Everyone's teeth cursed with plaque. Horrible curse

Amazing video I now know the truth…

I heard this message 6 years ago, and it can still renew my heart 6 years later.

I have learnt a lot,thankyou so much.But I would love to here about the law with regard to now that we are under Grace.

Can't help it but this guy has a.place.in my heart he's the guy who helped set my feet on the right path Also alittle funny great voice for listeners.

Thank you for your commitment to share with others Mr . Veith. Highly appreciated. Everyone on this planet should watch it- so help it GOD!

Loved this❤

One of the best Christians alive today. God keep Walter safe!

Revelation 21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the LAMB are the TEMPLE of it. Rev 21:22 explained by many other verses like John 2:21 John 1:29,31 Colos 2:2,3 you see the LAMB as being Sanctuary(temple) given already beginning with Adam &Eve to represent the true Lamb Jesus as being the Sanctuary(John 2:21 Colos 2:2,3) so that already Adam &Eve will be clothed already in Genesis 3:21 with the life of the true Lamb sacrificed on the cross in John 3:16 for the sins of Adam and all his repented children will be clothed with the righteousness of Jesus as Christ, which is His right doing in the Law of laws of the Sanctuary. Obeying Jesus in Mark 10:21 you will take your cross which you will need Galatians 2:20(Rom 12:1) 1John 3:9 1John 5:18 to be God’s sanctuary(1Cor 6:19 1John 3:16) for the final test of glorification in 2Thes 2:3,4 2Thes 1:10 Rev 12:17 Rev 13:15 to end successfully the Armageddon started in heaven against the Sanctuary(Ezekiel 28:18 2Peter 2:4) breaking the eternally state of REST in obedience called SABBATISMOS so that they will be not anymore seen as WORSHIPPERS. &To replace them God created for you a perpetual new chance of RESTING of of all kind of sins on your six days of the week living like in heaven(Luke 11:2) daily RESTING in obedience(Hebr 4:6) called SABBATISMOS in Hebrews 4:9 so that in Hebrews 4:10 you will ENTER in His REST of all His works(Genesis 2:1-3) RESTING “AS” HE RESTED on seventh day WITHOUT sinning on His six working days. Your daily REST in obedience is very much possible after you received in Matthew 11:28 your daily REST of all kind of sins taking in Mark 10:21 that cross which you will need in Galatians 2:20(Rom 12:1) being the other crucified lamb TOGETHER WITH Christ so that as being forever died in Gal 2:20 ONLY Christ will continue to live in YOU as Lord on the throne of all your ways of life being born again of God’s WORD(seed-Luke 8:11 John 1:1 John 17:17 Acts 11:14) SPIRITually WORDS(John 6:63) which will remain forever in YOU in 1John 3:9 1John 5:18 being born again to be IDentified in Rev 14:12 Colos 1:26 receiving in Colos 2:2 God’s MYSTERY called Christ on which is invested God’s infinite WISDOM(Colos 2:3 Proverbs 8:1) which have a beginning in Prov 8:22-25 John 1:1 made Sanctuary in John 1:14 John 2:21 with the main purpose that you will be sanctuary having forever Christ in you as hope of glory(Colos 1:27 Colos 2:2,3 John 2:21) having heart burn(Luke 24:32) in Rev 3:15,16 about the EXPLANATION given in Luke 24:27,44 so that knowing the NAME of His Father revealed in John 17:6,26 to have in Rev 14:1 being sealed now in Rev 7:1-8 you will be in Rev 14:6-12 Rev 18:1-7 the SAINT calling God’s invisible church to come out from the sinful living as ecumenical united in Rev 18:2 Rev 17:5,18 even with most sinful religions and atheists. For this purpose commanded you in John 6:44,45 to be attracted by Father’s TEACHING given beginning with Exodus 24:12 to have them in Galatians 3:24 to bring you to Christ in Galatians 2:20(Rom 12:1) to KNOW you in Matthew 25:12 Matt 7:23 as not anymore cursed in John 7:49 not KNOWING the Law of laws of the Sanctuary about Christ(John 2:21 Colos 2:2,3) and you being sanctuary as hope of glory in 2Thes 1:10 2Thes 2:3,4 Rev 12:17 Rev 13:15 being God’s LAWYER in Romans 3:4 fighting against Satan’s LIARS(Rom 3:4) who will judge God in Rev 14:7 making Him as LIAR in Rom 3:4 in all His words of the Law trying to demonstrate that even after Galatians 2:20 1John 3:9 1John 5:18 NOBODY CAN KEEP His Laws of laws and commandments Exodus 20.

