It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Rapture Conspiracy Explained

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 10:17 AM
Lets stick to the topic of the thread, the rapture, rather than the real life of any of the posters.

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 10:28 AM
NYGDAN What about this INTERPRETATION of a time line is a conspiracy? The guy has an interpretation agenda (which he posts all around the internet) and has self professed that he isn't reading anyones posts that don't discuss his INTERPRETATION. Seriously .. why is it here instead of down in BTS religion forum? There are already a dozen threads on rapture myth ... why is this one here? Where's the conspiracy???

I'm asking nicely... not uppity or anything. We'd like to see the conspiracy angle .. but we can't.

[edit on 9/27/2006 by FlyersFan]

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 11:06 AM
In several of your posts you refer to your particular explanation of the Rapture as "My Hypothesis". Would you object to characterizing this as your Interpretation?

If so, please consider the following scripture, and comment on how it applies to your eforts here.

20Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (New International Version)

20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (King James Version)

20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation.

21 For no prophecy ever came by the will of man: but men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit.
(American Standard Version) This is the Bible you stated that you use.

The reason I ask this is because you seem to get easily offended and consider any challenge to your "Hypothesis or Interpretation" personally.

I am curious if you feel that your understanding of this subject is because it has been personally revealed to you by God though his Holy Spirit.

If so then that may explain why in a different post you referred to people who offfered a view different from your own as "Stone Chuchers, Whiners, Scoffers,Cut & paste Theologians.....ect.

PLease dont view this as a personal attack, but merely an honest question from an interested observer of this thread.

Perhaps you will agree that true prophecy does not find its source in the expressed opinions or interpretations of men but, rather, originates with God. Thus, the Bible prophecies were never the product of astute deductions and predictions by men based on their personal analysis of human events or trends.

I look forward to your consideration of this.

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 11:30 AM

You post make very good points.

Sun Matrix and Dbrant thanks for your quotes.


You are a fountain of information, but I am afraid of you now. He, he.

Pokey Oats

Yes I did add something meaningful to the board, instead of agreeing with a thread that obviously has an agenda on the gullible, but you are still getting on my butt to bring the same issue.

Right now I have more important issues concerning this thread and you well will be ignored if you can not bring anything to the topic.

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 11:31 AM
Hi Dbrandt, Marg (mentioned):

Marg >> I want to know what Jesus had to say during his teachings about the tribulations/Rapture.”

Dbrandt >> Marg As I'm getting ready to go to sleep I won't be able to post all of them now, but will try to do so later if I don't get sidetracked. (Luke 21:36)

Dbrandt Commentary >> The word escape, besides being escape something, can mean vanish, which is what will happen in the rapture.

I find this entry in Dbrandt’s post quite puzzling, because previously Marg insisted with Flyer this “Rapture” business is a MYTH.

Marg Original (posted on 24-9-2006 at 12:43 PM) >> Flyers is right the Rapture or so called Rapture is nothing more than an invention of the latest century by The Rapture Cult was started by failed Anglican Priest Nelson Darby in the mid-1800s.”

Am I to take Marg at her word on page 1 or here on page 5? The fact is that Christ is teaching “NOTHING” about ‘our’ mystery translation to immortality (1Cor. 15:51-53) in Matthew 24 or anywhere else in the Four Gospels. That is quite impossible, because our mystery church (Eph. 5:32) did not even come to exist until after the start of Acts 9 with the conversion of Paul! Anyone paying attention to what ‘is’ presented in the OP and my arguments realizes that Paul is describing the ‘START’ (“at hand” = 2Thes. 2:2) of the 1000 Years “Day of the Lord” (1Thes. 5:1+2 = 2Thes. 2:2), while Christ is describing how that 1000 Years Period E.N.D.S. Marg’s errant assumption is that only ‘one’ gathering to the Lord is included in Scripture and Dbrandt is assuming Christ (Matt. 24) is describing that for the ‘end of the age’ (Matt. 24:3+). This is the common misinterpretation of ALL the Denominations that my hypothesis works to prove is DEAD WRONG.

