FrankForum (Frankness IS Forum)

No ads, no mods, Frankly Anonymous (you can join w/fake name/email, are not tracked)!
It is currently 31 Jul 2021, 08:45

All times are UTC

Forum rules

Guests and Members may post here.
Extra Smileys: ... _Editor_QR

Not moderated, so you are on your own. Spambots, stalkers and anti-semites will be banned without notice. Else, POLICE YOURSELF.

Post a reply
Message body:
Enter your message here, it may contain no more than 999999 characters. 

Font size:
Font colour
BBCode is ON
[img] is OFF
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are OFF
Disable BBCode
Do not automatically parse URLs
DM me in twitter if you have:
This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.

Topic review - Pre-Trib Rapture Debate
Author Message
  Post subject:  Dan9 Meter re Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
In Text Crit forum I started a thread on Daniel 9, since its focus is meter, which is a function of whether we have the right words. It demonstrates how Daniel 9 is the raison d'etre for Pre-Trib Rapture. It's an ACCOUNTING issue: Israel had seven more years due than could be played during her time, because Messiah died seven years early. So-called 'Christian scholarship' is so bad with the math in Daniel 9, this extra seven years gets misaccounted century after century. Waste of man hours, money, angst. For it's just a simple problem of time allotted which did not play. Provable. Mathematical.

So if you want, you can debate that thread's contents, here or there.
Post Posted: 11 Sep 2015, 10:47
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
No, it's at the end of; after in the sense of expiry of a SCHEDULE, not a law. Yeah, and sure Satan tried to end it early, but Matthew 16:18, Christ unilaterally contracts to make Church AFTER His Death, per Father's Discretion, John 17:20ff.

Yeah, a loophole. For there was to then follow 50 for the Gentiles, then 7 for the Trib anyhow, then Mill. But the 50 gets elongated by Matt16:18, NEW COVENANT to pay for NEW PEOPLE, namely 'whoever believes in their word', John 17:20ff. So the untold billions of new sins Christ must agree to pay for in advance, only He can authorize. Then Father determines how MANY. So not a time deadline, but a new bodies criterion.

So in modern terms, it's a way to avoid Mistrial. New covenant of promised future BODIES, which if Satan can defeat fulfillment, God loses and Satan wins. For bodies have to be born, have to be saved, have to mature.. the meanwhile, the Sword of Damocles Time Rule of someone needing to supermature by every 490 else Time Ends, continues to favor Satan in the Trial. Couldn't be more dramatic. Couldn't be harder to accept or believe. :twisted:

I tried to cover that issue beginning here, and then trying to ferret out the MisTrial issues, here and here. Search on 'Mistrial' (with or without caps). Too much reading, but I was thinking out loud. You're already thinking in that vein, so you don't need to read it.
Post Posted: 31 Aug 2015, 03:03
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
I meant it in a figurative sense, but it was probably a misuse of the word. Larkin didn't say much about hypostatic union other than identifying it as its own dispensation.

My concern is that Daniel 9:26 doesn't say that the Messiah is to be cut off BY the 62nd week but AFTER (we'achera) the 62nd week was over. If Jesus was killed 7 years early, that sounds like a Satanic attempt to violate Daniel 9:26. With the Church still here, we are His body/representatives, He is in union with us on a Spiritual level. I see that as the Messiah still being here AFTER the 62 weeks until the Rapture.

I see it as a legal loop hole.
Post Posted: 31 Aug 2015, 02:50
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Now, I don't know what Larkin said, I only know what Bible says, so if you want to go into more detail, please use Scripture?

Using Scripture: Hupostasis is His Nature being God-Man, Daniel 7:13. It's a keyword, Psalm 40:6 quoted in Hebrews 1:3, 3:14, explained in 10:5, quoted again as a nickname for Him in Heb 11:1 (metered) versus the covenant applying during a period of time="dispensation". So in Bible, the term represents His Nature.

Yes, Messiah was to be cut off at the end of 62 weeks, but instead died at the end of the 61st week, successful, so still on time. And that's why there is Church, as a TIME BRIDGE back. Paul documented it all in Ephesians, yes we represent Him as Body, 2 Cor 5:20 inter alia. But it's another legal term for BRIDE. Yes, we get the same spiritual life He had, and will have a body like His at death, 1John 2:26-3:2, Ephesians 5. Nothing mystical about it. So if you're calling that 'union' hupostasis in a figurative sense, okay -- but the term in Bible and theology technically only refers to His Nature.

