*** 8.8 Earthquake rocks Chile **** - Page 2

TroubleMaker · #1 02-27-2010, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron

A Tsunami advisory has been issued for the B.C. Coast.

Another sign of the times.

Of the 20 deadliest earthquakes in history, ten of them occurred before 1700. Were those also a "sign of the times?"

And of the ten that have occurred after 1700, most of the have been deadly because of the massive increase in population. If not for the increase in population, most all of the deadliest earthquakes would have occurred long ago in history.

Ron · #2 02-27-2010, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TroubleMaker

Of the 20 deadliest earthquakes in history, ten of them occurred before 1700. Were those also a "sign of the times?"

And of the ten that have occurred after 1700, most of the have been deadly because of the massive increase in population. If not for the increase in population, most all of the deadliest earthquakes would have occurred long ago in history.

Well considering the Apostles considered the day they were living in as last days, I think we need to consider that God who inhabits eternity has a different concept of time than you & I do.

We are nearer to the coming of the Lord than we ever have been!

TroubleMaker · #3 02-27-2010, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron

Well considering the Apostles considered the day they were living in as last days, I think we need to consider that God who inhabits eternity has a different concept of time than you & I do.

We are nearer to the coming of the Lord than we ever have been!

Well duh, of course we're closer. I'm also older than I've ever been. But speaking of the apostles, do you think they were correct? And yes, God has a different concept of time than you and I but the apostles concept was just like ours. If there's a difference, it would be that the life expectance was shorter, so they probably considered the last days to be even shorter.

So were they wrong or right? And if they were correct, would it be safe to say the "Coming" could be in 4128? And if so, would you still consider these to be the "last days" according to your concept of time? If it's going to be 4128, it might seem to some like there's no rush.

Ron · #4 02-27-2010, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TroubleMaker

Well duh, of course we're closer. I'm also older than I've ever been. But speaking of the apostles, do you think they were correct? And yes, God has a different concept of time than you and I but the apostles concept was just like ours. If there's a difference, it would be that the life expectance was shorter, so they probably considered the last days to be even shorter.

So were they wrong or right? And if they were correct, would it be safe to say the "Coming" could be in 4128? And if so, would you still consider these to be the "last days" according to your concept of time? If it's going to be 4128, it might seem to some like there's no rush.

Do I think the Apostles were correct? Absolutely, are we closer to the coming of the Lord? Yes, will it be in my lifetime? Maybe, maybe not.

God hasn't told me the exact date he is coming, perhaps he shared that with you?

I am only going by Jesus proclamation that there will be Earthquakes in divers places.

Do you not believe what he said in the Gospels?

berkeley · #5 02-28-2010, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron

Well considering the Apostles considered the day they were living in as last days, I think we need to consider that God who inhabits eternity has a different concept of time than you & I do.

We are nearer to the coming of the Lord than we ever have been!

*cough* 70 A.D. *cough*

TroubleMaker · #6 03-01-2010, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryan

*cough* 70 A.D. *cough*

Exactly.

Ron? Hello Ron? Testing 1, 2, 3, 4. Paging Ron? Have you given up on the "End times" discussion? I was really wanting to learn something and you've left the podium. I guess I'll continue to flounder in my lack of eschatological knowledge. Let me know if you come up with anything new.