Think about this carefully: What is the difference in ‘time’ between the ‘pre-trib’ Rapture interpretation and the ‘mid-trib’ theory and the 'post-trib' theory? The first group places our Rapture just seven years or so before the last group, with the mid-trib people falling somewhere in between. However, if my hypothesis is indeed correct (and it is), then all of them are off by just about 1000 years contained within the “Day of the Lord” itself (something vital is escaping their notice* 2Peter 3:8*+10). Peter, John and James (in the Four Gospels) had no idea God would raise Paul up LATER (Acts 9) and give him our gospel for today “through a revelation of Jesus Christ” (Gal. 1:11+12). Christ was still sent to Israel “ONLY” (Matt. 15:24) at the time His teachings on the ‘end of the age’ gathering (Matt. 24) were delivered to His kingdom disciples. Modern day scholars (like Dbrandt here) are transporting the ‘mystery’ (1Cor. 15:51) information from the Pauline Epistles and placing that into the mouth of Christ back in Matthew 24. What’s funny is that Dbrandt is giving Marg the same logic that Darby might use in his “pre-tribulation” Rapture Interpretation. I would rather see our resident “Scholar” continue with her “Flyers is right . . .” argument, than appearing wishy-washy as if anything contained in this thread will somehow change her view.

Dbrandt >> Another one said by Jesus, Mark 13:20 And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days. After studying and research and prayer, I believe this means the following. I actually think it has a dual application but as for the rapture. The elect's days are shortened, shortened as in removal from earth and we will have the number of days lessened that we will be on earth because of the rapture that takes place that removes us from the planet.

Christ is addressing the fact that if His return (Matt. 24:30+31) was not hastened, so the days near the ‘end of the age’ were shortened, then all life would be destroyed from this planet. Those martyred in the “Great Tribulation” (Matt. 24:21, Rev. 7:14 = “they have washed their robes* and made them white in the blood of the Lamb”) are part of the marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:5-10 = “His bride (John 3:29) has made herself ready. It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen* . . .”. Rev. 19:7+8) AND return with Christ (Matt. 24:30+31) in the SAME CHAPTER.

“And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen*, white and clean, were following Him on white horses.” Revelation 19:14.

Peter and the ‘early rains’ (James 5:7) ‘bride’ (John 3:29) has been with Christ for the entire “1000 years” (Rev. 20:4) and Elijah’s ‘late rains’ bride has already joined them on the ‘sea of glass’ (Rev. 4:6, 15:2) and participated in the “marriage supper of the Lamb” (Rev. 19:5-10), before Christ even thinks about returning in Matthew 24:30+31. He told the “bride,”

"Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and WILL kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name. . . . But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.” Matthew 24:9+13.

Christ says “and WILL kill you,” because the one enduring to ‘the end,’ is standing fast to the ‘end of his life.’ The types of Scripture teach the same thing for all the members of the “body of Moses,” as he was NOT allowed to enter the Promised Land apart from seeing death over this infraction (Numbers 20:11+12). Everyone baptized into Moses (1Cor. 10:1-4) was ‘laid low,’ and so will all the members of the late rains kingdom bride upon this earth very near the ‘end of the age.’ The missing link in your analysis is the ‘eternal gospel’ of Revelation 14:6 that goes out just prior to the start of the Battle of Armageddon (Rev. 14:15+). “The Elect” (Matt. 24:31) gathered at His return are those from the whole world accepting this ‘eternal gospel’ that adds members to the “Kingdom of Heaven,” but NONE to either the ‘body of Christ’ (Eph. 4:12 = that’s us) OR the prophetic kingdom ‘bride’ (Peter + early rains bride and Elijah’s late rains bride). Paul’s grace dispensation is all about gathering ‘judges’ of the world and the angels (1Cor. 6:2+3), while Peter and Elijah’s kingdom dispensation is all about gathering a ‘royal priesthood’ (1Pet. 2:9) of ‘intercessors’ to work before the throne (Rev. 7:14). What would heaven be without all the ‘citizens’ (The Elect = Matt. 24:31) of heaven themselves??


[edit on 27-9-2006 by Terral]

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 11:31 AM
Now back to the thread.

I have to say that this thread has turned into a very interesting one.

