Dalene and Andy

Since there is all this BF talk, I was wondering if anyone could help me with weaning ideas. My daughter is almost 27 months and I feel the time to wean is growing closer. But I have no idea how to go about it. She feeds a lot - during the day and even through the night, since we're co-sleeping - yes I am aware of the problem with teeth, but I had to weigh the pros and cons. So any ideas of how to go about weaning would be much appreciated.

Dalene


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/4/02 1:39:26 AM Central Daylight Time,
mactier@... writes:


>
>
>
> Since there is all this BF talk, I was wondering if anyone could help me
> with weaning ideas. My daughter is almost 27 months and I feel the time to
> wean is growing closer. But I have no idea how to go about it. She feeds a
> lot - during the day and even through the night, since we're co-sleeping -
> yes I am aware of the problem with teeth, but I had to weigh the pros and
> cons. So any ideas of how to go about weaning would be much appreciated.
>
> Dalene

This is just me, (and I never once attended a LLL meeting. I don't think we
even have one here) but I let my kids wean themselves. I know that there is
pressure to stop after a time. And boy do I remember the looks I got when I
was tandem nursing a 28 mo. old and a newborn, the looks got even nastier
when Moly was three and Jack was 8 mos. Once we were all at the zoo, and we
had to stop for Jack who was about 5mos, to nurse, then Moly climbed up and
lifted the blanket to nurse too. A woman walked by just as Darin took Jack so
I could finish with Moly and she laid in to me about how the baby was old
enough for a cup and the fact that I was still letting *the girl* nurse was
just sick. I thought Darin looked like he was going to explode! (when Jack
was almost three and still nursing, Darin was slightly uncomfortable with it,
and even made noises about quitting. which was funny because he didn't have a
problem with Moly nursing that long, but then maybe he was just ready to have
them all to himself again! <g>)

Moly stopped right around three and Jack was just past three, although he
would comfort nurse every now and then. I would have loved to continue.
Again, just me, but don't be in too much of a hurry to stop.
~Nancy


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Bronwen

> Since there is all this BF talk, I was wondering if anyone could help me
with weaning ideas. My daughter is almost 27 months and I feel the time to
wean is growing closer.

What is leading you to feel this way? Then I can give you ideas.

>since we're co-sleeping - yes I am aware of the problem with teeth,

There is no problem with teeth- dental caries is only a recent occurance in
human beings- 97,000 years of perfect teeth and breastfeeding for 4-7 years,
it doesn't make sense. I give you on e-mail hug for listening to your heart
and not a dentist. Your little partner is one lucky cowgirl.

Love,
Bronwen

Judy

on my way out this morning but ..
try the FAQs here:


http://lalecheleague.org/

and Mothering Your Nursing Toddler- By BAumgardner is excellent



Dalene and Andy wrote:

> Since there is all this BF talk, I was wondering if anyone could help
> me with weaning ideas. My daughter is almost 27 months and I feel the
> time to wean is growing closer. But I have no idea how to go about it.
> She feeds a lot - during the day and even through the night, since
> we're co-sleeping - yes I am aware of the problem with teeth, but I
> had to weigh the pros and cons. So any ideas of how to go about
> weaning would be much appreciated.
>
> Dalene
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
> <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=233351.2428261.3848243.2225242/D=egroupweb/S=1705081972:HM/A=1261180/R=2/id=noscript/*https://www.gotomypc.com/tr/yh/grp/300_04F/g22lp?Target=mm/g22lp.tmpl>
>
>
>
> ~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
>
> If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please
> email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the
> list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address
> an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

kayb85

That is if you believe in evolution of course. If you believe in
Biblical creation, God created us with teeth only 6000 years ago.
Sheila

> There is no problem with teeth- dental caries is only a recent
occurance in
> human beings- 97,000 years of perfect teeth and breastfeeding for 4-
7 years,
> it doesn't make sense. I give you on e-mail hug for listening to
your heart
> and not a dentist. Your little partner is one lucky cowgirl.
>
> Love,
> Bronwen

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/4/02 8:38:40 AM Central Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:

<< That is if you believe in evolution of course. If you believe in
Biblical creation, God created us with teeth only 6000 years ago. >>

That is if you believe in the bible as literal. Some of us believe in
creation and don't agree with the 6,000 y.o. stuff.

