Jostler

In what way? How has fermentation changed? I know a bit about wine, both modern production and ancient and I've never seen any real differences but the equipment and scale.

two questions you don't know the answer to followed by a spurious assumption don't do much to strengthen your case

This will be long so I hope your eyes don't glaze over I'll state the main point up front and go a bit deeper later. One of the most powerful places of personal healing and stability in Him we can find, is getting settled in our father issues. When we can come to a place (and we can do it by choice) of forgiving both our parents and realizing that they are fallen human beings in need of a saviour just like we are. Forgiveness is a choice though getting your emotions, sense of betrayal and all that to line up with your decision can take some Spirit empowered focus. I would encourage you to choose...now...to forgive your Dad and perhaps ask yourself a question or two. Does learning of this failure truly negate the good qualities he has? We're all a mix of purified and impure. There is a reason parental failures are likely to affect us more than most and it's a fascinating one to unpack.....so here goes At one point, I decided to do some digging on just what it means to be created "in His image". In the process I found out it's a much deeper and richer subject than I ever imagined. We're also created in His "likeness" and those words are not synonymous. In any case...the first thing to realize is that an image is NOT the reality. It's a reflection, a similitude...not the totality of what it represents. I may elaborate on that later. Most will focus at first on the descriptions we have of God (rightly so) and in every case we're given He describes Himself in the Word as having a human form. Bi-cameral construction, two arms, two legs, ears, nose, mouth, etc. Is that a reflection of His image? Definitely. But as the Teacher takes you deeper you begin to see that is the "entry level"...surface understanding. We do as individuals reflect His image physically. But that is not the highest, most complete reflection of His image that exists in the earth. The most complete reflection is found in US...male and female in union. And to be more exact, it's found in the human family. Male and female with children. In this reflection we find that the man of the house is a reflection of God the Father and the woman is representative of the Holy Spirit, while children represent Jesus, obedient to Father and Spirit. Children are BORN with this knowledge, ingrained and its foundational to their development because God intended from the beginning that children should first learn most powerfully of Him by watching father and mother. Had sin not intervened and the image become marred, we would not have the father/mother issues we do to overcome. But it did. The images became flawed, imperfect representations of the reality of the Godhead. But the child does not know this. And furthermore, the child doesn't know he/she is also marred, broken. The Bible uses light to add understanding to this: These lamps in Solomon's day were usually clay pots with an oil reservoir and a pinched area or hole that would hold a wick. Cursing father or mother cuts off the flow of oil to the wick and it can no longer burn and give off light. It's "life flow" has been cut off. Forgive, and do it quickly and be very, very careful about condemnation. It is possible to cut off the free flow of the Holy Spirit into your own life. In this image, father represents God the Father and is the seat of authority. Protector. Provider. Mother is representative of the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, the one who pulls along side, the Comforter, the POWER of the father. Again children represent Jesus, obedient to Father and Mother. If you want to test this, do an experiment. When you get around small children watch them. If the family is reasonably functional, when a child is afraid, they will invariably, instinctively run to Dad. If a child is hurt, physically or emotionally, they will without fail go to Mom. Why is it that Mom can speak, cajole, threaten consequences for bad behaviour, and get pushed to the limit, but when Dad intervenes ITS OVER. I believe it is this God implanted awareness of the Father's authority that kids instinctively respond to. I was fortunate because my parents modeled this very well. The most feared words I could hear from Mom were "We'll take this up again when your Father gets home." My Father was the disciplinarian in our home, and I believe that is proper and necessary. My Mother would discipline us if absolutely necessary and the discipline would not wait until Dad was around. But Mom's are designed to nurture and discipline is very hard for them to do. Father is able to look beyond the momentary pain he is dishing out to the consequences he is trying to prevent for the child should the behaviour go unchecked and become ingrained. That strong Father kind of love can handle disciplining much better than that deeply nurturing Mother kind of love. One thing I observed with my own daughters. My wife would literally spend an hour getting my daughters dressed and hair done for church or family outings. What did the girls do? Once finished, without a by your leave or thanks for Mom, they ran to me and asked me how they looked. My wife confessed she felt slighted and unappreciated and I sincerely wish I had understood the reason back then. But it was not that my girls had no appreciation...it was that they were already FULLY convinced of Mom's unconditional love. Dad's love may be in fact unconditional, but it needs specific reinforcement. Father carries an image of that "awesome, powerful" and even "terrible aspect of our Heavenly Father. He is less approachable and kids are often needing reassurance that father's love is still there in full measure. Fathers, you will do more to form your young lady's self-image than any other force on earth. If you tell them they are beautiful, they will know and believe that they are truly beautiful. If you don't tell them, they'll end up going and finding someone else who will. And that person's motivation for giving them the reassurance they need may not be pure at all. Because this instinctive response to the image of God is so powerful, it can cause great damage in homes where father is absent, uncaring or worse....abusive. The child is learning about God through their interactions with their parents. Like it or not it's happening and you can imagine what begins to happen to the child's concept of our Heavenly Father when Dad is violent, detatched, selfish or worse. It doesn't take much imagination to realize the damage done when a father begins to use his 8 yr old daughter as a wife. ? Or son...uggh. People who have experienced that often end up rejecting God completely, which is one reason satan spends so much time promoting sexual immorality and perversion. But our Heavenly Father is not guilty. The image is marred. There is so much more fascinating depth to the "image" and we didn't even touch on the "likeness" but I'll stop here or end up writing a book. Hopefully some of this will help in sorting out the powerful emotions you are feeling. Be blesssed sister, I am praying for you.

Actually he did address the problem pretty directly. Let me dig up a link where his explanation is. I found it entirely plausible. The short of it was that the wavelengths of energy emitted by faster decay were proportionately weaker resulting no net change of total energy released. I'll add the link and tag you if I find it...i recall one that doesn't take much time to review if I can locate it I did read it but honestly wasn't quite diligent enough to actually dig deeper. I had already inspected Setterfield's original statistical method and found it sound so I honestly kinda glossed over the criticism. Give me a bit and I'll do a deeper comparison and give the criticism a more fair look.

it's unusual for me to read the Apocrypha or extra-canonical texts but for some reason this one interested me. And I found it pretty fascinating reading, but I can't put it anywhere close to the level of Scripture. I was relieved to see that as you stated it's certainly not a gnostic text and in fact whoever the author(s) were they had a broad and intimate knowledge of both Old and New Testament Scriptures. By and large those early chapters seemed to me a pretty faithful paraphrase of a whole range of scriptures and I couldn't discern any mishandling. But after that I began having some issues. The descriptions of events in hell do not line up with Scripture in some pretty significant ways. All in all, while some of it *might* have happened that way, we have no reliable witness from Scripture to prove it. One thing that stood out was the assertion that Beelzebub was the prince of hell and satan was a totally different being....and Beelzebub elevated to a position of greater power and authority than satan? That doesn't fit the Bible at all to my knowledge. So, I found it interesting, a good story, but I can't take anything of spiritual significance from it....it's not trustworthy. It's "clean" enough I'm willing to speculate that the author may have had good intentions and a desire to defend the faith even. But it's not the Word of God, and good intentions or not, it's not Truth. This might be more like Pilgrim's Progress....fiction intending to teach spiritual lessons Maybe....thank you for sharing it, but i struggle to find anything truly useful in it?

If you want a full list of all the baptisms one way to approach it is to grab a concordance and look up every place the Bible says baptize, baptized or baptism(s). Then ask the text three questions. Who is the baptizer, the one performing the baptism? Who is the baptizee (sorry for the coined word ) or the one being baptized? And the third is "What is the element being baptized into?" There are more than 4

Have you read 1st Corinthians Chapters 12 - 14? That's one of the most detailed treatments of the subject you'll find. It explains the reality, nature and administration of all the gifts of the Spirit. If you read that prayerfully and ask the Teacher to enlighten it for you He'll explain it The gift of tongues gets more than it's share of attention because evidently misuse of it was causing issues in the church at Corinth. I think it still may be in a lot of cases in our day :). But it's real enough.

I believe the Bible clearly makes a distinction between spirit, soul and body. We are three part beings just as He is and it's actually a reflection of His "image and likeness" He created Adam with. Spirit is WHAT we are. That is the fundamental essence of our being. Soul is WHO you are and encompasses our mind, will and emotions. The soul is what gives rise to my personality and makes me, me and you, you. Body is currently the temporary "tent" we live in. Once this understanding is gained, a lot of apparent contradictions and controversies simply evaporate. This will be challenging for some, but I'm pretty sure I can back every word with Scripture I believe it is accurate to say we are saved, we are being saved and we will be saved. Salvation is not a completed work at the new birth. That's undeniably the foundation and something that cannot be passed over, it's the fundamental door to all the rest. But the idea that God deals with each part of our being differently is Biblically sound. At the new birth, the Bible witnesses our spirit which was dead is made alive. It is "born again" of INCORRUPTIBLE SEED. Evidently, the change is so profound it represents being completely removed from one family and adopted into another. We belong to satan's family at birth by default, due to the fall and its effects being transmitted genetically through the blood to every human born since Adam. At the new birth our spirit is so radically transformed that He who cannot be in the presence of sin, finds our new born spirit a place suitable to dwell in. It is pure as pure can be. The soul is not dealt with so thoroughly at the new birth but enters a PROCESS of transformation/salvation that occurs by degrees. The Bible describes this process as "sanctification". It isn't even possible to engage this process of being "weaned" off the worldly ideas, thinking and impulses until the indwelling Spirit brought with Him the power to engage it. The power to deny the lusts of the flesh simply was not available to us before that. We sinned because it was our nature to sin. Once He has taken up residence in our spirits, we no longer HAVE to sin, but we still CHOOSE to and we can still be tricked into it until He has identified for us the lies we have believed to be true and replaced those with His Word. This is a process and it does not happen overnight. I've seen all kinds of interpretations about spiritual warfare laid on this passage but I'm a simple man and I try to limit myself to what the Word says. It appears to me, the simplest and most important application of spiritual warfare has to do with our own minds (part of the soul) and the arguments and thoughts that try to exalt themselves above the Truth. It's a process we have to CHOOSE (again, human will...province of the soul) to engage and the Spirit has to empower. We can't do this alone. We have to be willing but He has to guide and empower the work/transformation. And the body is a different story altogether. The Bible witnesses that this flesh is so corrupted that it stands in enmity to Him and CANNOT be reconciled to Him. The only solution for this flesh is to lay it down, let it return to the dust it came from and receive a wholesale replacement from Heaven. But the mind, will and emotions are the battleground. So I believe it is necessary to discern what part of us God is speaking to when He speaks of salvation in the Word. 1. With reference to our re-born spirit I believe it is accurate to say we ARE saved...to the uttermost. What part of "incorruptible" is difficult to understand? 2. With reference to our soul, I believe it is accurate to say we are BEING saved. We're in a process of transition and it doesn't happen in a one and done fashion like His salvation of our spirit. 3. And with reference to our body, His answer is a new one. Our salvation is assured, but not complete until we are out of this nasty thing and living in a new one compatible with Heaven. This assertion I've made has much, much more scriptural evidence to back it up, and I will be happy to go deeper if anyone has questions or is interested. I learned all this in my quest to answer for myself the long running "once saved always saved or not?" question The controversy simply evaporates when the whole spirit, soul and body thing comes to light Blessings

Larry let me address this one part of your whole post. I feel I have been taught in MANY instances to take the Bible very literally and avoid seeing symbols unless the text itself demands it. In the cases where symbolism IS used, and they are many, the Bible always interprets the symbol. It's not left to us. Lets look at something. IMO there is NO argument over what is Jesus most important work. That was undoubtedly the cross, the redemption of mankind. But that is not the full scope of His work. In Jonah, Father Himself in his conversation showed that He has concern for His Creation....ALL of it...including animals. I don't want to make too much of this but doesn't the fact God would even mention the livestock that were spared by Ninevah's repentance indicate some level of concern for them? And just what was Jesus "job". What did He come to do? Redeem man? Of course, but is that all? Friend before He's done, He's gonna reverse ALL of what the devil has temporarily accomplished. Including the restoration of the animal kingdom, and ALL of nature. To take note of that, to expect it, to rejoice in it takes nothing away from the importance of redemption. I don't think we're given a lot of details in exactly what changed, but somehow Adam's fall affected everything he'd been given dominion over. And since that time: I don't pretend to understand the details, but whatever those are it's clear the Bible teaches that creation, nature, animals, all of it is in some form of bondage which will be lifted when His glory is fully manifested in the Sons of God. Our salvation is not complete until we have laid down this corrupted meat sack and received a new spiritual body from Heaven. My understanding (and this is debatable) is that God's intent for Adam was that the Garden should be Adam's kindergarden, where he learnt to be "god of this world" after the image and likeness of his Father who is God of all creation. A place to learn to exercise dominion in love. Adam messed that up but Jesus came to fix it. Adam abdicated when he chose to listen to satan rather than the Word and satan wrested that God given authority (dominion over 3-dimensional creation) and that is one of the things He restored to US (who are IN HIM) on the cross. But satan had plenty of time to mar and twist creation and subject it to bondage. It's not wrong to look at the whole picture, even if the rescue of mankind is undeniably the centerpiece My two cents

You've evidently taken time to read his detractors pretty thoroughly. Have you read what he actually did say? The Atomic Constants, Light, and Time Critiques and Responses Regarding Atomic Constants, Light and Time The Speed of Light Curve That is only a small sample of the body of his work, and a thorough examination of all of it is really necessary to see the level of scientific rigor present. What I find so compelling about Setterfield and his associates is his consistent refusal to throw out "inconvenient" data points and how subsequent, very recent discoveries from places as diverse as CERN to astronomical observations are fitting neatly into and even expanding on Setterfield's ideas about ZPE (there is no vacuum ) and how those give plausible explanations to what we see in Scripture. The cosmos is "wearing out"...slowing down as the Bible seems to indicate: The following article, if you read between the lines (Barry studiously avoids attacking his detractors personally, a courtesy most of those detractors do not return) you can discern why some creationists from other corners so vigorously attack him. You may not agree with Barry's arguments, but they are most assuredly internally consistent and logically coherent.....and most of all they fit with more of the Bible's witness. Easily. Where Do We Stand Compared to Other Creationists?

My goodness! Girl you've been through the mill in ways I find hard to imagine. May I pray for you? Father, my heart breaks when I hear some of these stories of lives this world has abused so grievously and I know Yours does too. I ask that You would move powerfully to reveal Yourself to my sister. Please respond vigorously to the cry of her heart to know You. I ask that you would commission some of those incredible ministering spirits to go forth and manipulate and manuever situations and circumstances in her life, to bring her into repeated, gentle confrontations with the reality of the person of Jesus Christ. And most of all give her an experience of Your great love for her. I ask You to move the hearts of Your people near her to bring words of life into her hearing and I ask You to prepare her heart to receive them. Plant them deeply and securely in well plowed soil. In Jesus' Name I ask it all, and thank You for being a God who responds to the cries of His people.

The Bible very clearly tells us that the gifts, including prophecy will cease. And it clearly tells us exactly when it will happen. Here Paul clearly states a time will come when the gifts will cease: In the following few verses Paul sets up a logical argument using a "now" and "then" juxtaposition. "Now" while gifts are active (among other things) and "then" when they will cease: When we see Him face to face, the need for, and the gifts will cease. Ain't happened yet .....

Isaiah 58 is a very relevant reference when seeking to understand what He expects from a fast. There is more so I recommend reading the whole chapter, the preceding verses outline the WRONG attitudes toward fasting which He will not respect. My own relationship to fasting changed when I noticed (had my attention DRAWN TO ) some time ago that Jesus seemed to EXPECT fasting to be a familiar part of His disciple's lives. In both of those verses Jesus said "when" you fast, not "if" you fast and when that was pointed out I just knew He was calling me to a fast. I suspect fasting is a neglected discipline, particularly in the modern western church. But, this is one of those things that is in scripture, but we're not given a precise commandment, a list of "fasting rules" to follow so IMO this falls into that category of I have a personal opinion you can take or leave. This is from my own experience and I can't prove it from the Bible. But, it *SEEMS* to me that a decision to fast lays hold of one of the most powerful "lusts of the flesh" and DEMANDS it submit to the will. It's an exercise in who is in control of my life...flesh or spirit? My soul WANTS to respond to that hunger and eat. With His empowerment I tell it NO! And that seems to be something He works with to break off other "bondage" to the flesh. We have to live with this fallen meat sack until we get our new bodies. It has lusts and desires that are always working against the Spirit in our lives. He seems to honor (and empower) a choice on our part to take that in hand and "discipline" it. My two cents.... With that said, I don't have a regular schedule or set time of fasting. I fast when I feel the Spirit prompting me to. I suspect for some it can become a "religious" thing...a legalistic flesh thing trying to "earn" righteousness. That won't impress Him at all I don't think.

This is another passage that makes preterism a difficult pill for me to swallow. Just as we cannot see a wolf and lamb dwelling together in our day, this passage a few verses above describes some circumstances we have yet to see as well. This logically has to occur during the Millenial Reign because of several things. 1. Sinners are mentioned so we have not yet made it to the Judgement. 2. Death is present so that last enemy has not yet been thrown into the lake of fire. 3. Apparently lifespans return to spans of hundreds of years and a 100 yr old is considered a "child" (the Hebrew word used there refers to a weaned child that is not yet an adult so i'm assuming it refers to a child over 4-5 yrs but less than 13) People just don't live hundreds of years right now....it's sure a reality to look forward to when the King gets back though

I think you have mixed up someone else. I am pretty familiar with Setterfield's body of work, and have not EVER seen any of those claims made....ever. You might want to check your sources one more ttime

I struggle to read it that way. In Rev 20:4 a limited group of saints is very precisely defined, and not all believers down through history fit the description. Precise, unambiguous wording there. The Word also takes pains to identify this specifically delineated, limited group as qualifying for the first resurrection. In a context this precise and unambiguous, I am not comfortable interpreting "the rest" as anything more or less than exactly what it means. "the rest" is most simply understood to mean everyone not included in the first group.

The messiah they're talking about is not the one we know. This is something to watch. For a couple of years now several Rabbis have been speaking of this and some have strongly implied he's here already, they've met him and he's just waiting for the right time to reveal himself. When they do trot him out, keep an eye on him. It's entirely possible he'll be the false prophet. Right now he's in the category Jesus specifically warned us about: This is the first time I've heard Kanievsky put a time limit on it Interesting development....

@backontrack That video spoke to me in ways you couldn't imagine without knowing my story. He just used you to remind me of some things He's told me many times in many ways, but I keep letting them slip from the forefront I am where I am because He has appointed it. I have all but begged, all but demanded permission to leave this place. Part of me literally hates what I see and feel here, and in part I am here because that part of me needs some transformation. I also know that He has placed me in an end time "Goshen" from which exactly the kind of transformational move experienced by those Inuit communities is destined to emanate. That was reminder to me....again....to focus more on what He is doing, than on what the devil is doing. Thanks

Unfortunately, I live in the midst of it It's probably worse than you think

This is hours and hours of reading, but Barry Setterfield (http://www.setterfield.org/) is a physicist who has dedicated his career to studying time and the speed of light (closely entwined subjects of course ) You can search YouTube for some of his lectures if you prefer more visual input, but the nitty gritty is in the papers. Let me try to summarize so you can decide if this is something you wish to pursue. 1. We have two ways to measure time. One is geologic time or solar time, measured by the rotation of the earth around the sun. The other is atomic decay. 2. Has found evidence that atomic time is slowing down, it may not be the "constant" we've been taught to believe it is. Atomic time and geologic time are, and have been diverging. 3. Has found evidence that the rate of slowing has changed over time. Extrapolation indicates that time was slowing down MUCH faster in ages past and that the rate of slowing continues to decrease. There is a Russian physicist who has done some papers on the topic as well, I forget his name but Barry refers to him. Of course, Barry has been completely ignored by mainstream science because his work presents a very plausible, scientific explanation for how the earth could be 6000 yrs old but appear to be billions of years old to our current methods of dating. You can check his work to see how sound you believe it is. My own opinion after review is that he has been scientifically rigorous and his data does show a statistically significant change in time and the speed of light just in the few centuries we've been able to measure the speed of light. If he's correct, he's got some pretty powerful evidence for a young earth. An aside: Secular scientists who don't refer to creation at all are discovering that the speed of light is not a constant as well. Under certain conditions the speed of light can be changed. Bose-Einstein condensates, aerogels, several other circumstances have been discovered where the speed of light can be modified....significantly. The closer we get to nano and quantum scales, the stranger things are becoming Here's an article that's easy to read and highlights a few of the scientists and experiments that have called the constancy of lightspeed into question in the last 30 yrs. https://bigthink.com/philip-perry/is-the-speed-of-light-slowing-down Bottom line: If the speed of light has changed even marginally over time, radio carbon dating is useless unless and until we know the speed of light at the time it was formed, and the rate of change of time since it was formed.

I AM trained, and one of the best ways to die in a situation like that is shoot to wound. If my weapon comes out, I have already decided there is no other option. Anything less and it stays holstered. Brandishing a weapon is IMO is a *very* foolish move.

man...interesting conversation and I am sincerely enjoying the "tone" as well. Maybe this thread should be held up as an example of Godly discussion, discussing topics, not attacking positions I'll hush now til I have something relevant to the subject matter Rock on....

For me it was a tossup between New American Standard and New King James versions I chose New King James because it has an excellent balance between readability and technical precision. My impression is the New American Standard is more technically precise, and slightly less readable but only marginal differences in both cases. I also use the Amplified Bible which you did not list and it will always be nearby when I study. That one I very seldom do daily reading from, but its an invaluable resource for bringing nuanced meanings of the original words that are simply not fully translatable into single english words. RSV and any paraphrased versions I have no interest in at all.

This is an interesting thought, and one I haven't settled my own mind on yet, BUT, as a so far speculative exercise, is it possible that this relates to that rather enigmatic passage in Matthew 27:50-53: I'm still working for understanding of this strange event which sounds so momentous yet we're only given this one verse (that I've found so far) and precious little detail. So far, I *think* I'm seeing some parallels with the "firstfruits" offering in the old temple worship system and we may find that this event is symbolized and pre-figured by that ceremony. Right now I'm trying to discern if Jesus and some portion (or all?) of the old testament saints were raised at the resurrection as "firstfruits" in the harvest festival symbolism. Jesus is definitely, unequivocally described as "firstfruits" but I'm seeing some (so far inconclusive) evidence the totality of the "firstfruits" offering to God may include more than just Jesus. Hahahah..I'm trying to be careful here because it's a line of investigation for me, by no means am I sure of these ideas After starting to dig into the details of the firstfruits in the old testament, I'm finding its a MUCH more complex topic than I had known. Food for thought though

Let me check up on something ( this is why this really does take some time and effort ). Lets see if our hermaneutics agree. Hermaneutics is simply a term egg-head theologians use to describe our "philosophy of interpretation" of a text, any text but of course here were talking about the Word of God. I accept that the Word of God is complete, inerrant (that has a caveat or two - I'm referring to the original languages - there ARE translation nuances that need to be studied out and understood, but that's related to the difficulties of transferring ideas purely from one language to another, not the trustworthiness of the Word) and I do not believe the Word EVER contradicts itself. When we run across an *apparent* contradiction, my assumption is NOT that the Word has contradicted itself, but that my understanding is either flawed or incomplete. In fact, over time, as I have pursued understanding of some of the apparent contradictions, in every case the Lord has eventually resolved the issue and I have learnt something very important. I've come to a place where I get excited when I see an *apparent* contradiction, because I'm mortally certain there is a jewel hidden there and if I'll pursue Him for an answer I'm going to learn something amazing. That said, I believe that if I see a verse, that contradicts my current understanding, just one is all it takes, that's a cue that my understanding is flawed or incomplete and I need to go back to the drawing board and seek Him for a resolution, because that Word is PERFECT. My understanding? Welllll......that has had to change more than once :). To really draw this out we'll be all over the map, I don't see any way around it. As He has dealt with me over time, I have also come to believe that the Word is VERY literal. I've had many personal experiences with "spiritualizing" a passage I didn't completely understand, only to be astonished later at how wrong the "spiritualized" interpretation really was once He'd provided more detail. I know there truly are many symbolic passages but I also find the text is usually very, very clear that its symbolic. In short, my first assumption is that a passage is very literal unless the text itself clearly demands otherwise. I have also come to understand that there are VERY few synonyms used in the Word. As in when Jesus said "nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom" for many years I assumed nations and kingdoms were synonymous and Jesus was just repeating for emphasis. But, a detailed study indicates otherwise. Nations and kingdoms share some characteristics but they are not one and the same. The revelation is in the differences between the two. That's just one example of many I've found, and just that one has influenced my understanding of how end time events unfold pretty profoundly. So, the "Day of the Lord". Is that a 24hr time period in which everything attributed to it takes place in a single sunset to sunset time period? Or is there another way of seeing that? Are there some places where that "Day of the Lord" phrase refers to a 1000yr prophetic "day" and some that refer to a 24hr solar day? Or do they all refer to one or the other? That's a pretty clear statement indicating that from God's perspective, a thousand years is as a single day. I won't try to delve into all the other passages that indicate that in some very signifcant ways God has divided human history in to six one thousand year days followed by a seventh "Sabbath" rest, the "Day of the Lord". Is it possible when we try to compress all those events into a single 24hr time period, we err? Is it possible that some events may occur a thousand years apart and still be on the same Biblical day? After that screed i better summarize My two main questions are: 1. Do you agree that if we can find a SINGLE verse that contradicts our understanding, it's our understanding that is flawed or incomplete and we need more revelation? 2. Do you agree that the Word contains NO contradictions, no matter how much it seems it does to our incomplete understanding until He clears things up? Actually there is a third I just thought of based on this: At one point in my walk, I got ahold of that and took it to Him and asked "Lord? Interpretation is part of understanding. If I can't interpret what I read, then I can't decide what it means. I can't know what to believe. If I can't interpret, how does the interpretation understanding is founded on come?" When the answer came back it was this "The Word must interpret itself." 3. Is that something you can agree with?