After a Shaky start with this thread and the subject of Mr. Terral personal interpretation of the Rapture, and personal findings.

I am not going to deny that his colorful poster board approach did a job of attracting believers and others like me.

Now the Rapture Mr. Terral style is a modern day doctrine adopted by some fundamentalist that wants to stay away from the mainstream old Rapture believes to build their own interpretation including the bible quotes that Mr. Terral has included with his theory to bring more validity of his opinion.

This a new school of though and one that is been opening up by a group to capitalized on the doomsday money pit.

Is this a conspiracy? Or an agenda.

Well let’s talk about the people behind this new idea of the ends of times.

A new doctrine brings new school of thought and many followers that get tired of the same old same, the same way that religious movements that has sprouted since the humble beginnings of the early church, we may now get ready for the branching movements of the definition and interpretation of what is called end of time doctrine.

Then again, a conspiracy? Or an agenda.

Well if we look at the books that has been written and sold by various so call experts, scholars, prophets and seers on the subject of doomsday I called an agenda.

Mr. Terral are you planning to publish your theory?

[edit on 27-9-2006 by marg6043]

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 11:32 AM

Dbrandt >> Now I find myself always wanting to state the following, because many believe that the rapture takes the christians, and then that's it, no one else is saved. That is absolutely false. There are more people saved and heaven bound after the rapture, than the amount of people that go in the rapture.

We agree. ‘Our’ mystery rapture takes place when the 1000 Years “Day of the Lord” BEGINS (2Thes. 2:2). Peter and the ‘cut off’ (Rev. 20:4) kingdom ‘bride’ (John 3:29) is raised ‘with us’ at the ‘first resurrection.’ Elijah returns to restore all things (Matt. 17:10+11) and his late rains bride joins Peter on the sea of glass ‘before the throne,’ between Matt. 24:21 and the ‘end of the age.’ Those two groups become ‘one’ at the ‘marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19) and return with Him in glory. The difference for us (body of Christ) is we are “IN” the Lamb even now (Eph. 2:6, Col. 3:1-3) also to return with Him in glory (Col. 3:4). We were already “IN” Him to start Revelation 1:10-19, as His brand new body. Peter and the ‘bride’ must join us “IN” Christ ‘through works’ (James 2:20-24) like everyone coming to God through the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matt. 24:14). GL seeing it,

In Christ Jesus,


posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 11:38 AM

Originally posted by Terral
WuXia, Jensouth:

Jensouth >> “You just got one of my last WATS That was some good detective work friend”

You are rewarding Mr. WuXia (or Ms. who knows?) for attacking my ‘person,’ instead of actively engaging me on the topic and particularly the substance of my arguments from the OP of this thread.

What you fail to see is that you are in fact attacking nearly everyone in this thread, and you STARTED IT!!! You have not spoken to anyone that has posted on the topic (in disagreement to you) in a civilized tone.
BTW….That was some good detective work IMHO. Whether wrong or right? But it must be true or you wouldn’t have gotten upset about it. There are people on this thread that have also rewarded you!! Whether wrong or right?

Originally posted by Terral
Shame on you.

No. shame on you!! Your arrogance surely has the devil pleased! I hope the Lord humbles you, because I fear your salvation is in serious danger if you don’t learn some humility and be humbled. Also, I fear you are causing many non-believers to stumble and view Christians in a bad light! How can you plant seeds now??

Originally posted by Terral
What happens when his/her dribble turns out to be false?

What dribble? There are Theologians & Pastors that disagree on this very doctrine! Many of them are good friends! I know many! If you weren’t so puffed-up friend, you could have many people actively engaging in this thread, and it could be a learning tool for all. You have people so mad, how can you possibly get your message across? Think about it. Whether you think you are attacking people or being calm in your replies….I can feel the fire coming off of you when I read your replies…..take a cool dip and calm yourself first. Remember it’s not what you put in your mouth that defiles it…. It’s what comes out of the mouth that defiles!

Originally posted by Terral
Stone chuckers.

You must be without sin, as you have cast the first stone!

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 11:51 AM
Hi Whitewave, Sun Matrix (mentioned):

White >> Also, won't be able to get the name of Terral's God out of him now because the questioner has been put on his 'ignore' list and he doesn't "hear" you anymore.

