Mr. Harold Camping issued a corrective prediction back in May after his prediction of “the end of the world” did not materialize. He said the corrected date was October 21, 2011.
I said then that Mr. Camping must be wrong, for what he predicted is contrary to what the Bible teaches.
The Bible teaches that “the earth abideth forever” (Ecclesiastes 1:4). There are many other passages of Scripture which directly affirm this truth.
Therefore, to suggest “the end of the world” is incorrect, in terms of what the Bible teaches.
Our Lord Jesus Christ is returning to this earth sometime in the future to set up his eternal Kingdom here on this earth. That Kingdom will never end (Luke 1:32, 33). Many mistakenly teach that Christ reigns only for 1000 years. The Bible does not teach this at all. The earthly kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ will last forever, and will never end. Many, if not most teachers of Bible prophecy have misunderstood what the Bible teaches on this point.
In several articles I read on line yesterday, Harold Camping is reported to have said the May 21 date was not mistaken, but he was mistaken in understanding literally what was meant to be understood spiritually. Mr. Camping is reported to claim that no one has been, and no one can be saved after May 21, 2011. Of course, this is flagrant error.
It is the same error made by followers of William Miller in the early nineteenth century when the 1844 date for Christ’s return did not materialize. To this day, Seventh-day Adventists still retain this date in prophetic chronology, but have spiritualized it, and made it refer to something that allegedly happened in heaven, not earth.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses have employed the same tactic with the date they set, 1914. Other dates were set before and after that, including 1874, 1925, and 1975, for events which never came to pass.
Such date setters are false prophets, false cults, as the case individually may be, and surely should never be trusted as sound sources of Bible teaching.
Ecclesiastes 1:4 Oops.
Isaiah 65:17 AKJV For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
Isaiah 66:22 AKJV For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, said the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
2 Peter 3:13 AKJV Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwells righteousness.
Revelation 21:1 AKJV And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
The first earth passes away? Is someone not telling us the truth? No, Jerry is not understanding Ecclesiastes 1:4.
Ecclesiastes 1:4 GNB Generations come and generations go, but the world stays just the same.
Ecclesiastes 1:4 NLT Generations come and generations go, but the earth never changes.
Ecclesiastes 1:4 ESV A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever.
Comments on Forever: For ever. The Hebrew word thus translated is from a verb root whose precise meaning we do not know. The noun, used here with the preposition “for,” is masculine, and, like its Greek equivalent, is used in many ways. It may refer to “antiquity,” “ancient days,” “long duration,” “continuous existence”; it may mean “indefinite,” “unending future,” “eternity,” etc. Again, like its Greek equivalent, it is best understood in each case in harmony with the nature of the subject with which it is used.
Exodus 21:5-6 ESV But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ 6 then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his slave forever.
What? A slave forever? Even in the new earth? Really?
For ever. From ‘olam, literally, “hidden time,” that is, time of indefinite duration. Its limits are either unknown or not specified, and must be determined by the nature of the person, thing, or circumstance to which it is applied. In the absolute sense, as applied to God, ‘olam, “everlasting” Genesis 21:33), means “eternal,” for God is eternal-without beginning or end. In a more restricted sense the resurrected saints enter into ‘olam, “everlasting life” (Daniel 12:2), which, although it has a beginning, is without end, owing to the bestowal of immortality. In a still more limited sense, ‘olam can have both a definite beginning and a definite end, either of which may be uncertain at the time of speaking. For instance, Jonah was in the belly of the fish “for ever” (Jonah 2:6) because at the time he did not know when, if ever, he would get out again. In this case “for ever” turned out to be only “three days and three nights” (Jonah 1:17).
Our English words always and forever do not of themselves imply time without beginning or without end. It might, for instance, be said of a man that he always lived in the valley of his birth. The fact that eventually he died there in no way invalidates the statement that he always lived there. Similarly, at marriage, husband and wife promise to be true to each other forever, meaning so long as they both shall live. If upon the death of one the other should remarry, no one would accuse him of breaking the vow made at his first marriage. It is no more justifiable to read into the Hebrew word ‘olam more than the context implies.
As for the slave, he had already served his master for a definite, limited period of six years. Now, by his own choice, he was to begin a term of service of indefinite duration. Obviously, the agreement would terminate at least with the death of the slave, which event could of course not be predicted. This indefinite term of service is therefore appropriately described as ‘olam, which would here be more accurately rendered as “in perpetuity.”
Translators of the LXX rendered the Hebrew word ‘olam as aiōn, its Greek equivalent. What has been said of ‘olam is equally true of aiōn. The attempt to determine the length of time involved, or to assign to the person or thing described the quality of continuing endlessly, on the basis of ‘olam or aiōn, is entirely unjustified. In each instance, the duration of ‘olam or aiōn depends solely on the context in which it is used, particularly on the nature of the person or thing to which the word is applied.
I do agree – Camping has it all wrong. When will people learn to read the Bible?
Matthew 24:35-36 ESV Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. 36 “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.
Oops – there it is again, “Heaven and earth WILL pass away”. And no one knows the hour, the context is Matthew 24:3 ESV As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?”
No one knows the exact time. But we have been given warning signs to look for. Watch. That comes from the Real Bible.
Dear A. Way,
As usual, for the most part, you have it all wrong above. Your remarks about the supposed indeterminate meaning of “forever” in Scripture are typical of those who believe in the mistaken view of materialist theology.
I have before explained the related terms in a straightforward manner: when “forever” is used of things in this age, it means forever in a finite sense, and may sometimes be thought of as perpetual. When “forever” (and of course its synonyms, and the words in the original language) has reference to the future age, in the KJV sometimes rendered “the world to come” (see Matthew 12:32), then “eternal” means “forever” in the infinite sense.
Since I explained this before, you have posted your mistaken information in direct contradiction to the information I have previously explained and proven from Scripture at length.
But on this site you know I encourage just such responses as you have given, because it helps everyone who may read them to think more deeply about just what is it that the Bible teaches, and how can we know that one interpretation is preferable to another.
Your understanding of Ecclesiastes 1:4 is absolutely backwards.
So that this comment remains short enough to be readable, I’ll leave the proof of that to another comment.