Official site providing information about the local government and community.

Provides blood drive schedule, health & safety classes, and contact information.

Includes road construction dates and information, adopt-a-road program, and Weighmaster permits requirements.

County Sheriff's Department

Calendar of events, and directions to the largest 4-H youth fair in Southwest Michigan for 56 years.

Information on community services.

When I said future tense that was used in Isa 9:6, I was talking about the
English translation (shall/will). Eventhough the Hebrew language has the
imperfect and perfect tenses only, the Bible translators follow rules to
translate Isa 9:6 as “his name SHALL/WILL be” to denote FUTURE action.
Most of the Bible translations translate Isa 9:6 to use future tense
(SHALL/WILL).

Remember that these titles refer exclusively to the “child”/ “son” that
was given to us, and in your term the “human nature” only . The “child”
and “son” to be born was not yet called “Mighty God” when Isa 9:6 was
stated. If the “child” or “son” or any part of the “son’s” being is
already the “Mighty God”, then Isa 9:6 is false in stating “shall/will”.
Remember this text is a prophecy not history.
Notice that the titles do not include, King, but “Prince” of peace,
Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God (Not Almighty God), Everlasting Father.



Another fallacy, that you present is that Jesus split into 2, one existing
in Heaven, aside from the Father and holy spirit, then the other one
became human, both being existing at the same time. The Bible does not
support that. Phil 2:7 stated that Jesus EMPTIED himself and was made in
the likeness of men. If Jesus emptied himself, therefore, nothing is left
of his being when he became human.

Another example is Luke 20:9-16. Here God paralleled himself and his Son
to human beings. When the Father sent his son, the WHOLE being of the
“Son” went. There is no indication of another part of the “Son” that was
left.




((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

Douglas Cox wrote:

>
> As I interpret this prophecy, the "constant" which was taken away
> refers to the diurnal rotation of the earth, the knowledge of which
> was stamped out in the time of Antiochus IV.
>
SNIP
>
> Antiochus and his agents stamped out the knowledge of the earth's
> diurnal rotation, and established the supremacy of the geocentric
> cosmology of the Greeks, with its system of rigid spheres. Daniel's
> prophecy said the heavenly sanctuary would be "cleansed" after 2,300
> evening-mornings. This can be interpreted as 2,300 years,


No. No it can't. It completely overlooks the Hebrew concept of time.
Do we also infuse your evening-morning = years interpretation in the
Christ being in the grave? The standard prophetic principle of
interpretation is to accept the literal, normative stand until either
the context, surrounding prophecies or history proves other wise. This
is a very large leap based upon a very tenuous presupposition.