 "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path." Psalm 119:105 Contact Editor | Bible studies | Newer students | Bible Q & A's | Study tools | Search our site Library/Bookstore | Statement of faith | New material on site | Join our mailing list | Home Page | Donate QUESTION LIST; Page Number 51 NEW FORMAT AVAILABLE! Click here for printer-friendly version
| To list of all questions on Website |
| Back To Top | Does it matter how a Christian male wears his hair?
A reader asks:
Answer: Hi, any way he wants it. The Scripture regarding long hair was an admonishment against Homosexuality, in that the fallen angels, who are returning, and who are male, may well use men sexually as they will be using females. I refer to:
Peace to you in Christ Jesus.
Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | The Mark of the beast—will they know it when they take it?
Hello. You found a couple of good references from my site which say basically what you and I agreed on earlier. My, you are good with your search engines. :o) Regarding your above question, wherein you state, "I wonder if this is completely true?": Yes, I feel that it has to be true, and here is why. In the below Scripture we see that God has a very dire consequence for all those who take this mark of the beast, whatever it entails. It therefore stands to reason that for there to be punishment, especially as drastic as this punishment is, there must necessarily be choice. And for there to be choice, there must be information to base that choice upon; else, we could not be punished for taking the mark. However, in the below we see that those who do take this mark are in fact severely punished.
I know that pastor Murray thinks that all of this stuff is to be spiritualized away. But that doesn't work for me. (Heck, he and Dennis even say that we are in the Fifth Trump, and that all that was written to have happened up till that point [Rev 1 - Rev 9] happened, only "spiritually." Which is absolutely absurd!) When I read the above Scripture, it is quite clear to me that God shall execute the ultimate punishment upon all those who take this mark of the beast (we're talking Lake of Fire type stuff here in verses 10 & 11!). I take that as literally as I take the below Scripture, wherein we see the Tribulation martyrs being rewarded for rejecting the mark of the beast and all that goes along with it:
Regarding the national ID card, National Driver's License's, etc. These will come, they must; in this day and age everyone is being identified, located, categorized—all awaiting the day when the beast rises and succeeds to power. But these are not marks in the hand or the forehead, they are plastic cards that you carry in your wallet or purse. They may well be used to locate and manage all people, but they are not in themselves the mark or the number. Also, observe please that the number taken is not a number individual to us; but rather, it is the number of HIS name (it's name, the first beast is an "it," not a "he"; but it is the same Greek word autos for he, she, it, etc. The Greek word "autos" means self—himself, herself, itself—depending on what the subject is.). No doubt they (the marks and numbers) shall all be identical.
This cannot be any ID card. This is an initiation, it is membership into the club of the living, for a while; for, all who do not possesses this number shall not be allowed to live:
And all who do take it shall not live eternally:
This is a serious decision that all shall be faced with, far too serious to be missed by them. Heck, they surely will gather that something important is happening here when they see people being beheaded for refusing to receive this mark and all that goes along with it! And they shall know what the Bible says about this mark, they just won't believe it--to their own destruction. Also, the remaining faithful Christians shall no doubt be telling people that this is the mark of the beast spoken of in God's Holy Word. Not to mention that at that time God's supernaturally gifted Two Witnesses shall be operating openly, no doubt warning about taking this mark. I say "openly operating," as opposed to hidden, because we see that all the people did in fact observe them, but the people of the world do not accept them; and what's more, they rather rejoice when antichrist slays these two prophets:
When one takes the book of Revelation (or the whole Bible, for that matter) literally, he gains a tremendous amount of clarity. :o) To the shame of the churches, Christians today are doing way to much "this really means that" type stuff. No; this means THIS, and that means THAT. Not a difficult concept. Sure, there's symbology in the Bible, but that is to make easier for us to grasp things. And not everything is a type or a parable. The reading of fact as parable or type—and reading parables or types as fact—are the basis for most errors in Biblical exegesis. But even a parable and a type must be true; else, the antitype cannot be true. The "antitype" is the actual event that the "type" mimics. Therefore, in conclusion, simply stated: God said what He meant, and He means what He said. That's why He called the thing, The Book Of Revelation.
Anyway, there shall be no innocent's in Hell, and no guilty's in Heaven. Choice; we all shall make an informed choice. Some will believe and some will deny, but all shall know that they are making a choice. One may deny Jesus Christ, but he may not claim ignorance in the matter—the very act of denying and rejecting something means that you have heard of the matter. Likewise, one may take the mark of the beast, but he cannot say that he did so unawares.
Peace
to you in Christ Jesus.
Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | More on Ezekiel 44 NOT being the Millennium; More on the so-called "second chance doctrine"
A reader writes:
Answer: Hello. I understand why you need this doctrine (a second chance in the Millennium); and we shall discus this shortly. And I also want to thank you for having the courage to bring this discussion to me, instead of letting it fester behind my back. As you know, I don't discourage honest disagreement, I do not shy away from posting it here, and I believe that every man has the right to his/her own opinion on any matter biblical. All that I do expect is that their opinion or disagreement be based upon the words of our Lord's book, the Bible; and that they be allowed to rise and fall based upon that perfect holy Word. A quick word on the accusations in your E-mail, then we will get right into the Scriptures that you inquire for. I knew at the moment Lance Knight fell (The Overnight fall of Pastor Lance Knight...) that there was a phenomenon coming. That phenomenon being that since Lance's fall, and since he spiritually hurt so many people, that what would result from that was that people would withdraw to a safe place. That safe place is that if anyone disagrees with pastor Murray on anything, then that person is to be dismissed for fear that another Lance Knight debacle is happening. What has resulted from Lance's antics is that people are afraid of anyone who is not in lockstep with the good pastor from Arkansas on every single thing. This, I believe, is why satan used Lance. As I have without pause stated so many times before that I like pastor Murray, think that he is fine Bible teacher, is honest, means well, has dedicated his life to teaching God's Word, and has been used mightily by our Heavenly Father to lead many to salvation—I shall not now use our time herein to say it any further. I will overlook the shot that you threw at me when you said: "some of the students in my SC discussion circle think you're slipping!" and "lest we think you were merely trying to pick a topic...that you and Lance Knight can both agree on." But I will address where you said: "You do realize that Pastor Knight...also believed and taught that on this same subject "a certain pastor from Arkansas" was in error. ." So, what of it? No doubt that both Lance and I know that the sun shall rise tomorrow—does that make me a yokefellow of his? Surely Lance knows that Jesus Christ is the Son of God—does that make me a Lanceite for knowing the same thing? How about you? Is the sun coming up tomorrow? Is Jesus Christ the Son of God? Does that make you suspect? Are you going the way of Lance Knight? Of course not. Sure, Lance is right about some things, but then even a broken watch is correct twice a day; nevertheless, that does not mean that anyone who is also right about those some things that Lance is, is like unto Lance. Please think a little deeper here, please be a little bigger than sophomoric debate tactics. This is very serious, and Lance Knight is in trouble with the Lord—pray for him if you ever followed his ministry. But don't listen to him! And quit using him as a battering ram. And, how can you compare me to Lance Knight? I disagree with pastor Murray on a particular doctrine, but am always careful to show the man the respect that he has earned; while on the other hand, Lance called him the antichrist and "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden," which is to say—satan! Please do not compare me to Lance Knight. Nobody (that I know of) has done more on their Website to expose Lance Knight's false teachings than I. I refer to my below work: One more thing, then we will move to questions regarding the millennium and Ezekiel. You said:
Slipping? Is that what it is called when one disagrees with the Shepherd's Chapel pastor Murray on something, especially when one offers Scriptural support for that disagreement; "slipping," is it now? I see; could it be that you feel that I own a certain loyalty to pastor Murray since I have studied his work for some decade and a half, and that I should not be publicly disagreeing with anything he teaches and says? Do you think that I betray him here in presenting a Scriptural rebuttal to one of his doctrines? I'm sorry, perhaps you don't know my position. Please allow me to state it boldly and unapologetically so that there is never again any misunderstanding on where Nick Goggin stands:
OK? God's Word is the principle thing regarding doctrinal understanding, all else is of varying lesser import. And there shall be no respect of persons here, other than common courtesy and benefit of the doubt for those who have proven themselves over time to be honestly seeking the truth and endeavoring to teach the same. Pastor Murray falls into this category. I truly believe that the man means well, but he is simply wrong on his Millennium teachings. I also hasten to add that this error does not destroy the value of all his work. For, even pastor Murray, who so admires Dr. Bullinger's work, finds himself in disagreement in several key areas with the good Doctor (not least of all, the Rapture theory). Would pastor Murray demand any less for me regarding himself. I think not. After all, he is the one who is always saying "check me out." OK, I did, and that is why we are here today with this. Let's allow the Scriptures to decide, shall we not? Now to the work You ask me:
You ask me the "why's." The "why's" of why did God do this or why does God do that. I cannot know. Can you? We cannot fully understand God's ways, any who claim to are only fooling themselves. Even Apostle Paul, who certainly was closer to understanding our Lord than we, humbly admitted to as much: "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?" (Rom 11:33-34). And again, "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known." (1 Cor 13:12). You ask me: "IF the Millennial reign of Christ will not be a time of teaching--just WHAT then, will the purpose of it be...?" I could turn it around and ask you a question that you likewise cannot answer: "If the Millennium is a second chance, then why are we even here in this flesh world—what is the purpose of this place if our decisions here can be reversed in the Millennium after we pass on from this flesh life?" The problem is that you are attempting to understand God by your own understanding. You cannot understand God based upon how you reason here in this flesh world. We are much too small to fully understand Him. Once again, Paul in the above Scripture told you as much. So, instead of speculating, let us examine the Scriptures which bear upon this topic. We shall do this momentarily, but first: Nevertheless, I can answer your question, even though you cannot answer mine: Q: "IF the Millennial reign of Christ will not be a time of teaching--just WHAT then, will the purpose of it be...?" A: To reward the martyrs and those who resisted the beast until the end:
I'm sorry, but I read the above over and over again, and I still can't help but miss the part about them "teaching salvation to the Elect's loved ones who died in an unsaved state." First let's set strait what your position is, and the position of those whom believe as you do. I know that right about now you are biting your tongue because I said that you believe in second chances. I know that you will say that you do not believe in second chances—yet, your whole doctrine screams SECOND CHANCE! Pastor M. also says that he isn't teaching second chances, then he goes on to teach a second chance. You can't have it both ways, either you believe in a second chance or you do not. And saying that you do not believe in second chances does not mean that you don't. Let's examine this doctrine and observe that it is nothing other than a second chance, no matter how much certain people don't like it being called "a second chance" doctrine. In my, Is there a second chance for the unsaved in the Millennium...? study (which also referenced my The State Of The Dead study), I addressed why the Millennium can't be a second chance or a time of teaching salvation to those who died unsaved. I listed Scriptures that document that every man is judged for what he does here, and that once we pass on, we have made our choice. Three of those Scriptures from the first above mentioned study are:
How anyone can place a "Millennium second chance" in there, I don't understand. Now, let's visit the doctrine in question and determine for ourselves if it is implying a second chance or not. Many pastor M. students study here at WBSG and can attest that I am below laying out pastor M.'s doctrine as he teaches it. This doctrine states that after we die, and when some of "us" die in an unsaved state (don't believe upon Jesus Christ) that other fellow people, who have also passed into the heavenly realm (the Elect), can in the Millennium "go to" these who died in an unsaved state and preach Jesus Christ to them. Then they may accept Jesus Christ at that time (after they had already died) and go from the lost to the found category, the unsaved to the saved category. That is a second chance, friend; I don't care how you slice it. And all the denying in the world that it isn't a second chance does make it to not be a second chance. And all the qualifiers in the world of "I am not teaching a second chance because many never had a first chance to begin with" does not make it okay. If one dies an Atheist, then he is preached to in the hereafter, and allowed to change from being an Atheist to being a Christian before Judgement Day, thereby saving his eternal soul; then he has had a second chance. And to say that he never had a first chance in this world is to lay the blame not upon the unsaved, but upon God Himself (we shall document this later). Speaking of "qualifiers," this is just like when at P.O. 2006, a certain pastor started out with "Now, I'm not setting any dates, but..." then he spent the next hour doing nothing but setting dates (which conclusions I am in total disagreement with, by the way). It's kind of like me saying "Now, I'm not saying that you are wrong, but..." then spending the next ten minutes showing how they were wrong. In other words, I'd just be "covering my butt." Either you are saying that they are wrong, or you are not. Either you are setting dates, or you are not. Either you are teaching a second chance, or you are not. Let the matter be determined by the evidence of the conversation or teaching, and not upon denials and qualifiers and prefaces. You and those who believe as you do, do not like the term "second chance." And I don't blame you! For, you are obviously cognizant that there are no second chances—that much you gleaned from the Bible itself. However, what you believe in is nothing other than a second chance! If it would make you happy we could change the term from "second chance" to "a chance to change your mind after you die." Does that taste better to you? But, isn't it really implying a second chance? Of course it is, and you know it; you just don't like the way it sounds, because you can sense the folly in it. And I would respect you more if instead of playing all this verbal Judo, you just came out and honestly admitted that you believe that people have a chance to change their mind, to change what they shall be judged upon, and thereby change their very fate even, AFTER they die and return to our Lord. One more point on why you feel the need to believe in this doctrine, then we shall get the Scriptures that you inquired of. A necessary note is needful here: While I know that it probably isn't possible that some won't misunderstand me with what I am about to say, I nevertheless shall try to be o-so-clear. Please understand that what I am about to say is not an indictment of anyone. I do not in my heart feel that the below is WHY this pastor teaches the Millennium doctrine as he does; but regardless of his intent, the below is why people hang on to this teaching tooth and nail. Okay, clear your mind please; pretend that you are an outside observer, that you are not a pastor M. student, that you are not one of these Elect people that he speaks so often about; pretend that you have never so much as heard of any Millennium. Now, with that frame of mind let me explain to you a doctrine, and let's see if it appeals to you. In this doctrine, you are this Elect person simply because you believe the teaching; it makes sense to you, you understand it; therefore, you are Elect. Now, being an Elect person places you in a very special club. For one, you are guaranteed salvation, you are guaranteed that you can no longer ever be deceived, you are also guaranteed that no harm shall come to you in the Tribulation. Not only shall you not be hurt, but you won't even be discomforted whilst this word goes mad for antichrist. You are also one of God's special people, His favorites, ranking not far below the Bible greats, even. You have also reserved a seat for yourself in the choicest heavenly positions; you are a somebody! Both in this world and in the world to come. All that is required of you to join this club is that you believe what a certain pastor teaches; for, the evidence that you are Elect is that you agree with that pastor's teachings, that they make sense to you, that they are true to you, that you "get it." Appealing, is it not? But it gets much better than this! Also, as a reward for membership in this elite corps of the Elect, you have another ability; you can go back to your loved ones who died in an unsaved state, and you can convert them postmortem (after death). No longer need you agonize over whether your Atheist deceased husband is hell bound, no longer need you worry about your Gay brother living in California denying God; for, you can save them! All by merit of the very fact that you are one of God's Elect. And you are God's Elect if you say that you are. You are God's Elect, with all these privileges, simply because you believe that you are. Because you "get it" when a certain pastor teaches it to you this way. This is a very powerful draw into any doctrine. There isn't a soul on Earth, who this doctrine, if it be true, wouldn't draw them into it and hold them there. Naturally, one who wants to believe this doctrine would vehemently oppose anyone who countered what that certain pastor (and now his son) teach regarding the doctrine in question. Today, that would be me. It is my unenviable task here to debunk the good pastor's Millennium teaching. I know that that does make me popular in certain circles who feel that pastor M. is nigh unto inspired. But, what if he is wrong? I am sure that it isn't lost on you that when a fellow like me comes along and says that the good pastor is wrong on this one, that this fellow isn't going to exactly be your most favorite guy. He is taking away a security blanket from you. If he is right then you can't save your lost deceased relatives, if he is right then you may not be all that you think that you are. You now will have to look at the Tribulation as something other than a treat. Let us examine the Scriptures and see if we can find our answer in the Word of God to this matter, and let all lips be silent that contradict sound Scripturally documented doctrine, one way or the other, either yours or mine. Allow me to answer based upon your very own questions. From the top; you said:
Okay, what do the Scriptures say that the purpose of the Millennium will be? That is what we really want to know here. The Millennium
What does that mean? The fact that so little is written of the time (the Millennium) indicates that we aren't to know too much about it. As to why? Well, let's just agree that it is God's purposes, or He would have written more in-depth on the matter. But there are several facts that can be extracted from the above Scripture. One is that these martyrs (Vs. 4a [all martyrs from all times]) are greatly rewarded for laying down their lives, as also are those who weren't martyred, didn't die, but who also did not worship the beast and all that goes with it (Vs. 4b [starting at "and which had not..."]). One glaring fact is that all those who are operating during this thousand years (the Millennium) are guaranteed eternal life; for, as it is written of them, "on such the second death hath no power" (verse 4), which means that they cannot go into the Lake of Fire, which church folk often refer to as "going to Hell." That all who are operating during this Millennium are already at that time (prior to Judgement Day) saved eternally is evidenced by the above statement in our verse four that we just mentioned: "on such the second death hath no power". This "second death" is explained to us later in this chapter: "And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." (Rev 20:14-15). Therefore we learn here that the second death, the death of a soul, is carried out in the Lake of Fire, not in some eternal torture chamber. And also, we learn that all martyrs of God are guaranteed salvation. Life for life, I suppose. It seems fair. And for giving their very lives, and cutting short their time on the Earth, they are granted a thousand years with Christ that others will never see. Once again, sounds fair. However, equally evident is that all those who are not operating during this Millennium may or may not eventually go into this Lake of Fire. Their fate shall be determined by God at Judgement Day later in this Millennium chapter. For, the Scripture states that "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished" (vs. 5), and that they did not participate in "the first resurrection"; therefore, there needs be another resurrection later on. We see that other resurrection just prior to Judgement Day, AFTER the thousand years, "when the thousand years are expired" (Rev 20:7), at "until the thousand years were finished" (Rev 20:5), where they are resurrected for Judgement (after one final assault attempt against God's people, which God Himself puts down), either "good" Judgement to eternal life or "bad" Judgement to eternal perdition in the Lake of Fire. Daniel spoke of this resurrection; or better stated, the angel of the Lord spoke to Daniel of this resurrection, and Daniel wrote it down for us to read:
There are two specific
prophesies in the above Scripture. Regarding verse one above, Christ
spoke on this matter: "For then shall be great
tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time,
no, nor ever shall be." (Mat 24:21), and below is the New Testament
fulfillment of Daniel's Old Testament prophecy contained in his verse two
above:
Let's work with our original Rev 20:1-6 Scripture a little more; for, there is more information contained within it that shall preclude any possibility that this Millennium is "a time of teaching the lost". In verse four we read, "...I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years." We also read in verse five, "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished." And that what transpired in verse four was: "This is the first resurrection." (vs.5). Therefore, those operating in the Millennium are all saved eternally, and any who are not saved eternally (at that time) are not operating during this thousand years (the Millennium). Therefore, it is not possible that those who have died in an unsaved state could be present in this Millennium at this time being taught anything by anybody; for, if they are in this part of the Millennium, then they are already eternally saved and have no chance of hazarding the Lake of Fire; for, the Scriptures states quite clearly "on such [those of the Millennium first-resurrection] the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years." (Vs.6). "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished" (vs. 5) is taken by those who believe in this doctrine to mean that they just aren't "saved yet." However, what it really is saying is that they do not operate in this Millennium at that time, until we see them here immediately AFTER the thousand years: "And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea." (Vss 7-8). Some will say that in the above that it is just satan who is at that time allowed to operate in the millennium (actually, technically, immediately after the thousand years), and that those who he goes out to "deceive" in the "four quarters of the Earth" were always there. This is not possible, as evidenced by the internal evidence within the Scriptures themselves. Observe: The Resurrections
In other words, how could satan find so many to lead into a final assault on the camp of God's people if they had already been here being taught by the Elect for a thousand years? Surely God's Elect, if they were here "teaching" as this doctrine claims, would have mentioned that one more testing is going to come upon them, that satan is going to be loosed for a short season to temp them into doing what shall amount to their destruction by God before they can ever reach the camp of the saints to battle against them. They would be prepared for satan and would not be able to be deceived by him.
Also, there could not be so many ("the number of whom is as the sand of the sea") who were here with Christ for the thousand blissful years before satan is released, then turn on Christ, God, and God's people, and attack them with satan leading the charge. No, what happened is that in the below, these above multitudes arrived at the same time that satan was cast back to the earth (released from the bottomless pit). How did they "arrive"? They were resurrected. To "live again" IS TO "resurrect." The terms are synonymous in the book of Revelation. And as it was written of them: "But the rest of the dead [deceased ones] lived not again [resurrected] until the thousand years were finished." (Vs. 5). In other words:
Only the damned would use the end of the Millennium to try to attack God's saints. Only those who know in their heart that Judgement Day for them is simply a stop along the way to the Lake of Fire would attack God's saints in the Millennium. Did not the rich man in Luke chapter 16 (of Lazarus and the rich man fame) know that he was damned? So too shall those of the later resurrection, those "the rest of the dead" who "lived not again until the thousand years were finished" (Rev 20:5) know their lot when they are resurrected (lived again). We shall deal more specifically with the term "deceive" used in the above (Rev 20:8) shortly. But let us now pause, and allow me to ask you, after having heard my argument, after seeing my Scriptural witness: what Scripture do you base your premise on that the unsaved shall be taught salvation in this Millennium? What Scripture do you base your position upon that anyone will be taught anything by anybody in the Millennium? You have none. Search in vain, it is not there. You challenge me to produce Scripture, and I do; yet, you produce no Scripture for your position. All you bank on is that "Nick's wrong and pastor Murray's right," without proving one iota of your case through Scripture. I congratulate your loyalty to pastor, but chasten your infidelity to Scripture. IF Ezekiel chapters 40-48 were about the Millennium, which they are not, then that still wouldn't allow for any teaching in the Millennium; for, we see no teaching even in the below, which is just prior (supposedly) to this Millennium; but rather, we read that "So will I make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel; and I will not let them pollute my holy name any more: and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel." (Vs.7). Observe that even at that early time, prior to when some people say the Millennium commences, the people already knew the truth; even "the heathen". So where is there any need to teach it again in the Millennium to those who already know it prior to that Millennium, but reject it? How can you teach somebody something that they already knew by witnessing it themselves? Also observe that what is being described in verses11-13 cannot be in any Millennium; for, in the Millennium we are in spiritual bodies—there is no flesh to bury. Nor, I might point out, is there any mention of the below "seven years" of burning weapons (vs. 9 below) and "seven months" of burying corpses (vs. 12 below) in the Millennium chapter of Revelation (Rev 20). And if you would say that the below happens just prior to the Millennium, I would point out that none of the below is mentioned in the book of Revelation, especially not where one would expect to find it in Revelation chapter nineteen which immediately precedes the Millennium of Revelation chapter twenty.