Daniel 9 didn't call for hupostasis, it's a Greek term and Daniel wrote that chapter in Hebrew. It was always forecast that Messiah would be God taking on Human Nature, ever since Adam, Gen 3:15. But the term hupostasis is born much later, and means one nature standing under another one (hupo under, stasis standing).

Now, maybe you mean something else and I'm misreading you?
Post Posted: 31 Aug 2015, 02:01
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
You must be talking about hupostasis. Clarence Larkin wrote about that in his book The Dispensational Truth. I've been of the opinion lately that we are currently still in hupostasis. No, Christ is not here in the flesh, but we are His body and in Him we are the Temple. Daniel 9 says that the Messiah must be cut off AFTER the 62 weeks, but you're saying He died 7 years beforehand. Well, it's well after the 62 weeks, and we are still here until the rapture. That must mean that we are still in a hupostatic state. I'm not saying that we are God in the flesh like Christ, but we represent Him here in a way that no priest has ever been able to. Daniel 9 called for hupostasis, and Israel's rejection of Christ called for an extension of hupostasis else Daniel 9 would be violated, hence the Church.

As a result, since Jesus died at 33 rather than 40, the quality of hupostasis was expanded from individual to collective.
Post Posted: 31 Aug 2015, 01:27
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Yeah, well my pastor had classified (and he wasn't the only guy) Christ's Lifetime as a separate Dispensation. That's distinct from the 490, which he didn't know about, and the covenants, actually. A dispensation is the time period over which a particular covenant, spans. So my pastor inter alia, was thinking there was a special short dispensation for His Lifetime, after which comes Church, but the Age of Israel still overlaps for that last 40 years. The last clause is a commonly held one. Bible seems slightly different from all of them.

Problem is, I can't find yet if Paul's doing that, accounting Christ's Life as a separate dispensation. Maybe he is. I just don't know. All this is original stuff based on the SOURCE TEXT so there is a ton of testing to do, of the results.

As for what was to happen absent Church, that we know: 2100 years for the Jews, and then Mill begins. So had Israel accepted Him, He would have died on time at age 40 seven years later, then the 'times of the Gentiles' of 50 then 7, then Mill. Of the 7, half belonged to the Jews, 'time of Jacob's trouble' as well. So the 7 is split. For the Temple was 3.5 years late in starting, so it was Jewish time in effect given to the Gentiles, so now reversed in the credit.

That's not how you meant 'Temple', but that's the accounting in the OT, all based on Time. There was no Temple=Body of Christ promise to Israel. She was promised Bride, but playing Vashti, refused to come when He came and called. But just as Vashti was never divorced, so Israel will still be Queen of the Nations during the Mill (to use Jewish terminology).
Post Posted: 31 Aug 2015, 00:42
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Um, wow. I'll have to re-read that a few times before I can begin to grasp that.

But what if Paul was tagging a new dispensational age at Christ's birth, like the Age of the Living Temple. I doubt those 33 years before the Church had any Millennial quality, and we know as you said that the Church began with Pentecost, however the common factor between the birth of Christ and the Church is that they are both the Temple. Jesus was born on Chanukah and Paul said that we are being fitted together as the Temple. Where exactly (chapter and verse) did Paul tag Jesus' birth? Was he talking about the Temple?

This goes back to Joel and Acts. If the Church was never opened, would Israel have been called the temple? We know the stone temple was destined for destruction so what would take its place in that situation?
Post Posted: 30 Aug 2015, 23:55
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Yeah, you're hitting squarely on the issue. YES Christ was born during the last 490, see '4103' in the spreadsheet. It was a scheduled thing. Long prior, Moses listing the countdown from Genesis 1 meter forward, the Mill was supposed to begin 4200 after Adam's fall, the idea being that by then 2100 years for the goyim then 2100 for the Jews would have elapsed.. including, Messiah's lifetime. His lifetime was supposed to be 40 years. Added to that, was the repayment for Abraham maturing early, 53.5 years. So, 4200-93.5 would mean an initially planned birth of 4106. But then came David, and he died age 77 (1Kings 6:1 tells you that if you do the math from 1Kings 2:39), and then Solomon didn't start the Temple until 3.5 years later (ibid). So now 53.5+3.5, or 57. So now Messiah has to be born 3.5 years earlier, Chanukah 4103 (Haggai 2 witty prediction, 357 years before 24 Chislev at sundown would be known as Chanukah).

So now, 4200-53.5-3.5-40=4103 birth, so then He should have died 40 years later=endpoint in Daniel 9, 586BC+70+70+483=37 AD. But, He was rejected so died 7 years earlier, hence two sevens, not one, remain.

