Is the tribulation about to start?

originally posted by: ketsuko
...
Gandhi said be the change you want to see in the world? ...

He also said: “The most cruel crimes of which history has record have been committed under cover of religion.” He shamed all of India by refusing to enter the great temples whose gates had been closed for centuries to low-caste Hindu worshipers. “There is no God here,” he told the crowds who gathered. “If God were here, everyone would have access.”

To understand Gandhi we must relive two events that shaped his early thinking. Let us go back to the year 1869 in the state of Gujarat in northwest India. There Gandhi was born into a comfortable family who, like the majority of Gujarati, take pride in the fact that they have many Brahmans (priestly caste) within their state. Traditionally, Hindu society is divided into four major castes, or classes, with clear distinctions separating them.

Caste and Colour

The Hindu’s theological writings, Mahā-Bhārata, say:

1. “The colour of the Brahmans was white [highest caste, made up of the priests and scholars];

2. “that of the Ksatriyas red [second caste, of warriors and nobles];

3. “that of the Vaiśyas yellow [third caste, of farmers and traders],

4. “and that of the Śūdras black [fourth caste, of manual labourers].”

Below these and apart from the structure of society were the impure ones, the Untouchables.

Regarding this caste system, The Hindu reported:

“The Mandal Commission has warned against any assumption that the caste system was on the way out . . . If religion was ever used as an opium of the masses, it was done in India. A small priest class by a subtle process of conditioning the thinking of the vast majority of the people, hypnotised them for ages into accepting a role of servility with humility. . . . As caste conditioned and controlled every aspect of an individual’s life, says the Commission, it led to a situation where lower castes were backward, not only socially, but also educationally, economically and politically. But the higher castes advanced in all directions.”​—May 4, 1982.

At the age of 18, Gandhi sets out on his first train ride to Bombay on his way to England to study law. Before boarding the SS Clyde, Gandhi is called before his caste elders and told in no uncertain terms that if he proceeds to England he will be formally expelled from his caste. Why? “One is obliged to eat and drink with Europeans,” they argue. “I do not think it is at all against our religion to go to England,” he replies. His caste elders consider it taboo that he be mingling with the white man who is polluted because he eats meat and drinks liquor. Gandhi protests that it is a case of caste discrimination reversed. Despite his pleas they are unmoved, and Gandhi leaves India an outcast from his Vaisya (farmers and traders) caste.

Life for Gandhi in England is difficult. He is not only a foreigner but a “colonial” Indian at that, and he could move about only among the fringes of British society. Gandhi is puzzled, since those who discriminate against him call themselves Christians. He has already formed an opinion about Christianity: “I developed a sort of dislike for it,” he wrote. “And for a reason. In those days Christian missionaries [in India] used to stand in a corner near the high school . . . pouring abuse on Hindus and their gods. I could not endure this.” Likewise in England, Gandhi finds it difficult to endure discrimination foisted upon him by “Christians.” What is his verdict? ‘I love Christ, but I despise Christians because they do not live as Christ lived.’

Leaving England with a law degree, Gandhi attempts a practice in South Africa. There he finds racial prejudice from the onset. In spite of his first-class ticket, he is removed from the compartment of a train and told that he must travel in a van reserved for coloured people. Gandhi’s protests fall on deaf ears. He is forcibly removed from the train and left to spend the night in the waiting room.

A Vital Decision

That night he made the decision never to yield to force and never to use force to win a cause. Reflecting on the incident, he wrote: “The hardship to which I was subjected was superficial​—only a symptom of the deep disease of colour prejudice. I should try, if possible, to root out the disease and suffer hardships in the process.”

Let us go back for a moment and examine these two formulating incidents in Gandhi’s life. In the first instance, before leaving for England, Gandhi is rejected by his own people because of his desire to associate with the white man. In the second case, it is the white man that throws him off the train because of Gandhi’s skin colour. It was not just his own injury or humiliation that infuriated Gandhi; it was the deep cancer of man’s inhumanity to man because of differences in skin colour.

He later wrote: “So long as we have this contempt on the part of white races for the coloured man, so long shall we have trouble.” Interestingly enough, Gandhi’s verdict applied just as much to the Indian who for thousands of years had perpetuated a caste system based on differences of skin colour. In this segregation it was now Indian against Indian, Brahman against Untouchable.

Self-Respect for the Untouchables

On his return to India, Gandhi found hateful divisions and scars fostered by caste segregation. How can we condemn the British, he noted, when we are guilty toward our own Untouchable brethren? “I regard untouchability as the greatest blot of Hinduism,” he said. In giving sanction to untouchability, Hinduism had sinned, according to Gandhi.