I placed the above Scripture here to illustrate and to document my position as laid out in our study at Is there a second chance for the unsaved in the Millennium...?, that Ezekiel chapters 40-48 are not what shall happen during the coming Millennium of Revelation chapter twenty, but rather are what WOULD have happened had not man rejected and killed the Messiah. But they did reject Him, thereby forfeiting the promises of Ezekiel 40-48. Ezekiel 40-48 will not happen, ever. Revelation twenty represents the new promise, the new way. Revelation chapter twenty supersedes Ezekiel chapters 40 etc. because we (as in mankind) rejected and killed the King, thereby placing His Kingdom in abeyance (i.e., not yet). Another Scripture that certain people confuse is the below one. "They" suppose that the below is speaking of the Millennium. Now, oddly, IF it were speaking of the Millennium, which it is not, it would disprove their "Millennium teaching time" theory; for, it states that, "And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me". Observe:
However, it is not at all speaking of the Millennium, it is rather speaking of the First Advent of the Messiah Jesus Christ. Observe the above verse thirty-four in context to the verses leading up to it:
This covenant they also brake (broke); for, they reject it when they rejected Christ and killed Him. Had they not killed Christ this would have led to the above Ezekiel 39 Scripture and into the Ezekiel 40-48 Scriptures. But they broke that covenant when they broke Jesus Christ on the cross. Nevertheless, God knew that they would reject the Messiah, and in His dying He made a way of escape for those who believe upon Him—even unto today. That way of escape is outlined in the New Testament of our Bible. However, Christ needn't have died to save them; you will remember that Christ even forgave sin BEFORE He died on the cross "And when he saw their faith, he said unto him, Man, thy sins are forgiven thee." (Lk 5:20). And had they worshipped Jesus as King of kings and Lord of lords, and had they not murdered Him on false witness, and had they accepted Him when He came at the First Advent, they could have offered animal sacrifices to God for the redemption of their sins (as the Ezekiel 40-48 Scriptures outline to have been done). But God was not well pleased with the blood of animals, as Paul states in his epistles. Therefore, at the first, though God knew that they would do so, it was not intended that they kill Messiah, that is to say that this is not what God had instructed them to do. They were to listen to Him (Jesus) as God said from heaven: "While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him." (Mat 17:5). But they didn't "hear ye Him" (listen to him); they killed Him instead. But had they not killed Him, we would be in the Ezekiel 40-48 Scriptures forever, Christ reigning over His people; there never would have been a New Testament of the Bible. But, since having broken the covenant and killing the Messiah, God changed the final outcome of this world—that change can be read of in the book of Revelation. And now there shall be no more flesh after the Second Advent, but at the first there was to be flesh forever. That is why Ezekiel 40-48 describes everything in flesh terms: flesh bodies (Ezek 44:18 & 20), marriage, divorce, virginity, widows (Ezek 44:22), animal sacrifice (Ezek 44:11 &15), flesh death (Ezek 44:25), sin offerings (Ezek 44:27), etc. These things can not be future to us, they cannot be in the Millennium; for, we know that offering animal sacrifice for sin after Christ was once offered on the cross would be an insult to Jesus Christ and a grave sin; we know that per Jesus Christ we do not marry in the resurrection (Mat 22:30), we know that there shall be no more tears or pain or dying in the eternity (Rev 21:4); we know that there shall be no more flesh after the Second Advent (1st Cor 15:47-55). Ergo (therefore), Ezekiel 40-48 is absolutely NOT speaking of the coming Millennium which is spoken of in Revelation chapter twenty. They (Rev and Ezek) speak of two outcomes, the one (Ezek) is what should have happened had they not rejected the Kingdom by killing the King Jesus Christ, and the other (Rev) what shall happen because they did. I know that this is difficult to understand, and even more difficult to explain; but, yes, God knew that Messiah would be rejected, that is why He wrote of it in the Old Testament, but it was hidden to the people; for, did not the disciples of Christ even not know that Christ would be crucified? No, they did not know it, that is why they had the following exchange with Jesus:
Then, after His crucifixion and resurrection, they asked Him what we all basically are asking:
Likewise did God also know of the rise of antichrist, which is why we find Daniel speaking of it in the Old Testament; however, that was not what He had wanted to happen. But He allowed Christ to be crucified and He shall allow antichrist to rise. Why? Because of the choices that "we" have made. Man broke the covenant, not God. It was because of man that Ezekiel 40-48 shall not happen. It is because of man that the book of Revelation shall happen. And as to your question of: why we don't "just go immediately to the Great White Throne judgment following the 7th trump?", you would have to ask God this when you meet Him. I do not know. But as I illustrated earlier, I too can ask you impossible questions. One that immediately comes to mind is that if there is a chance in this Millennium (call it a first, a second, or another chance, if you wish; it matters not) for the unsaved to change their minds and to change their final lot, then "why did God bother to send us here through this flesh world anyways?" If one can deny Christ in this flesh world, then die, then accept Christ when they see Him whilst they are in their angelic bodies (who wouldn't believe then?!?), then why are they tasked to come through this flesh world and make a choice in the first place? And really, is this Millennium doctrine that we are debunking presently really all that fair? I mean, here you have two people, two souls who died while being a state of denial regarding Jesus Christ; one was lucky enough that their husband or father was one of these Elect of God people so that they can change their mind after death and before Judgement Day, but the other one didn't have any such advocate and is doomed to stand Judgement Day as a denier of Jesus Christ. Does that sound like something that God would do? Does that fit in with any Scripture in the Bible? No, not one. Not any New Testament Scripture, anyway. And further more, we have only ONE advocate, and that is Jesus Christ. "God's Elect" are not advocates for any soul:
You may be saying right about now that you don't consider yourself to be any mediator. Oh, really? What do you call someone who can "go back to lost deceased loved ones and convert them to Christ during the Millennium"? If they could do this, which they cannot, then that would make them advocates, mediators. This doctrine is insidious when fully examined! And I refuse to apologize for stating that. "Let the chips fall where they may," as some have said. Do you realize that stripped of its clothing, this doctrine means that we can save souls? This is very dangerous thought, friend. Though I know that it isn't what you intend to be saying, and it certainly isn't anything that I have ever heard the good pastor state. But the doctrine says nothing other than that when fully examined in the bright light. And if you want to be angry with me for pointing it out; so be it, be angry with me. But do examine the Scriptures and make your own mind up based upon what God says on the matter, not on what I or the good pastor say on the matter. Did not even the beloved Paul state: "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" (Gal 4:16). You said:
Well, first of all, nobody's "eternal fate was already settled" (save for satan and those certain fallen angels from Genesis 6) until Judgement Day. And secondly, you confuse "the second resurrection" to mean some kind of eternal salvation. That is not at all what it means. To be resurrected is to once again participate in the affairs written of in the Bible, in this case, participate in the Millennium; as we illustarted earlier, it is to "live again." All are resurrected, but some go on to be destroyed in the Lake of Fire afterwards. It is at Judgement Day when God by Christ shall judge the world, and it is then alone that fates are set and sentences carried out. Some may "make it" that you think not, and some may not make it that you think shall. Let God do the judging, please. I am not saying who is and who is not going to be spending the eternity in Heaven with God and who is and who is not going into the Lake of Fire. That is not any man's place to state. But we can read what the Scriptures which speak on this matter say and get a pretty good idea as to who is going where, but we cannot now know the love of God and His mercy at that time. You really can't be sure that a passed-on loved one "didn't make it." And if I may be be a little callus here: you really won't be as bothered by that then as you are now; for, in the resurrection we are all one big family, not small individual families like we are here today. We are brethren, not husbands, children, mothers, fathers, and wives, etc. In heaven we are all children, God being our Father. "And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God." (Rev 21:3). Or, if you understand that there are no separate genders in Heaven, all souls (including those of flesh females today) being called simply "the sons of God," then you will benefit from this deeper explanation several verses down from the above one:
I'm happy that God stated it both ways, "...they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God" (Vs. 3), and, "...I will be his God, and he shall be my son" (Vs. 7), so that women today can know and be confident that they are not left out, that they, their souls, was (and is) included in the below. It's just that in this flesh age you (women) were formed in a female gender to give birth to the other "sons of God" who must pass through this flesh life:
Moving on.... I also know what is giving you some trouble here. It is the use of the word "deceive" in verses 8 & 10 in the below Scripture to which you referred to in your E-mail.
I know that you read the word "deceive" in the above to mean, "teach falsely, lie to them to make them worship satan over God." But by the definition (supplied above) it could just as easily mean here "to cause them to gather themselves 'together to battle' and to 'compassed [encircle] the camp of the saints'. You basically base your whole "Millennium teaching time" theory on the the above interpretation of "deceive" as it is used in the above Scripture. For, you suppose, who would satan be "deceiving" if there weren't people there that could change their minds. This is where you err. And then you add to your error by presuming (incorrectly) that since satan can change minds, so too can we. So that you create a whole new conflict in the Millennium between God and satan and between true and false doctrine that isn't there in the Scriptures, and that was resolved at the Second Advent. the only conflict between God's and satan's people in the Millennium is when satan and his people circle God's people preparing to attack them—and God abruptly sets upon them, casting satan into the Lake of Fire and sending the others to Judgement Day which is held one verse later. Nobody can change their minds in the Millennium, not one way or the other. All shall know God and Jesus are very real at that time. Remember, these people (souls) have by then already seen the Second Advent of Jesus Christ, they experienced, many of them, firsthand the book of Revelation chapters 1-19. And they are now at that time in spiritual bodies have total recall of the world that was and what happened both therein and in our (by then destroyed) world. What, pray tell, shall you be teaching to anyone in the Millennium? That God is real and it is He whom created them? They know that by then. That Christianity is the only religion that God inspired after the Old Testament religion of the Hebrews became corrupted (by the priests) and replaced (by God)? They already realize this by then. That Jesus Christ is real, and that He is the only Mediator and Savior and the only way to eternal life? They woefully realized that when they watched Him return at the Second Advent and beat this world with a rod, killing them after casting their antichrist into the pit. What is there for you to teach? Pastor M., when asked that very question on a Q & A segment of his television Bible study program, answered by saying: "Discipline, they will be taught discipline in the Millennium." I'm sorry, but what does that mean? I mean, what does that really mean? We are going to "teach discipline" to people (souls) whom rejected Christ and thereby rejected eternal life? Or, could it be that you feel that we shall "teach them discipline to believe upon the Lord Jesus Christ who they had denied until their last breath whilst still on this Earth?" Is that, my friend, not a second chance? Of course it isn't a second chance, because you don't believe in second chances after death, do you? Oh, but you do, my friend, now don't you? You just don't like the way it smacks. 1 chance while in the flesh Oh, but you will say that many didn't have a "real" chance on this Earth, so this teaching on your part in the Millennium will really only equal one chance. And you believe this, huh? What did Christ say regarding seeking the lost and saving souls on this Earth? I mentioned earlier that I would document that to say that "some didn't have a chance in this life" was to blame God. The below Scripture documents just that. Please take the time to read the whole below Scripture, for in it is your answer. Also observe that the decision is made while we are still here on this Earth, nothing of any "Millennium teaching time" after death is mentioned here by our Lord. Also observe that it is God who chooses out and calls out those to salvation:
Do you understand that if there are some in the Millennium that were not saved while on this earth, because "they didn't have a fair chance," to which you (presumably [on your part]) must then "go back to" to teach salvation or discipline or whatever—then that means that God failed! Which of course is not possible. I know that you don't believe that. But can't you see that your doctrine of a "Millennium teaching time" screams nothing but that? The rest of letter I believe I have already covered earlier in this Q & A; if not, please send me a rebuttal reply, pointing out where I was remiss. I speak of the closing paragraphs of your letter, as below:
In closing What is the danger in this "Millennium second chance" doctrine? The danger is that it causes us to not try so hard to reach others with the Gospel of Jesus Christ; because, if we feel that we can "have a shot at them" in the Millennium when they are unencumbered by the flesh and the weaknesses and doubtings of the flesh mind, we may just wait. That would be a tragic mistake. I cringe whenever I hear any pastor say, "don't worry about it, don't push it; we'll teach them in the Millennium." Sadly, we shall not be able to teach them in the Millennium; and the only chance that we had to teach them here we spent idly, waiting for another day that doesn't come. Could that be why Jesus implored us to:
Surely Jesus didn't see a day in the Millennium when we could play catch-up with men's souls. Reach your unsaved loved-ones now, today; pray for them, pray for them hard; for, tomorrow may be too late, one day too late.