Ren

kayb85

I think it's more than just believing it's literal, it's believing
that it is accurate historically. There have been people who have
counted the generations (and how old each person was at death in each
generation) and figured out historically how many years are between
Adam and Jesus, and we know from more recent historical records how
many years there are between Jesus and now.

My point in this is not to argue the creation/evolution point but to
point out that evolutionary arguments aren't going to be effective
arguments in convincing someone to breastfeed past the toothless baby
stage. I think breastfeeding babies with teeth is a good idea. I
breastfed my babies with teeth and never had a problem. But you're
not going to convince young earth creationists (and there are a lot
of homeschoolers in that category) to breastfeed using that
argument.
Sheila


--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., starsuncloud@c... wrote:
> In a message dated 10/4/02 8:38:40 AM Central Daylight Time,
> Unschooling-dotcom@y... writes:
>
> << That is if you believe in evolution of course. If you believe
in
> Biblical creation, God created us with teeth only 6000 years ago.
>>
>
> That is if you believe in the bible as literal. Some of us believe
in
> creation and don't agree with the 6,000 y.o. stuff.
>
> Ren

Tia Leschke

>
> There is no problem with teeth- dental caries is only a recent occurance
in
> human beings- 97,000 years of perfect teeth and breastfeeding for 4-7
years,
> it doesn't make sense. I give you on e-mail hug for listening to your
heart
> and not a dentist. Your little partner is one lucky cowgirl.

My granddaughter had to have her top front teeth pulled when she was almost
2. The dentist tried to feed my daughter that line about night nursing, but
she knew better. Recently a friend told me that she had weaned her almost 2
year old son on the dentist's advice for the same reason. She was quite
upset about it because she hadn't been able to nurse her daughter at all and
wanted to continue longer with her son. I only wish she had brought it up
before weaning him. All I could do was tell her to check out even medical
people's advice. They don't always know what they're talking about.
Tia

Bronwen

> My point in this is not to argue the creation/evolution point but to
> point out that evolutionary arguments aren't going to be effective
> arguments in convincing someone to breastfeed past the toothless baby
> stage.

> But you're
> not going to convince young earth creationists (and there are a lot
> of homeschoolers in that category) to breastfeed using that
> argument.

Ok. How about this.

Our creator would not have designed a system with such an incredible flaw.
No other species gets cavaties while they nurse. It doesn't make sense.
It is commonly understood that in biblical times, babies were nursed till
three or later. It is said that Jesus was nursed till about eight or nine.

Love,
Bronwen

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/4/02 11:34:07 AM Central Daylight Time,
leschke@... writes:


> > There is no problem with teeth- dental caries is only a recent occurance
> in
> > human beings- 97,000 years of perfect teeth and breastfeeding for 4-7
> years,
> > it doesn't make sense. I give you on e-mail hug for listening to your
> heart
> > and not a dentist. Your little partner is one lucky cowgirl.
>
> My granddaughter had to have her top front teeth pulled when she was almost
> 2. The dentist tried to feed my daughter that line about night nursing,
> but
> she knew better.

Well, regardless if we are 97,000 years old or just 6,000 years old. For
thousands of years breast milk was it.
It isn't breast milk that damages babys teeth. But a Bottle with formula left
in a crib at night, so baby won't cry, or so baby can fall asleep will.
Bottle=wrong shaped plastic nipples, Formula=sugar=bad teeth (cavities and
misformed teeth) Breastmilk=natural mommy stuff.
~Nancy


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Deborah Lewis

> Since there is all this BF talk, I was wondering if anyone could help
> me with weaning ideas. My daughter is almost 27 months and I feel
> the time to wean is growing closer. But I have no idea how to go
> about it. She feeds a lot - during the day and even through the
> night, since we're co-sleeping - yes I am aware of the problem with
> teeth, but I had to weigh the pros and cons. So any ideas of how to
> go about weaning would be much appreciated.

She'll do it herself when she's ready. = )
Twenty seven months sounds like such a baby! My son was four when he
decided he was done.
He has perfect teeth and he slept with us and nursed when he wanted.

Deb L

Sally Ann Vinke

OK, taking a plunge here....I absolutely respect and to a great degree
agree with most of the responses so far with regard to child-led
weaning. I was devoted to the idea when my child was young. However, in
the end I did initiate weaning, and since I haven't seen anyone actually
offer the ideas requested, I'll give a quick synopsis of what worked for
me.

