. Of course, a believer   
   > > could   
   > > just ask God and the spirit of God would lead them to the truth so that   
   they   
   > > might see and understand.   
   >   
   > What does that have to do with Jesus predicting his return within the   
   > lifetime of his followers?   
      
   So mankind would know the time period. A last call understanding. The big one   
   that ties into that is the prophecy of Joel that Peter announced at the   
   beginning.   
      
   >   
   >   
   > > > See how that does violence to Scripture, in the name of conservative   
   > > > exegesis?   
   > >   
   > > Speak in plain English please.   
   >   
   > "Violence to Scripture" just means interpreting it in a way that's at   
   > odds with its plain meaning, usually for some kind of personal gain.   
   >   
   > "Conservative" just means you favor traditional interpretations of the   
   > Bible over more modern and often secular interpretations of it.   
   >   
   > "Exegesis" just means the process of interpreting and analyzing the   
   > Bible to better understand what it's saying.   
      
   That is the word I was asking about.   
   It is the not what Jesus spoke about and is most typically the way of carnal   
   men.   
   It is also the way of atheist theologians.   
   God speaks to the heart of man As Jesus promised for those that believe in   
   Him and walk according to his ways.   
      
   He also calls to those that are lost, those that seek eternal life.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)