Paul's Eph1:3-14 meter addresses all this. How to make up for the 'credit remaining' on Israel's time, since due to Him begin rejected, Church had to be inserted (see also the prior Romans 9-11). Paul's meter ties also to Daniel 9, 434 syllables (62 weeks) which leaves 56 in ellipsis at the end, same as his dateline of 56 (first sevened paragraph), playing on Mary's ending 56 in her meter of the Magnificat, 56 being the sevened equivalent of that 57. The full explanation is bigger, but I'm trying to simplify it.

So in order for that to balance, Paul has to be retroactively dating the 490 from Christ's BIRTH. But the COVENANT is not tied to a beginning of a 490, even as Abraham matured 2046 from Adam's Fall, not evenly at 2100. So, yeah there is an overlap, and that's been known (in other ways) in theology for a long time: that the 40-year period starting at Pentecost 30 AD, was still part of the 'age of Israel' as modern Dispies would term it, as well as the start of the 'Age of Church'.

It's this overlap, which preoccupies the writers' meter in the NT. They were plotting it out, just as Mary was. For look:

If there's a 53.5 credit owed the goyim on Jewish time, then DURING Jewish time, that credit has to play. For JEWISH time started 53.5 years early, owing to Abraham maturing 490 years after Noah got his 490.. so time could continue. So now how does the overlap get paid? That's why Mary ends the Magnificat with Abraham, cleverly ending her meter at Christ's Age 56. Why? That's 16 years after He was scheduled to die. Yeah, but He was scheduled to die 57 years before the Mill was to begin. So like all the OT writers, she's doing an equidistant pun. Sample of that punning style is partly shown here , but I'm not yet done with the piece. It might be more easily seen in or doc or htm (latter two require Bibleworks fonts to read the Greek).

So look: He really dies 64 years prior to the Scheduled Mill. So everyone wondered how that extra 7 years would be made up (and it is, we know with hindsight, during 64-70AD). So the writers were working that accounting into their Chapter 1 meters just as the OT writers did, just as Mary did, as a kind of spiritual/prophetical GPS (here's where we are on the old Jewish TimeMap, even though we are Church and Rapture can't be predicted). Because the Rapture's varying possible balancing deadlines were still of doctrinal value. So Paul charted them.

Notice it's a WHAT IF the Rapture happened charting, which he continues throughout the meter until it ends '62 weeks' later in a Groundhog day: showing that AT ANY TIME the Rapture can happen, starting with balancing to the Abrahamic credit. And, by the way, if the Rapture doesn't occur, here's a satire on what happens in Church during those specific years. Really biting satire. So biting, I had to do a video series explaining that doc, so folks could test the data first hand.

What creeps me out, is that Peter turned that passage into a marching song at the start of the 'Year of the Four Emperors', interpersing his text with the Pauline text. I've not worked out all the cadences, but enough is shown so you can see interleaved cadence is intended. Jude then patterns off Peter, then Mark upon Jude and Luke, and then the Writer of Hebrews on the foregoing, all within 12 months.

So there will be errors, can't be wholly right. Yet, the basic design of the meter is also certain, once you crunch the numbers from Genesis through Rev.
Post Posted: 30 Aug 2015, 20:42
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Ok. Im a little confused now. You're saying that Paul was tagging Jesus' birth as the start of a new 490, when Israel was still in its last 490 according to Daniel. Was this new 490 supposed to overlap the last 33 years of Daniel's 490? It can't pertain to the Church, since that didnt start for another 33 years.

Or does Paul's 490 take effect after the 70 weeks are up? In that case, Paul was tagging Millennial time.
Post Posted: 30 Aug 2015, 14:33
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Yeah, a new 1050, anyway; that's why there is a Rapture, the last Jewish 1050 didn't end. Underlying math is here. The math I knew before I knew the meter, and the spreadsheet maps the math; some of those videos predate the meter, most are after it. The meter uses the math. The videos help you orient to the math, but it's a lot to slog through, sorry! Took me six years to even understand, lol.

CAUTION: I know there are mistakes somewhere. There have to be. I've just not found them yet. If you see any, please let me know.

Paul's reset of the meter to Christ's birth post-Cross is complicated to explain, I did several video series on it, but you'll die from watching them -- they make me barf, anyway. Just use the spreadsheet: it ASSumes that the new 490 began at Christ's death, but Paul retroactively dates it to His Birth.. if I'm reading Paul right. So the spreadsheet's AD end points are 30 years later than Paul uses. I have yet to correct that.