Peace to you in Christ Jesus. Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | Propaganda movie designed to discredit the Protocols of...Zion and all who believe in their Judaic authorship and execution
A reader writes:
And follows-up:
Hi Xxxxxxx. Thank you for info. I didn't even know that they came out with this "refutation" movie. I watched the free trailer from the link that you sent.
What can we say? They are trying to make the Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion AntiSemitic, and anyone who believes them into being so-called AntiSemites. They picked some idiots and extremists to interview, which was designed to give all of us a bad name. It's propaganda—but the average person won't see it as propaganda, they will see it as rooting-out nasty AntiSemites.... You've got to love the fact that in the movie (movie trailer) they went to the State Prison to interview convicts who believe that the Protocols are true, and they also found a Skinhead looking guy with a NAZI flag who also believes that the Protocols are true—talk about smear tactics and "guilt by association!" The hidden message is that "only THOSE kind of people" believe that the Protocols are true, and if you don't want to be one of those kind of people, then you won't believe that the Protocols are true. Are we that stupid that we fall for this tactic? Hmm....I wonder. Speaking of the Protocols and the false info on that movie trailer: They said in the trailer that the Protocols were an AntiSemitic book used to oppress Jews in Russia during and after the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. What a lie! The Bolshevik Revolution in Russia was a Jewish Revolution; funded, financed, sparked, and reaped, by Jews in Russia. Observe from Jewish sources themselves:
AntiSemitic Forgeries??? In fact, one of the very first things that the Bolsheviks did after the Revolution was to make even possessing a copy of the Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion a capital offence. Men were led out to their front lawns and shot in the base of the skull right in front of their families for just being found with a copy of the Protocols in their house. Odd action for a so-called AntiSemitic regime! The Protocols were the framework of the plan which the Jewish Bolshevik Revolution followed to overthrow that once Christian nation (Russia was once a Christian nation, until that 1917 Revolution, that is). Yet, these Judaics say that the Protocols were AntiSemitic; these people are liars! Jesus spoke of them, to them:
They suppressed the Protocols in post-Revolution Russia with summary execution on your own front lawn in front of your wife and children—today they suppress the Protocols with lies and propaganda in movies such as the one that you alerted me to. So we see both attributes of satan's children spoken of by Christ in the above John 8:44 Scripture at work in their actions today and yesterday—1). lies, and 2). murder. "Ye shall know them by their fruits." (Mat 7:16a). Why Christians today find this so hard to believe from a people and religion that had Christ murdered upon their own false witness, is beyond me. These people killed the Son of God and gloat about it to this day (read the Jewish Talmud once); and yet, many Christians today call them "the chosen of God people." The Christians "hate" Pontius Pilate and love the Judaics; yet, it was Pilate who tried to spare Jesus Christ and the Jews who demanded His execution! Why is this world upside-down today? Why are Christians so confused and overthrown?
Yet, our people (Christians everywhere) can't see that they have sided-up with the wolves—sided-up with the enemy—and have themselves become an enemy against their true Christian brothers and sisters. Amazing! The Protocols are being used against these unwitting Judeo-Christians (Judaized so-called Christians) as we speak. America is following the Russian and Polish model into communist slavery. Yet, the average Christian is so pre-occupied with not appearing to possess even the remotest semblance to a so-called AntiSemite, that they are letting the wolves in with the sheep. And we all know what happens when the wolves are allowed at the sheep. Today's overthrown and beguiled Christians haven't a clue that this has absolutely nothing to do with any so-called AntiSemitism. That's just the cover story. It is all about the rise of the religion of the antichrist—antichristianity, the religion of the Tribulation (Rev 13) which shall chew them up and spit them out. And these certain International Judaics* are its sages, and the Judaics of Judaism today are its followers. * The Judaic authors of Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion and their fellows today. Thank you for passing on this information to share with us here. Peace to you in Christ Jesus.
________________________________________________________________________
Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | The videos and further analysis of these three videos regarding Martial Law and Concentration Camps In America
A reader writes:
Hello. You said:
But we have models from the past that have worked. Take Nazi Germany for instance, or the Soviet Gulag system. Or Poland of old and China today. They don't have to incarcerate those who go along with the State dictates—they only have to seize the dissidents. And sadly, as we move forward in time, there seems to be less and less people with the ability to free-think and resist. Therefore, don't imagine the whole country going into camps, only those who are "unmanageable." You said:
You mention the "radical left wing." As opposed to what, the "radical right wing?" My point is that "they" control both sides of the argument and turn us against each other. But suppose some nut did say this before? Does that make it untrue? You have to be careful to identify the tactic of them using idiots to discredit valid information. They do a variation of this tactic when they have a KKK guy dressed in a white sheet with eye holes on TV speaking about Holocaust denial. What is accomplished by this is that any normal person who then questions the honesty about the WWII experience of European Jews is then made to look like a nutcase. Did you know that by Jewish numbers themselves, from Jewish sponsored census', that there were not globally six million missing Jews from before WWII to after WWII? Anyway, we shall not go there now.... Therefore, men of good conscience refuse to address the obvious discrepancies in the Holocaust exaggeration for fear of being discredited as a hateful nut. And the "reparations" $$$ keep rolling into International Jewish organization's coffers, and Israel is allowed cover for every atrocity that they commit upon the Palestinians; because, after all, the Jews are perennial victims, silly. Listen, you can't let other people MAKE you think what they want you to think, you can't allow them to bully you into saying and believing what they dictate for you. For, if one allows this today, what shall they do when the watchword of the day is to worship antichrist and take the mark of the beast, whatever that entails? We all must free-think—especially in this generation!
Therefore, let's instead look at the evidence. In the first video (Video #1) we see (now retired) Colonel Oliver North being asked in 1987 a question that he quite obviously wasn't going to answer. He looked shocked that it came his way, and we see him whispering into his lawyer's ear in a very animated fashion—the man was shook—that much is obvious from the expression on his face when he was asked the question under oath. That question was if there were plans to suspend the United States Constitution. That means Martial Law! You then notice someone that the Senator identifies as Mr. Chairman, not deny the allegations, but rather saying that the matter could be discussed in private away from the public discourse. Therefore, there was indeed a "that matter" in the first place. Had they asked Oliver North if he worked on a plan to arrest Santa Clause, he would have simply answered, "No, of course not, Senator." But he did not do that, the whole apparatus went into action and the question was scuttled. To any intelligent person, that means that, yes, Col. North did work on such a plan. Now, if you are the trusting sort, and you think that the government of America and global governments generally for that matter, have the best interest of the citizenry in mind--then you will not be alarmed by all of this. However, if you are a Bible believer and you read Revelation chapter thirteen--then you shall be shocked by all of this; for, you see the "how's" of how they could accomplish the world beast system.
Now, I ask you, what purpose could that have other than to move people from one room to another in a secure facility? Also, you notice that all the warehouse's windows were blocked-up with cement blocks. But in a "train repair facility" they have all these windows to provide free lighting to the workman inside. Why does one block up all the openings in a room or building? Answer, to keep whoever is in from going out, or vice-versa. It is obviously a retrofitted repair facility that is ideal now to process "arrestees" or "internees." I won't even speculate what the three new the gas-fired "furnaces" are for. But the video author (in the expandable notes to the right of video playing field) muses that perhaps they are for the destruction of the bodies of "Bird-Flue victims." And in Video #3 we see that the facility is staffed by all the cars in the parking lot and the guards at the gate. In other words, this wasn't a vacant building (as it looked in the first video). Based on all those above facts, I cannot see how this facility can be anything other than a secure detention center to be used at ? time, with ? persons, for ? reason. And the fact that there are plans for Martial Law in America by the existence of the Executive Orders (which we saw partly in operation in New Orleans during the Hurricane Katrina aftermath), there then must necessarily be detention centers to relocate arrestees to. Will these facilities be used for more sinister purposes before and during the Great Tribulation than just to detain "looters?" The answer to that, is that it should be obvious to the Bible student that they shall be.
Coincidence? I'm thinking no. :o) And also bear in mind the presence of Helicopter windsocks and high-tension-wire markers, indicating that air traffic is anticipated at this "train repair facility." And last, but certainly not least, do not forget the three separate layers of fencing—having the barbed-wire top panels leaning in towards and facing inside the camp, to keep people in—not out! Why try to keep the train mechanics in, rather than the thieves out??? I feel that based on the above documentation and witness, to minimize and marginalize this by referring to it with the pejorative, "conspiracy theory," is, well, suicidal! Or, the result of a brain-washed citizenry. I know that you aren't brainwashed because you are reading here with us, and brainwashed people don't like what they read here, because it upsets their euphoric ignorance and child-like trust of the world's governments (and soon to be world government under Revelation 13:1-4, etc.). Nevertheless, be careful, "they" have laid stumbling blocks in your path so that you will not expose them (which is why it is hard for me to break through), or, after they having been exposed by someone else, you won't listen (which is why you doubt this evidence that you are seeing with your own two eyes). Perhaps the former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, J. Edgar Hoover, who was well acquainted with conspiracies, said it best as to what you are warring-with within yourself regarding believing this matter:
The problem here is not that there isn't proof, but that people have been conditioned (brainwashed) to reject it. But they won't reject it when the train stops, they dismount, and begin to walk down the barbed-wire-topped fenced corridor into places like this. Of course, by then it is too late for them. The only way out of that place alive (barring direct Divine intervention), in my humble opinion, is to accept the mark of the beast. Then you are alive, for a while; until, that is, Jesus Christ returns to this world with fury and wrath upon all who have taken the mark of the beast, the name of the beast, or the number of his name:
I had a (very?) young fellow write to me a couple of days ago—very rude fellow he was, and I didn't answer his last letter—he said that the mark of the beast is simply "deception." I know where he gets this from, but I'm sorry, "deception" doesn't cover all three categories that the Holy Spirit alerted us to in: "And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name." (Rev 13:17). It's time for some people to update some old teachings and bring them into alignment with reality—IMHO (In My Humble Opinion). Nobody can constantly "spiritualize-away" everything in the Bible that they can't fit into their doctrines. I get so tired of Christians always saying "God said THIS, but He really meant THAT." Perhaps E.W. Bullinger (deceased), my favorite Bible teacher, said it best:
Thank you for the question, it allowed us to more perfectly explain the matter.