Please allow me to better understand your statement here in light of what appears in the post above yours:


Terral’s Reply >> My ‘one God’ (1Tim. 2:5) is the God and Father (Rev. 1:6) of our Lord Jesus Christ His “Only Begotten Son” (John 3:16). Christ Jesus is the “one Mediator” between God and men at the “right hand of God” (Col. 3:1-3) making intercession (Romans 8:34) for believers as we speak. 1Timothy 2:5. My God sent His Son to die for us at Calvary and He raised Jesus Christ from the dead (Rom. 10:9, 1Cor. 15:3+4), so our forgiveness could be through His precious blood. Eph. 1:7.

Am I missing something? Please inform me on how to be more clear about the true identity of “The Almighty” in Revelation 1:8 and Christ’s “His God and Father” (Rev. 1:6) who raised His Only Begotten Son from the dead (Rom. 10:9). Is this some kind of trick question? Thank you.

The “Deity” questions can be posted here: Trinity Conspiracy Thread >> )

Thank you again,

In Christ Jesus,


posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 11:54 AM
Just to emphasize what Nygdan has already stated.

Keep the discussion on the topic and not each other.

Our terms and conditions also state that you will not collect personal information about forum members. Do not post other member’s personal information on ATS.

Thank you.

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 11:58 AM
Mr. Terral has you ever consider that the so call tribulation/rapture was an issue between Jesus and the Jews.

Doesn't the bible tells that during Jesus passion the righteous were resurrected and walk for all to see? Matt 27:52-53

And that in many instances in the bible during Jesus teachings and written by the apostles and redacted by the church Jesus talked about the second coming to be a fulfilled during the Apostles life time?.

Matt. 10:23 addressed to his 12 disciples.

Matt. 16:28 addressed to the followers.

Matt. 16:24 addressed to the disciples again.

Matt. 24:1-15 last day prophecy

Matt. 24:3 addressed to disciples in private

Verse 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled, addressed to the living generation of his followers time.

Matt. 14:62 addressed to the chief priest.

Luke 18:1-5 parable

Luke 18:7-8

John 21:22 beloved disciple believed by the rest of the disciples to never die.

Matt. 28 Truly I say unto you, there are some standing here who shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his Kingdom"

Then why we should trust a shady book called revelations over teachings of Jesus himself and his disciples that wrote Jesus words?

Doesn't occurred to you that the revelations book was a very controversial book that the author became in question?

Doesn't occurred to you that perhaps the early Church wrote the revelations to keep the new emerging religion Dependant on the church for salvation?

Doesn't occurred to you that perhaps the revelations was written by a bitter person than die waiting for the second coming promised during his life time by Jesus himself.

Mr. Terral tell Why did God gave his begotten Son to die in the Crux?

Do you think that after that we are to be expecting a doomsday end of time?

If I was a religious follower of Jesus and his teachings I will be offended by the abomination that the book of Revelation is to the existence of the Son of God than die so all mankind will be saved.

Why we most trust the modern version of a myth over the bible teachings of Jesus?

Jesus never talk about tribulations or rapture he talk in present time during his life time all the time.

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 01:01 PM
Posting information that a person has tried to make money in the past by pushing this crap isn't posting 'personal information'. It's debunking.

Posting information that a person doesn't do IRL what he claims to do here may be posting personal information, but it is for debunking.

Wuxia only posted here what is ALREADY on the internet and available for eveyrone at anytime .... PUBLIC INFORMATION .... he didn't post anything that isn't already on the internet.

Isn't that what this site is supposed to be about? Bringing the public information to the front for people to see and to discuss and to debunk with????

When Jimmy Swaggart preaches his 'holier than thou' junk and then people point out his finances and adultery .. that may be personal, but it's relevant. It's allowed to be posted here. So should the same information on Terrels activities.

I'm all for personal safety on the internet. In fact I understand it and very strict about it.

However - the author of this thread invited an investigation. He invited it by posting on a board that investigates and debunks. He invited it by presenting himself as something that he is not. This isn't a bible interpretation site. It's a debunking and investigation site.