Still not satisfied that I'm reading it right. Nothing of what I've shown, is 100% certain. This research is in a first-pass stage, needs a LOT more testing (including the spreadsheet). The only certainty is that YES there is a pattern based on 490+70+490=1050 x 2 = 2100.
Post Posted: 30 Aug 2015, 05:02
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
If Paul was tagging Christ's birth, was he indicating the start of a new 2100? Can one dispensation coexist within another dispensation?
Post Posted: 30 Aug 2015, 04:34
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
We can't predict the Rapture. It's based on Church-Body maturation, Eph 4:12-13. So if it happens to be (which God foreknows) of the same duration as Jewish time, so what? Could be, might not be. Common Jewish position is Messiah's time lasts 2000 years. But Bible doesn't say anything about a Messianic dispensation that I can find.

The only thing is, Paul newly benchmarks a 490 at Christ's birth. So the 1050's would have to be accounted that way too, although not solely that way. David had six time grants, none of which started with his birth, but all of which play to when he was crowned at Hebron, then over all Israel, then when he died. So there are 490s keyed to those dates, and so too, 1000's. His own Hebron crowning occurs on the 1050th anniversary of when Abram became AbRAHam.

So what are the benchmarks for Christ? I'm not sure. I plotted all this 10 years ago (before I knew of the Hebrew/Greek meter) in . If you see a mistake, let me know?
Post Posted: 30 Aug 2015, 03:51
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Have you found any reason to believe that the Church's present duration of nearly 2000 years some how balances to Jewish time? Honestly that would kind of scare me. I would have to reassess my understanding of the rapture if any such evidence did exist. What could that mystery event be if not the start of a new dispensation? I would think that the imminent rapture would rule out any sort of balancing.
Post Posted: 30 Aug 2015, 02:34
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Possibly. The thing is, what if any is the relationship to the fact that now history is almost 2000 years post Cross? Maybe it's just coincidence, or wishful thinking, but if there's some kind of balancing to Jewish time, then we're due for something. Maybe not the Rapture, but.. I don't know. Rapture cannot be predicted, as it's based on bodies, not time, John 17:20ff being the criterion, echoed in Eph 4:12-13, idea of the 'destination of life', katantaw being the fullness of the maturation of Christ (which seems like a corporate thing, since no individual will mature as much as He did).

Paul measures the new 490 from Christ's Birth, which shocks me. His dateline picks up where Mary left off, in Ephesians 1:4 at 56 (age of Christ=syllables), so that would be our 59 AD. Paul and the NT writers have their own Anno Domini which coincidentally tallies with our own because Varro made the same mistake in reverse as Dionysius made in retrospect; but to the NT writers, the A.D. is measured based on how old Christ should have been pre-adjustment for David's delay (born 4106 from Adam's Fall), or would be after that adjustment (actually born Chanukah 4103 from Adam's fall, ties to Haggai 2). I've not worked out all the details to make the conversion, but usually 6 years works.
Post Posted: 26 Aug 2015, 05:58
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Well here's a funny idea. If the Millennium belongs to the Messiah, what if human history is actually bisecting a hypothetical 2,100 year Messianic reign? Pre-trib theology is dependent on the Church acting as a spacer between the cross and the Trib. I've seen some of your clips on the Genesis restoration, the possibility is thought provoking. Jesus is King of kings, surely He must have ruled over Lucifer and friends as such before they fell into sin. According to the Genesis restoration theory, the Cosmos were destroyed and rebuilt (I think it was literally flooded with water), we know that the same thing will happen with fire after the Gog and Magog revolt at the end of the Millennium. Water first then fire. Maybe the kingdom of God is like a Millennial sandwich, lol.
Post Posted: 26 Aug 2015, 04:43
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Good questions. The actual Mill period is 1050, same as before (1050+1050=2100). So the Gog Magog begins when the 1000 years have ended, get it? From Rev? As for why it's not 2100, I don't know. The meter is always the same, stressing a 1050, not 2100 ending; even when John plays on Daniel 9, see or the later . Or 'htm' or 'doc', but the latter two require Bibleworks fonts, to read the Greek.

Many Jews see the last 1050 which they call 1000, as part of a 2100 which they call 2000, belonging to 'Messiah'. Google on 'Age of Messiah' to see that. Oddly, you might find some Muslim sites with that too. I remember finding one some years back, want to say it was haroun yahya, but maybe not.