Gandhi took up the torch for the Untouchables. He lived with them. He ate with them. He cleaned their toilets. He attempted to restore their self-respect. He gave them a dignified name​—no longer were they Untouchables, but Harijans, or people of the god Vishnu. “It is necessary for us Hindus to repent of the wrong we have done, . . . we must return to them the inheritance of which we have robbed them,” he wrote.

What was the inheritance of the Harijan, according to Gandhi? Human dignity, the basic inheritance of all people. The Harijan simply wants to be treated as a human rather than an animal, he argued. Who robbed him? According to Gandhi, his fellow Hindus. “The most cruel crimes of which history has record have been committed under cover of religion,” he said. He shamed all of India by refusing to enter the great temples whose gates had been closed for centuries to low-caste Hindu worshipers. “There is no God here,” he told the crowds who gathered. “If God were here, everyone would have access.” Once an obviously well-off missionary came to Gandhi to get his advice on how to help the outcaste people in the Indian villages. Gandhi’s answer was a challenge to Christianity: “We must step down from our pedestals and live with them​—not as outsiders, but as one of them in every way, sharing their burdens and sorrows.”

“In the dictionary of nonviolent action, there is no such thing as an ‘external enemy,’” Gandhi said. With the world’s future itself at stake, as one modern writer commented, all differences would be “internal,” and if our aim is to save humanity we must respect the humanity of every person. Segregation based on caste negates respect, therefore people suffer. Their suffering is not silent anymore. It is reflected in statistics of crime and violence. Therefore the questions come up: Have Gandhi’s ideals worked? What about nonviolence in India? How practical are Gandhi’s ideas for the world in general?

Nonviolence in a Violent World (Awake!—1984)

a reply to: ketsuko

If You Are an Untouchable

● You either sweep the streets, clean latrines or handle dead carcasses

● You cannot enter into the home of one of a higher caste. Brahmans will not allow you to enter a Hindu temple

● Your children cannot marry out of your caste

● In the cities you are the dispossessed​—living in squatter settlements, desiring the basics of food, shelter and water

Untouchability has been outlawed in India since 1950. Yet a recent survey of about a thousand villages throughout India revealed that, if you were an Untouchable, 61 percent of other people would not let you use their well; 82 percent would not allow you to enter the temple; you would be refused lodging by 56 percent; 52 percent of the washermen would refuse you their services; and 45 percent of the barbers would refuse you a shave

Source: Gandhi—What Shaped the Man? (Awake!—1984)

a reply to: AutomateThis1

No, not remotely. What the hell is wrong with you? Coming back like that.

Edit: thought about adding, decided you aren’t worth it. So here’s to you !

a reply to: ntech

We will have to disagree I am afraid
While “the law” still stands, Christians are not under the law but saved by grace through faith
The rest of those outside of Jesus, yes indeed you are right of course.

Jesus didn’t come to rule anything, just turn hearts before God and establish the new covenant of faith, end religion. No alternate plans, send Jesus to lead the lost to God, the whole and only plan, that’s it, everything.

You said a lot in your post but offered nothing to justify all you said, just word soup.

If you are under the Mosaic covenant do you undertake all 600 odd laws and if not why not, me, not a Jew and I follow no Mosaic laws or rituals, maybe I am hell bound but my faith is in Jesus not the law, not rules
A mish mash of theology in my opinion, no reason or logic

a reply to: whereislogic

This from a person who shuns their own families if they leave the Kingdom Hall, hypocrisy at its most disgusting
Turning your backs on family for religion
Disgraceful to use Ghandi

originally posted by: TzarChasm

If you're "watching and waiting" you might want to consider the possibility you could be doing more constructive things with your time, besides...y'know... expecting the end of the world. Because that can't be good for your health.

Jesus said 'Occupy (keep busy) until I come.'

we can watch, wait and work at the same time.
not like those cults that sell everything and sit on the hill waiting for whatever.
(I feel bad for those people. we really have to be careful whom we believe)

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: ntech

We will have to disagree I am afraid
While “the law” still stands, Christians are not under the law but saved by grace through faith
The rest of those outside of Jesus, yes indeed you are right of course.

Jesus didn’t come to rule anything, just turn hearts before God and establish the new covenant of faith, end religion. No alternate plans, send Jesus to lead the lost to God, the whole and only plan, that’s it, everything.

You said a lot in your post but offered nothing to justify all you said, just word soup.

If you are under the Mosaic covenant do you undertake all 600 odd laws and if not why not, me, not a Jew and I follow no Mosaic laws or rituals, maybe I am hell bound but my faith is in Jesus not the law, not rules
A mish mash of theology in my opinion, no reason or logic

Point 1. The grace through faith concept comes from Romans 11. The olive tree parable describes a newly converted Christian as a wild olive tree branch or twig being grafted in to the family tree of Abraham despite it's origins. However the parable does state you can lose your grace if you lose your faith. The cutting away of the branches for disbelief.

See the Parable here Romans 11
And note the Isaiah 6 reference in verses 7-11. Paul was aware of the curses I have mentioned earlier. Or else why the reference? And why Romans 11 makes much more sense if you are aware of the 2000 year curse? Also you run the risk of being subjected to the curse if you fall away and get cut off. There's a whole list of bad things that can happen when you're subjected to the curse.

Point 2 The Mosaic Covenant actually doesn't require much of you if you are not a practicing Jew. You are not required to follow the 613 laws in this case. You only need to follow 7 simple ones.


1 Do Not Deny God
2 Do Not Blaspheme God
3 Do Not Murder
4 Do Not Engage in Incestuous, Adulterous or Homosexual Relationships.
5 Do Not Steal
6 Do Not Eat of a Live Animal
7 Establish Courts/Legal System to Ensure Law Obedience

And those are pretty much a given as societal norms. At least until recently anyway. See the Link. The Noachide Laws.

a reply to: ntech

So Paul lied, bible is false, hmmm

1 Corinthians 10:23-29
23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not. 24 Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth. 25 Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake: 26 For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof. 27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be ...

As. Christian, not a Jew, I am not under Jewish or Mosaic law
Not interested in your argument

Paul warned of Judaisers, people who preached Jewish law at christians, spoke very poorly of them Judaisers and their evil
Be warned
margmowczko.com...

You are a Judaiser,
Jesus died for nothing in your theology, think about it

You are quoting two book separated by how many years? A thousand? More? And you think that is legit? Cmon man.



a reply to: ntech

I think you missed my point, which was about governments or whomever using pandemics to control a narrative. My point about the 1918 epidemic is that we cannot ask those peeps about if they felt the gubment was abusing freedoms.

The histrionics of how the disease spread is another subject all together.


a reply to: ketsuko

Fair enough on the son part, but 20 years experience is pretty good in anything wouldnt ya say?


And why would I read books about a book? The be-all-end-all book BTW. Make NO sense.



a reply to: ketsuko

My beef isnt about Christ's teachings, it is about the OP bemoaning the end of time cuz someone got elected he or she didnt like.

I wonder if the OP thinks people in Yemen other such places feel the same? Probably not cuz American Christians are all that matter, just like our Jesus teachings say, eh?



a reply to: Raggedyman

NOTE: This is a blanket post to cover some of the responses so far. I had initially planned on answering each one individually, but many of the posts cover the same thing, which makes my job easier; I lumped them into one reply instead.

Summarized replies:
People have been saying this is the end time for thousands of years. Nothing has happened yet. Prophecies like Matthew 24 can apply to any point in time, so what makes you think it applies to today? Why are you watching anyway? Didn't scripture say no man knows the hour or the day? (Matthew 24:36) Jesus comes as a thief.

• The context of Matthew 24 is that the events closest to the second coming all happen in the same generation (Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30, Luke 21:32), not spread out over a long period of time.
  
• The end time began at the crucifixion and has been on-going. Most of the prophecy of the Bible has been fulfilled, between the crucifixion and present-day. Those left to be fulfilled are rapid ones, which is why they are happening in rapid succession, within the same generation.
  
• Scripture has many types and anti-types. In other words, history repeats itself and there is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9). The way people were before Noah's flood is a type of what it will be like just before the second coming. The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is a type of the second coming. Jesus is a type of Adam. Babylon in Revelation is a type of the original Babylon.
  
• I've covered this before in another post. Fulfilled prophecy puts us at the tail end of the end time. The reason the United States is important is because it brings about worship of the mark of the beast. This in no way negates the need for salvation of all who will come to the Lord, it just means the key players are the United States (beast of the earth) and the papacy (beast of the sea). These two have their origins in divided Rome, which goes back to Babylon (Daniel and Revelation clearly show this).
  
• Jesus comes as a thief and indeed we do not know the hour nor the day. Revelation 3:3 says if you don't watch, He will come like a thief. Matthew 24:42 watch, because you don't know the hour He comes. We're supposed to be watchful and know when the time is near, even at the door. He will come as a thief, upon those who are not watching. There's a reason we have end time prophecy, so that we can know.
  
• The third temple is not a physical temple that must be built, it is the human body and the church body (1 Corinthians 6:19); Godlessness is a type of the abomination of desolation. Not keeping the body holy. Being drunk with the wine of spiritual Babylon's fornication. The abomination of desolation by the papacy has already occurred, as they clearly give themselves authority to take the place of God on earth. The abomination of desolation occurred in Jerusalem by the Romans circa 168 BC. Again, types and anti-types.
  
• I mentioned politics surrounding 2020 and the Trump Presidency, I didn't say one way or the other whether I was for or against him. As I stated in the original post, it's not about politics, even though they paint a picture, it's about Biblical prophecy being fulfilled.
  

Summarized replies:
I just don't see it. Everything is going on as it always has.

Matthew 24 has an answer for that. It says that it will be like the days of Noah. Scoffers will abound and say that it's never going to happen (2 Peter 3:4-5), living their lives as if everything is normal when it's not.

Matthew 24:37-44 KJV

37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,

39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken [gathered up; second coming], and the other left [condemned].

41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.

44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.

There is much more scripture that makes it clear that we're near the very end of earth's history.

The goal of the original post was to posit the question, not for an answer, but to make people think about the times we're in and to pay attention. Don't shrug it off. Look into it some more.

There are three kinds of Christians:

• Those who are asleep and think the end isn't coming anytime soon (days of Noah).
  
• Those who know the end is near and are waiting for a pre-trib rapture.
  
• Those who know the end is near and are waiting for the second coming.
  

Most non-Christians fall into the first category, but some know things have taken a turn for the worse.

You don't need to believe a word I say. The truth will be made apparent soon enough. This is a wake-up call, a seed planted that will hopefully bloom later.

originally posted by: Freth

The third temple is not a physical temple that must be built, it is the human body (1 Corinthians 6:19);

While agreeing with the first half of the sentence, I suggest looking rather to the corporate body of 1 Corinthians ch3 v16;
"Do you not know that you [plural] are God's [one] temple?"
So anyone who controls at least the outward manifestations of the corporate body is "occupying the temple".

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: Freth

The third temple is not a physical temple that must be built, it is the human body (1 Corinthians 6:19);

While agreeing with the first half of the sentence, I suggest looking rather to the corporate body of 1 Corinthians ch3 v16;
"Do you not know that you [plural] are God's [one] temple?"
So anyone who controls at least the outward manifestations of the corporate body is "occupying the temple".

Agreed. Added context for that as well.

The Abomination was a pig being sacrificed to a pagan god, Zeus in Hebrew temple. While Satan even called the Prince of Air(which might of been a title/mantle in Babylon), or Beast of the Skies.

I think the Four Horsemen might of been based on Haleys Comet, an funky thing, it kind of came true. It happened more then a thousands years ago, when a piece broke off an hit northern Europe, still well after the book was assembled.

It also implied that God will destroy the world one day.

Thing is when is not a Day of Judgement, when life is an every day test. Paul might of been a fabrication that lead to making of the Vatican, and was based of someone else.

a reply to: Freth

Matthew 24 is an overview. A summary of what events are to come to pass before the end.

What do you mean when you say these events are to come to pass before the end? I do not understand the connotations of end as you have cited. Would that be meant end of an era or trial or perhaps our very existence?

It appears that the Revelation of Jesus to John teaches us that there has been one gathering of the righteous dead from Sheol to the kingdom of heaven which has already occurred. Then there shall be two more gatherings of humans in the future.

I am assuming that the next gathering of righteous people will be after Jacobs Trouble [Great Tribulation] era. But that is not the end as yet. Then after one thousand years from the Great Tribulation will come the end of this creation.

Do you mean the end of this creation or the end of Jacobs Trouble ?

a reply to: Specimen88

"I think the Four Horsemen might of been based on Haleys Comet,"

At least you are looking in the right direction.

In astrology a great year is a 24000 year cycle. Each great year consisit of four periods of roughly 6000 years period in which humankind envolves from dark period to one of enlightenment, rinse (flood), repeat. This great cycle is an expansion of yearly cycle from which the seasons are the darkess of winter to the light of spring.

Luke 22:10.... He said to them, “Behold, when you have entered the city, a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; follow him into the house which he enters.

The water bearer is Aquarius. That is the age we have recently entered. Aquarius still exists in age of spiritual darkness (the first horseman).

The bible reflects peoples minds. The darkness, despair, hope indicates that many fail to understanding that God exists in the present, awaiting all, with open hands. Instead people prefer to exist in mind full of lusts and fears.

God exists in the NOW. Not in mind dreams of tomorrow.

a reply to: glend

I'm more inclined that it does try to represent the spirit of the times, especially with the O.T and how it gradually became new.

Do you mean the now that was, did, an going to be.

originally posted by: Specimen88
a reply to: glend

I'm more inclined that it does try to represent the spirit of the times, especially with the O.T and how it gradually became new.

Do you mean the now that was, did, an going to be.

Meaning present. Everything in mind is past/future tense. So focusing in present (without past/future thoughts) allows breathing in of nature and God.