Peace to you in Christ Jesus. Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | Tacmars (Tactical markers); Internet control; Search engine shenanigans
A reader writes:
Answer: Hello. Thank you for the info on Tacmars, a good site is here: http://www.tackamarks.freeservers.com/ They have taken down that Website but what I gave you was from the Web Archives. Below at right is a montage of photos taken from that now-down Website:
"Oddly," there are very few real web articles on these Tacmars, only a bunch of establishment articles debunking the very existence of Tacmars. Most all articles that I find on Tacmars refer pejoratively to them as "conspiracy theories," such as this Tacmar article on WikiPedia, but it will give a basic overview of them:
You've got to love that above last paragraph. :o) Also, regarding those markers on the signs, they are printed on effervescent decals (see picture below, and picture at right taken at dusk with a camera flash). That means that they light up when hit with a beam of light (like the reflectors on a bicycle). This decal stock is more expensive than regular decals―why do they need these things to light up when light is shone on them at night if they are just "date stickers," dating the sign (as though that would be necessary)? Surely the Highway Departments in America aren't going to be inspecting the signs at night. Also notice in the picture at right that they didn't apply the "date stickers" to all the signs.
Now, if you couple the above WikiPedia article, third paragraph up (where it states that Tacmars provide "Directions to closest detention facilities"), with our earlier article (The Videos and further analysis of these three videos regarding Martial Law and Concentration Camps In America) you should begin to start seeing a bigger picture emerge. And it is not a pretty picture. In fact, the "picture" gets quite ugly when you bear in mind the testimonial at below right; particularly the "multinational peacekeepers doing military operations" part.
WikiPedia is user-built; in other words, everyday people can add to the articles. However, they have a cadre of "minders" who censor (review) all articles and delete "objectionable content" (and whole articles). The Judaic ADL (Anti-Defamation League) and JDL (Jewish Defense league) are constantly monitoring WikiPedia to have "sensitive" articles removed or censored (or they force heavy qualifiers and disclaimers to be included). Also, AOL (America OnLine) will not deliver certain mail from their ever-increasing lists of censored Websites, authors, and Newsletters (just try to get Edgar Steele's newsletter from his Conspiracy Pen Pal Website on AOL why don't you! It won't be delivered on AOL and certain others. [Yes, Edgar Steele is Racist―please don't complain to me about it. But somewhere along the way he lost his right to think as he wills; that being my point]). Oh, by the way, the Judaics gained control of AOL several years ago in their Time/Warner acquisition (becoming AOL/Time/Warner). They (Judaics) own it all. These groups (ADL, JDL, WikiPedia, Google, AOL (and legion others), are all operating in concert. Call it a conspiracy of information control, if you will. While all the while giving off the illusion that information is free-flowing on the Internet. Let's face it, when was the last time that you clicked to, say, search results page 54, to select a Website? The word never is coming to mind. Now you know the value of being placed on the first page of search results. Therefore, by controlling where a Website is on the search results page, a search engine company can effectively control what most people learn about any given topic. look at it like this; for example: If we have 100 Websites that say that water is dry, and we have 20,000 Websites that say that water is wet; but the first dozen pages of the search results are overwhelmingly "water is dry" Websites―then they have effectively altered the truth, and supplanted into people's minds that water must be dry because all the Websites (that they see) say that it is. Now, they haven't perfected this method yet, but it is coming. It is all about information control. If you control the information being assimilated by the mass populace―you, in effect, control what the mass population thinks and knows. This is the exact reason why the International Judaics harnessed the Press from it's early days on (documentation to follow). In fact, speaking of Google: What is happening nowadays is that Google is becoming the Internet. They are the search engine of choice world-wide. Currently they are even endeavoring to scan-in all books from major world libraries and archiving them. So that, eventually, when you do an Internet search, you will really be doing a Google search; or better stated, when you search for what the internet says, you will really be searching for what Google says. So that whatever Google includes, is included; and whatever Google censors, is censored. With all the so-called "hate-speech/hate thought" laws being imposed by the International Judaics world-wide, it is only a matter of time when any content not inline with the censor's ideals shall be deleted, inaccessible, and outlawed under penalty of law. And it is a small matter for Google, at the right time, to buy-out all smaller search engine companies and incorporate them into their monster. WikiPedia being part of the behemoth:
I have in the past stated that "not hardly one piece of information in any mainstream media venue reaches your eyes or ears except that a Judaic censor has screened it, reviewed it, edited it, altered it, written it, or fabricated it." My saying this, of course, offended the sensitivities of the uninformed, over-trusting, and ignorant. Never mind that the Judaics admitted way back in 1897 that they already then had control of the world's press:
And:
Anyway, back to Tacmars. The writing is so clearly on the wall that America is being prepared to go under Martial Law; yet, our Christian brethren can't (won't) see it! And when you add what the book of Revelation states about the coming world order (Rev 13) to the obvious fact that America (and all Western Christian Nations) are going to go under Martial Law (especially evident by the extreme "security" and surveillance measures that have gone into place since 911 [but grandma gets strip-searched at the airport; yet, 2500-5000 illegal's enter by our unsecured southern border daily])―it doesn't take the sharpest knife in the drawer to figure out what is going to be transpiring during that time. Yet our brethren sleep. "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge"
― God, Hosea 4:6a.
Peace to you in Christ Jesus. Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | The inadvertent result of the Millennium so-called "second chance" doctrine
Answer: Hello. You are welcome. And I want to thank you for inquiring further as it gives opportunity to explain deeper. Sometimes when one writes, he isn't getting his point across to the person who reads it. On the internet (and all written media) it is easy to misunderstand each other as we aren't looking face to face, observing body language and voice tone when used for emphasis or minimization, etc. So it is always good to receive feedback. Since you cover so many points, may I just take your issues paragraph by paragraph? And this study here shall define the exact differences between this present author's interpretation (mine) of the Great Tribulation and some other Bible teacher's interpretations of that event. This present Q&A (and an upcoming Tribulation study) shall fill in all the blanks (I hope), and most likely will upset some students who have learned it differently under other teachers. But I ask that the Scriptures and reasoning of them be examined, and that the reader, had perchance he learned this somewhat differently, will allow the Scriptures themselves to be the sole determining factor on how this Tribulation (and Millennium) are to be interpreted. In other words, PM students need to have an open mind, compare the Scriptures, and fall on the side of what God's Word says, not what men may say, neither myself or any other. Over the past several days and weeks we have been discussing a doctrine about the Millennium of Revelation chapter 20. The only people that are having a problem with our studies on the Millennium are members of a certain church group from Arkansas. The feedback from all others is in agreement with what we have written here. And I know where many people are getting this doctrine from. It is from a good pastor, whom I respect. I began my study of the Bible under this Bible teacher, and he is a good man. But now I have come to understand the Millennium differently than he currently teaches it. On confidence in pastor M.
I hasten to add that pastor Murray is still my pastor, and if I ever get married (again, I am divorced) I would love for him to officiate at the wedding, etc. In other words, pastor Murray is not a false teacher, he just isn't perfect. As neither are you nor I. I want to make that clear, lest pastor Murray's enemies, and they are legion, use this matter to defame the good pastor. There isn't a Bible teacher yet who hasn't, after careful study, had to go back and revisit some of his older teachings which deeper study has revealed more Biblical documentation one way or the other. For instance, look at the author of the Companion Bible, whom authored its footnotes and the 198 appendices, the late Dr. Rev. (Anglican) E.W. Bullinger; he was indisputably among the greats regarding Biblical scholarship (so esteemed is he among Biblical scholars that even those who disagree with him on certain matters still respect and quote him―almost a hundred years after his death). Yet, in his day (late 1800's-1914) he fell for the Rapture lie, as well as the "new Bible manuscripts" lie (which explains why in his footnotes in the Companion Bible he is constantly writing "not in originals," "omit," "earlier manuscripts read...") This later honest error (the "new manuscripts") represents the greatest blot on Bullinger's otherwise sound career, and certainly to his shock (had he realized it) inadvertently places doubt in the student's mind as to the very validity of the Book that this man dedicated his life to teaching―the Bible. Bullinger was tricked into this; and in his early day (late 1800's) he was not in possession of the vast amount of proofs that the "new manuscripts" (underlying the Revised Version (RV) of circa 1890, which Bullinger mistakenly took to be the standard by which all others should be judged) were really fakes manufactured from manuscripts based upon the third century A.D. perversions by Origen (Origenes Adamantius, ca 182-ca. 251; famous for his Hexapla) infused into the manuscript stream meant to subvert the Word of God and make way for a Bible text that allows the antichrist to be supplanted as the God of this world (the NIV, NASB, etc.). For more on this controversy, see our: Adulterations in the Newer Bible Versions (NIV, NASB...); Proof that the King James Bible (KJV) is the True Word of God. And regarding the Septuagint (LXX), which was another fraud at the hands of Origen, read a great book on the subject (if you can get past the author's caustic style you will find many pearls): The mythological Septuagint by Dr. Peter S. Ruckman, ISBN# 1-58026-093-4 (If you can't find a copy, visit or write to Bible Baptist Bookstore, PO Box 7135; Pensacola, FL. 32534). I highly recommend this book, but caution the reader that the author, though very well learned, often sounds childish in his critiques of certain other "scholars." This represents the blot on this man's work (Dr. Ruckman). I guess that we all have our "blots." So anyway, none of us are perfect. But being human doesn't make one bad, it just makes them... well... human. And happily for us, God understands this and takes it into account. In the text box at above right we saw a quote on imperfection from Dr. Bullinger himself regarding the Biblical scholarship performed by himself and his staff at Things To Come, a Bible-study periodical published in the late 1800's and early 1900's. If a gifted scholar of Bullinger's class humbly admits to imperfection and error, how much more so we even of today? I allow in my heart those above humble words of Dr. Bullinger for Pastor M. and all sincere (but human) men of God who seek to teach rightly; and own them by choice myself, if I may be permitted the indulgence by the reader. What would be bad, however, is if one saw through Scripture that his teaching on some matter or other was not 100% in line with those Scriptures, and then he did not correct it for shame of admitting imperfection. Many pastors, preachers, and Bible teachers fall into that trap (and it is a snare) by being afraid to admit past error because they feel that their students will loose faith in their credibility if they admit past error. I feel that just the opposite is the case, and that people are smart, and that they never expected any man to be perfect; and that quite to the contrary would trust a teacher more who came out and said that they were wrong on something, here is why, and here is Scripture to support the new doctrinal view. I would rather study under a man who uses his gift unselfishly regarding pride, and trains all his efforts to searching the Scriptures by the Holy Spirit for new light for new information that Daniel said would be forthcoming in the latter days. And if you believe that we are in the last days, and I do, then wiser would be the man that allows the Scriptures to lead, regardless of past understandings and interpretations: "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever." (Ps 12:6-7). Who shall guarantee that God's Word is preserved and true for ever? And who has promised that we would have that true word from the generations of old on through till the eternity (including our own day even)? God shall! So, while the truth was always there in the Scriptures, we can't dig it out until God allows us to see it:
By the above prophecies we see that it is not possible that men wouldn't be wrong in some points, but we see also that God shall shed light on those Scriptures of old and lead His faithful to a more perfect understanding of the Bible as the end grows nigh. Let us not waste so great a gift of God by stubbornly refusing to grow, by refusing to admit that we are not perfect―that we never shall be. Did not Apostle Paul, while at the time fancying himself a servant of God, even persecute Christians and the early church until Jesus Christ shed some light on him that really got his attention? :o) I speak of:
In other words, I too once believed the Millennium to be as that doctrine teaches that it is (a second chance, though they are quick to state that it isn't a second chance; but it is a second chance), because I learned it from that same source. At the first we all learn from a teacher, then, as we grow, we begin to learn on our own (with the Holy Spirit present, of course). This happens (growth) with all people in all areas of study, not just Biblical studies. If it didn't, we would still be in 18th century chemistry, and 19th century biology, and 20th century avionics, etc. And regarding Biblical doctrine, as we saw above, Daniel states by the Holy Spirit that in the end times God would increase knowledge and understanding. And if we do not grow with that increase, but rather remain stubbornly in the past, then we have not benefited from that increase from God. Changing is never easy, and admitting past error is not a pleasant thing to have to do; it is painful; but, we must at all times align ourselves with the Scriptures; and if we ever find that Scriptures shed more light, we must take that into consideration―all pride aside. However, we must also be careful with change; for, satan's false teachers also aim to introduce change, but the changes that they introduce are lies. The key then, is to let the Scriptures confirm the truth. Any and all doctrine (teaching, a doctrine is a teaching) must align with the Bible or it is to be rejected. That's why God gave us His written Word, so that we could learn and have a means to document teachings one way or the other. Nevertheless, I hasten to add, being wrong is not necessary being a false teacher―some error innocently, but a false teacher errors purposely. That is the difference―intent. And in some of my own older writings I reflected that Millennium doctrine that many believe today, and which we are correcting here today; which I have, after careful study, come to the conclusion is not reconcilable with Scripture. So now, here, I am trying to make it right. We are currently preparing a study on the Tribulation that shall, hopefully, shed greater light on what the Bible speaks about that time (and also the Millennium). It shall be titled "The Environment of the Great Tribulation of Revelation 13" but the link is not yet at this time (July 23, 2006) active. However, very little is written in the Bible of that time (the Millennium)―which is why there is so much confusion on the matter, and why so many see things differently regarding that time. That doesn't make them bad, it just make them wrong. Now, to your questions (I want to point out that when we answer someone's questions here the answer isn't necessity to THEM, it is to all whom it applies to. So, the when I use the word "you" in the below, it does not necessarily mean the person who asked the question): You said:
What testing? There is no testing mentioned. This is the problem, that there is to be "testing" is something added to the narrative of Revelation 20; it is not there. I know what you are drawing from, you are drawing from:
First, may I point out that the above AFTER the 1000 years. But anyway, what some people assume is that since satan is "deceiving" people, that that must mean that he is "tricking them into following him." That is not what it means, and I covered that in the original study (More on Ezekiel 44 NOT being the Millennium; More on the so-called "second chance doctrine") thusly: Excerpt of above referenced study:
What I didn't include in that above study, and that which I am glad that you gave me the opportunity to include here now, is that the Greek word above (planao, Grk. #4105) which is translated as "deceive" in our above Scripture, was also translated in several other ways in the New Testament. A small sampling of the variant translations below should give you a better feel for the word as used by the Holy Spirit. We enter into error when we interpret single words translated 400 years ago as we interpret the word in 2006. Observe several usages of this same Greek word planao. In the below series of Scriptures I have highlighted the English words that the Translators used when transferring the Greek word planao to English. By the way, this method is the most productive for interpreting any word in the Bible, much more so than using a Strong's Concordance Dictionary (although, it was by this very method that Dr. Strong made his Concordance and Dictionary, but as in all works such as this, the author adds to the definitions some of his own opinion and biases). And with this powerful tool (PC Study Bible Version 4 Reference Library+), you too can do studies as in the below. Once again, our Strong's definition:
And to refresh our minds and bring focus, below is our Scripture in question:
Below are other Scriptures using that same Greek word (English words highlighted are those that the Translators used for the Greek planao). Note: not all Scriptures are given below where the word (planao) was used; it actually is used 39 times in the New Testament manuscripts (in the Textus Receptus―i.e., the trusted King James Bible Greek Manuscripts underlying the New Testament). We list 15 of them in 14 verses below. These 15 were chosen because of their value in giving the full variety of the meaning of the word planao. You will also notice that often it takes two or three English words to translate the lone Greek word planao. Below are 15 of the 39 usages of the Greek word planao in the N.T. of the King James Bible (Note: #1 below actually uses the word twice and constitutes the 15th occurrence, though our list is only numbered 1-14):
What we see by the above illustration is that the Greek word planao could have been translated to "be gone astray", "do err", "shall deceive", "Be deceived", "wandered", "to seduce", "deceiveth", etc., in these Scriptures; for, combined, these ARE the definitions of planao. as the Strong's indicates:
So the question is, when it is said of antichrist in the book of Revelation that he "shall deceive..."; does it mean that he will "trick them" or that he will "seduce them," or that he will lead them to do evil in the sight of the Lord? I shall make my case for the latter being the best interpretation. But the words all mean the same thing, really. He will deceive them into doing an offensive act (taking the mark, worshipping the beast, delivering up to kill all who do not likewise do so), he will seduce them to commit spiritual fornication (worshipping him as God―over and instead-of God), he will lead them in rebellion against God (by forsaking the Lord God who had made them, and taking to themselves a new "god" [antichrist/satan]). Some more need be said on "deceiving" in the Tribulation, for it bears greatly on the proper interpretation of the entire Tribulation, and as we see, now the Millennium as well. Let me explain. I know that a certain teaching states that antichrist is going to be here on this Earth pretending to be Jesus Christ, saying the he is Jesus Christ, doing what people figure that Jesus Christ would be doing. This is not at all in the Bible! In fact, just the opposite is in the Bible. And this is huge, and I know that it is. He (antichrist) shall come in his own name; he shall force worship on the people, causing to be killed those who refuse; he shall not point men to God as Jesus Christ did, but rather, he shall direct all worship towards himself; he shall openly kill God's Two Witnesses, whom the people know are servants of the Living God but don't at that time care (Rev 11:7-10). We are currently preparing a study on the Millennium "The Environment of the Great Tribulation of Revelation 13" which shall address this and more. However, as stated above, the link is not yet at this time (July 23, 2006) active. Look for it within the week; or, if you are on our mailing list you will receive notification the moment that it is posted. Nevertheless, let's observe what the above incorrect interpretation has led to. If we assume that antichrist must "fool" the people into thinking that he is Jesus Christ (this is the first error), then we come to the conclusion that he will be acting good, charitable, kind, loving, generous, etc. (this is the second error). Then based upon that, we would have to go even further into error and then reason that all the people on this Earth at that time who worship antichrist and the first beast (system), must be doing it unawares; for, we would suppose, satan (antichrist) tricked them into thinking that he was Jesus Christ. It is for this reason that many Christians who follow the above doctrine need to find a place, before Judgement Day, wherein God "gives these poor deceived people a 'real' chance, or a 'fair' chance." They find this "fair chance" in their Millennium doctrine which we are currently debunking. And like I said in the other study, to say that they didn't have a "fair chance," or didn't have a "real chance" on this Earth to discern good from evil, satan from God, antichrist from Jesus Christ―then this ipso facto (by that very fact) lays the blame right at God's doorstep. For, if we believe the above doctrine, then, heck, God let them be deceived! And yes, I know of the "blindness in Israel" and the "spirit of slumber". But that blindness was in part and had a condition set upon it: It was only until the fullness of the Gentiles be brought in. Apostle Paul brought the Gentiles in through his Epistles and early church-building among the Gentiles. In other words, that "blindness" and "spirit of slumber" is long-ago over. Observe the doctrine (teaching):
My point is that God isn't "blinding" or sending "spirit of slumber" on anyone today―they are doing it themselves through unbelief in the Messiah Jesus Christ, as documented in the following illustration: And I also know of the "strong delusion" in 2nd Thes 2:11, but look at who this is set upon―those who rejected Christ already). They made a choice when they denied Christ, and are now fit to be used for the negative part of God's plan.
In other words, they picked a side by not picking Christ's side. They were then set-up to follow satan (antichrist) BECAUSE they had themselves first rejected Christ. Which is more damnable, denying Christ or worshipping antichrist? They are both damnable violations, and they also can only be accomplished by the same person. For, no one who believes upon Jesus Christ shall worship antichrist, and no one who worships antichrist shall have believed upon Jesus Christ. God did not trick them into denying Jesus Christ; God forbid! He allowed them to make their choice. Once having made that fatal choice, what He does with them is irrelevant to their final condition (unless He Divinely guides them). They sealed their fate when they denied Jesus Christ. My point is that some will say that the above Scripture (2nd Thes 2:9-12) means that God blinded them to Jesus Christ and therefore will allow someone to preach Jesus Christ to them after they die (in the Millennium). This simply isn't the case. Just like Satanists today are not "tricked into worshipping satan"―they make a conscience choice. Just like Atheists today, they are not "seduced by false teaching" into not believing in God―they choose not to believe that there is anything higher than themselves. Or the Islamic suicide bomber―had they known God they would not be murdering innocents (and themselves). Or Jews today―had they known God they would have known Jesus Christ; for, one cannot now (since shortly after the First Advent) know God and yet not know Christ Jesus:
We Christians need to stop making excuses for evil! And we need to stop blaming God for every bad thing that is. For instance, "we" say that Gays are born that way to love other men. Then we read in the Bible that God made it a Capital Offence (death sentence). What then do the Biblically-ignorant think? They think that God is a cruel God who forced these poor nice people into "loving" themselves into Hell. And "us" stupid Christians let that stand because we haven't got the hoss to stand up and declare that God did not make them Gay, and that He condemns Homosexuality as one of the most vile of sins; so evil is it that He destroyed in Sodom and Gomorrah and the outlying cities the whole of men, women, children, and babies for it (for corruption leads all to sin, as today with the skyrocketing new-Gays rate); and so vile that He affixed a death sentence to it in His Bible. Shame on us. Yes, shame on Christians for this. Do we not even today see Christian denominations ordaining openly Homosexual Bishops? Female Bishops as well? Have we not seen that Homosexual Pedophilia is epidemic in the Catholic Church's clergy ranks? Have you not heard that a full 50% of new clergy in seminaries are (supposedly non-practicing) Homosexuals? And that isn't just Catholic priests, it spans all denominational seminaries. I could point out that the Judaics control these seminaries and are doing this on purpose to destroy Christ's church, but in this study I shall try to avoid speaking about our destroyers any more than I have to (but this was necessary to mention; for, it explains why the Christian churches are seemingly "shooting themselves in the foot" and seem to be purposely destroying themselves from within by their own hierarchies which have long ago been infiltrated and supplanted by crypto-Judaics and useful idiot "Gentiles" like the crypto-Judaic Billy [33rd degree Freemason―Satanist] Graham). So, yes, shame on (some) Christians for winking and nodding at Homosexuality in the world and now in the very churches even. There is a word for those of "us" who do this:
God didn't make anyone Gay, and quit letting satan's minions say that He did. And no Sodomite (or female) has any business leading any church of God and Christ―but lately we see both genres ascending to top positions of leadership in the various Christian denominations. That was planned, it is not by accident; and it certainly wasn't of God, nor is there any Biblical support for either practice (Gays or female leaders) in the church hierarchy. It is only a short time away that any Christian pastor who refuses to marry two men or two women shall not be allowed to hold church. That day is coming―can you not see and sense it―the churches are almost all the way destroyed from within at this time. They are near-dead hulls listing aimlessly and emptily to their fall. And Homosexuality and Feminism have been two great battering rams in satan's hand. Just look at what he has done to the moral fiber with just those two tools! He has many other such tools in his hands, not the least of Liberalism. Yes, this is all part of the plan―a real-life conspiracy opening right in front of your eyes; though I know that the word "conspiracy" scares away many people. This was also planned to keep you ignorant to the very conspiracy itself! Moving on... You said:
Once again, where do you find in Revelation 20 (the Millennium chapter) ANY testing? Do you see now how one error can then lead you into several other errors? You are building a case based upon a faulty foundation. Your faulty foundation is the misapprehension of the word "deceive" that we explained above. The "testing" is here and now, on Earth, in these flesh bodies―that is why you are here in the first place. It is here and now that you are making your choice. And once made, you will then stand Judgment Day based upon what you did now whilst still alive on this Earth. Does that mean some are doomed to hell? Listen, God does the judging through Jesus Christ on Judgement Day―it is then that He shall determine what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. And please don't further confound yourself by misapprehending Judgement Day as well. God shall sort out who goes where, and He shall base that upon their works, their faith, their wittingness (what they knew when), and their place within or without the Book of Life. None of us today can say that so-and-so is going to Hell because they did this-or-that. Only God can and will judge. When we do what you are doing, when we say to ourselves "my deceased loved-one was a good person, but they just messed up in ..., and surely God won't judge them to Hell", we are ipso facto judging other's fates in our own minds. Then we try to alter the Bible to fit them into the end of it. When we needn't have done that because we don't know which way God will judge anyone. Do we know for sure? No, we do not. You said:
No! You misunderstand. There are "two" resurrections, yes, but each soul (us) only goes through one of them. (I placed the word "two" in parenthesis because while from Scripture we can glean that there is more than one resurrection, we cannot know for sure how many there are.) What is confusing you (and others [please understand that I am not referring to the question-asker specifically, necessarily, but to all who apply]) is that you think that people go through both resurrections, as though one meant something other than the other one. This is not the case, they (the resurrections) are just different times when different people resurrect. And as we stated in the prior study, to "live again" is to resurrect. And that even those who eventually end up in the Lake Fire resurrect sometime prior to Judgement Day to be judged. Resurrection is not eternal life. All resurrect at some point prior to the Great Judgement day. All. How many resurrections there are we cannot know, because it isn't written how many there are to be other than that there is more than one; i.e., "...This is the first resurrection" (Rev 20:5b); however, we see the final resurrection at Judgement Day in the following words: "And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works." (Rev 20:13). You said:
Once again, your "testing," that is not in the Scriptures, is causing you difficulty. There is no testing to be found in the Millennium chapter of the Bible (Rev 20); nor, I might add, is there any testing to be found in the Ezekiel chapters (40-48) that you errantly presume to be speaking of the Millennium; nor is satan anywhere to be found in those Ezekiel chapters either. Ezekiel is not in the Millennium. Enough said on that. You said:
Oh? And what have you decided to do with:
You said:
Do you see where you are now going with this? Based upon your initial errors, which we pointed out earlier, you are now moving towards openly believing in second chances! Which of course is the natural conclusion of the Millennium doctrine as taught by some pastors and Bible teachers. At least you are open about it, not like that other fellow who keeps denying that he sees second chances, when his whole doctrine screams SECOND CHANCE. You "don't think that the word supports" that you "must accept Christ before your last breath"? What word, or whose word do you refer to? Certainly not the Word of God's Bible. Do you realize what you have just said? You have stripped the New Testament of every Scripture, of every imperative that speaks of the fact that man must believe upon Jesus Christ to be saved. This is what that doctrine has done to you. You are saying, in effect (in very strong effect, I might add) that it is not necessary to the salvation of man that he believes upon Jesus Christ. And to substantiate in your own heart this absurd conclusion, you must invent a second chance after death, whereby a man may then at that time accept the Savior that he had denied whilst alive. Talk about turning something upside down!