This man is something else

I think that, as opposed to the Second Advent and the "Marriage of the Lamb" that nobody knows, the preceding "great and dreadful day of the Lord" can actually be established as the 20th March 2031. The world will feel that ominous consuming fire approaching and will run around trying to hide, while Christians enter into their inner prayer "chambers". When the Christians come out, there will be no OTHER flesh and blood survivers - who will be burnt up and trodden "as ash under their feet." They will mourn for their friends and relatives who weren't "saved", but SOMETIME afterwards will witness the return of Christ coming from east to west. Raising their eyes they will be transformed in an instant, allowing them to rise up and meet His RETURN. Thereafter they will be consoled when He "wipes the tears" from their eyes and takes care of them like as "calves of the stall". That's how I perceive these future Biblical events, but I will look at the verses you mention...... Don't the dead in Christ rise "first" - a great multitude ? Then those living Christians that are "left" come safely out of their prayer chambers - AFTER the "wrath", to "tread upon the ashes of the wicked who have been removed from the earth" - "The righteous shall NEVER be removed but the wicked shall be cut off". These "saved" righteous remnant then "lift up their eyes", and are then "changed in the twinkling of an eye", and able to rise up and meet Christ returning with this great host..... The chronology in the Septuagint is a few hundred years longer than in the Masoretic Text. Both are flawed: The imminent millennial reign of Christ on earth coincides with Yahweh's 2nd 'day' of rest - "and His rest shall be glorious" because His Son is ruling on earth for that 1000-year-day. So if Yahweh's first "day" of rest was ALSO a thousand-year-day, in which Adam died at 930 years old "in the same day" he sinned, and Adam was also made near the end of the previous 6th 'day', then we are currently near the end of the 13th thousand-year-day which actually ends on the "great and dreadful day of the Lord" on the 20th March 2031.

Powerful sermon give us hope and courage

Inspiring message.

Amazing. Thank you so much. Just found this.

No! Not all sickness is a result of the person sinning! Omg

How do u fit a triune god in the sanctuary? He repeatedly reffer to God as him he himself so which of the three the he reffering to

Love this sermon

Thank the Lord for His Amazing Facts Ministries!!!

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children." So, the Israel of God also be destroyed for the same.

I confess the Lord Jesus Christ as my personal savior

They have relentlessly pursued me to even try to kill me and my husbands ex wife lives better than me and many others who have done heinous things. But yet I am disturbed after years of not wanting to be and caused to stumble. I was angry and cursing but God still listened to me bcus he does not feel it's fair and he is still gonna avenge me.

Keep strong. Dont forget that despite the struggles and madness in this world today, God is full of justice, mercy and love. Justice said we broke His perfect law - causing the world's previous perfection to be destroyed - and therefore we deserve Hell (like a punishment in any legal system but this is eternal as His perfect law is eternal too). Don't think you fit in that category? Ever done one of these?: lying, stealing - regardless of how small the object EVER, hating others - which is murder in God's perfect law, lusting (plus God sees our entire thought life). Justice says "the soul that sins shall die" - if we break one in thought/word/deed it's as if we're guilty of all of them. Quite simply, living by the law (which is doing everything perfectly) is impossible for sinful humans . The law shows us that 1. We will die in Hell if we fail to follow it and 2. We cannot save ourselves BUT, 3. God's perfect, immovable law points us to Christ, who followed and fulfilled the law in thought, word and deed perfectly in our place. He did what we couldn't and did it on our behalf. He was then sentenced to death on a cross, and took our personal punishment for our sin, paying our penalty (like paying our fine) completely FOR us, and has given us freedom. If we turn from the sins we have committed and repent (pursue the opposite direction of love through Christ) He will, overtime, recreate us back into that previously perfect image through The Holy Spirit which Jesus sends to all who accept Him as their personal Lord and Savior of their life. He will help us through the struggle, the stress, and anything we experience in the world. It's about letting Christ in to guide and teach you and obeying Him through His power (not ourselves, we need Him to help us as it's impossible without depending on His power and instruction). He is our substitute in His life, death and resurrection. He essentially rewrote history in our place so that, if you believe in Him, it will be as if you had never sinned if you accept Christ's death as our own in our place. He is in Heaven right now preparing a place for us so that He can take His faithful, believing children home with Him when He returns. He will ressurrect us from death when He returns, giving mercy to those who accept His love, instruction and teachings in their life, and give justice to those who refuse it. He doesn't want ANY of us to go to Hell and die for continuing in evil and rejecting His way to life, thats why He died FOR us. Hes giving EVERYONE a chance, He wants everyone to take the free gift of salvation from Hell. He wants us to be His and begin to follow His life of love and service through His power and abiding (staying) with Him. So long as we keep our hearts near to Christ through His strength, strive to follow His will of perfect love revealed in the Bible, and let Him lead in the midst of (very certain) pitfalls and struggles, we will, in time, win the ultimate victory over sin, pain and DEATH through Christ. Even if you are willing to be made willing, pray for Jesus to come in and He will do what we can't. Give us The Holy Spirit who will guide us in the right way. Christ says in John 16:33: I have told you these things, so that in Me you may have [perfect] peace. In the world you have tribulation and distress and suffering, but be courageous [be confident, be undaunted, be filled with joy]; I have overcome the world.” [My conquest is accomplished, My victory abiding.] - (AMPLIFIED version) NOTE: You are NEVER too sinful or messed up that God cannot turn your life around through Jesus. EVER. Regardless of what you've done or what you're going through you CAN make it through Jesus. If you have any questions let me know xxx

