End Times--Mormon style

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

BJ this thread is not about what I believe it is about LDS beliefs.

Yes---but in light of your own beliefs, ***uming you understand that 1000 years of peace are patterned after the 7th day of creation, then you would also understand that the 6000 years before that also have significance and that it does not speak of the tribulation but rather the earth as a whole.

Or do you think that the only part that matches is the last 1000 years?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Ahhh, you have found some scholarly stuff about Armageddon at BYU. As noted, I like to keep my mind open about such prophecies. Find me the scripture on this one and I will agree. Otherwise, it is our best scholarly understanding (but not doctrine.)

LDS Bible Dictionary

"Armageddon*
Armageddon. A Greek transliteration from the Hebrew Har Megiddon, or Mountain of Megiddo. The valley of Megiddo is in the western portion of the plain of Esdraelon 50 miles north of Jerusalem. Several times the valley of Megiddo was the scene of violent and crucial battles during O.T. times (Judg. 5:19; 2 Kgs. 9:27; 23:29). A great and final conflict taking place at the second coming of the Lord is called the battle of Armageddon because it will be started in the same locale and will be decisive. See Zech. 11–14, especially 12:11; Rev. 16:14–21."

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

LDS Bible Dictionary

"Armageddon*
Armageddon. A Greek transliteration from the Hebrew Har Megiddon, or Mountain of Megiddo. The valley of Megiddo is in the western portion of the plain of Esdraelon 50 miles north of Jerusalem. Several times the valley of Megiddo was the scene of violent and crucial battles during O.T. times (Judg. 5:19; 2 Kgs. 9:27; 23:29). A great and final conflict taking place at the second coming of the Lord is called the battle of Armageddon because it will be started in the same locale and will be decisive. See Zech. 11–14, especially 12:11; Rev. 16:14–21."

Once again--a spiritual battle or a physical one? Remember, the Jews thought that Christ had come and would lead them in a great physical battle or at least free them from the Romans and missed the great spiritual battle He won.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Yes---but in light of your own beliefs, ***uming you understand that 1000 years of peace are patterned after the 7th day of creation, then you would also understand that the 6000 years before that also have significance and that it does not speak of the tribulation but rather the earth as a whole.

I don't understand what you are trying to say. But anyway the tribulation is a seven year period that culminates in the second coming of Christ.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Once again--a spiritual battle or a physical one?

A physical one that just precedes the second coming of Christ. Which is what is said in the quote above "A great and final conflict taking place at the second coming of the Lord is called the battle of Armageddon because it will be started in the same locale and will be decisive."

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

A physical one that just precedes the second coming of Christ. Which is what is said in the quote above "A great and final conflict taking place at the second coming of the Lord is called the battle of Armageddon because it will be started in the same locale and will be decisive."

I don't see anything in there that depects it must necessarily be physical.

You are still ignoring whether or not you see a correlation with 1000 years of peace with the last day of the creation.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

I don't understand what you are trying to say. But anyway the tribulation is a seven year period that culminates in the second coming of Christ.

I thought you said "3 and 1/2" at one point. And what about the 1000 years of peace---does the 1000 years of peace correlated with the 7th day of creation?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

I don't see anything in there that depects it must necessarily be physical.

Originally Posted by Billyray

LDS Bible Dictionary

"Armageddon*
Armageddon. A Greek transliteration from the Hebrew Har Megiddon, or Mountain of Megiddo. The valley of Megiddo is in the western portion of the plain of Esdraelon 50 miles north of Jerusalem. Several times the valley of Megiddo was the scene of violent and crucial battles during O.T. times (Judg. 5:19; 2 Kgs. 9:27; 23:29).A great and final conflict taking place at the second coming of the Lord is called the battle of Armageddon because it will be started in the same locale and will be decisive. See Zech. 11–14, especially 12:11; Rev. 16:14–21."

