Northwest Indiana Discussion

Wow... That was deep.

I doubt there will be time for him to be born and raised with the short time span allotted for him to be here de jure-7 years at most.

Which would assume it hasn't already happened, of course. But what you are describing is an incarnation such as was with Christ, which as far as I can see is only found in the Omen movies.

I don't see why it isn't more likely that when he sustains the mortal wound then Satan would just totally possess/ control his body. Or perhaps even merely to the extent Hitler was controlled of the Devil.

Satan will only have 7 years at the most back here once he is cast down. That is not enough time for a person to be born and age in flesh.

Very simple to knock the logic of that. The time frame you are working with is basically a guess. But that still doesn't preclude a human being from willingly being the tool of the Devil, not unlike Hitler or Judas.

It is wonderful that the Lord loves us so much that he has shortened the time of the tribulation, so that His election can be saved.

Unless you meant Obama I think that was a typo. I take it you meant to say "elect?"

That said I disagree in that we have been in the tribulation since before the Middle Ages. What you are using interchangeably is perhaps the Great Tribulation. And that subtle difference has led to many a confused position. But then some still don't get that the king of the north, king of the south business written by Daniel is now mostly history and involves such well known figures as Cleopatra.

The one thing that perplexes me most about the rapture doctrines is that it is equally possible that there will be a pre-Great Tribulation taking away of the saints as there is for post. And it makes sense to me because it says the dead in Christ will rise first then we who are alive and remain will be caught up. It well could be at the battle of Megiddo. But then the is this archetype of Noah and the taking away to safety. Plus the issue of the return of Christ mentioned at two distinctly mountains. So despite all the pretty graphic mosaics on this period by various factions I am not firmly committed to any one projection.

Also consider that even given the marketplace today how in the world could many, if any, Christians survive without the means to buy, sell, or trade? How could you even just pay your property taxes and live off of the land in abject poverty for 3 - 7 years? Perhaps I'm just thinking in Western terms but for me this is one of the few true mysteries of unfilled prophetic scripture, especially since the elect are supposed to recognize the times and seasons and prepare. I find it difficult to believe that anyone could be alive who didn't take the mark of the Beast to be caught up to meet Christ at the end of a 7 year Satanic reign as some dogmatically contend is what will happen. But I can't rule it out entirely either.

Mirage, read "The End Of The Age" by Pat Robertson. In his book, he describes how this is possible. Don't forget, God protects his own. No harm will come to them who God seals as his.

If you would like to borrow my copy of the book, PM me.

Are His elect not the same as His election? No, not a typo. Maybe you should edit your own work before you criticize mine.

Fail grammar much?

I find it curious that over the AIG bonuses the House (without proper debate, discussion, or consideration of the Constitutionality) just exhibited mob rule to retroactively and unconstitutionally tax those bonuses back from the individuals. So now we have the government illegally seeking to invade a private contract between employees and their private employer.

If this trend towards ignoring the legalities continues, which I feel it will, before long perhaps we will say they gave their power and authority to the Antichrist.

God's Word is very plain

Actually not always when it comes to prophetic events before they happen, and especially when you are working with a 400+ year old translation to English.

I've heard many a Baptist preacher with little formal training claim how simple the Bible is to understand but as cited above without the background and proper context it is easy to go astray. Should women REALLY not speak at all in church? As it is written, study to show yourself approved.

The Scripture to which you refer, 'should women REALLY not speak at all in church', that word means 'to chatter.' No one should chatter in church.

I started to say partly right except it isn't. You're creating a doctrine out of speculation. You notice the men weren't chided for talking. But if you look into extra Biblical information you see that the men & women were separated. The women up in the balcony had a hard time hearing and would call down to their husbands asking "What did he say?" Or so I have been told. Now that makes perfect sense and does not contradict the text one little bit. But it does change the interpretation quite a bit from the perspective of a casual read. Study to show thyself approved, you see.

And while the text is accepted as Sacred Scripture remember that these letters were primarily targeted to a specific church. Today we just glean from the wisdom imparted from these transmittals but really these letters were not written to us at all so we were not the intended audience. I'd be willing to bet that none of the Epistle writers had a clue their writings would last 2,000+ years.