Wow that is amazing thank you so much for this I always thought the Sabbath was for the Jewish people

Such a beautiful sermon and explanation! Praise God 🙏🙌

Yes we are co-laborers with God! We need to live our lives that way

Thank you again Elder Skeete.You are the very BEST teacher since Paul. Through the Holy Spirit and the power of God,you made everything VERY clear. Thanks again and may God bless you always 🙏

Dear Elder Skeete, a question here. It is Godly to hang the picture of Jesus in our homes? Would the picture itself be looked upon as "graven image? I DO HOPE I'M NOT BLASPHEMING!!!!!!!!!

AMEN

thank you pastor

Thank you pastor

May the good LORD bless you with more light

Amen

He did exactly as Jesus did.

Great movie if you wanna get angry over an appalling injustice. This man was a harmless preacher trying to bring hope to people. In my opinion (Not a christian or anything) but this man is probably the only person I can call a Christian. Because he died for preaching hope. Jesus died for preaching hope. Well if god exist perhaps John Huss did go a better place. I hope so anyway. Because this poor man didn't have to die.

I'm not even a Christian and the fact that this harmless man who just told people to just believe and receive salvation was murdered is absolutely appalling.

They burned the goose, but they wont burn Luther

requesting for the sequels in English please.

What a load of CRAP! That Council, the Council of Constance wasn't convened for Huss. It was convened by the Emperor because there were THREE popes all claiming to be the true pope and this division had been going on throughout Europe for more than a century. When one of these popes died, there were not then only 2 popes because there were 3 different political factions throughout Europe, each one supporting their own man. The Council was called by the Emperor to straighten out this mess. The Emperor fired all 3 popes, and put his own man on the throne of St. Peter, who wound up to be just as bad as the other three popes that had been fired. Do you believe that a Cardinal could threaten the all powerful Holy Roman Emperor with excommunication after he just fired 3 popes? He wouldn't dare! He'd have been arrested, killed and thrown into the river.

Plot twist. Was it on " THORS -day? Odin is actually Nimrod, which is only a description, Nimrod in Hebrew means "rebel". He was also known it is argued as Gilgamesh. Now it is said that Nimrod married his mother. That would be Frigga. Now Nimrod , he gets cut up into 14 pieces and Semiramis can only find 13. So she erects, pun intended, a phallic symbol to replace it. There is a really big one in Rome that came from Egypt. Washington also. Then Tammuz comes along. Allegedly brought in an egg by his father the sun god on winter solstice. But he was a mighty hunter like his dad and killed by a pig. So mom/wife created a little pagan fertility rite to honour him. It begins on Ash Woden's (Odin) day, Wednesday, where they paint a "T" on the forehead in ash, and then they observe the "Forty day of weeping for Tammuz". This ends on Good Frigga day , Friday. Then an orgy where they dip eggs in the blood of the sacrificed 3-month-old children from last years orgy, post term abortion essentially. A Sun-day worship service, it is sun worship, which ends with the eating of the beast that killed him, an Easter ham. It is paganism. It is easy to spot. It is always the father, the son, and the mother. Isis, Horus, Seb., etc...... They just change the names and some of the rites. Hence, few are sacrificing babies on Easter. Sadly not none. What the Word of God says. His name is Y'shua. Others have set up a replacement theology and 99.99% use a name that derives from transliterations. Numbers 13:16 These are the names of the men which Moses sent to spy out the land. And Moses called Oshea the son of Nun Jehoshua. Bamidbar 13:16 Orthodox Jewish Bible (OJB) 16 These are the shmot of the men which Moshe sent to spy out the land. And Moshe called Hoshea ben Nun Yehoshua [See Zecharyah 6:11-12 on the personal name of Moshiach in prophecy]. Zecharyah 6:11-12 Orthodox Jewish Bible (OJB) 11 Then take kesef and zahav, and make atarot (crowns), and set them upon the rosh Yehoshua ben Yehotzadak, the Kohen HaGadol 12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus saith Hashem Tzva’os: Hinei Ish, TZEMACH Shmo ; [Yehoshua is said to be the namesake of the coming Moshiach Ben Dovid; see Ezra 3:8 for the Aramaic translation of Yehoshua’s name, Yeshua; see Jer 23:5; 30:9; 33:15; Ezra 3:8; Zech 3:8; Mt 2:23; Isa 4:2; 9:2-7; 11:1-12; 53:2, 11; Moshiach the new “Joshua” Isa 49:8].]; and out of his place yitzmach (he [Moshiach] shall sprout up, Yeshayah 53:2), and he shall build the Heikhal Hashem. Zechariah 6:11-12 New King James Version (NKJV) 11 Take the silver and gold, make an[a] elaborate crown, and set it on the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest. 12 Then speak to him, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts, saying: “Behold, the Man whose name is the BRANCH! From His place He shall [b]branch out, And He shall build the temple of the Lord; Jeremiah 23:5 King James Version (KJV) 5 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. All I know is He is circumcised on the 8th day and named Y'shua. It is the Aramaic translation of Joshua. Yehoshua in Hebrew. All translate to "Salvation sent by God". I know the word " sus " in Latin means pig . He was crucified on the eve of Passover. Constantine in 321 A.D. changed it to Easter and the 7th day Sabbath to Sun-day worship. By edict still followed today. It's about authority and whose you choose to be under. And Rome claims her sun-day worship children. All of them. What are Protestants protesting? He was born Tishri 2, 3759. (sept 11th 3 B.C.) Late summer. And this is what God has to say about Easter and her son/husband Tammuz. Her. Jeremiah 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger. Him. Ezekiel 8:13 He said also unto me, Turn thee yet again, and thou shalt see greater abominations that they do. 14 Then he brought me to the door of the gate of the Lord's house which was toward the north; and, behold, there sat women weeping for Tammuz. They now call it Lent. 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11 King James Version (KJV) 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: P.S. The mother of the Messiahs name is Miriam, not Mary. Mary does not come from Miriam. Mr Veith just proved that since Babylon they just change names. So if they changed it, it was for a reason. Let's say a little prayer that everyone learn that there is only one name under heaven by which we can be saved. It isn't 400-years-old and created by Rome. Learn to love it. It means, "Salvation sent by God". "sus" in Latin means pig, sow, boar, hog.