Around 22-24 months, the process of nursing became problematic for me
when I realized my daughter was not really nursing, but rather chewing,
biting and generally playing, but not truly nursing (during the day). I
tried for several weeks to refocus the experience with gentle prompting
and being sure that *I* was really *there*, to no avail. Finally, I
began a two-pronged approach to gently wean from the frequent,
NON-feeding daytime sessions (we still had long, relaxed FEEDING
sessions in the morning, at night, and perhaps once, sometimes twice
during the night).

First, I began delaying my response to the request; instead of instantly
dropping what I was doing, I would ask her to wait 10 minutes. Often,
she would go to whatever she was doing while waiting, and forget all
about it. Secondly, when she would either insist she couldn't wait, or
come back after a few minutes, I would begin to nurse, but if she was
not feeding, but merely (and PAINFULLY) playing/chewing/hanging out, I
would explain that it was uncomfortable for me, and that if all she
wanted was a cuddle, we could cuddle. Often we would just sit or lay
together, skin to skin, and talk or coo for a bit. After a time, she
would get up and proclaim she was done. After a few weeks, she stopped
asking for *ma-ma* during the day, still occasionally asking for a
cuddle, and we continued to have true nursing sessions first thing in
the morning and before/during sleep for a few more months, then she just
sort of tapered off. One day she hadn't nursed overnight, or in the
morning (just crawled out of bed and started the day without me), and
when sleep time came, I asked if she wanted to nurse, and she simply
said *no, I think I'm not going to do that anymore, ok?*

Now, i know many feel it should be completely left to the child, and
more power to you. Also, I'm not sure I would have initiated weaning if
she was still *feeding a lot* as you've indicated your daughter is. But
if, for whatever reason (and I'm not clear on yours, so it's hard to
say) you do decide to wean, my suggestion is to be slow, gentle and
honest, and be sure to remember that a huge part of nursing,especially
in older ones, is about the time and connection.....physical and
emotional. Please be sure to leave a nice, wide open door to that aspect
for your child. :-)

sally

On Friday, October 4, 2002, at 12:35 AM, Dalene and Andy wrote:

> Since there is all this BF talk, I was wondering if anyone could help
> me with weaning ideas. My daughter is almost 27 months and I feel the
> time to wean is growing closer. But I have no idea how to go about it.
> She feeds a lot - during the day and even through the night, since
> we're co-sleeping - yes I am aware of the problem with teeth, but I had
> to weigh the pros and cons. So any ideas of how to go about weaning
> would be much appreciated.
>
> Dalene
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

>
>
> ~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
>
> If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please
> email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the
> list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address
> an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Judy

these are all wonderful suggestions- and many more like them can be
found in the book I mentioned.
Mothering Your Nursing Toddler
and How Weaning Happens- is a good one, too.
I know lots of moms who do exactly this- wean during the daytime- or
conversly-wean during the night time.
It *is* a two way street. Mom has be comfortable, too.
Love, Jude

Sally Ann Vinke wrote:

