[dwashbur]

If you like to play with numbers, as Harold Camping seems to like to do, here is this --

from Family Radio --

[I]Interestingly this same message of salvation or judgment being the result of the Gospel is hidden in the total number of years the Gospel was to be sent by the churches into the world. We have learned that the church age began immediately after Christ demonstrated how He suffered and died to make payment for sin. That was in the year 33 A.D. We learned that the church age officially began on Pentecost, May 22, 33 A.D. It continued exactly 1,955 full years until May 21, 1988 when the church age came to an end.

Mistake number one, and of course it brings the whole house of cards crashing down, but some people can't figure that out. First of all, my alter ego, Sir Nitpick, sez it's not 33 A.D. it's A.D. 33. I'll let that pass.

But it wasn't 33 A.D. or A.D. 33. We don't know what year it was. The year 33 comes from the statement that Jesus began his public ministry when he was "about thirty years of age" and the idea that his public ministry lasted roughly three years. The three year figure comes from the mention of three different Passovers in the Gospels. But notice that both numbers are approximate; "about thirty" could mean anything from twenty-nine to about thirty-two, and the mention of three Passovers doesn't preclude the idea that there were more than three and the others simply aren't mentioned. So we have a plus-or-minus of almost ten years. And we have NO WAY to tell what year it actually happened.

But it gets even worse. We also know that our calendar is wrong. Jesus wasn't born in year A.D. 1; when the calendar was calculated, the authorities who calculated it were off by somewhere around 4-6 years. Jesus was born somewhere around 6 or 4 B.C. Again, we don't know for sure. So that gives us close to 15 years or so of uncertainty. How on earth anyone thinks they can make a precise calculation based on that, remains to be explained.

If this is how Camping arrives at his precise dates, I think it's safe to say his calculations are based on, um, NOTHING. And his followers are hanging their hats on, precisely, NOTHING.

I'd love to believe this whole movement is a joke. Sadly, it's not.

[Wondergirl]

This may come as a shock to you. But I don't know you from a hole in the wall. So why should I be in the least concerned what you think ? What are you going to do.. slap my wrist ?

Synn is a super moderator who can boot you off the site if you are a troll.

[Alty]

Ya know... I just don't feel like working that hard right now. The atmosphere is not particularly to my liking. Why put myself out for a bunch of skeptics. And they're not only skeptical in a rational and scientific way, they also strike me as somewhat arrogant and rude, almost to the point of outright disrespect. I refuse to put forth diligent effort for a bunch of smart a**es.

I started reading the latest posts and came across this, and I have to comment.

HSB, if you don't like the atmosphere here, and you don't want to put in the effort to answer any questions, or to be a part of the discussion, then why are you still posting?

You say we're all skeptics, well, show us why we shouldn't be. Start answering some questions. Fish, or cut bait!

You refuse to put forth any effort for a bunch of smart a$$es. Well, you got the smart part right, and I'm sure that's why you won't respond to any of the questions being asked of you. You've dug yourself into a hole and you have no way out. Instead of gracefully admitting that you don't have the answers to the questions being asked, you name call and try to turn the tables onto the people that have asked you these questions.

I know we're not as stupid as you had hoped. We won't just take your word for anything. I find it funny that you call us arrogant. I guess it takes one to know one. :)

You and you alone have backed yourself into this corner. If you truly believe that you're right, then prove it! If you really think you're smarter than everyone else, then answer the questions asked of you. Surely that shouldn't be too difficult for a genius such as yourself. :rolleyes:

[HeadStrongBoy]

HeadStrongBoy: God may save some of them.

Wondergirl: What do you then do with all the passages that say that Jesus died for all?

HSB: It's not a guarantee, because doing any of that is effort (or work) on our part.

WG: What do you do with the passages, such as Eph 2:8,9, that say God's grace is free, that He has done all the work of salvation, and asks us only to love Him and each other?

Haven't we gone through all of this before ? In my opinion it becomes complicated because you're favoring the particular verses that make God's program fit your preferences.

When we diligently, with God's help, compare the other verses that describe salvation we must realize that salvation for ALL must mean those all who have been predestinated by God. And NOT all who on their own have decided to become Christians. I see no problem at all with Ephesians 2:8,9. The faith that is being talked about is a gift. And it has NOT been given to everyone. And it is NOT a function of any decision that we have made.

[Wondergirl]

Haven't we gone through all of this before ?

Not in this thread. :)

In my opinion it becomes complicated because you're favoring the particular verses that make God's program fit your preferences.

As are you.

When we diligently, with God's help, compare the other verses that describe salvation we must realize that salvation for ALL must mean those all who have been predestinated by God.

That's Calvin. I'm with Luther.

And NOT all who on their own have decided to become Christians.

Not on their own, but with the help of the Holy Spirit.

[HeadStrongBoy]

HeadStrongBoy: This may come as a shock to you. But I don't know you from a hole in the wall. So why should I be in the least concerned what you think ? What are you going to do.. slap my wrist ?

WG: Synn is a super moderator who can boot you off the site if you are a troll.

Que sera sera. I do what I do. And she will do what she will do.

[dwashbur]

Que sera sera. I do what I do. And she will do what she will do.

I hope she doesn't boot you off, at least for a while, because this is giving me a much-needed laugh.

[HeadStrongBoy]

WG: That's Calvin. I'm with Luther.
HSB: And NOT all who on their own have decided to become Christians.
WG: Not on their own, but with the help of the Holy Spirit.

I really don't see the difference. Unless you want to make an issue of the particular phrase "help of" the Holy Spirit. The way I see it there is only one God, not three. The Holy Spirit is God. The Holy Spirit is not just a helper. God must give the human being a new soul. He doesn't help the person get a new soul. He actually does all the work of giving the person a new heart (soul, or spirit). He must do it all, because before we're saved we're spiritually dead. Before we're saved we cannot believe to save ourselves. Help is out of the question. It's an all or nothing kind of situation. There are other scriptures that make a big issue of verifying that point. Exodus 31:13 and Numbers 15:32-36. Open your eyes !

[Alty]

I hope she doesn't boot you off, at least for a while, because this is giving me a much-needed laugh.

LOL! I'm not laughing so much as banging my head against the wall. He's infuriating, arrogant, unkind, and just an overall pain in the butt.

Not what I consider a good Christian by any means.

[Wondergirl]

Harold Camping says 1988 marked the end of the church age. It turns out that 1987 is the year he was asked by the elders of his church to refrain from teaching his new doctrine, which of course he refused to do.

[HeadStrongBoy]

dwashbur: The deity of Jesus isn't the question. The question was your statement that YHWH is Hebrew for "I am." Thank you for admitting that you made it up and that it's wrong.

The deity of Jesus is exactly the question.

YHWH is one possible form for the words "I AM." It may be that YHWH is the infinitive form of the verb "to be." I am personally not interested in the specific conjugation of the verb "to be" in Hebrew, unless it strengthens my case that Jesus actually said (perhaps in veiled form) I am YHWH. It seems to me the Pharisees and Lawyers picked up on it immediately and wanted to stone Him for the blasphemy of making Himself equal to God.

The logic (if we can use that word) is that if Jesus is YHWH, then all the words in the so called Old Testament are the words of Jesus personally, as if they were printed in red. That's why any question about Jesus being YHWH calls into question the authorship of the Old Testament, which was given by YHWH.

[HeadStrongBoy]

What's your point ? Besides your info is wrong. He submitted to their decision to stop teaching. And because of it, he decided to leave amicably. Because he considers himself to be a teacher, first and foremost.

[Alty]

What's your point ? Besides your info is wrong. He submitted to their decision to stop teaching. And because of it, he decided to leave amicably. Because he considers himself to be a teacher, first and foremost.

Where did you get this info? Is it factually based, or based only on Camping's word?

[HeadStrongBoy]

I admit it's based only on Camping's word.

[Wondergirl]

Independent Baptist was the denomination he was in?

[dwashbur]

the deity of Jesus is exactly the question.

Only to you. My point was your abuse of the Hebrew language.

YHWH is one possible form for the words "I AM."

No, it isn't. I already told you what the form of "I am" is in Hebrew and you chose to ignore it, even though I took the word straight out of Exodus 3. Well, maybe it's the other tense? No, that would be HYYTY. Anyone who really knows Hebrew will admit that we don't know what YHWH actually is. It's a name, but what it's derived from, if anything, is beyond our current knowledge.

It may be that YHWH is the infinitive form of the verb "to be."

Wrong again. The verb "to be" is HYH. The infinitive form, if there was one (which there isn't) would be HYH with slightly different vowels. No matter how you try to slice it, you can't get there from here. YHWH and the verb "to be" are two very different words.

I am personally not interested in the specific conjugation of the verb "to be" in Hebrew, unless it strengthens my case that Jesus actually said (perhaps in veiled form) I am YHWH.

Did you really just say that you don't care what the actual facts of the language are, unless they support your preconceived notions? Thank you for finally admitting that!

It seems to me the Pharisees and Lawyers picked up on it immediately and wanted to stone Him for the blasphemy of making Himself equal to God.

They actually made that accusation earlier when he said God was his father. They tried to stone him in this instance for claiming he was older than Abraham.

The logic (if we can use that word) is that if Jesus is YHWH, then all the words in the so called Old Testament are the words of Jesus personally, as if they were printed in red. That's why any question about Jesus being YHWH calls into question the authorship of the Old Testament, which was given by YHWH.

Well, you're right about one thing: it's questionable whether there's any logic there. I would conclude: no.

[HeadStrongBoy]

Wikipedia says Christian Reformed Church. And I have heard him confirm that.

[Wondergirl]

My chiropractor is Christian Reformed -- healing, speaking in tongues, anointing with oil.

[hauntinghelper]

Ahhh... the plot thickens... so apparently the church age is done since they won't receive his teaching... brilliant.

[hauntinghelper]

Dwashbur, beautifully put.
Wondergirl... so is mine.