2070 Christs glorious return

[Ben Avraham]

No you didn't. That's absurd, they were at a low point having just been let out of captivity. The furthest thing from being called Mighty God by human wisdom.

You are wrong! They could not be more jubilant than they were for the chance to rebuild themselves for a new beginning. One has to be a Jew to explain his or her happiness at making Aliyah. By the Rivers of Babylon they could not even sing a son of joy just for the reason that they could not sing so far away from Zion. The pagans knew that the Jews returning from Babylon were the owners of all Israel. So, their human wisdom was to pay homage to them even as if they were Mighty God. According to Isaiah 9:5 in the JPS they were already planning to explore the mercy of the Jews.

 

[Kemosloby]

You are wrong! They could not be more jubilant than they were for the chance to rebuild themselves for a new beginning. One has to be a Jew to explain his or her happiness at making Aliyah. By the Rivers of Babylon they could not even sing a son of joy just for the reason that they could not sing so far away from Zion. The pagans knew that the Jews returning from Babylon were the owners of all Israel. So, their human wisdom was to pay homage to them even as if they were Mighty God. According to Isaiah 9:5 in the JPS they were already planning to explore the mercy of the Jews.

Ok it was a good day for the Jews but I doubt anyone was calling the Jews Mighty God. Besides, in the prophecy as you see it, Israel would be the Virgin not the Son. They were cleansed of their sins, paid for by their captivity.

 

[Ben Avraham]

Ok it was a good day for the Jews but I doubt anyone was calling the Jews Mighty God. Besides, in the prophecy as you see it, Israel would be the Virgin not the Son. They were cleansed of their sins, paid for by their captivity.

You are not focusing when you read. I said that Israel/Ephraim aka the Ten Tribes was the virgin and Judah was the Son. If you read the text within this chain, Isaiah 7:14,15,22 and 8:8 you will understand that I never said that Israel was the son. Then, Amos 5:2 couldn't be more clear about Israel being the virgin. But Judah was the son. (Isaiah 8:8)

 

[Kemosloby]

You are not focusing when you read. I said that Israel/Ephraim aka the Ten Tribes was the virgin and Judah was the Son. If you read the text within this chain, Isaiah 7:14,15,22 and 8:8 you will understand that I never said that Israel was the son. Then, Amos 5:2 couldn't be more clear about Israel being the virgin. But Judah was the son. (Isaiah 8:8)

Shadow of things to come, it was probably just pointing in the direction of the Son, since Jesus came from the tribe of Judah and is called Mighty God.

 

[e.r.m.]

Do they make a written explicit confirmation that everything must have a written explicit confirmation, or do they say "what we see are puzzling reflections as in a mirror"

Unless they do, it's just conjecture on our part and it has no weight. The Bible authors stress over and over holding to God's word carefully and not implementing our own ideas into God's word.
Matthew 15:3, 1 Timothy 4:16, John 12:48-50, Acts 17:11, 2 Peter 1:20-21.

You can't just look at possible connections and say that they exist. That's not an authority you have.

 

[Kemosloby]

Unless they do, it's just conjecture on our part and it has no weight. The Bible authors stress over and over holding to God's word carefully and not implementing our own ideas into God's word.
Matthew 15:3, 1 Timothy 4:16, John 12:48-50, Acts 17:11, 2 Peter 1:20-21.

You can't just look at possible connections and say that they exist. That's not an authority you have.

You can't put your ideas into God's word, but you can get ideas from God's word. "Follow the way of love and eagerly desire gifts of the Spirit, especially prophecy." Everything I've said falls within God's word.

 

[e.r.m.]

You can't put your ideas into God's word, but you can get ideas from God's word. "Follow the way of love and eagerly desire gifts of the Spirit, especially prophecy." Everything I've said falls within God's word.

Ideas from God's word are written. That's my point.

Read my post on exegetical tool
http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/exegetical-tool.180459/#post-4452111

 

[Kemosloby]

Ideas from God's word are written. That's my point.

Read my post on exegetical tool
http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/exegetical-tool.180459/#post-4452111

You're missing a great deal of the bible if you ignore all the symbolism and metaphors. If Jesus wanted to make an explicit and direct meaning He would not have used so much symbolism and metaphors.

I agree with you for the most part that most major points in the bible are made in several places in many ways, perhaps so that one line can't be cherry picked and corrupted. But not much in the bible is explicit. It is filled with metaphors and symbolism. And the interpretations of metaphors and symbolism should be one with the correct interpretation of everything else. It should all add up. That said, i don't see anything wrong with the theory. That there will be a resurrection of the dead should be an undeniable fact. That Jesus used a metaphor about his own death and resurrection, Jesus laid down a prophecy with that statement. "Tear down this temple and in three days I will raise it up again" It's our job to figure out the meaning or meanings of the prophecy, I used scripture to do it , and it also hold true with reality. Both meanings can hold true without making the other false.

 

[Muffled]

The prophecy of Kemosloby. This is a theory that Christ will return to resurrect the dead in 2070 or shortly afterwards. Here is the basis of the theory and scriptural support.

Jesus stood in the temple of the Jews in Jerusalem and stated "tear down this temple and in 3 days I will raise it up again" This statement had multiple meanings. The temple Jesus was standing in was a Temple of God, Jesus' body was a temple of God; And those who believe in Jesus are the body of Christ. Christs body was destroyed on the cross and in 3 days resurrected. He was resurrected early on the third day, already gone before anyone came to look the next morning. The temple of the Jews was destroyed in 70 ad by the Romans. This started the timer for the resurrection. Christ promised to return to resurrect his church, i.e. those who believe in him. "But do not let this one fact escape you, The Lord is not slow at keeping his promise, he is patient not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance, therefore let 1 day be 1000 years. 2 Peter 3:9; Some simple math says the third day is 2070-3070, and Christ said " I will come quickly like a thief in the night" So very shortly after 2070, paralleling the resurrection of Christ. Gone before morning.

Romans 6:5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his.

I believe if you are shortening the third day it isn't really a third day. Also Jesus never says anything about resurrecting people just Himself.

 

[Muffled]

There’s been no shortage of people making such predictions for the past 2,000 years, and so far, every one, each and every single one, has failed. And then everybody (well, the ones who didn’t die) runs back to the drawing board and starts again. ‘Twas ever thus.

I believe it is fun as long as one doesn't get too excited about it.

 

[Muffled]

Is this a Biblical "soon" or a modern day "soon"?

If one considers all of history to be millions of years then a few thousand isn't much.

 

[Kemosloby]

I believe if you are shortening the third day it isn't really a third day. Also Jesus never says anything about resurrecting people just Himself.

Any part of a day is a day. Jesus was resurrected on the third day. He said he would be three days in the belly of the earth, so we see that Jesus was dead on three seperate days, but not three full days.

The bible absolutely does say Jesus will resurrect us from the dead...both the righteous and the wicked will be resurrected on the last day.

 

[Muffled]

Any part of a day is a day. Jesus was resurrected on the third day. He said he would be three days in the belly of the earth, so we see that Jesus was dead on three seperate days, but not three full days.

The bible absolutely does say Jesus will resurrect us from the dead...both the righteous and the wicked will be resurrected on the last day.

I believe that is a problem since you say it is the first day of the third year and He says it is the last day.

 

[Kemosloby]

I believe that is a problem since you say it is the first day of the third year and He says it is the last day.

2070 begins the metaphorical third day, with 1 day lasting 1000 years. But the "last day" is a literal day, which my theory is says falls sometime in the third metaphorical day. i.e. Somewhere between 2070 and 3070. If it follows the pattern of Jesus' resurrection, very early on the third metaphorical day, closer to year 2070 than 3070.

 

[Muffled]

2070 begins the metaphorical third day, with 1 day lasting 1000 years. But the "last day" is a literal day, which my theory is says falls sometime in the third metaphorical day. i.e. Somewhere between 2070 and 3070. If it follows the pattern of Jesus' resurrection, very early on the third metaphorical day, closer to year 2070 than 3070.

I believe it still sounds arbitrary to me. one takes the 2000 years as reality but than the last thousand isn't. What is your rationale for that?

 

[Kemosloby]

I believe it still sounds arbitrary to me. one takes the 2000 years as reality but than the last thousand isn't. What is your rationale for that?

It follows the pattern of Jesus's death and resurrection. Jesus was dead for two full days.( A day begins at sunset in the bible) Two full days = 2000 years + part of a day. Jesus was resurrected before the morning of the third day, when people came to look that morning Jesus was already gone.

Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. -John 20:10

 

[e.r.m.]

You're missing a great deal of the bible if you ignore all the symbolism and metaphors. If Jesus wanted to make an explicit and direct meaning He would not have used so much symbolism and metaphors.

That's not a license to indulge your own ideas. We need to find what "He" meant, not come up with new ideas and use this symbolism and metaphors after the fact as support.
There are anchors for metaphors and symbolism in the New Testament.

Revelation 12:1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:

Genesis 37:9-10 And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me. [10] And he told it to his father, and to his brethren: and his father rebuked him, and said unto him, What is this dream that thou hast dreamed? Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth?
------------------------------------------------------
Matthew 13:36-37 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. [37] He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;...
--------------------------------------------------------
Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it , and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

Obviously it wasn't his flesh, because his flesh was still standing there holding the bread and he didn't rip off his flesh and hand it to them. The remembrance precedence he was setting here was just unavoidable, especially since He said it was for remembrance.
-------------------------------------------------------
John 2:19, 21-22 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. [21] But he spake of the temple of his body. [22] When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

The men the Bible documented had their own meaning behind their symbolisms. They all have anchors, Not permitting for us to go off with new meanings according to our own mindsets. NOONE in the Bible ever connected Jesus's three days raising His temple with the timing of His return. There is no Biblical anchor for this.

I agree with you for the most part that most major points in the bible are made in several places in many ways, perhaps so that one line can't be cherry picked and corrupted. But not much in the bible is explicit. It is filled with metaphors and symbolism. And the interpretations of metaphors and symbolism should be one with the correct interpretation of everything else. It should all add up. That said, i don't see anything wrong with the theory. That there will be a resurrection of the dead should be an undeniable fact. That Jesus used a metaphor about his own death and resurrection, Jesus laid down a prophecy with that statement. "Tear down this temple and in three days I will raise it up again" It's our job to figure out the meaning or meanings of the prophecy, I used scripture to do it , and it also hold true with reality. Both meanings can hold true without making the other false.

That Jesus used a metaphor, "Tear down this temple and in three days I will raise it up again", about his own death and resurrection, is indeed an undeniable fact.
That there will be a resurrection of the dead is another undeniable fact.

That Jesus connected His own resurrection to the timing of His return to resurrect His followers is nonexistent in the Bible and a pure fabrication.

The two undeniable facts stand ALONE and do not support the pure fabrication.

 

[Kemosloby]

That's not a license to indulge your own ideas. We need to find what "He" meant, not come up with new ideas and use this symbolism and metaphors after the fact as support.
There are anchors for metaphors and symbolism in the New Testament.

Revelation 12:1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:

Genesis 37:9-10 And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me. [10] And he told it to his father, and to his brethren: and his father rebuked him, and said unto him, What is this dream that thou hast dreamed? Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth?
------------------------------------------------------
Matthew 13:36-37 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. [37] He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;...
--------------------------------------------------------
Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it , and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

Obviously it wasn't his flesh, because his flesh was still standing there holding the bread and he didn't rip off his flesh and hand it to them. The remembrance precedence he was setting here was just unavoidable, especially since He said it was for remembrance.
-------------------------------------------------------
John 2:19, 21-22 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. [21] But he spake of the temple of his body. [22] When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

The men the Bible documented had their own meaning behind their symbolisms. They all have anchors, Not permitting for us to go off with new meanings according to our own mindsets. NOONE in the Bible ever connected Jesus's three days raising His temple with the timing of His return. There is no Biblical anchor for this.

That Jesus used a metaphor, "Tear down this temple and in three days I will raise it up again", about his own death and resurrection, is indeed an undeniable fact.
That there will be a resurrection of the dead is another undeniable fact.

That Jesus connected His own resurrection to the timing of His return to resurrect His followers is nonexistent and a pure fabrication.

The two undeniable facts stand ALONE and do not support the pure fabrication.

Well give it up then, I disagree with you so just drop it.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The single most important “indicator” in the Bible is Jesus Himself, saying, “some of you yet living” will be around when it comes. I can’t help but wonder who, from among those around Jesus at the time, is still living. We ought to track them, if we really want to know when it’s all gonna go kaboom!

It is Not all going to go kaboom. There will be healing for earth's nations - Revelation 22:2
Jesus, as Prince of Peace, is going to usher in global Peace on Earth among person's of goodwill.
- Matthew 25:31-33,37

Both Matthew 24 and Luke 21 have a minor and a MAJOR fulfillment.
The MAJOR fulfillment is set for our day or time frame setting as mentioned at Revelation 1:10
Revelation was Not written for the first century but for our time.
There were first-century people still alive in the year 70 when the Romans armies destroyed Jerusalem.
The Christians had already fled the city in the year 66 - Luke 19:43-44; Luke 21:20-21

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Shadow of things to come, it was probably just pointing in the direction of the Son, since Jesus came from the tribe of Judah and is called Mighty God.

Yes, Isaiah titles Jesus as Mighty God - Isaiah 9:6
God is a title, and Isaiah did Not address Jesus as Almighty God.