> OK, taking a plunge here....I absolutely respect and to a great degree
> agree with most of the responses so far with regard to child-led
> weaning. I was devoted to the idea when my child was young. However, in
> the end I did initiate weaning, and since I haven't seen anyone actually
> offer the ideas requested, I'll give a quick synopsis of what worked for
> me.
>
> Around 22-24 months, the process of nursing became problematic for me
> when I realized my daughter was not really nursing, but rather chewing,
> biting and generally playing, but not truly nursing (during the day). I
> tried for several weeks to refocus the experience with gentle prompting
> and being sure that *I* was really *there*, to no avail. Finally, I
> began a two-pronged approach to gently wean from the frequent,
> NON-feeding daytime sessions (we still had long, relaxed FEEDING
> sessions in the morning, at night, and perhaps once, sometimes twice
> during the night).
>
> First, I began delaying my response to the request; instead of instantly
> dropping what I was doing, I would ask her to wait 10 minutes. Often,
> she would go to whatever she was doing while waiting, and forget all
> about it. Secondly, when she would either insist she couldn't wait, or
> come back after a few minutes, I would begin to nurse, but if she was
> not feeding, but merely (and PAINFULLY) playing/chewing/hanging out, I
> would explain that it was uncomfortable for me, and that if all she
> wanted was a cuddle, we could cuddle. Often we would just sit or lay
> together, skin to skin, and talk or coo for a bit. After a time, she
> would get up and proclaim she was done. After a few weeks, she stopped
> asking for *ma-ma* during the day, still occasionally asking for a
> cuddle, and we continued to have true nursing sessions first thing in
> the morning and before/during sleep for a few more months, then she just
> sort of tapered off. One day she hadn't nursed overnight, or in the
> morning (just crawled out of bed and started the day without me), and
> when sleep time came, I asked if she wanted to nurse, and she simply
> said *no, I think I'm not going to do that anymore, ok?*
>
> Now, i know many feel it should be completely left to the child, and
> more power to you. Also, I'm not sure I would have initiated weaning if
> she was still *feeding a lot* as you've indicated your daughter is. But
> if, for whatever reason (and I'm not clear on yours, so it's hard to
> say) you do decide to wean, my suggestion is to be slow, gentle and
> honest, and be sure to remember that a huge part of nursing,especially
> in older ones, is about the time and connection.....physical and
> emotional. Please be sure to leave a nice, wide open door to that aspect
> for your child. :-)
>
> sally
>
> On Friday, October 4, 2002, at 12:35 AM, Dalene and Andy wrote:
>
> > Since there is all this BF talk, I was wondering if anyone could help
> > me with weaning ideas. My daughter is almost 27 months and I feel the
> > time to wean is growing closer. But I have no idea how to go about it.
> > She feeds a lot - during the day and even through the night, since
> > we're co-sleeping - yes I am aware of the problem with teeth, but I had
> > to weigh the pros and cons. So any ideas of how to go about weaning
> > would be much appreciated.
> >
> > Dalene
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
> >
> >
> > ~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
> >
> > If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please
> > email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the
> > list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address
> > an email to:
> > [email protected]
> >
> > Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
>
> If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please
> email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the
> list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address
> an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Collette

does it actually say in the bible that we didn't have teeth till
then? I never heard that!
Collette


--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., starsuncloud@c... wrote:
> In a message dated 10/4/02 8:38:40 AM Central Daylight Time,
> Unschooling-dotcom@y... writes:
>
> << That is if you believe in evolution of course. If you believe
in
> Biblical creation, God created us with teeth only 6000 years ago.
>>
>
> That is if you believe in the bible as literal. Some of us believe
in
> creation and don't agree with the 6,000 y.o. stuff.
>
> Ren

Rachel Ann

Um,

If you take the bible literally the world is not yet 6,000 years old...I think that is what Ren means.
According to the Jewish calendar the year is 5763.


Rachel Ann, who takes the Torah quite seriously, but not literally....(ie, it is all true, imho, but the 7 days, for instance, were allegorical for 6 stages of the world development...7 day was a regular day.)
----- Original Message -----
From: Collette
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 7:37 PM
Subject: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re: Weaning


does it actually say in the bible that we didn't have teeth till
then? I never heard that!
Collette


--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., starsuncloud@c... wrote:
> In a message dated 10/4/02 8:38:40 AM Central Daylight Time,
> Unschooling-dotcom@y... writes:
>
> << That is if you believe in evolution of course. If you believe
in
> Biblical creation, God created us with teeth only 6000 years ago.
>>
>
> That is if you believe in the bible as literal. Some of us believe
in
> creation and don't agree with the 6,000 y.o. stuff.
>
> Ren


~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~

If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).

To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]

Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/6/02 7:59:22 PM Central Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:

<< does it actually say in the bible that we didn't have teeth till
then? I never heard that! >>

Um....the point was that was when people were created if you believe in the
Bible.
But this quote:
<< That is if you believe in evolution of course. If you believe
in
> Biblical creation, God created us with teeth only 6000 years ago.
was not mine....I believe it was Elissa or Shyrley.

Ren

Elissa Cleaveland

> << That is if you believe in evolution of course.
> If you believe
> in
> > Biblical creation, God created us with teeth only
> 6000 years ago.
> was not mine....I believe it was Elissa or Shyrley.
>
> Ren
NOT ME!!
Elissa

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com

kayb85

No! lol It doesn't say when babies started teething. We do know
historically that many people in Biblical periods of history nursed
for several years. Jesus himself was probably nursed for several
years.

