Why were the SACRIFICES NECESSARY BEFORE ... Will they be re-instituted again ... and if so WHY?

[angels4u]

24 minutes ago, George said:

Honestly, He exposed how corrupt the system is!  As a person, I find the means by which operates rubs me the wrong way.  However, his policies greatly helped Americans and the world ... for that i can commend him.  So you have to be able to separate the man ... from what he actually accomplished. 

Quote

, I find the means by which operates rubs me the wrong way. 

Not to go in details,I feel that also,there's something I don't trust ,can't post it in this thread..

[Alive]

2 minutes ago, Selah7 said:

My thoughts about this are that when Jesus returns, the 1,000-year period (Millennium) begins. After that, there's the GWTJ. 

The GWTJ is followed by the age to come (the Eternity)—This is the New Jerusalem.

 

in Christ, Selah 

I suggest a complete reading of the NT again and take careful notes of what the writers had to say about the Lord's return and specifically what happens.

 

[Selah7]

Just now, Alive said:

I suggest a complete reading of the NT again and take careful notes of what the writers had to say about the Lord's return and specifically what happens.

 

What is your understanding, Alive?  

[George]

5 minutes ago, Alive said:

Luke 18:30 (NAS20S) who will not receive many times as much at this time, and in the age to come, eternal life.”

The comparison passage is ...

Mat 19:27  Then Peter said in reply, “See, we have left everything and followed you. What then will we have?” 

Mat 19:28  Jesus said to them, “Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 

Mat 19:29  And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold and will inherit eternal life. 

Mat 19:30  But many who are first will be last, and the last first.

So you have the Lord talking about them sitting in judgment over the 12 tribes of Israel ... just as they believed.  They believed the Kingdom was coming to Israel.

Act 1:6  So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”

But they didn't comprehend His plan .... they didn't even understand the plan God had for the Gentiles at this point!

Be blessed!

 

 

[George]

7 minutes ago, Alive said:

I suggest a complete reading of the NT again and take careful notes of what the writers had to say about the Lord's return and specifically what happens.

Should we ignore the Old Testament?

[Alive]

8 minutes ago, Selah7 said:

What is your understanding, Alive?  

At this point, I see no possibility of a 1000 year gap. I see the Last Day as His commonly referred to 2nd advent, as a one time deal. He comes and a bunch of things happen...resurrection, angels sifting, judgement, restoration and the final accounting. One Day of the Lord. Not two.

[Alive]

5 minutes ago, George said:

Should we ignore the Old Testament?

LOL

Of course not, but I am pretty sure the additional light shed on the OT rules "the Day".

Pun intended.

[George]

What if the DAY ... is a 1000 years?

Psa_90:4  For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past, or as a watch in the night.

2Pe 3:8  Now, dear friends, do not let this one thing escape your notice, that a single day is like a thousand years with the Lord and a thousand years are like a single day. 

[missmuffet]

4 minutes ago, Alive said:

At this point, I see no possibility of a 1000 year gap. I see the Last Day as His commonly referred to 2nd advent, as a one time deal. He comes and a bunch of things happen...resurrection, angels sifting, judgement, restoration and the final accounting. One Day of the Lord. Not two.

It looks like you are amillennial. 

[Alive]

Oh BTW and then I'm gonna watch the news--I am missing the 5.

:-)

Some one drew from the Church Fathers to make a point. Actually Polycarp was mentioned, but that was incorrect.

Here is something Irenaeus wrote in Heresies. Read it carfully a couple times.

For how had He disciples, if He did not teach? And how did He teach, if He had not a Master's age? For He came to Baptism as one Who had not yet fulfilled thirty years,but was beginning to be about thirty years old; (for so Luke, who hath signified His years, hath set it down; Now Jesus, when He came to Baptism, began to be about thirty years old:) and He preached for one year only after His Baptism: completing His thirtieth year He suffered, while He was still young, and not yet come to riper age. But the age of 30 years is the first of a young man's mind, and that it reaches even to the fortieth year, everyone will allow: but after the fortieth and fiftieth year, it begins to verge towards elder age: which our Lord was of when He taught, as the Gospel and all the Elders witness, who in Asia conferred with John the Lord's disciple, to the effect that John had delivered these things unto them: for he abode with them until the times of Trajan. And some of them saw not only John, but others also of the Apostles, and had this same account from them, and witness to the aforesaid relation. Whom ought we rather to believe? These, being such as they are, or Ptolemy, who never beheld the Apostles, nor ever in his dreams attained to any vestige of an Apostle?