Note the highlighted part.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

You are still ignoring whether or not you see a correlation with 1000 years of peace with the last day of the creation.

I see the connection that you are trying to make in that the last day is a day of rest and the millennium for the most part is peaceful but I don't see why you think this is relevant here.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

I thought you said "3 and 1/2" at one point.

7 years with the last 3 1/2 being called the great tribulation prior to the second coming of Christ and the start of the millennium.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

I see the connection that you are trying to make in that the last day is a day of rest and the millennium for the most part is peaceful but I don't see why you think this is relevant here.

If you don't see the relevance, than you do not see my perspective.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Note the highlighted part.

If I compare this to what the Jews thought during the time of Christ, they might have thought the battle would start in Jerusalem and be decisive. I just refuse to read into it as much as you do and prefer to keep an open mind about how God will fulfill His prophecies.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

If you don't see the relevance, than you do not see my perspective.

I certainly don't see any relevance from anything that you have told me so far.

Why is the millenium relevant to things that we are talking about which take place prior to the second coming of Christ?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

If I compare this to what the Jews thought during the time of Christ, they might have thought the battle would start in Jerusalem and be decisive. I just refuse to read into it as much as you do and prefer to keep an open mind about how God will fulfill His prophecies.

But your own Bible dictionary talks about it.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

But your own Bible dictionary talks about it.

Billyray, you are putting your own paradigm over the Bible dictionary. You THINK you know what it means and therefore you conclude you do rather than understanding that you are putting your own bias on it and then interpretting it to mean what you want. I see what it says. I also do not see anything that states itis a decisive physical battle. I see the atonement as a decisive battle at a decided location, and yet the battle was completely spiritual in nature. I just keep an open mind as exactly what is meant. God teaches us that His ways are not our ways and so, I keep an open mind.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

I certainly don't see any relevance from anything that you have told me so far.

Why is the millenium relevant to things that we are talking about which take place prior to the second coming of Christ?

Why is the millenium relevant to prior to the millenium? What is what is prior to the millenium revelant to the millenium? If you don't get that, then--well, the whole of the Bible teachings is lost on you. Really? You really don't see the relevance of each part?

Do you see the relevance with the millenium with keeping the Sabbath day holy? Or is there no revelance to the creation, our existance today, or the millenium to you as well?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Billyray, you are putting your own paradigm over the Bible dictionary.

BJ that is exactly what it says. What are you talking about?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Why is the millenium relevant to prior to the millenium?

Right. If we are speaking about events that take place BEFORE the millenium then the millenium which takes place after the second coming isn't relevant to what we were discussing.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Do you see the relevance with the millenium with keeping the Sabbath day holy?

What does this have anything to do with events that take place prior to the millenium?

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

BJ that is exactly what it says. What are you talking about?

I am going to ***ume that you have read Plato and the cave. Are you sure you are not seeing things from inside the cave? I am just saying that until I have that beatific experience, I will not ***ume I understand God fully on these future prophecies until I have experienced them.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Right. If we are speaking about events that take place BEFORE the millenium then the millenium which takes place after the second coming isn't relevant to what we were discussing.

My question was rhetorical. I asked it because it should be obvious the relevance of the pre and post millenial events. It would be like stating that a rainstorm is irrelevant to the rainbow.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

What does this have anything to do with events that take place prior to the millenium?

Because God does things in patterns that are seen throughout the creation all the way to the millenium.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

I am going to ***ume that you have read Plato and the cave. Are you sure you are not seeing things from inside the cave? I am just saying that until I have that beatific experience, I will not ***ume I understand God fully on these future prophecies until I have experienced them.

What is wrong with understanding plain English?

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Billyray

What is wrong with understanding plain English?

Because when the Pharisees thought they understood plain English, they got it wrong.

1Cr 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Because when the Pharisees thought they understood plain English, they got it wrong.

So a person can't expect to read the NT and understand it. Is that what you are saying?