I was just pointing out that arguments for evolution won't sway
Christians who believe the Bible literally, as many homeschoolers
do. The book the continuum concept itself uses evolution as its very
basis. I love the ideas in that book and I think it could have been
written with a creationist view, but a lot of Christians wouldn't
even read it because of its evolutionary basis. Also, use of terms
like "we've been doing this for 90,000 years" or millions of years or
whatever won't be accepted. Neither will arguments that teeth are
things that we've developed through time, because we believe the
first humans were created perfect, with a perfect set of teeth.

Sheila


--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., "Collette" <rayvenne@a...> wrote:
> does it actually say in the bible that we didn't have teeth till
> then? I never heard that!
> Collette
>
>
> --- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., starsuncloud@c... wrote:
> > In a message dated 10/4/02 8:38:40 AM Central Daylight Time,
> > Unschooling-dotcom@y... writes:
> >
> > << That is if you believe in evolution of course. If you believe
> in
> > Biblical creation, God created us with teeth only 6000 years
ago.
> >>
> >
> > That is if you believe in the bible as literal. Some of us
believe
> in
> > creation and don't agree with the 6,000 y.o. stuff.
> >
> > Ren

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/4/02 7:39:06 AM, sheran@... writes:

<< That is if you believe in evolution of course. If you believe in
Biblical creation, God created us with teeth only 6000 years ago. >>

Then dental caries are only a short part of the history of the world anyway.

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/4/02 8:38:47 AM, sheran@... writes:

<< I think it's more than just believing it's literal, it's believing
that it is accurate historically. There have been people who have
counted the generations (and how old each person was at death in each
generation) and figured out historically how many years are between
Adam and Jesus, and we know from more recent historical records how
many years there are between Jesus and now. >>

Then you have to believe Adam was really the first person.

If it is historically accurate it might as well be literal.
It can't be literal without being historically accurate.

If that is important to you, it doesn't need to matter whether your
children's teeth are good because in heaven their teeth will be good and
that's the only important thing. Jesus is late. If he's still coming, it
should be soon. Then teeth won't matter for anybody.

Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/4/02 10:21:02 AM, felesina@... writes:

<< It doesn't make sense.
It is commonly understood that in biblical times, babies were nursed till
three or later. >>

Now THERE was a law. Not multiplying, but that babies had the right to nurse.

When I get to the end of the e-mail I'll look for that if nobody's posted it
already.

Sandra

Rachel Ann

According to Jewish law mother is obligated to nurse, barring health problems either way, if the mil or her mother nursed.

A nursing mother is not suppose to marry until the child is 2yrs, because there was the fear that the new dh would want a child and that would interfere with nursing the older child.

A woman who is nursing can use birth control for 2yrs (there are other reasons for using birth control, mostly to do with mom's health).

Nursing can continue till age 4 according to what I learned, if the child is healthy, and until 5 if the child is ill. There is something about giving breast milk by cup but I forget...

When I first had a child, when I was pregnant, I asked my Rabbi if I could nurse publically..not the norm for most Orthdox women. He said yes, if necessary.

BTW, according to Jewish law, be fruitful and multiply applies
1)to a man, not a woman...it is his obligation
2)her health takes precedence, including pyschological health.
3)really is fulfilled when the man has one child of each sex or two boys according to some authorites(most hold one child of either sex.) It becomes easier to use birth control after that.

but of fundamental importance is the mother's physical and psychological health.

probably more than you wanted to know

----- Original Message -----
From: SandraDodd@...
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re: Weaning



In a message dated 10/4/02 10:21:02 AM, felesina@... writes:

<< It doesn't make sense.
It is commonly understood that in biblical times, babies were nursed till
three or later. >>

Now THERE was a law. Not multiplying, but that babies had the right to nurse.

When I get to the end of the e-mail I'll look for that if nobody's posted it
already.

Sandra

~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~

If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).

To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]

Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

kayb85

> Then you have to believe Adam was really the first person.

I do.

> If it is historically accurate it might as well be literal.
> It can't be literal without being historically accurate.

It is literal in some places and in some places it is filled with
symbols and allegories. Either way, it is filled with truth.

> If that is important to you, it doesn't need to matter whether your
> children's teeth are good because in heaven their teeth will be
good and
> that's the only important thing. Jesus is late. If he's still
coming, it
> should be soon. Then teeth won't matter for anybody.
>
> Sandra

I do believe their teeth will be perfect in heaven. But that doesn't
mean that their teeth aren't important now too.

Jesus isn't late. He's on His own time table. Only God knows the
hour when He will return.