Amen

@Neetheam Al-muhaisen I watched total onslaught. Dr. V. uses is a tricky speaker. He uses the sandwich technique in his speaking quite a bit. He likes to tell the a truth, then a lie or half truth, followed by a truth. He also uses alot of half truths “typical of protestant apologists.” Don’t get caught up in his stuff though. The church has been defending attacks and accusations against her for 2000 years. Anything he says can be run against an apologist and shot down. Remember he has no authority. His interpretation of the bible is little more than conjecture. No matter what the Catholic church has done or could ever do. There is no other authority until Christ returns. Remember the last guy who tried to take on the throne? What was his name? Looserfir or something… spectrummagazine.org/article/news/2011/10/31/dark-fantasy-world-walter-veith For a taste of what you’ll find in that article: “Veith, it goes without saying, is trading in a world of fantasy and myth that has considerably less logic than a Dan Brown novel and a great deal more creepiness. There is, however, something mesmeric in his performance. If nothing else, he knows how to play the chords of apocalyptic menace with a campy but bravura showmanship. And he seems to know exactly what he is doing. Veith repeatedly states in his performances that he is not telling his listeners what to believe but is simply presenting them with the “facts” so that they can make informed judgments for themselves. But these claims are also simply part of the show.” Read the rest there. It’s well worth it.