As for the tie between Acts and Joel, yeah. Teachers vary, but the idea was that Israel's Filling would have a physical component, like it did at Pentecost, but for Church it doesn't. For Church the keywords differ: plerow and pleroma, not goofy or ecstatic. Those NT keywords are the same as for the Lord, and He was never drooling/dancing like Saul or David; the OT Greek term for them was pimplemi (like being filled after a good meal, same as Hebrew sabea).
Post Posted: 26 Aug 2015, 02:36
  Post subject:  Re: Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Hi there.

I'm a fellow pre-tribber. You've done alot of studying on the subject. Very impressed :mrgreen: Since nobody's debating yet, I'd like to ask you about Acts 2:17's citation of Joel 2:28. Joel was talking about Israel's reception of the Holy Spirit in the Millennium, right? So was the prophecy duplicated for the Church? Surely Israel will still recieve this blessing. Wouldn't that make the Church a preview of sorts for the Millennium?

What got me thinking about this was the dispensations you outlined: 2100 years for gentiles, 2100 years for Israel. So why only 1,000 years for the Millennium :?:
Post Posted: 26 Aug 2015, 01:16
  Post subject:  Pre-Trib Rapture Debate  Reply with quote
Christians roughly and often bitterly divide, over whether the Jews have a future in history; and particularly, whether God's Promises to the Jews in the OT, even still apply to them. Much of what has become modern history centers on this divide, especially from Constantine (when the Catholic church really began, by his fiat).. through the Reformation. Even long after the Reformation began, since its main proponents Calvin and Luther were so virulently anti-Semitic, whether in Catholic or Protestant lands, pogroms against the Jews continued to be based on a claim that God has rejected them. So you see, this is a rather toxic and important topic to analyze, especially now with all the attention focused on the Middle East.

There's a running and odd historical trend from the first-century forward: interest favoring the Jews and interest in learning Bible, correlate positively. So, when interest in learning Bible declines, interest in protecting the Jews declines as well. When this decline occurs, a rise in religious institutionalism accompanies it, which you can usually demonstrate by looking at Church History, especially the 'councils'. During such a rise, the freedom to get and read Bible for itself, diminishes. Then comes some kind of war, when the variant religionists fight each other. The wars of Europe mostly register these changes, and of course the pogroms follow or precede. Good book tracing these is the Atlas of Bible and Christianity edited by Dowley, and also Christopher DeHamel's History of the Bible.

So: among Christians, the majority, Calvinists and Catholics, many Anglican, Seventh-Day-Adventist, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and even some Baptist groups -- these generally hold that when Israel rejected Christ at His First Advent, she forfeited all the eschatological promises made to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David -- so Church instead inherits those 'covenants' or 'promises'. This majority group's position, is often categorized as 'Reformed Theology' or more aptly, 'Replacement Theology', in Christendom.

A large and vocal minority, often called 'Dispensationalists' -- who also span many denominations or 'independent' groups that defy precise classification -- these 'Dispies' usually hold variants of the idea that the eschatological promise to the Jews is YES future and YES separate from the promise aka covenant to Church, an entity created by Christ postmortem based on Matthew 16:18 and ratified in John 17. Consequently, within this group, there is a debate over when the Church covenant begins and ends; and consequently when the one to Israel, recommences and finishes. The Church 'Age' or Covenant's commencement is generally agreed to begin at Pentecost, though some think it doesn't begin until the appointment of the apostle Paul (with what proof I do not know, I can't find any Biblical justification for a starts-with-Paul contention).

Ergo, most 'Dispies' would tell you that due to 1 Thess 4:17, there will be a 'Rapture' (Anglicized version of Vulgate in that verse, Latin rapiemur translating Greek harpagesometha), and this 'Rapture' ends Church and begins the Tribulation, which is the last 7 years promised to Israel per Daniel 9:27. After which, she is still 'queen of the nations' in a literal Millennium.

Sad to say, the Biblical scholarship by both Replacement and Dispie 'camps', even among their degreed folk.. is abysmal. So you end up with silly and scurrilous movies like 'Left Behind' and 'Da Vinci Code', and all manner of related print nonsense, which have nothing to do with the Bible text, or even with either side in this 'debate'.

Of course, most Jews hold they have a future promised by God too, and most believe in a literal 1000 years which Messiah starts. They disagree whether Jesus is the Messiah=Christ (Heb=Greek), so if disagreeing, think there is only the latter 'Advent'. Surprisingly, some Muslims hold that Jesus is the Messiah (as herald of a 2nd coming of Mohammed, though some don't believe Mohammed will return) -- but claim the Millennium belongs to them, rather than to the Jews.