Sheila

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/7/02 3:39:46 PM, sheran@... writes:

<< Jesus isn't late. He's on His own time table. Only God knows the
hour when He will return. >>

I think he told some New Testament people it would be in their lifetimes.
Maybe that's some of the allegorical truth.

kayb85

Where?
Sheila

> I think he told some New Testament people it would be in their
lifetimes.
> Maybe that's some of the allegorical truth.

[email protected]

> I think he told some New Testament people it would be in their
lifetimes.
> Maybe that's some of the allegorical truth.

In a message dated 10/8/02 12:32:35 PM, sheran@... writes:

<< Where?
Sheila>>

While I hate to have to do the research for Bible literalists who should KNOW
all these things, here are some things I looked up myself in the concordance
at:
http://www.concordance.com/cgi-bin/contr.pl

And then some other things I lifted from other people's lists of evidence of
the same subject, that Jesus is late; he said he'd be here during the lives
of those he was speaking to.

Matthew 16
27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels;
and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which
shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Hebrews 10:37 For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come,
and will not tarry.

Revelations 22 verses 7, 12, 20 [but I think Revelations is crack-smoking
nonsense, so I'm not bothering to quote those; of course only those who DO
want to hope that book is as literal as God stopping the sun in the sky are
eager for Jesus to come back right now and smite me]

1John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard
that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we
know that it is the last time.

---------
From here on down is just cut and paste from various webpages found by going
to google.com and putting in "Jesus return lifetime"
---------

Every mention of "the last days" or equivalents [last times, last hour] in
the New Testament refers to the 1st Century. There are no exceptions. Check:
Hebrews 1:2; Acts 2:17; 1 timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy 3:1; James 5:3; 2 Peter 3:3;
Jude 18; 1 John 2:18.


Do you know what the Bible says about an "end of the world?" NOTHING. What do
the historic creeds say? Again, NOTHING. What the Bible actually says is:
* World without end, Amen -- Ephesians 3:21 KJV
* The earth remains forever -- Ecclesiastes 1:4
* End of the age -- Matthew 13:39, 49; 24:3


BUYING INTO A NEW TEACHING IN CHURCH HISTORY [LAST 150 YEARS] OF AN ESCAPE
FROM THIS PLANET, FROM THIS LIFE'S TRIBULATIONS AND FROM KINGDOM
RESPONSIBILITIES.
 
The relatively new teaching of a "rapture-removal" from planet Earth is a
distortion of key scriptures historically interpreted to refer to a general
resurrection. Jesus specifically prayed against the human weakness for
removal (John 17:15). And His prayer is still in effect.


 

The following quotes confirm that Jesus deliberately lead his followers into
false expectations.
Matthew 10:23 - When giving instructions to his apostles as to just how they
are to go about spreading his message Jesus says, ." . . for truly I say unto
you, you shall not finish going through the cities of Israel until the Son of
Man comes."

Matthew 16:28 - Jesus says to his disciples, "There are some of those
standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming
in his kingdom."

Matthew 24:33-34 - After prophesying a wide assortment of events including
the second coming, Jesus said to his disciples, ." . . when you shall see all
these things, know that it (the 2nd coming) is near, even at the door. This
generation shall not pass till these things be fulfilled." He was obviously
referring to the contemporary generation.

Matthew 26:64 - When brought before Caiaphas, the Chief Priest, Jesus said to
him, "I tell you, hereafter you shall see the Son of Man . . . coming on the
clouds of heaven." According to this the second coming was to happen during
Caiaphas' lifetime.

Mark 9:1 - Jesus said to the people and to his disciples, ”Verily I say unto
you, that there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of
death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.

Luke 21:27-28 -Jesus said to the rich people, “And then shall they see the
Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these
things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your
redemption draweth nigh.”

Luke 21:32 - Jesus said, again to the rich people, “This generation shall not
pass away, till all be fulfilled.”

I Thessalonians 4:15-17 - In his first Epistle to the Thessalonians Paul
assures the congregation that the second coming is very near. ." . . we who
are alive, . . . shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord
Himself will descend from heaven . . . and the dead in Christ shall rise
first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together . . ."

Revelation 22:7 - Jesus says, "Behold, I come quickly."

Revelation 22:12 - Again Jesus says, “Behold, I come quickly.”

Revelation 22:20 - Jesus says, "Surely I come quickly."