@Neetheam Al-muhaisen Thus by 1380 Wyclif had set himself in open opposition to the property and government of the Church, he had attacked the pope in most unmeasured terms, he had begun to treat the Bible as the chief and almost the only test of orthodoxy, and to lay more and more stress on preaching. Yet he would have protested against an accusation of heresy. Great freedom was allowed to speculation in the schools, and there was much uncertainty about clerical property. Even the exclusive use of Scripture as a standard of faith was comprehensible at a time when the allegiance of Christendom was being claimed by two. popes. It must be added that Wyclif frequently inserted qualifying or explanatory clauses in his propositions, and that, in form at least, he would declare his readiness to submit his opinions to the judgment of the Church. It seems to have been a time of much uncertainty in matters of faith, and the Lollard movement in its earlier stages is remarkable for a readiness of recantation. Wyclif’s heretical position became, however, much more pronounced when he denied the doctrine of Transubstantiation. His own position is not quite clear or consistent, but it seems to approach the Lutheran “consubstantiation”, for he applied to the Blessed Eucharist his metaphysical principle that annihilation is impossible. To attack so fundamental a doctrine tended to define the position of Wyclif and his followers. Henceforth they tend to become a people apart. The friars, with whom the “reformer” had once been on friendly terms, became their chief enemies, and the State turned against them. Old-fashioned Protestant writers, who used to treat medieval heresy as a continuous witness to the truth, found in Wyclif a convenient link between the Albigenses and the sixteenth-century reformers, and the comparison is, perhaps, of interest. Like the heretics of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, Wyclif started with an attack on clerical wealth; he then went on to dispute the authority of the Church and, finally, its sacramental system, but unlike them he avoided those Manichaean tendencies which threatened the most elementary moral laws. That madness had been exorcized by the great Scholastics. On the other hand, Wyclif resembled the Protestant Reformers in his insistence on the Bible as the rule of faith, in the importance attributed to preaching, and in his sacra-mental doctrine. Like them, too, he looked for support to the laity and the civil state, and his conception of the kingly dignity would have satisfied even Henry VIII. The doctrine of justification by faith does not, however, occur in Wyclif’s system. The English Lollards carried on but very imperfectly the tradition of Wyclif’s teaching. His real spiritual inheritor was John Hus, and it was through Bohemia, if at all, that he is directly connected with the Reformation. A large number of Wyclif’s Latin works have been edited and printed by the Wyclif Society. His English works have been edited by T. Arnold (Oxford, 1869-71) and by F. D. Matthew (London, 1880) for the Early English Texts Society. Many of the English tracts, however, are certainly by his followers. Besides these works Wyclif was reputed, even by contemporaries, to have translated the whole of the Bible, and two “Wyclifite” versions are in existence. Abbot Gasquet has disputed the genuineness of this author-ship (“The Old English Bible“, London, 1897), and F. D. Matthew has defended the traditional view (Eng. Hist. Rev., 1895). This much, at any rate, is certain: that the Bible was familiar even to laymen in the fourteenth century and that the whole of the New Testament at least could be read in translations. It is also clear that portions of the Scriptures were called Wyclifite in the fifteenth century, and sometimes condemned as such, because a Wyclifite preface had been added to a perfectly orthodox translation.

@Neetheam Al-muhaisen It is impossible to understand Wyclif’s popularity, the weakness of the ecclesiastical authorities, or even the character of his teaching, without taking into account the extraordinary condition of the country at the end of the fourteenth century. The discredit which had been brought on the principle of authority in Church and State and the popularity of revolutionary ideas have been touched upon in the article Lollards. and the causes which explain the spread of Lollardy are responsible, to some extent at least, for. Wyclif’s own mental development. His earliest writings are mainly logical and metaphysical. He belonged to the Realist School, and claimed to be a disciple of St. Augustine, but it was his attitude in the practical and political questions of Evangelical poverty and Church government which gave him influence. The question of Evangelical poverty was a burning one throughout the fourteenth century. Originally a subject of bitter controversy within the ranks of the Friars Minor, it had received a wider extension, and the chief theological writers of the time had taken sides. When the papacy declared for the moderates, the extremists, with their literary supporters, Marsiglio of Padua, William of Ockham, and others, assumed an attitude of hostility to Rome, and soon found themselves advocating a church organization without property and practically under the control of the State. From the mendicants, then, Wyclif inherited his hatred of clerical and monastic endowments, and in this he showed no great originality. Throughout the Middle Ages the wealth of the clergy was liable to attack, and that sometimes from the most orthodox. What is, however, characteristic of Wyclif is the argument, half-feudal and half-theological, with which he supports his attack on the clergy and the monks; yet though connected with his name it was in part borrowed from Richard Fitz-Ralph, an Oxford teacher and vice-chancellor, who had since become Archbishop of Armagh. Fitz Ralph had been himself an opponent of the “mendicants”, but Wyclif found in his theory of “lordship” a convenient and a novel way of formulating the ancient but anarchical principle that no respect is due to the commands or the property of the wicked. “Dominion is founded in grace” is the phrase which sums up the argument, and dominium it must be remembered is a word which might be said to contain the whole feudal theory, for it means both sovereignty and property. “Dominion”, then, or “lordship”, belongs to God alone. Any lordship held by the creature is held of God and is forfeited by sin, for mortal sin is a kind of high treason towards God, the Overlord. Fitz-Ralph had used this argument meaning to justify the distinction between “property” and “use” which the moderate Franciscans had adopted and the extremists had rejected. Wyclif, however, brought it down into the marketplace by applying it to clerical possessions. He even went further than the argument authorized him, for he came to hold that no monks or clergy, not even the righteous, could hold temporal possessions without sin, and further that it was lawful for kings and princes to deprive them of what they held unlawfully. Logically, Wyclif’s doctrine of lordship should apply to temporal lords as well as to spiritual; but this logical step he never took, and he did not, therefore, contribute intentionally to the Peasant Revolt of 1381. Yet the assaults of so well known a man on church property must have encouraged the movement (of this there is a good deal of evidence), and the “poor priests”, who were less closely connected with lay-men of position and property, are sure to have gone further than their master in the communistic direction. Wyclif’s attack on the property of the monastic orders and of the Church would necessarily bring him before long into conflict with the ecclesiastical authorities, and he was led to guard himself against the results of excommunication by maintaining that, as he put it, “no man can be excommunicated unless he first be excommunicated by himself” (viz. by sin), a statement which may be true of the effect of excommunication on the soul, but which cannot be applied to the external government of the Church.