Obviously the powers here can do as they wish .... but I completely disagree with allowing this thread to continue and I disagree with removing the posts that contained PUBLIC INFORMATION that debunk Terral.

Obviously Terrals' rapture myth timeline is not a conspiracy. The notion of 'rapture' has been debunked scripturally already. Properly debunking the troll isn't allowed. Therefore ... this is my last post on this thread.


edited for spelling

[edit on 9/27/2006 by FlyersFan]

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 01:17 PM
Hi Sparky (Flyer, Sun ment.):

Sparky >> In several of your posts you refer to your particular explanation of the Rapture as "My Hypothesis". Would you object to characterizing this as your Interpretation?

No sir. Please allow me to explain: My ‘hypothesis’ is the premise/proposal given in the first three sentenced of the Opening Post, saying,

Terral’s Hypothesis >> Another invention of the Denominations is represented by the pre, mid and post-tribulation Rapture interpretations by modern day theologians. The Rapture of our mystery church (Ephesians 5:32) is prophesied by the Apostle Paul and ‘only’ by him in his thirteen Epistles to Gentiles. The common error of Bible Commentators today is they mix the events of ‘our’ mystery Rapture with Christ’s “Olivet Discourse” detailing things taking place at the ‘end of the age’ (Matthew 24:3+).

Anyone’s ‘hypothesis’ is their ‘theory, suggestion, proposition or premise,’ usually appearing at the very top of a well drafted Opening Post. Sentence #1 demonstrates the ‘source’ (invention = device or design) of the misinterpretations (the Denominations = Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Protestant Churches) for the three major theories (pre, mid, post-trib). The second statement defines ‘our’ mystery church as the one Paul calls the “mystery is great” church of Ephesians 5:32 (Col. 1:24 = His body church) and makes the bold claim that ONLY Paul prophesies about ‘our’ mystery rapture. Therefore, if you can prove a connection between Matthew 24 and Paul’s (1Cor. 15, 1Thes. 4) teachings, then my ‘hypothesis’ is doomed to failure. The final statement binding all three into one identifies the ‘common error’ of the ‘Bible Commentators’ among all the previously mentioned ‘Denominations’ who mix the elements of Christ’s Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24) with Paul’s mystery revelations about ‘our’ totally separate Rapture event (1Thes. 4:17). Every following statement in every convincing argument with each Scriptural reference points straight back to my original ‘hypothesis’ described right here, that I am willing to defend against all challenges from the members of the ATS Board. By contrast, my ‘interpretations’ are concerned ONLY with the substance of God’s Word and how His truth says exactly what I am saying in my original thesis.

Sparky >> If so, please consider the following scripture, and comment on how it applies to your efforts here ([snip]quotes 2Peter 1:20+21).

The context of Peter’s statements concerns the ‘giving’ of Scripture through the writers of the New Testament. In other words, the prophecies given by Peter, John, James and Paul are not a matter of their own personal interpretations. Paul did not even have the luxury of seeing the Gospel of Matthew in the canonized form, before writing his two letters to the Thessalonians on this Rapture topic. You are trying to intermingle the concepts of God delivering His ‘God-breathed’ (2Tim. 3:16+17) mail (Scripture) with His commands for us to “rightly divide” the word of truth (2Tim. 2:15). Our readers should sit back and realize that everyone making contributions to this thread is in some way attempting to push ‘their’ interpretations forward, while presenting opposing interpretations to their debating opponents. Some are saying our Rapture is described in Matthew 24, which seeks to dislodge or work against ‘my’ proposal atop the OP. Am I to shut up and defend nothing, because “no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation”? While “no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will” (2Pet. 1:21), every ‘interpretation’ must be made by the human will of somebody. Otherwise, we all read the same verses with our own individual interpretations. I prove nothing by simply asserting that Darby and the Dispensationalists are DEAD WRONG and the “Rapture is a MYTH” like Flyer and his band of scoffers. Instead, my task is to offer an ‘opposing’ interpretation to that held by the ‘pre, mid and post’ tribulation Rapture scholars of our day. What makes ‘my’ interpretation any more or less ‘personal’ than theirs? If you are here to try and diminish my willingness to ‘stand firm’ (Eph. 6:11-14), then expect to return home empty handed.

Sparky >> The reason I ask this is because you seem to get easily offended and consider any challenge to your "Hypothesis or Interpretation" personally.

No sir. Please “quote >>” from my Opening Post and point out any errors you see using Scripture. One of the Mods holds that you can write on this topic without even quoting one thing from God. My skin is thick and the full armor of God is sufficient for me. I simply have no time for the “NO RAPTURE EXISTS” crowd. Your partner (Sun Matrix) followed me here from the “Adam and Eve” thread ( ) where the shining light of his testimony was Sun Matrix >>“PLEASE, no need to make crap up is there?” (Top Page 4). That is not an excerpt from his comments, but the post in its entirety. Are you confusing an actually “challenge to your Hypothesis” with enduring insults like this? Your reply was, Sparky >> “Terrel; if you want to put your trust in Sumerian mythology that is your prerogative. I'll stick with what the Bible says.” When your children are raising their children and every hair in your head is gray and your eyes are growing dim, then you will have much less time for the nonsense and folly of men bearing stones.

Sparky >> I am curious if you feel that your understanding of this subject is because it has been personally revealed to you by God though his Holy Spirit.

Yes and with knees bare from constantly seeking His wisdom before His throne. Do you have any interpretations of 1Cor. 15 or 1Thes. 4 to offer?

Sparky >> If so then that may explain why in a different post . "Stone Chuchers, Whiners, Scoffers,Cut & paste Theologians.ect.

These are the members who fill the threads with everything but ‘their’ interpretations on these topics like you. I cannot even write on the topic in answering your post, because all you want to talk about is Terral, Terral, Terral like your buddy Sun Matrix. Some of you carry fish and some only carry bones . . .

In Christ Jesus even now,


[edit on 27-9-2006 by Terral]

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 01:22 PM

You KNOW you violated my rights in this forum by deleting my posts as I broke NO Terms of service rules.. and you know it.
I will be filiing a formal complaint to the owners of this site and questioning your ability to read and understand english, in particular, your ability to understand the Terms of Service.
YOU, Umbrax, have now become my new interest. Enjoy the ride.

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 01:33 PM

Originally posted by Terral
That is quite impossible, because our mystery church (Eph. 5:32) did not even come to exist until after the start of Acts 9 with the conversion of Paul!

The church began with the first person to place their faith in Christ alone for salvation. Now that first person could have been one of the apostles(but they didn't get that Jesus came to pay for sin until after He was resurrected). Or it could have been Mary, sister of Lazarus and Martha for she did this:

[1] Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.
[2] There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him.
[3] Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.
[4] Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him,
[5] Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?
[6] This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.
[7] Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this.
[8] For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always.

It appears Mary understood why Jesus was here, to pay the penalty for sin.

On a side note:
(To give everyone something else to dwell on, I believe this Mary, spoken of here is also the woman caught in adultery in John chapter 8 and told to go and sin no more. It appears she took those words of Jesus to heart. I also never thought about this until I heard someone say it the other day. The woman caught in adultery was caught in the very act of adultery, so more than likely she had no clothes on. In movies portraying this event the actress is always clothed, for obvious reasons, but in real life she was probably brought before Jesus physically naked. Adding to her shame and adding to the plot to trick Jesus. This woman, whoever it was, really understood forgiveness considering what happened to her. Can you imagine how she felt the day Jesus was crucified. When she saw Jesus on the cross also naked before the world, all the memories of the day she was exposed before the world naked came rushing back to her memory. And to realize Jesus was also srtipped naked to pay for her sin had to be very overwhelming.

Back to my point, the church started before the apostle Paul was saved.

Also God knew the church would be started so your point isn't valid to me.

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 01:47 PM

Originally posted by Terral

We agree.

Actually we don't agree, here's why.

In Rev. ch 2 &3 the church(es) are mentioned. In Rev. ch. 4 a door in heaven is opened(indicating the rapture has occurred). In that same chapter we are introduced to the "24" elders(the church now in heaven because Christ came for them). Then the horrible events after the rapture begin in chapter 6. Then in chapter 7:13-17 we are introduced to another group of people, who are not the 24 elders. This is a different group, who have come out great tribulation, and they are in heaven because they have received Christ as Savior. So this is an unncountable group, larger than the "24" elders, yet still saved by Christ. This is what I'm talking about.

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 01:58 PM
Know Your Rights

Originally posted by WuXia
You KNOW you violated my rights in this forum by deleting my posts as I broke NO Terms of service rules.. and you know it.
I will be filiing a formal complaint to the owners of this site and questioning your ability to read and understand english, in particular, your ability to understand the Terms of Service.
YOU, Umbrax, have now become my new interest. Enjoy the ride.

Your complaints are welcome, but this sort of off-topic finger-pointing is not.

The senior staff is reviewing this matter, and will do so without further derailments of this thread.

I will reiterate what my fellow mods have already said: stay on topic and avoid personal attacks.

Do not ignore our requests.

Topic: The Rapture Conspiracy Explained

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 05:47 PM

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
Incorrect answer. I am that I am has a name. The problem is the name of your god that you call "I am" is not the name used by others.

So back to the same question. If you post scripture, surely you have the guts to post the name of your god.

BTW, anyone that uses the slang term "FFS" is showing who his god is. It certainly is not the "I AM" of the Bible.

[edit on 27-9-2006 by Sun Matrix]

Actually, by my understanding "I AM" is a translation of the name that God identifies himself as.

Ok, please forgive me for the acronym because in retrospect your posts made for a nice, crisp, light air amdist some rather brilliant debate with a lot of references that for my brain required some considerable effort to follow.

As for me, I find myself in a delicate situation. I was a Chrasmatic Christian for 10 years but am going through a stage where I need to indulge in some earthly delights, thus I am not too sure of my religious status.

I believe in a higher power but have also figured out that I don't want to go to my grave with only a small amount of "experiences" - if you get what I mean.

Thus, I suppose, by my old belief system I am a backslider.

That said I remain impressed with Terral's efforts, it's certainly well thought out and backed by a lot of scripture.

Do I think I will see a Rapture in my lifetime, I don't know, I just honestly don't know.

Once again, sorry for my terse response, at the time I failed to see your interjections as a nice distraction from the intense debate going on.

Pokey Oats

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 06:01 PM

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Posting information that a person has tried to make money in the past by pushing this crap isn't posting 'personal information'. It's debunking.

Ok, I will only create one of these types of messages and mean in no way to derail the thread. Terral, Marg and other debaters, please forgive my interruption in this manner, because I'm really enjoying this thread, there's some really interesting and well thought out information being presented.

But, what flyers is saying is an outright lie. The only information that was posted about Terrel was regarding PERSONAL DEBT and had nothing to do with making money from his theory. It was a hideous and low tactic to use.

I will not respond to this post but just wanted to point out that the statement above made by flyers was false.

And thank God for the fantastic Mods here because frankly I found the kind of smearing that was being used against Terral absolutely shocking!

Pokey Oats

posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 06:23 PM

Originally posted by Pokey Oats

That said I remain impressed with Terral's efforts, it's certainly well thought out and backed by a lot of scripture.

Do I think I will see a Rapture in my lifetime, I don't know, I just honestly don't know.

Once again, sorry for my terse response, at the time I failed to see your interjections as a nice distraction from the intense debate going on.

Pokey Oats

No problem. Except that Terrals posts are not really backed by scripture. I could take it apart piece by piece as others could and have already.

He won't address the facts that are presented so it's basically a waste of time.

Terral just makes a statement and then throws a scripture verse behind it like it
means something when it doesn't.

Look in any of his threads and you will see the same comment. "Terral the scripture says something different than what you are saying."

If a man comes to town claiming to be a police officer and I know he is a terrorist, it is my responsibility to point this out. His failure to answer my simple question, WHAT IS THE NAME OF YOUR GOD should tell you all you know. Wouldn't a man of God be proud of his God.

That said, I will sit back and watch for now, the point has been made.

Sorry about your admitted backsliding, most of us have been there at one time or another even more than once. Those days are past for me know.

And now to comment about the topic. One thousand years of tribulation is a bit farfetched.

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in