Jesus Christ and all the Apostles spoke of urgency, they spoke of the great and desperate necessity that a man believe upon Jesus Christ to live eternal―and you have made it so that it isn't necessary, it isn't binding, because, as you would say, "we get a second chance." The last several verses of the Bible speak of no such second chance; but rather, they speak of the urgency that man gets right with God now:
You said:
No, reader, it does not imply that. It "implies" the idea of once. As in one chance. You refer to:
Observe that the Holy Spirit is linking your verse 27 with verse 28; for, verse 27 beings with "And as.." and verse 28 begins with "So...". In other words, as the things are in verse 27, so too are the things in verse 28.
In other words, as we live one time, then are judged upon that, so too did Christ die one time, and by that we saved. Can you see that it is speaking exactly about "once." It is saying that there is only one chance, and that there is only one way. Let's now take this Scripture and place it in context with the whole passage. My notes [in brackets] shall attempt to direct the reader's attention to the concept of "once" that runs through the Scripture (as well as other matters):
In other words, as we have one chance, die, then are judged upon that life; so too did Christ die once that all may live who accept Him. We no more have a second chance than Christ would have a second crucifixion. I wonder if I brought that out well? You said:
Once again, you are adding to the Scriptures. Where does it say that those who resurrected first are governing over the nations? It does not say that. And how could they "govern someone" who isn't yet resurrected? They cannot. I also know where you are getting this from. You are confusing (or mingling):
with:
But look at the timing of the above two events. In the first (chronologically), those of the first resurrection are with Christ; but AFTER the next resurrection, satan leads these deluded ones into attacking those who were with Christ in the first resurrection. Observe the timing and sequence, paying close attention as to just when this second group is resurrected:
In other words, those who were as numerous as "the sand of the sea" (Vs. 8), whom satan deceived into attacking God's saints by where they "compassed the camp of the saints about" (Vs. 9), "lived not again" (Vs. 5) until they were resurrected in verses 7 & 8 "when the thousand years are expired" (Vs. 7). In other words, they were not yet resurrected when those of the first resurrection were "priests" and who those that "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years" (Vs. 4), whatever that entails. The only ones in the 1000 years are those who were a group of souls who partake of: "This is the first resurrection", who we see are a very specific select group who were chosen by their actions: "that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands" (Vs. 4). "We" see the words "reigned with Christ" (Vs. 4) and suppose that there are other souls then to reign over. But this is not so stated. It says that they reign with Christ, it does not say, as you stated, "those that "make it" at the first resurrection govern the nations". You are adding to the Scriptures that which is not written. And we cannot now know what those of the first resection shall be doing during the 1000 years before the others are resurrected because the Holy Spirit has not included that information in the text. You have leaped to two conclusions: you have supposed that since they are "priests" (Vs. 6) that they must be over a congregation as priests are today in our flesh world―totally overlooking that the primary duty of any priest is to serve and worship God and Christ. You also supposed that since certain are "reigning with Christ" (Vs. 4) that they must be ruling over people or souls―totally overlooking the fact that to "reign with" someone is to share in the management of the Kingdom. Whatever that may mean at that time. Your suppositions cannot however be supported with the Scriptures themselves, as I am sure that you would agree. We cannot understand that future fleshless time based upon our present flesh world's rules and manners. You know that you cannot supply one verse in the entire Bible which states that this Millennium is a time of ANY teaching of ANYONE; you know this. I have called for one from the several people who have objected to my position, to no avail, they found not one, nor shall they ever find one Scripture that speaks of any Millennium teaching time wherein a man may become saved in that time who was destined by his actions in this world to be lost (should God judge them to the Lake of Fire). You asked for Scriptural documentation regarding my doctrinal position, and I believe that I have supplied it. I am here defending a doctrine, that is fine, I expect to be challenged; however, I could just as easily turn this "argument" around and demand your Scriptural documentation to the contrary; could I not? It is difficult to have all the answers regarding this Millennium because the Holy Spirit has remained mute on several key aspects of it. That was of course for a good reason―God, in His infinite wisdom has determined that at this present time we are simply not to know all that shall transpire during the Millennium. That's good enough for me. But as we see, He did leave much in the Scriptures for us to glean. I feel that I have drawn that out as best that I could at this present time. And perchance more shall come to light as we careen towards and through the Great Tribulation. After all, we still have to hear what the Two Witnesses have to say for their 42 months on this earth (no, this first part of the Tribulation wasn't shortened―only the second part was shortened to circa 5 months), and as well what the Seven Thunders utter (which has hitherto now been sealed).
So, aside from the testimony of the Two Witnesses, there are also "seven instructions" that are to be given to us during the Tribulation which are not written here in the book of Revelation―but they shall happen, they shall be given to those of us who are alive during this Tribulation. In other words, God's revelations are by no means completed. It is that it just isn't time yet for the final words to be given unto man. And when they are given, I guarantee that they shall be contained here and there in the Bible (just like the New Testament and Christ were then found in the Old Testament once it and He was revealed and offered), both in the Old and the New Testaments―it is by that that we can at that time know that they are indeed truly the words of the Lord God, and not some deception and snare laid by satan and his cohorts on this Earth. These are truly exciting times that we are entering! But be careful of deception and false teachers; for, as Scriptures warns, they shall also rise:
You closed with:
I feel that that is the most wise and prudent course of action. And please know I feel that PM (pastor Murray) is simply in honest and heartfelt well-meaning error on his Millennium doctrine, and is not intentionally teaching anything that he feels is incorrect. As well, we may see him change his views on his Millennium doctrine someday; let us graciously allow him that human right, won't we? And if you won't, then you give up any right of your own to ever change your mind as new information is revealed and clarified by the Holy Spirit from the Scriptures of God's Holy Bible. Let us therefore be merciful on each other for the human fallibility that is present within us all. "For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." (Mat 7:2). And also please know and understand that the sometimes harsh words in this Q&A are not directed at you personally; when I write, I write to all (who apply). See our soon-coming The Environment of the Great Tribulation of Revelation 13.
Peace to you in Christ Jesus.
Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | Where do aborted babies, deceased children, etc., go in the end?
A reader writes:
The simple answer is: babies and the young are innocent of any sin, and therefore do not need the washing of the Cross. What does Christ bring to a believing Christian? He brings forgiveness. Forgiveness of what? Forgiveness of sin. One can only be guilty of sin when they reach the age of accountability. If after being told not to play with the candle, a young child then knocks over the candle and burns up the house killing five―is he a mass-killer? No, he knew not what he did―he couldn't fully realize the consequences of his actions. Likewise, if a three year old finds daddy's gun and pulls the trigger into his brother's head―has he murdered the lad? No, he knew not what he was doing. He was innocent by reason of ignorance. Many "retarded" adults are likewise covered. You haven't forgotten Christ words, have you?:
What are little children? They are innocent. Which is what I am trying to relay here in this study. How can we adults become innocent once again? Through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ for all whom believe upon Him. And contrary to what some preachers teach: all sins (save for the unforgivable sin) can be forgiven right here, right now, on this Earth. Murders, Rapes, Abortions, Adulteries, Thefts, Blasphemies, Homosexuality, all sins et all that depraved man may commit, can be forgiven right now in this world by the blood of Jesus Christ on that Cross. A believing Christian may have full confidence that his sins which he has truly repented of to God in Jesus Christ's name are ALL blotted out of the books. They are no more―they no longer exist―they have been bought and paid for by a mighty ransom (I speak of Jesus Christ)―and shall not be brought up on Judgement Day. But you must repent of each one (or ask to be covered for those not remembered by yourself from times past) and you must believe upon Jesus Christ. That is what Jesus was here to do, and He accomplished His work. How foolish this must all sound to an unbeliever! No matter; hell's jaws gape and she salivates for her great feast:
As well, many adults are also forgiven because they did "it" (something) in ignorance, not knowing that it was wrong. Let God judge, please. But in the below you shall see what I am saying. In the below, you tell me, why was Paul forgiven at the first:
However, I hasten to add, so that no one misconstrues this to mean that they can willingly remain ignorant as a shied to the consequences of their sins, that Paul was speaking of a time BEFORE Jesus Christ and Christianity was spread to the people through the churches.
A look at the whole Scripture, of which the second above Scripture (1st Tim) is just an excerpt, reveals that now, since Paul's and Peter's and the other Apostle's work in Christ, all now have the ability to learn the truth which convicts the sinner:
What of those who foolishly say that they don't sin?
And I have met a Catholic man in my area who actually said that he never repents because "he doesn't feel that he has any need to, for he doesn't sin." Not knowing that by simply saying what he said, he sins. Oh, truly said our Lord: "Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." (Mat 7:14). A broken repentant sinner's fear is more valued than the marvelous deeds of a thousand self righteous hypocrites! I say that we are nearer to God when we repent of sin and error than we are when we do great good deeds. Nigh indeed! For, even an unbeliever may do great deeds, but only a Christian will break and repent upon doing wrong. Catholics also say that Mother Mary was sinless all her life (the Catholic's "Immaculate Conception" dogma), in effect making a little goddess out of our Lord's blessed for all times mother, thereby shaming her memory on this Earth; but Scripture speaks differently on the matter:
As a side note, we must state that the last above Scripture is wrongfully skewed into the errant (though quite popular in Christian churches) teaching of the so-called "Original Sin" which supposedly is charged to every human baby at birth. This is not at all true. All are born completely innocent, and no one bears the sin of another. Briefly stated, in the below (Rom 5) Scripture, "by one man sin entered into the world" (vr. 12) means that Adam was the first to sin, thus bringing sin as an institution into this world. And Jesus Christ later bringing the institution of forgiveness into this world "the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ" (vr.15). That is why it is said the "first" and the "last" Adam elsewhere in Scripture: "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit." (1st Cor 15:45). This is not saying that Adam was the first man (first human), but that the first man Adam is being compared to to the last (Godly) Adam (Jesus Christ). The subject is "Adam" not humans. The below (Rom 5) Scripture It is not saying that we are charged with Adam's sin; but rather, that since Adam was the first to be given a Law from God, which he then broke, it was he (Adam) who brought into this world the thing called sin. For sin is the transgression of the law; but without any Laws from God there could be no sin. For there was no Law to break, which is what sin is: "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." (1st Jn 3:4). Before Adam was told to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the midst of the Garden, there was no Law to break.
We speak on this a little bit in an older Q&A on this Site, which below is an excerpt of:
In conclusion; the children, the babies, the aborted fetuses, the severely mentally handicapped: they are all in Heaven eternally even though they knew not Christ Jesus whilst their soul was in the flesh; for, they have no sin that Jesus had needed to pay the price for on that Cross. What was the purpose of His work on that Cross?
Peace to you in Christ Jesus; the innocent are in Heaven for ever, never having had the "opportunity" to relinquish that gift and right. In that may the many tortured souls among our Christian sisters who aborted their babies in times past find peace; as well as our Christian brothers (of whom I am one) who in times past facilitated the woman's decision to have that abortion, or who did not try earnestly to stop her (yes, men can be charged with the sin of abortion―by aiding and abetting.) But please do repent. I know that you have. Peace to you as well in Christ Jesus. That same Jesus Christ whom Paul speaks of:
________________________________________________________________________ Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | "New Things" and "New Groups" A reader writes:
Hello Xxxxx. I do not know that group, but there are so many "groups" now that one doesn't know who to trust anymore. All that I can say when requests like this come in for confirmation or warning-off of groups and splinters, is that we must compare what any group or teacher/preacher says with the Holy Scriptures. The Bible is the final word for us now on the Earth regarding what God did and did not say and instruct. As we near the endtime, and we are nearing it, there shall rise many false teachers and errant religious systems; we know this because the Bible has forewarned us of it. The safest course of action is to investigate a church's or a teacher's teachings, comparing them to the written Word of God Bible, and then after careful consideration and much prayer make a decision regarding as to whether the teaching is sound and in accordance with our Heavenly Father's Word. As we wind down this old world new information shall come, yes; Daniel told us as much, and there are the Two Witnesses of Rev 11 who shall witness revelations from God, and the Seven Thunders of Rev 10 as well have not been unsealed as of yet; HOWEVER (!!!), so too shall new heresies and new traps from satan come upon us. Satan has many false teachers. God has few true teachers. Could it have really been any other way? Is there not one Holy Spirit but a legion of evil spirits. Hundreds of false prophets in the Bible, few true ones of God―and those true ones killed by satan's people, I might add.
My point is, be careful with anything new. "New" isn't necessarily bad, but it could be. "New" must align with the Scriptures, or it is to cast aside as unreliable. Perchance in the future it may prove to be correct―but we are too close to the endtime to be letting ourselves be drawn off into "some new thing." Prayer in Jesus' name, faith in our Heavenly Father for guidance, and healthy lump of time studying God's written Word, the Bible, with the Holy Spirit present, shall insure that we all individually stay in God's will. Be careful, the times of trickery are near; and if I may quote the Master, they are: "even at the doors" (Mat 24:33b).
Regarding where you asked of this group:
But, do they all not say that very thing? Groups come and go, they all spring-up claiming to be the possessors of ancient truth, a "remnant" of the true ones, those who understand "deeper" than their "average common" Christian fellows; however, so far it seems that they all fizzle-out when their doctrine (teachings) are compared to the indelible Word of God as contained in His Book, the Bible. Did not Lance Knight and his heresies fall likewise? We hear no more of old Lance and his beguiled followers, now do we? Regarding where you stated of them:
But the Bible says that a man is to be judged by "the mouth of two or three witnesses"―that means that there are to be trials where the witnesses testify. And where there are trials, there are jurors and judges. Civil law and it's administration was an important part of what God had set up for His people so that they could be protected and judged fairly and surely for crimes on this Earth. I would rather be judged by a jury of twelve Christians than a jury with seven Atheists, two Jews, one Muslim, and two "I haven't made up my mind yet's." How about you? And if you feel the same as I in this, then where shall you find those twelve Christian jurists if Christians aren't serving on juries? Some Christians see serving on juries as a form of "judging," which they have been deluded into thinking that Christians shouldn't be doing. However, a jury at once convicts the guilty AND frees the innocent. The innocent are set free, and the guilty locked away where they cannot prey on the weak any longer. That is a good thing, not a bad thing. Our courts system, while far from perfect, still protects those who cannot protect themselves and punishes those who prey upon the weaker. And serving in the military? Did not God Himself raise great armies in Israel from the people? Well, they were serving in the service of the military. If America did not have a great and feared military, we would all be speaking German, Russian, Arabic, or Chinese; and would be virtual slaves like the Chinese, most Muslims and the Russians were and once were. And certainly Christianity would have long ago been outlawed and the freedom to worship in it relinquished. Just last week in some Muslim hell-hole nation, a fifteen year old virgin was raped. She then was then tried and hung for violating chastity rules. She was "lawfully" (there) executed for being defiled! In many Arab cultures they have what is called "honor killings," where the brother or father kills his sister or daughter for bringing shame on the family by being a rape victim―yet, rape is codified in the Koran―rape is legal in Islam according to their holy books! Mohammad and his band of demonic men elevated rape a grotesque art form; the Koran is littered with stories about the taking of slave girls. Just what, may I ask, do you think that slave girls are used for? Laundry service? Maids? Chefs? Please!, let's be realistic here―slave girls are sex slaves, slave men are laborers. Yet President George Bush the second has the audacity to call Islam both a "great religion" and a "religion of peace." He cannot be that ignorant, therefore he must be complicit. "Islam" is the latest International Judaic's boogey-man. And when Islam has served the Jews well, it shall be dismantled. "They" (the International Judaics) are careful to keep Islam fragmented that she cannot ever rise as a world power. And if she ever did―woe to the world! For, one out of every six humans on this planet is a Muslim―most of them uneducated and savage, kept in submission by fear and violence―thus making them the perfect weapon in International Jewry's hand. The word "Islam" literally means submission. And you may also note that Islam is not seen in the book of Revelation. So, something happened to them who today comprise one-sixth of the planet's current inhabitants. What happened to them may well be being seen in today's wars and run-ups to war. Someday soon in America men shall be beheaded for Christ Jesus. Once a nation is overthrown, it is at that moment at the complete mercy of her overthrowers, whether they be revolutionaries, foreign armies, or the International Judaic precursors to antichrist. Voting? Well, there is an alternate form of governance―tyranny. Tell them that if they don't like to vote, that they shall be well pleased to have their way in the Tribulation; for, in the Great Tribulation there shall be no voting. And meanwhile, while they await that fateful time, evil men shall control the voting till the whole system is corrupted―while these good men, Christians, aren't voting. The only voice in America, then, shall be the voice of non-Christians. That is happening in no small part today. Christians don't vote with their faith (how can we have in a majority Christian nation the legal institution of abortion, "drive-through" divorce, pornography as "free speech," if Christians are voting with their faith?!?), they have been seduced into voting for whomever promises them the most tax refunds, welfare payout's, economic advantage, etc.; and "peace," that as we see, is no peace. President Bush II promised not to engage in "nation building," that was one of his first election's platforms and he used that very term in his debates on Judeovision (television); however, nation-building is all that he has done ever since being elected, and that he did and does for his International Judaic masters―we Christians die destroying and conquering Muslims; and the International Judaics reap and prosper and rule backstage. Christianity, Islam, Judaism―yes, Virginia, these are holy wars. America licks the Kosher hand; and the world, outside of America, can plainly see it. Islam doesn't "hate our freedom," as Bush and the other treasonous pretend-Christian servants of Judaica posit―they hate our hidden masters, the International Jews. Be careful of "new things."
Peace to you in Christ Jesus. Back to list of questions at top of page
In
His Service: Contact
Editor |
Bible
studies |
Newer
students |
Bible Q
& A's
|
Study
tools
|
Search
our site NOTE: To insure quality and content integrity, these In-depth Bible Studies are © copyrighted and may only be downloaded for study and shared private use. They may not be reproduced or distributed for sale or publication without prior written approval. Other Christian Web sites are welcome to link up to this Website or any page on it. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AntiSemitism?
No way! Reality from their own mouths. Why would they expose
themselves, you ask? They can't help it; when they are winning,
they get cocky—that has always been their downfall—pride. Today
they are more and more coming out into the open; that is because they
feel that at this late time they cannot be stopped. And that those
who are against what they are doing aren't listened to by anyone
anymore. The fix is in, so to speak. Look at the head of
Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff—openly a Judaic. And he is the
man in charge of America if the sitting President ever declares a state
of Martial Law! Oh, don't worry, "they" will give him a good
reason to declare that Martial Law in America (and all Christian Western
nations) when the time is opportune—then the Tribulation begins.
Photo at right: Homeland Security Director, Michael Chertoff with Pres.
G.W. Bush.
Moving forward, in
Video #2 (and I placed
them in order for this reason), we saw people-mover turnstiles with bars
over them and to the left and right side (see pictures at right from
video) so that no human could pass into or
out-of the adjoining room without going through the (one way)
turnstiles (shown in picture at right).
And let's not overlook the three categories of zones
within this camp. In
Video #2 we saw mention of and video of the Red Zone, Blue Zone, and
Green Zone markers, which perfectly coincides with the three degrees of
pickup (arrest) lists mentioned elsewhere on our Website here:
Changing the subject. When you do a search on Goggle.com, you will
almost invariably find that Wikipedia pops up on the first page of
search results. WikiPedia is a Judaic founded and controlled free on-line
encyclopedia. Goggle is a Judaic founded and controlled search engine.
Together they represent one control apparatus for information. For
instance, if you type in "Tacmar" into Google.com search engine, the very
first entry out of the 2,530 results is, of course: