wingnut-

8 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

Now, if you do not mind, how does one access the option to create or vote, if you will, for a “thumbs up” or another ?

In the lower right of any post made you should see a circle with a thumbs up in it, when you click on that it gives you choices regarding reactions.

8 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

Secondly, I noticed that most subject lines posts have a solid circle adjacent to the title...

Not sure what you are referring to here, maybe you can clarify?

9 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

Others may have a light colored star and some may not have any symbol at all.. Do you know what these mean or represent?

Not sure what you mean here either, not sure what type of device you use for the site so it may differ from mine if you are not on a computer.

8 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

I've come to the conclusion that the first half of the 70th Seven WAS in the past, namely from when Yeshua` was about 30 until He was 34, which apparently was in 24-28 A.D.

I get the same thing, but there is a conflict with that as well.  How do you reconcile a break in the middle of the week given what is said in chapter 12.

Daniel 12: 11 And from the time that the regular burnt offering is taken away and the abomination that makes desolate is set up, there shall be 1,290 days. 12 Blessed is he who waits and arrives at the 1,335 days. 

5 minutes ago, Revelation Man said:

WE NOW SKIP FORWARD TO THE 70TH WEEK !!

This is where your entire theory falls apart, you don't understand Daniel's prophecy and still look to events that are fulfilled.

10 minutes ago, Markesmith said:

The question is what is the sign of the son of man?

Yes, first you get total darkness, then you get the glory of His coming, as lightning lights up the sky, this is the sign.

17 hours ago, Markesmith said:

What is the sign of the son of man?

Matthew 24:7  For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

Luke 17:24  For as the lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day.

1 hour ago, ProudArmyWife said:

There are letters to churches in Revelation, at the beginning. 7 churches. How do these letters relate to our churches today? What do they mean? (I am just starting to try and understand end times passages. Please be patient with me as I post questions)

The seven churches were actual churches that existed in the first century, all located in what is modern day Turkey.  While there are certainly messages that can be applied to us still today, the letters were written and composed for them as you can see by specific information within them.

Revelation 2:13 “‘I know where you dwell, where Satan's throne is. Yet you hold fast my name, and you did not deny my faith even in the days of Antipas my faithful witness, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells.

Obviously no one today was alive in the days of Antipas, so when reading these letters you want to keep them in the context they were written.

10 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, wingnut-.

Furthermore, there is no 7-year trib, either! Instead, there's a 2,000-year trib, and a "pre-trib" is now quite impossible. (There's no "mid-trib" or "pre-wrath" trib, either.) "Post-trib" is the only position possible with a 2,000-year trib.

There's NO SCRIPTURE that equates the "tribulation" with the "70th Week of Daniel 9." Therefore, there's NO SUCH THING as a "7-year trib."

People who READ INTO Daniel 9:26 the "Antichrist" (as the "Prince that shall come") frankly know NOTHING about Hebrew. The "he's" of Daniel 9:27 point back to the "Messiah" of 9:26! (Actually, the "he's" in verse 27 don't exist in Hebrew; they are merely the 3rd-person singular forms of the verbs ONLY! Their subject noun must exist OUTSIDE of the noun construct state, `am nagiyd, "people of-a-prince," in verse 26!)

I agree brother, but I wonder then how you apply the historical view to chapter 11 in harmony with Daniel 9?  I am still trying to figure that one out, there is something wrong there.  Have you been following the daughter of women thread?

1 hour ago, Revelation Man said:

Jesus does not say what you say brother. Jesus because a SCRIPTURE is used, doesn't mean everything has to be connected as you think. Daniel chapter 5 is used for the Revelation 17 Harlot, that doesn't mean Rev. 17 happened back in Babylon's time brother. Rev. 12 talks about the Genesis 37:9 dream, but it happens during the 70th week. God/Jesus uses crossover scriptures all the time. My point is/was, you should be able to add all the clues up and understand its all future. If we take one verse or one clue we are going against God's own idiom, Here a little, there a little, line upon line, precept upon precept. 

God Bless. Prophecy is not easy and the truth is most people are not called unto it in full, so its not going to be revealed unto them in full. 

Well I hate to break it to ya, but the shepherd won't be struck again.  If Jesus tells you a prophecy is fulfilled, you should probably accept that, and if you did some study on the history of the early church you would know that it did in fact happen in the 1st century.  But if your practice is to look for fulfilled prophecies, I guess you are also looking for a virgin birth.  Good luck with that!

4 hours ago, iamlamad said:

You might have proven something to YOURSELF. Suppose you prove how Paul's rapture gathers from anywhere but EARTH. 

I guess then what you are proving is that you bear false witness, then when confronted with scripture that refutes it, your pride doesn't allow you to admit to your error.  Duly noted.  As far as helping you understand scripture, I can't, after years of trying the only thing that will recover you from your many errors is God, ask Him.

1 minute ago, iamlamad said:

Certainly there are verses that speak of EVENTS posttrib. But that was not the subject. We were talking of the RAPTURE. There is no simple verse that proves Paul's rapture is posttrib or any other trib.

Of course that is not true, as the passage includes the gathering.  The truth is simple, your claim was false, I just disproved what you said, and you cannot provide one single example in scripture that speaks of a gathering pre-trib.  Post-trib is the only position that has such evidence, what people do with it is on them.

6 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

NO SIMPLE verse says posttrib.

Of course there is, quite a few actually, here are two very direct and clear ones.

Matthew 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Mark 13:24 “But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, 25 and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken. 26 And then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. 27 And then he will send out the angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven.

1 minute ago, Revelation Man said:

It just astounds at at the amount of people who profess knowledge of Prophecy, then get it ass so wrong. It is what it is.

More astounding that someone would think they know better than Jesus, but ok lol.

13 minutes ago, Revelation Man said:

There is no 200 Million man Army on horses, its an Angelic Army. Israel is subdued for 3.5 years, but 1/3 of Israel REPENT and Flee to Petra. You are not counting on that, even though God says its factual.

This is factual.

Matthew 26:30 And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. 31 Then Jesus said to them, “You will all fall away because of me this night. For it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.’ 32 But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee.” 

Zechariah 13:7 “Awake, O sword, against my shepherd,
    against the man who stands next to me,”
declares the Lord of hosts.

“Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered;
    I will turn my hand against the little ones.
8 In the whole land, declares the Lord,
    two thirds shall be cut off and perish,
    and one third shall be left alive.
9 And I will put this third into the fire,
    and refine them as one refines silver,
    and test them as gold is tested.
They will call upon my name,
    and I will answer them.
I will say, ‘They are my people’;
    and they will say, ‘The Lord is my God.’”

Already happened, 1st century, that is factual.

Zechariah 4:11 Then I said to him, “What are these two olive trees on the right and the left of the lampstand?” 12 And a second time I answered and said to him, “What are these two branches of the olive trees, which are beside the two golden pipes from which the golden oil is poured out?” 13 He said to me, “Do you not know what these are?” I said, “No, my lord.” 14 Then he said, “These are the two anointed ones who stand by the Lord of the whole earth.”

1 hour ago, Spock said:

Thanks for answering all my questions wingnut....I definitely need some time to ponder and sort over everything you said. However, the very last thing you said has confused me. If I’m reading you write, it sounds like you don’t believe a 3rd temple needs to be built in Israel before the second coming. Is this true? 

No problem brother, and the answer is yes, I do not believe a third temple is necessary regarding the beast of Revelation.  There is nothing in Revelation to tie the beast to a temple, that is all based on assumption.

1 hour ago, Spock said:

If so, how do you reconcile these verses with that then...

2 thess 2: 

He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

From the moment Jesus died on that cross the veil of the temple was torn in two, by a divine act.  From that moment on any significance of a physical temple ceased to exist to God.  Paul is one of the NT writers who teaches us that we are now the temple, so when he wrote this passage we should understand that he is not speaking of a physical temple.  I would look to the example in scripture, Judas, and expect the man of sin (lawlessness) will follow the model of a betrayer, one who poses as a Christian but is actually a wolf in sheep's clothing.  When he declares himself to be God, it will be rather obvious, but there is nothing to say this must be done in a physical temple.  Setting himself up in the temple most likely speaks to a position of hierarchy within the Christian faith.

Isn't that the model of all false prophets or false messiah's throughout history?  Every single example is someone whose roots are in the faith, they then gain a following by persuading people they are special and voila, a cult is born.  Just consider what Paul says after and see if it is not consistent with all the information.

II Thessalonians 2:9 The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, 10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, 12 in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

He can do things to convince people, but his signs and wonders are false, and he is using deception.  So God sends a strong delusion to the wicked, this encompasses all of mankind, and even those who reject Christianity will be convinced by this man to believe what is false.  Whoever this is, he will come from among us.

1 hour ago, Spock said:

Matt 24

15 So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’fn spoken of through the prophet Daniel--let the reader understand--

16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

The term "holy place" does not equate to a temple, Jerusalem is referred to as a "holy place" or "holy city" so the holy place will most likely be somewhere within the city.

1 hour ago, Spock said:

Do you not believe what happened around 161 BC regarding AE was a Type, a foreshadow of things to come?

Only if the modern interpretation of Daniel is true.  If there is a more accurate understanding of chapter 11 that has no flaws as every presentation I have ever seen does, then I would go with what aligns to the whole of scripture.

1 hour ago, Spock said:

If that literally happened, why don’t you believe it could and will happen again with the Beast? 

Things can happen again, but if we know a prophecy has been fulfilled then it has been fulfilled, anything that resembles it in the future doesn't change that.  Think of it this way, you're not looking to the future for a virgin birth and Jesus to be born again, and neither is anyone else, so why should Daniel or any other prophecy be treated differently?  Why would we recognize the significance of who our Savior is at birth, but devalue His death and resurrection when it is the most significant event ever?

14 hours ago, Spock said:

Wing nut, has Charlie satisfactorily explained how Matthew 24:15-22 fits in to you with Daniel 9:26-27?

Well, charlie has not really addressed this directly by his own admission he has focused on Daniel.  He has taken some heat for that, but if we are honest with ourselves charlie has actually taken the proper approach per scripture.  Jesus seems to point us to the fact we need to understand Daniel before we can make sense of the Olivet discourse, so charlie is right to do so.

However, I already see how Matthew fits in with Daniel, but since so many people are stuck on future they really aren't willing to address the actual sequence we are given and ignore the historical fulfillment found within the Olivet discourse.  Many of the things people still believe are future and base their eschatology on took place in the first century.  In large part it is because everyone just relies on the account from Matthew and do not account for the other two accounts from Luke and Mark.  So start with this from Luke's account.

Luke 21:10 Then he said to them, “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. 11 There will be great earthquakes, and in various places famines and pestilences. And there will be terrors and great signs from heaven. 12 But before all this they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors for my name's sake.

When you compare the three different accounts it is clear when they are speaking to the same things, even if they don't use the exact same wording in regards to each detail.  But the point is, using the specific sequence we get from Luke, we know that everything that follows verse 11 has to be examined in a broader context of time that begins in the 1st century.  In verse 11 Luke refers to terrors and great signs from heaven, which points us towards events in Revelation such as the two witnesses and the false prophet calling down fire from heaven, angels flying overhead with warnings, events involving the sun, moon, and starts, wormwood, etc.  Matthew and Mark refer to those two verses as birth pains  or the beginning of sorrows.  But when you take all three together it speaks to where it starts and where it ends, covering a large amount of time.

What Luke describes in verses 12-19 coincide with what Matthew refers to as the falling away, and this occurred in the 1st century, in fact, it began with the disciples themselves.

Matthew 26:30 And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. 31 Then Jesus said to them, “You will all fall away because of me this night. For it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.’ 32 But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee.” 33 Peter answered him, “Though they all fall away because of you, I will never fall away.” 34 Jesus said to him, “Truly, I tell you, this very night, before the rooster crows, you will deny me three times.” 35 Peter said to him, “Even if I must die with you, I will not deny you!” And all the disciples said the same.

Of course this was prior to the Holy Spirit indwelling them, but the point is that we are given a very real example of the same sequence Paul wrote of in II Thessalonians take place prior to the crucifixion, including the one and only example in scripture regarding the son of perdition, or son of destruction.

John 17:12  While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

The other thing in regards to what took place in Matthew 26, in the passage above, Jesus points us to a prophecy from Zechariah as being fulfilled.  This very passage is used in regards to future eschatology models, despite Jesus saying it was fulfilled in Him.

Zechariah 13:7 “Awake, O sword, against my shepherd,
    against the man who stands next to me,”
declares the Lord of hosts.

“Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered;
    I will turn my hand against the little ones.
8 In the whole land, declares the Lord,
    two thirds shall be cut off and perish,
    and one third shall be left alive.
9 And I will put this third into the fire,
    and refine them as one refines silver,
    and test them as gold is tested.
They will call upon my name,
    and I will answer them.
I will say, ‘They are my people’;
    and they will say, ‘The Lord is my God.’”

In the first 6 verses of chapter 13, Zechariah prophesies about a cleansing from sin and a fountain being opened to the house of David and Jerusalem.  Does any of that sound like what we see regarding the everlasting covenant?

Also, I recommend you examine and consider everything that took place at the last supper that night.

Matthew 26:26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.”

Does this sound like it is related to what we are discussing, or what Daniel speaks of in chapter 9?

14 hours ago, Spock said:

I’d like to read what you now consider to be the game changer evidence that takes you away from the traditional interpretation.

As you can see there are a lot of reasons I already viewed chapter 9 in this way, but I did find your use of "traditional" interpretation interesting.  Actually, what you are referring to is a modern interpretation, not more than a few hundred years old.  For roughly 1800 years or so, the modern interpretation was not the accepted interpretation of the church.  Charlie sees the RCC as the culprit, and on that we disagree, because there were other players involved in this newer and futuristic view which I see more as a result of Darby and his introduction of dispensationalism.  Which by the way was considered heresy by the majority of Christendom at the time, it began to gain more of a foothold when Israel became a nation again and people saw it as a possibility.  Prior to that there was no nation, no expectation of a nation, and thus no expectation of a third temple and other aspects of the future model.

While one can look at it and say the church just was unaware and understood all the prophecy incorrectly because of their short sightedness, it really doesn't hold water because the futurist view has a fatal flaw in regards to a third temple.  WE are the temple now, scriptural fact that cannot be reconciled, so naturally they wouldn't have considered even if a temple were built that it would change a thing.  And another scriptural fact, you don't find a physical temple in Revelation to be desecrated, that is something people are reading into the scriptures.

12 hours ago, Spock said:

 Wingnut, if you don’t mind, you can chime in here too....what do you think of Charlie’s interpretation of Messiah making the covenant with the many for one week?

I think it has merit, but it really hinges on the interpretation of chapter 11 and whether or not there is an explanation for what we read there.  As far as chapter 9 goes, if you read that prophecy on its own merit and in the context it is written then what charlie presents is the more sensible conclusion for chapter 9, the issue arises with chapter 11.  The question you have to ask yourself is this, have you heard an explanation for chapter 11 that you completely agree with?  I don't just mean a part of it, I mean have you ever heard a complete breakdown of that chapter you agree with?

11 hours ago, Spock said:

When did Jesus or God make a covenant with the Jews for one week?

Perhaps this has always been the real issue in regards to Daniel, exactly what that final seven represents.  So bear with me, and consider the everlasting covenant from these Ezekiel passages.  Charlie pointed you to Jeremiah 32 which does speak to it, but I think the two passages from Ezekiel reveal a more direct connection to some of the terms we find in Daniel 11.

Ezekiel 16:59 “For thus says the Lord God: I will deal with you as you have done, you who have despised the oath in breaking the covenant, 60 yet I will remember my covenant with you in the days of your youth, and I will establish for you an everlasting covenant. 61 Then you will remember your ways and be ashamed when you take your sisters, both your elder and your younger, and I give them to you as daughters, but not on account of the covenant with you. 62 I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall know that I am the Lord, 63 that you may remember and be confounded, and never open your mouth again because of your shame, when I atone for you for all that you have done, declares the Lord God.”

If you read the entire chapter, which you really need to, in the prior sections the two sisters are identified as Samaria and Sodom.  In an earlier post I mentioned Ezekiel 23, where we see the two sisters, Oholah and Oholibah, which represent Samaria and Jerusalem respectively.  Now consider this, Samaria is the elder sister, and in this passage from Ezekiel 16 Sodom is the younger sister of both.  When was Sodom destroyed?  BEFORE Israel even existed, before these two older sisters even came to be.  People like to dismiss the spiritual understanding or rendering of passages, but when you see such obvious displays that it is necessary then I would just say that should probably be a practice you don't take part of.

The significance of Sodom being included in this is to reveal the understanding that this everlasting covenant applies not only to the divided kingdoms of Israel, but also the Gentiles.  When you come to grips with that, then you understand that this everlasting covenant is the very covenant that you and I are included in.  And you know when this covenant went into effect, not the future, but the past.

Ezekiel 37:24 “My servant David shall be king over them, and they shall all have one shepherd. They shall walk in my rules and be careful to obey my statutes. 25 They shall dwell in the land that I gave to my servant Jacob, where your fathers lived. They and their children and their children's children shall dwell there forever, and David my servant shall be their prince forever. 26 I will make a covenant of peace with them. It shall be an everlasting covenant with them. And I will set them in their land and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in their midst forevermore. 27 My dwelling place shall be with them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 28 Then the nations will know that I am the Lord who sanctifies Israel, when my sanctuary is in their midst forevermore.”

The same holds true for Ezekiel 37, you really want to study the entire chapter and not just the passage I posted.  There are certain absolute truths we know and have been taught in the New Testament (New Covenant), the most significant event in the history of creation is the death and resurrection of Jesus, which enacted the eternal promises.  Another absolute truth is that there is only one body, made of both Jew and Gentile, which by deduction means no more divided northern and southern kingdoms as well.  This is represented in the joining of the two sticks in Ezekiel 37.

I'll address some of your other questions in a separate post to avoid a lengthy read of different subjects.

13 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

Anyway, WITHOUT offending you in any way, my initial reaction re: your excellent background and abilities, and of course, you must have wonderful connections within the publication industry, is whether I might be giving too much of my interpretations re: Daniel given my desire or intention to hopefully offer all new interpretations to the public...

Finding a publisher is much more difficult than writing, that's for sure.  And, given that what you are presenting may ruffle some feathers you could possibly run into extra resistance depending on who you make contact with.  I would think your best bet is to find a publisher that is familiar with the Christian book genre, but regardless use caution.  Keep records of conversations and such, don't just hand over all your material to someone without a written agreement in place.  It is not uncommon for publishers to take material and then pass it off to someone else that takes the credit.  Show them enough to get their interest, then settle on a contract, if you know a lawyer that can assist you with negotiating and serve as witness to what takes place that isn't a bad idea.

13 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

Are you speaking about the daughter of the KOS and the daughter of women in 11?

Charlie

Yes, I am thinking based on your comments about the Old Testament that passages mostly overlooked such as these may have come to your attention as they have mine.

8 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

Thank you for the prompt response... also, and if you do not mind——

would you be willing to give me a little of your background?

I don't mind, but I am a very private individual so there may be some things I won't answer for anonymity's sake.

9 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

Are you a professor or teacher, etc., in religion or theology?

I studied at Liberty and got a degree in eschatology back in the early 90's.  It is a bit ironic that my position doesn't even slightly resemble what I believed at that time, and if I were to attend those classes today it would be difficult to pass because I reject the eschatology they push.

12 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

Are you a professional writer on the Scriptures or religious matters, etc.?

Journalism was my major in secular university, so I am a professional writer, but not focused on religion or theology with my writing.  However, since I was a child I have been drawn to biblical prophecy, particularly the book of Revelation.  I have a fairly good grasp on the sequence of events, the when of things is unclear as far as what remains future, so I am always looking for those missing pieces.

6 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

wing nut, if you do not mind, I will try and respond to your latest message re: the comment about the 3.5 years .... approximately 20 minutes ago?

but in the meantime, should you or Spock have any thoughts on my latest two responses, I would absolutely love to learn of them...

thank you both very much, Charlie 

 

The first thing that comes to my mind in regards to this would be Ezekiel 23, Oholah and Oholibah, the two women associated with the northern and southern kingdoms of Israel.  The second thing that comes to my mind are the two women in Zechariah 5 that carry the basket to Shinar.

8 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

Without going into too much detail of 11, and certainly prior to my response to wing nut (which will definitely be tomorrow), I would respectfully ask you to consider the following items that have supported my interpretation of 11 in a “spiritual” versus “historical” approach:

You can lay the whole thing out, I am interested in the whole thing, so no need to make a special post for my sake.

6 minutes ago, Spock said:

Like you wingnut, I’ve been reevaluating Daniel 9 again. 
what has caused me to re-evaluate this passage is this....most of the commentators hit the pause button when either Jesus was baptized or when Jesus was crucified and of course the former leave out his 3.5 years of ministry and the latter may have their timeline incorrect if they follow Bishop Ussher’s calcualtions. He uses 445 BC as the starting point, but 457 BC may be the correct one. 

Yes, and as I said to charlie when I read chapter 9 I see it exactly as he does, the problem arises when one arrives at chapter 11.  The other issue that I see which we haven't gotten to yet, is what significant event took place 3.5 years after the crucifixion?  Because if the week is continuous, which according to chapter 12 of Daniel following the AoD there is a specific number of days set forth.  Something had to occur at this point for the whole thing to come together, and chapter 12 makes it impossible for there to be a break in the middle of the week.

As far as the calculations, to me that is not all that significant because we know He came, so that period of time was fulfilled one way or the other.

26 minutes ago, Firebirdman55 said:

I just realized Israel also signed these peace treaties with Jordan in 1994 and Egypt in 1979. So I’m not sure if this has any more significance than those. 

The only significance I can see is the relation to Ezekiel's prophesy in chapters 37 and 38, regarding the Gog-Magog war.

2 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

wing nut—- Please understand this is an absolutely PERFECT illustration of why 11 is SO darn difficult. 

The positive thing we have going in this conversation is that anytime I read chapter 9 it reads to me exactly how you see it.  So take your time, share your understanding, and if it agrees with the whole of scripture it won't be difficult to persuade me.  Like spock said, my problem arises with chapter 11 and attributing any of those things to the Lord.