@Neetheam Al-muhaisen Wyclif (WYCLIFFE, or WICLIF, etc.), JOHN, writer and “reformer”, b. probably at Hipswell near Richmond, in Yorkshire, 1324; d. at Lutterworth, Leicestershire, December 31,1384. His family is said to have come from Wycliffe, on the Tees, in the same county. The traditional date of his birth is given as 1324, but some authorities put it earlier. Hardly any thing is known of his early life, and his career at Oxford is obscured by the presence of at least one man of the same name and probably of more. It is almost certain, however, that he was educated at Balliol College and that in 1361 he must have resigned the master ship on receiving the living of Fillingham. This he exchanged a few years later for that of Ludgershall. It must not be supposed, however, that he gave up his university career, for livings were often given to learned men to enable them to continue their studies or their teaching. Wyclif himself, for instance, received a two years’ license for non-residence, in 1368, on account of his studies. Meanwhile, in 1365, a man of his name, and usually identified with the future “reformer”, had been appointed warden of the new Canterbury Hall by Simon Islip, Archbishop of Canterbury, only to be turned out two years later in favor of a monk by the new archbishop. The dispossessed warden, with the fellows, appealed to Rome, but failed in their appeal. A number of Wyclif’s recent biographers have sought to identify this warden with another ecclesiastic, a friend of Islip’s and probably a fellow of Merton; but it seems dangerous, in spite of much plausibility in this new identification, to reject the direct statements of contemporary writers, controversialists though they be, and possibly of a reference in one of Wyclif’s own writings. Soon after these events, probably in 1372, Wyclif received the Degree of Doctor of Theology. He was by this time a man of repute in the university, and it is strange that his doctorate should have been so long delayed. The explanation may possibly be found in the fact that Balliol was an “Arts” college and that most of its fellows were not allowed to graduate in theology. Ecclesiastical promotion did not fail the new doctor; in 1373 he received the rich living of Lutterworth in Leicestershire, and about the same time he was granted by papal provision a prebend in a collegiate church, while he was allowed, also by papal license, to keep it as well as another at Lincoln; this latter, however, he did not eventually receive. Though his opinions on church endowments must by this time have been well known in and out of Oxford, Wyclif cannot with certainty be connected with public affairs till 1374. In that year his name appears second, after a bishop, on a commission which the English Government sent to Bruges to discuss with the representatives of Gregory XI, and, if possible settle, a number of points in dispute between the king and the pope. The conference came to no very satisfactory conclusion, but it appears to mark the beginning of the affiance between Wyclif and the anti-clerical oligarchic party headed by John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, the king’s brother. This party profited by Edward III‘s premature senility to misgovern in their own interests, and found in the Oxford doctor, with his theories of the subjection of church property to the civil prince, a useful ally in their attacks on the Church. Wyclif must frequently have preached in London at this time, “barking against the Church“, and he refers to himself as “peculiaris regis clericus”. The Good Parliament, however, with the help of the Black Prince, was able, in 1376, to drive John of Gaunt and his friends from power. A year later the death of the prince gave Lancaster his opportunity, and the anti-clericals had once more the control of the Government. Under these circumstances the attempt of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London to bring Wyclif to book was not likely to succeed. He appeared at St. Paul’s escorted by his powerful friends, and the proceedings soon degenerated into a quarrel between Lancaster and the Bishop of London. The Londoners took their bishop’s side, but the council broke up in confusion. The papal authority was next invoked against Wyclif, and a series of Bulls were issued from Rome. Nothing much came of them, however; Oxford, on the whole, took Wyclif’s part, and a council of doctors declared that the propositions attributed to him, though ill-sounding, were not erroneous. When Wyclif appeared, early in 1378, at Lambeth, both the Princess of Wales and the London crowd interposed in his favor. The summons, however, led to the formulation of eighteen articles which give a fair account of Wyclif’s teaching at this period. But before his next summons in 1381 his heresies, or heretical tendencies, had developed rapidly. The Great Schism may partially account for this and also the fact that Wyclif was now becoming the leader of a party. It was about this time that he began to send out his “poor priests”, men who, except quite at the beginning, were usually laymen, and to lay much more stress on the Bible and on preaching. In 1380 Wyclif took the momentous step of beginning to attack Transubstantiation. It was at Oxford that he did so, calling the Host merely “an effectual sign”. This open denial of a doctrine which came home to every Christian, and the reaction which followed the Peasant Revolt, lost Wyclif much of his popularity. In 1381 an Oxford council of doctors condemned his teaching on the Blessed Eucharist and a year later an ecclesiastical court at Black-friars gave sentence against a series of twenty-four Wyclifite propositions. The Government was now against him. Westminster and Canterbury combined to put pressure on the still reluctant university authorities. A number of prominent Wyclifites were forced to make retractations (cf. Lollards), but nothing seems to have been demanded from the leader of the movement except a promise not to preach. He retired to Lutterworth and, though he continued to write voluminously both in Latin and English, remained there undisturbed till his death. He was probably cited to Rome but he was too infirm to obey. Indeed he was probably paralyzed during the last two years of his life. A second stroke came in 1384 while he was hearing Mass in his church, and three days later he died. He was buried at Lutterworth, but the Council of Constance in 1415 ordered his remains to be taken up and cast out. This was done in 1428.

EVIDENCE CHRIST'S "RETURN", OR APPEARING, WAS FIRST CENTURY Brian Hyde October 29, 2020 Scriptural evidence in support of a first century return of Christ in judgment in AD 70, or more correctly, appearing (Gk parousia), at the “consummation of the ages”, is huge. We are all familiar with Matthew 24:3. Thus a more accurate translation of Matthew 24:3 would be: "Tell us, when will these things be? What is the signs of your presence and of the end of the age?" First, what precisely is the meaning of the word ‘parousia’? The word ‘parousia’ is a transliterated Greek word (pronounced par-oo-see'-ah) which according to Strongs (3952) means ‘a presence’, ‘a coming’ as in ‘an arrival’ or ‘advent’. The HELPS Word-studies renders ‘parousía’ variously as “be present, arrive to enter into a situation; coming, especially the arrival of the owner who alone can deal with a situation; a visit of a king or some other official, 'a royal visit'.” In other words, if you were in Judea at the time, then though you may not have seen Jesus in person, and though you may not have seen supernatural signs evidencing his presence, you knew beyond all doubt by what was taking place, that Christ was present, for Jesus had predicted them. He would bring them to light as he did the sign predicted in Matthew 24:30 (Gk phainó ‘cause to appear’). The disciples understood this, hence their urgent question "What is the sign of your presence (Gk parousia), and of the end of the age?" Because of early interpreters rendered 'parousia' as the end of the physical planet, it is understandable that many modern readers of Jewish scripture have come to a wrong conclusion in expecting that Jesus "coming" was to be a physical bodily return, rather than a special final manifestation of his ongoing spiritual presence. I've said repeatedly Jesus never left so as to return. Spirit goes nowhere in the Spirit relam for whatever is Spirit has no time and space as in the physical realm. Jesus was with his disciples in person always-via Spirit-unto the end of the world. Nevertheless, for the sake of his disciples who were living in a dimension of time and space, Jesus used the only language they could understand at that time, to describe his special appearance. When was it? It was clearly to be during at the “last day” of the “last generation” that was at “the end of the age” that was the “end of the world” of Ancient Israel. It served to bring about that world’s ending. And Jesus and his disciples were living in that very last generation. This is why almost everything Jesus said is time related. Matthew 10:23 - "Truly I say to you, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes." Those "cities" were destroyed in AD 70. The disciples were told by Christ to preach "the gospel of the kingdom" (Matthew 24:14). This is because it was imminent. It had been imminent since John the Baptist and Jesus came preaching the "kingdom of God" was "at hand". The Baptist clearly sets the time-frame with his warning that the ax was ALREADY laid at the root of the tree to be cut down and burned by fire (Luke 3:9). "Tree" was a metaphor for Israel, as per the life of the nation, and "ax" a metaphor for the act of cutting dead the life of the nation, and the burning of the tree by "fire" a metaphor for the judgment. All of which took place during AD 66-70. That the destruction of Jerusalem was Judgment Day could not have been more obvious than by God not intervening on behalf of the Jews, in order to save them as He had in the past. This is because they were "His people" no more. The nation that had been God’s covenant people, was never restored. Unsurprisingly, then, Christ's teachings (parables and prophecies) (himself personally, or through the apostles) were all associated with and directly related to the demise of the old kingdom of the Jews and the end of their "world", and the establishment of the "kingdom of God" and of His Christ. Matthew 16:27,28 - "Truly I say to you, there are some who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom." "Taste death" is a Jewish expression meaning to experience mortal death. In other words, Christ's return would PRECEDE their mortal death. The people to whom these words were addressed were standing right there in his presence, listening to him. Imagine their excitement! Matthew 24:34 - "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place." "This generation", meaning the generation in which Jesus was then living. Matthew 26:64 - "You [the high priest] will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven." All Hebraic prophecy was to be understood figuratively. "See" here means with "spiritual eyes" recognize or understand. In other words, it would dawn on them. The teaching of Jesus to his disciples is clear as a bell. It was that his coming was to take place "soon" within the lifetime of disciples, before some of his audience would die, and before his generation would pass away. In the past many theologians have struggled with these statements and have been at a loss to explain why Jesus "failed" to keep his promise. Now they are beginning to see that they are the ones who "failed" because their presuppositions prevented them from paying proper attention to historical context. There are so many other scriptural time references regarding the return of Jesus in a first-century context and which tie in to the destruction of the Jewish temple in AD 70, that there really is no excuse. For instance: Matthew 24:34 - "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place." Jesus’ use of "this generation" throughout the gospels always refers to that generation of his contemporaries: Matthew 26:36; 11:16; 12:39, 41, 42 and 45; Luke 11:50-51; 17:25; Mark 8:38. Matthew 26:64 - "You [the high priest] will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven." "See", here, also means to witness. Revelation 1:1 - "...things which must shortly take place". The word 'revelation' (ταχει, tachos and en tachei) means "quickly, all at once, with all speed, without delay." Revelation 2:16 - "Repent, or else I will come to you quickly" Revelation 3:11 - "Behold, I come quickly!" Revelation 22:6 - "...things which must shortly take place." Revelation 22:7 - "Behold, I am coming quickly!" Revelation 22:12 - "Behold, I am coming quickly." Revelation 22:20 - "Surely I am coming quickly." γγυς, engus means "at hand", "near" Revelation 1:3 - "The time is near." Revelation 22:10 - "The time is at hand." μελλει, mello, mellei means "about to, on the point or verge of" Revelation 1:19 - "Write ... the things that are about to take place." Revelation 3:10 - "... the hour of trial ... is about to come upon the whole world." Further NT indications of a first-century return of Jesus which was imminent, as follows with my notes and emphasis: Romans 13:11-12 - "You know what hour it is, how it is full time now [i.e. there is more time left] for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed; the night is far gone, THE DAY IS AT HAND." 1Corinthians 7:29-31 - "Brethren, the APPOINTED TIME HAS GROWN VERY SHORT: from.now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none, and those who mourn as though they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those who buy as though they had no goods, and those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it. For the FORM OF THIS WORLD is PASSING AWAY." Time was so short, in fact, that the commonplace things of life had lost importance and they were to treat them as such. 1Corinthians 10:11- "On us [i.e.. first century audience] the ENDS OF THE AGES HAVE COME." Philemon 4:5 - "The Lord is at hand." James 5:8-9 - "The coming of the Lord is at hand ... Behold, the Judge is standing at the door." At hand, at the door, clearly meant now! 1Peter 4:7 - "The end of all things is at hand." "At hand" meaning RIGHT NOW! 1John. 2:18 - "Little children, IT IS the LAST HOUR ... we KNOW that IT IS the last hour". So the Apostle John was either deceived or was liar if this is not true! Hebrew 10:37 “For yet a LITTLE WHILE, And He who is coming will come and will not tarry." So, "tarry" means delay. 2,000 years? Oh, please, give me a break! To expect me to read all these statements and then accept the Christian argument that this language does not mean what it says, is an insult to my intelligence. Its total bunk!

The Vatican is the whore of Babylon, mother of harlots (false churches) and idol worship around the world, see Revelation 17 and 18! The RCC/Vatican has nothing to do with biblical Christianity!!! chick.com/products/tract?stk=0071 King James Bible GOD tells HIS people to come out of her, the false church of Rome: And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues, Revelation 18:4. Listen to godly preachers like Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. David Reagan but the most important thing is to get saved: Thank JESUS for paying for your sins on the cross and HIS resurrection on the 3rd day!!! You shouldn't be a SDA because they deny eternal punishment of the lost in hell and have other UNbiblical doctrines.

Thank you so much Pastor Doug. I needed to hear and watch this. Love your teachings, God Bless

Now the Catholic Inquisitors in Hell see the Brightness of Jan huss in Heaven. They tormented day and Night but Jan Huss will Enjoy the Heavenly Joy.

Now the Catholic Inquisitors in Hell see the Brightness of Jan huss in Heaven. They tormented day and Night but Jan Huss will Enjoy the Heavenly Joy.

Because in the beginning was the Word, there is first evidence of Christ's return in prophecy. I was shown this beginning in 2012 A.D. According to the Book of Daniel, Jesus has already returned and we have entered the "age to come" foretold by Jesus in the Harmonious Gospel of St. Mark, chapter ten, verse thirty on December 30, 2018 A.D., the Glorious Manifestation of Our King, Lord, and Savior. This comment provided on the 287th day of the 2nd year of the General Resurrection of the Dead. risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com The specifics of the Book of Daniel include the foretelling of the exact days of Jesus' baptism, crucifixion, and return in glory. There is no more antichrist because the spirit of antichrist was destroyed by the breath of Jesus' mouth at the glory of His coming. As Saint John the Baptizer, I have been resurrected for more than sixty-five years.