Replacement Theology holds that it belongs to Church, if a literal millennium. For example Calvin thought it means replacing the Catholic Church of Revelation 17 (which text isn't necessarily Catholic, but definitely Roman). Many in the Replacement camp deny a literal Millennium altogether, chiefly Catholics, since Origen allegorized Revelation 7 against the plain text of Jewish tribes, to mean only Christians; so did Augustine, in other respects. (The links are searches, so you can select sources you respect.)

So this thread relates to these positions. If you want to know where I stand, it's YEAH Pre-Trib Rapture, because the timing of the Tribulation is a set of accounting books which has been tracked since Genesis 1, in the Hebrew meter; because every Chapter of the NT references it as a historical backdrop, and every Chapter 1 of every NT book continues the OT timeline: in particular, Paul creates an annual prophetic timeline for Church 62nd-week time loop playing directly on Daniel 9:26. Documented in videos (ongoing project), to wit:
  • Basic math, here; master that first, or you'll not be able to follow the meter. Notice the core is built around Genesis 5, so now you know why all those Bible dates are so annoying and plentiful. BIBLE'S TRACKING TIME. Question is, why? Well.. countdown to Messiah, a promised 2100 years, which any Jew can explain (they think it's only 2000, rounding it off). Christians don't know anything about this, but it's all over Scripture.
    • That's the 'dispensation' the BIBLE accounts:
    • 2100 years for the goyim = Adam to Abraham, and it matches the Bible timeline, which is tracked, Abram becoming mature year 2046 from Adam's fall; then
    • 2100 years for the Jews = Abraham to Christ, and He's born 4103 from Adam's fall;
    • then Messiah comes (yeah, and He died per the tracking in Bible, year 4136 from Adam's fall),
    • with the Millennium then supposed to be 53.5+3.5 years away but instead 64 years away,
    • to pay back 2100-2046 (plus a 3.5 year loss owing to late start of 1st Temple), also tracked from Moses in Psalm 90, forward. This way the shortening of 'Gentile' time is made up. So each 'group' gets a total of 2100 years.
    • TWO 'dispensations', essentially.
    • But Christ being rejected, took out the Time Bridge, since the last 7 of the 2100 for the Jews, hasn't played.
    • For Daniel 9:26 ends at 37 AD, but He died 7 years prior, so that's why Israel is owed seven years (586 BC Temple down +70+70+483=37AD, the accounting begins with Temple down not Nehemiah's return, since the Decree is GOD's, not a human King, Daniel 9:2 reading Jeremiah 25 and 29, and Daniel 9:24. Thus the two 70 reimbursements, then 69 weeks, with the Trib supposed to follow after).
    • Ergo, Church is a Time Bridge. So THREE dispensations total, prior to Millennium. How long the third one lasts, is not stated, as its completion depends on bodies, not set time, per Father's discretion, John 17:20ff.
  • Moses begins tracking both 2100's in Genesis 1, here.
  • Moses creates a panoramic tracking of both the Adamic and Abrahamic 2100's using sabbatical meter accounting in Psalm 90, here.
  • Isaiah tracking Moses, here.
  • Daniel tracking Isaiah, here.
  • Mary tracking Daniel, here.
  • Matthew tracking Moses' endpoint and Mary, here.
  • Luke tracking Matthew and Paul through Mary, here.
  • Mark tracking Luke, here.
  • Paul tracking Luke through Mary then satirizing the future history of Church, here. Map of his rhetorical style, is here. It's a lot of material to slog through, sorry. Took me over a year to write.

    Then, in the Year of the Four Emperors,
  • Peter tracking Paul's Ephesians meter to make a marching song out of Church prophecy, here.
  • Jude tracking Peter, here.
  • The writer of Hebrews tracking Mark tracking Luke tracking Paul, here.
    Then, beginning 7 years after the Temple fell just after the Year of the Four Emperors (August 70 AD),
  • John tracks the writer of Hebrews, Paul, Peter, Jude, Mark, and then back to Daniel, here.
In short, there's a lot of tracking using the same OT timeline system, a kind of rolling calendar, here's where we are on the time map. Now, is that material correctly interpreted? Probably not. But until I find where the errors are, I'm sticking with it. If you find any, let me know!

Else, debate as you will. I won't jump in unless you ask. Frankforum's supposed to be about YOU, as my stuff is already 'out there'. Enjoy!
Post Posted: 20 Aug 2015, 02:05

All times are UTC

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited