lekh l'kha

I believe that the context demands that it refers only to the book of Revelation - BUT: BUT the Hebrew word shaba means "to be complete" and it is the root word for shabat and sh'biyiy (sabbath and seven). The seventh day completes a cycle and is followed by a new beginning (the 8th day and the beginning of a new week), the seventh year completes a cycle and is followed by a new "week" (a new beginning), the seven times seventh day after Passover completes a cycle and is followed by a new beginning (Pentecost), and the seven times seventh year completes a cycle and is followed by a new beginning (the year of Jubilee), and the entire Revelation of God (Genesis to Revelation) opens with a cycle of seven and closes with a book which is saturated with sevens and cycles of seven. And that Revelation speaks about a thousands years of peace (a "seventh" - a sabbath millennium) immediately before speaking about a complete new heavens and new earth. The Revelation also completes the prophetic picture, of which part is found in Daniel and other prophetic books, and the Revelation prophesies not only right up to and including the return of Christ, but beyond the return of Christ and even to beyond the great White Throne judgment. The Revelation also transcends time, so that the beast of Revelation 13 could refer equally to Nero Caesar and the Roman Empire and to the beast that will rise from the bottomless pit (or is busy rising from the bottomless pit right now?). So what I'm saying is, it's no accident that the Revelation is so full of sevens and cycles of seven - and if it completes the entire Revelation of God (Genesis to Revelation) as well as the prophetic revelation of God, it's therefore no coincidence that the book which completes and closes the entire revelation of God, closes with the words: "For I testify together to everyone who hears the Words of the prophecy of this Book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add on him the plagues that have been written in this Book. And if anyone takes away from the Words of the Book of this prophecy, God will take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which have been written in this Book. He who testifies these things says, Yes, I am coming quickly, Amen. Yes, come, Lord Jesus. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with all of you. Amen." (Rev 22:18-21). So in my opinion the immediate meaning and context refers to the Revelation only, but it most certainly has an extended meaning to be referring to the entire revelation of God (Genesis to Revelation). Lekh

Thank you. Likewise. And if it happens before the Great Tribulation, you can explain it to us on the way up Otherwise we can just pray for one another during the tribulation, and pray to the Lord to hasten His return to gather His elect.

Satan was defeated at the cross, not bound at the cross: "And the great dragon was cast out, the old serpent called Devil, and Satan, who deceives the whole world. He was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. And I heard a great voice saying in Heaven, Now has come the salvation and power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ. For the accuser of our brothers is cast down, who accused them before our God day and night. And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb, and because of the word of their testimony. And they did not love their soul until death... ... And the dragon was enraged over the woman, and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. " Rev 12:9-11, 17). He can't make war against the saints if he's bound. He was defeated at the cross, but he is not yet bound - and the only One powerful enough to bind him is the One who also defeated him at the cross: "And I saw an angel come down from Heaven, having the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him a thousand years. And he cast him into the abyss and shut him up and set a seal on him, that he should deceive the nations no more until the thousand years should be fulfilled. And after that he must be loosed a little time." (Rev 20:1-3). In the wisdom of God, he has permitted His defeated foe to continue his activity in teh world until he is bound, then at the close of the millennium God will loose him again once last time for just a short time. We assume that because Jesus is the One with all authority in heaven and in the earth, He has bound Satan. But He hasn't - not yet, anyway. lekh

Question addressed too-hoo? Anyone who believe that the great tribulation is not the same as the wrath of God, and to those who do. That's why I included "Why or why not?". As I commented earlier in post #24 here I do not believe that the great tribulation is the same as the wrath of God and I have already touched on the why

Question addressed too-hoo? Anyone who believe that the great tribulation is not the same as the wrath of God, and to those who do. That's why I included "Why or why not?". Well that includes me, 'cause I believe that the great tribulation is not the same as the wrath of God. My answer's in post number 48. But very few will agree with my radical revolutionary interpretation.

Parker 1, Check out the harmony of Matthew 24:29-33 with Rev.6:12 - 7:17: Mat.24: 29-33: sun and moon darkened immediately after the great tribulation, Son of man appears and all the tribes of the earth mourn, and the elect are gathered from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. Behold the fig tree when it shows signs of life, you know that it is near. Rev.6:12- 7:17: Sun and moon stop shining, men try to hide from the wrath of God, John sees the elect in heaven who had come out of the great tribulation. The four winds are held back until 144,000 from all the tribes of Israel are sealed. Check how the words "and, "therefore", "but", and "for" join all the sentences together from Mat.24: 9 through verse 33 and beyond that. Check how the word "then" (Greek: tote: "at that time") begin to be used in Mat.24: 9 and are is used 8 times from verse 9 to verse 31, and remember how all the sentences in the whole passage are joined together by the words "and, "therefore", "but", and "for", from verse 9 onwards. This is the same in the Greek as well as in the English, and the common rules of grammar demand that we see the verses as all speaking of one and the same tribulation - the tribulation the Lord begins to speak about in verse 9 and mentions lastly in verse 29. Okay, so the Israelites were still in Egypt while God's judgment plagues were being poured outm upon the Egyptians - but why were those plagues being poured out upon them? Because the Egyptians were afflicting God's people, and would not release them from bondage to go and serve their God. "And the third angel poured out his vial on the rivers and fountains of waters, and they became blood. And I heard the angel of the waters say, Righteous is the Lord, who is, and was, and who will be, because You have judged these things, since they have poured out the blood of the saints and prophets; and You gave them blood to drink, for they were deserving. And I heard another out of the altar saying, Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are Your judgments." (Rev 16:4-7). But the Israelites were kept from being harmed by those judgment-plagues, and Jesus promised that His people who belong to Him will be kept from the hour of trial which is to come upon the whole world. Everybody assumes that this means that the rapture will take place before the bowls of wrath begin to be poured out, but the Israelites were still in Egypt while those plagues were being poured out upon the Egyptians, and it is only in the middle of the sixth bowl of wrath that Jesus interjects: "Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is the one who watches and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame." (Rev 16:15). The final plague on the Egyptians redeemed God's people by judging Pharaoh and his armies. What about the judgment of the beast and his armies? The seventh seal, seventh trumpet and seventh bowl all mention the same things: Noises, thunderings, lightnings and an earthquake, with the seventh trumpet and seventh bowl adding HAIL (a symbol of judgment) - but these things are not mentioned in any of the seals, trumpets and bowls preceding the seventh ones. Why? It's because throughout the Bible, we read of the major judgments of God coming at the completion of cycles of seven, NOT before: 1. The seventh of seven days in the days of Noah: "For in seven more days I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights. And I will destroy from off the face of the earth every living thing that I have made." (Gen 7:4). 2. Jericho: The seventh day, the seventh time the Israelites marched around the city, at the sounding of the seventh trumpet. Revelation: Seventh seal, seventh trumpet and seventh bowl of wrath. This is why Jesus interjects in the middle of the sixth bowl: "Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is the one who watches and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame." (Rev 16:15). So the plagues began to be poured out upon Egypt because the Egyptians were afflicting God's people severely, but the Israelites were miraculously kept from being harmed by those plagues, and the final plague (the judgment of pharaoh and his armies) became the deliverance of the redeemed, and they were removed from Egypt. And so the saints will experience great affliction at the hand of the beast and his armies, and the saints will witness the first six "plagues" (bowls of wrath) being poured out upon the world, but the saints will be kept from being harmed by those bowls of wrath, and when the sixth one comes, we will know to "look up, for your redemption draws near": "And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars. And on the earth will be anxiety of nations with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; men fainting from fear, and expecting those things which have come on the earth. For the powers of the heavens shall be shaken. And then they shall see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to happen, then look up and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." (Luk 21:25-28) For: "Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is the one who watches and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame." (Rev 16:15). "Watch therefore, praying in every season that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things which shall occur, and to stand before the Son of Man." (Luk 21:36). This is why the saints are shown in heaven in the introduction chapter to the bowls of wrath (Revelation 15) to be singing the song of Moses - because this is the song the Israelites sang after the days of their affliction had ended, after the plagues had been poured out upon Egypt, and after the final plague on the Egyptians (the judgment of Pharaoh and his armies) delivered them. They were delivered immediately before the judgment of Pharaoh and his armies - on the same day. Being kept from the wrath of God does not even mean being raptured before the first bowl is poured out - it simply means being kept from the wrath of God - but not from afflcition at the hand of "Pharaoh and his armies" (the beast and his armies) before our deliverance. Lekh

Question addressed too-hoo?

"The one who overcomes, this one will be clothed in white clothing. And I will not blot out his name out of the Book of Life, but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels." (Rev 3:5) "But whoever shall deny Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in Heaven." (Mat 10:33) I believe the only way anyone has his name written in the Book of Life in the first place, is to be born again. And I believe the only way a born-again Christian can have his name blotted out of the Book of Life, is to make a conscious choice to deny his faith in Christ: "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good Word of God and the powers of the world to come, and who have fallen away; it is impossible, I say, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify the Son of God afresh to themselves and put Him to an open shame." (Heb 6:4-6). I believe the great apostasy in written about in 2Thes.2 must somehow involve a conscious choice to deny salvation through the shed blood of Jesus only - perhaps to avoid being beheaded for refusal to worship the beast and his image or take his mark, I don't know, I can only speculate what the reason will be for the great apostasy. A BIG LESSON FOR ALL OF US: "Peter answered and said to Him, though all shall be offended because of You, I will never be offended. Jesus said to him, Truly I say to you that this night, before the cock crows, you shall deny Me three times. Peter said to Him, though I should die with You, yet I will not deny You. All the disciples also said the same." (Mat 26:33-35). What about "though I should die FOR you I will not deny you"? All these disciples who said they would rather die with Jesus than deny Him, DESERTED Him after He was arrested: "Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd, and against the Man who is My companion, says Jehovah of Hosts; strike the Shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered. And I will turn My hand on the little ones." (Zec 13:7). I believe Jesus allowed what happened to Peter for our benefit - to teach us not to trust in ourselves that we will not deny Him. We have to (1) watch, and (2) pray, asking GOD TO KEEP US from falling. Personally, I don't trust in myself (I really don't), because I know myself only too well. How I would cope under extreme stress, judging by the way I react to extreme stress generally, doesn't give me much self-confidence. But I believe that's where Jesus wants all of us to be - to have a total lack of confidence in own ability to stand. So about OSAS - nothing except a conscious choice to deny our faith can get our names blotted out of the Book of Life, in my opinion. Lekh

Take note, though, Parker 1 - that we have been promised that we will be kept from the wrath to come - not from tribulation or from the great tribulation: "I have spoken these things to you so that you might have peace in Me. In the world you shall have tribulation, but be of good cheer. I have overcome the world." (Joh 16:33) "confirming the souls of the disciples, calling on them to continue in the faith and that through much tribulation we must enter into the kingdom of God." (Act 14:22). Jesus did not say "in the world you shall have wrath". He said, "in the world you shall have tribulation. Your mistake is to make the great tribulation = the wrath of God which follows it. The great tribulation is not the wrath of God - it is the tribulation of the saints who undergo tribulation at the hand of "the beast and his armies" - that is why Jesus promised that the days of the great tribulation will be shortened for the elect's sake. It's not for the sake of the "left behind" Christians, or only for the sake of Christians who will become Christians during the tribulation period - it's for the sake of all Christians, because all Christians will be in the world during the great tribulation, suffering great tribulation at the hand of the beast and his armies for their refusal to worship the beast and his image and receive his mark. The great tribulation is not the wrath of God. The wrath of God follows the great tribulation. The rapture occurs at the sounding of the last trumpet, the very day God's wrath begins to be poured out upon the world. Pre-tribulationists fail to see and understand this distinction that the New Testament makes between tribulation and wrath. Lekh

I've spoken about Thes.2: 4 before in another thread, but I don't want to take Parker1's thread off topic by speaking about it again here. But I don't agree that a belief in a pre-trib rapture or even in Replacement Theology will be the thing that causes Christians to fall away. Many Replacement theologists are already backing the wrong horse when it comes to the devil's hatred of the Jews and his drive to kick them out of their land one last time, and I really don't know or even want to think about where that might lead them in the future. But I think the falling away is something far deeper and has to do with whose sheep individual men and women are, which involves things like who we (any of us) place our trust in for doctrinal leadership - Jesus only, or our own chosen "Christian" leaders and "prophets"? Whose sheep we are will decide who we place our trust in, ultimately. But pre-tribulationists like Dave Hunt I have respect for, even though I disagree completely with their belief in a pre-tribulation rapture, because people like Dave Hunt fight against false doctrine in many respects, even though the pre-tribulation belief itself, if it's not true, is false. Ultimately, though, pre-tribulationists in general follow only one Shepherd - Jesus; and I think that the criteria that decides ultimately who falls away and who doesn't has everything to do with whose sheep individual men and women are, and who they as a result place their trust in. If we believe that pre-tribulationism is a lie, then we cannot meet one false eschatological doctrine with another false eschatological doctrine which damns pre-tribulationists to hell. There are a lot of Christians from many differing persuasions who will become offended when they must suffer tribulation at the hand of the beast and his armies: "But they have no root in themselves, but are temporary. Afterward when affliction or persecution arises for the Word's sake, they are immediately offended." (Mar 4:17). "Then they will deliver you up to be afflicted and will kill you. And you will be hated of all nations for My name's sake. And then many will be offended, and will betray one another, and will hate one another." (Mat 24:9-10). I personally don't believe the Lord is only talking to Israel and the Jews here - but no matter, because whether only Israel and the Jews or whether Gentiles also, the principle remains the same - suffering tribulation for the sake of the name of Jesus offends many Christians - even John the baptist was offended by the fact that the Messiah had done nothing to deliver him from his chains: "And coming to Him, the men said, John the Baptist has sent us to You, saying, Are You He who should come, or do we look for another? And in the same hour He cured many of infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits. And He gave sight to many who were blind. And answering, Jesus said to them, Go and tell John what you have seen and heard; that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the gospel is proclaimed to the poor. And blessed is he who shall not be offended in Me." (Luk 7:20-23). John had given his whole life to serve the Lord - and he served Him more faithfully than any other prophet who had come before John. But the Messiah who should have all authority in heaven and in the earth was the only one with enough power to deliver John from his chains - and yet He was doing NOTHING about John's plight. It's for the reasons above that I believe the "name it and claim it" believers are in more danger of falling away in the great apostasy than the pre-trib believers, I think. And there are just as many Christians who believe in a post-trib rapture who will fall away, as there are pre-trib believing Christians - the criteria which decides whether we stand or fall has nothing to do with a pre/post trib belief, in my opinion, or even in a belief in Replacement Theology - it has everything to do with whose sheep we are, and who we as a result place our trust in. Lekh.

Indeed. Conversations such as these show both sides of the issue we are discussing, allowing the reader to evaluate, and make decisions on which position they believe the Scriptures teach. That is one of the reasons that such discussions have their place in forums such as this. I appreciate and respect your position on this issue, as I believe that you respect the position that I have presented. That is not the attitude of some others who have responded to discussions such as this one. Those types I choose to ignore instead of arguing with. That just comes with maturity, of which I am still developing. Thanks, Rick

You be blessed, too It's a non-argument to say that "there has to be a sound scriptural foundation for belief in a pre-tribulation rapture" merely because there is "a huge portion of the Christian community who believe in the pre-trib rapture", and it a non-argument because there is also a huge portion of the Christian community who believe in a post-tribulation rapture, and so there has to be a sound scriptural belief in a post-tribulation rapture. That sort of illogical reasoning is the same sort of reasoning that is used to interpret the very parts of the Bible that pre-tribulation rapture folks use as proof of a pre-tribulation rapture, as I have already shown clearly in the second post in this thread. An example of this is the way pre-tribulationists flatly ignore the fact that with the exception of only two out of 35 + New Testament verses, the words "tribulation, affliction" etc found in the New Testament are ALL referring to the tribulation, affliction etc suffered in some form or another by the saints (and normally at the hand of the authorities of this world). Pre-tribulationists flatly ignore the fact that the New Testament promises us that we will be save from God's wrath - not from tribulation: "I have spoken these things to you so that you might have peace in Me. In the world you shall have tribulation, but be of good cheer. I have overcome the world." (Joh 16:33) "... confirming the souls of the disciples, calling on them to continue in the faith and that through much tribulation we must enter into the kingdom of God." (Act 14:22). Pre-tribulationists also flatly ignore the very, very important fact that Lot was delivered from Sodom on the very day it was judged, the angels taking him and his family by the hand and literally whisking them out of Sodom (there was no time for Lot to run all the way to the distant mountain from which he watched the destruction of Sodom - a biblical type of the rapture). Pre-tribulationists also flatly ignore the very, very important fact that the judgment of Pharaoh and his armies (a biblical type of the judgment of the beast and his armies) = the deliverance of the redeemed (same day), and that Egypt is a biblical type of the world, and the affliction of the Israelites under the hand of Pharaoh and his armies was increased before the day of Egypt's final judgment (which was the day of the deliverance of the redeemed), and that the Israelites were still in Egypt while the plagues were being poured out, and that just as the Israelites were kept from being harmed by those plagues, so Jesus promised the saints that we will be kept from the wrath of God, and they flatly ignore the very, very important biblical fact that in the middle of speaking about the sixth bowl of wrath, Jesus tells his saints: "For they are spirits of demons, working miracles, which go forth to the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that day, the great day of God Almighty. Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is the one who watches and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame. And he gathered them into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon." (Rev 16:14-16). Jesus is not telling unbelievers to "watch", and to keep their garments." He tells His own followers over and over again to "watch and pray always that you will be able to escape these things (God's judgment that will be poured out upon the world) and to stand before the Son of Man" (Luk.21: 36). But always, the judgment of the world = the deliverance of the redeemed (same day), as it was in the days of Noah, and "the church" was told three times to "watch and pray" at the time of that first most important event in the history of the universe (the night Jesus was betrayed into the hands of sinners) - and yet "the church" went to sleep, just as ten out of ten virgins went to sleep and were ALL caught by surprise by the bridegroom's return: "While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept." (Mat 25:5). You would have to add another 2 virgins to the ten if you want to argue (like most pre-tribulationists) that the "pre-tribulationist" virgins were not asleep, and it would will be totally illogical to add virgins that weren't asleep, because there are only ten virgins, and ten out of ten of them went to sleep and were caught unawares by the coming of the bridegroom. The parable of the ten virgins, therefore, is biblical proof of the rapture - period, it is not biblical proof of either a post-tribulation or a pre-tribulation rapture, because it's not referring to tribulation - it's simply the Lord prophetically saying that we will ALL be caught unawares by His return - regardless of whether or not this comes at the close of the greatest time of tribulation the Lord's people will ever have known. Pre-tribulationists ignore the very, very important biblical fact that we are told directly both in Daniel 7 and Revelation 13 that the beast will make war against the saints and overcome them, and that the saints will be given into his hand for three and a half years. But the beast will be overcome by the return of Jesus - the day of the judgment of the beast and his armies = the day of the deliverance of the redeemed, just like the day of the judgment of Pharaoh and his armies = the day of the deliverance of the redeemed. Pre-tribulationists take the seven-DAY biblical marriage consummation period, and without any biblical precedent or reason, multiply it by 365 to come up with a seven-year marriage consummation period in heaven. Then there is also the fact that pre-tribulationists flatly ignore the very, very important biblical fact that the Day of Trumpets (Rosh Hashanah) is God's appointed time, and it is linked even in Jewish non-Christian theology to THE DAY THE JUDGMENT OF THE WORLD BEGINS, AND THE DAY OF THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD (once again, the same day). Pre-tribulationists flatly ignore the very, very important fact that the Israelites sang "the song of Moses" AFTER their redemption from Egypt - which was AFTER the judgment of Pharaoh and his armies became their deliverance, and they sang the song of Moses on the other side of the red sea (Exodus chapters 14 and 15), and the fact that in Revelation 15, which is a parenthetic chapter introducing the seven bowls of wrath, the saints are in heaven singing the song of Moses. Is this before or after the judgment of the beast and his armies = the deliverance of the redeemed? Well, we read about God's judgment of the beast and his armies in the 7th seal, 7th trumpet and 7th bowl of wrath (777), just as Jericho was judged on the 7th day, the 7th time the Israelites marched around the city, at the sounding of the 7th trumpet - and in the middle of speaking about the sixth bowl of wrath, Jesus says to His saints: "For they are spirits of demons, working miracles, which go forth to the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that day, the great day of God Almighty. Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is the one who watches and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame. And he gathered them into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon." (Rev 16:14-16). Even the "post-tribulation, pre-"bowls of wrath" folks flatly ignore the above facts, and the fact that the Israelites were still in Egypt while those judgment-plagues were being poured out upon Egypt, and yet the LORD miraculosly kept them from being harmed by those judgment plagues. But there deliverance only came when the final plague was poured out upon Egypt - the judgment of Pharaoh and his army in the red sea, which became the deliverance of the redeemed (same day). Those of us who believe in a post-tribulation rapture see a sound scriptural foundation for that belief, and we see all the holes in the pre-tribulation rapture view. Exactly - but it's illogical to assume that such a statement favors either a post-tribulation or pre-tribulation rapture. And now I've just explained to you what the Bible teaches us about what is going to happen and when, so I hope you take notice, because it doesn't help teaching Christians they are going to escape coming under the affliction of Pharaoh and his armies of Egyptians (the beast and his armies) BEFORE they are going to be delivered by their rapture ON THE SAME DAY as the judgment of the beast and his armies. And it doesn't help to flatly ignore whose tribulation is being referred to in all except 2 of the New Testament verses which speak about tribulation, affliction, etc. Nevertheless, when the final great tribulation of the saints at the hand of the authorities of this world arrives, there will be just as many who believed in a pre-tribulation rapture who will remain standing in their faith, as their will be from among those who believe in a post-tribulation rapture, because the criteria which decides who will stand and who will fall has nothing to do with eschatological interpretation of the Bible, and everything to do with: 1) Whose sheep he/she is; and 2) Who he/she is trusting in - because Peter trusted in himself, but the Lord told us over and over to "watch and pray". God bless you, Parker 1, and I mean what I say when I say that I love people who believe ion a pre-tribulation rapture, because they have a zeal for Christ and His return that is unsurpassed, though matched by many who do not believe in a pre-tribulation rapture Lekh

I never posted in the last thread, because I know that "pretribbers" and "postribbers" cannot see one another's viewpoints, not matter here long we all argue and debate this question. I never asked what all this schatological debate has to do with evangelizing the lost, either (only you will know what I mean by that, Parker 1 ). The problem is the moment threads like this start, then often the person who started the thread accuses those who disagree with his position of following/teaching false doctrine and and whatever. Nobody's believing a lie from the devil if he believes in a post trib rapture, and vice-versa. There a very few Christians who deliberately teach a theology/doctrine knowing that it's false, and if they do there's probably some sort of status/prestige or monetary benefit invloved. So we can actually debate doctrine without accusing one another. So I'm a pre-millenialist who is also post-tribulationist, but I love the Christians who believe in a pre-trib rapture, because almost all of them have a zeal for God that is unsurpassed, though matched by many who don't believe in a pre-trib rapture. But I do think there are serious flaws in the pre-trib position - even when pointing out that Lot was removed from Sodom and that Jesus stated that at the time of His return, things will be just as they were in the days of Noah - because even in pointing these things out, the pre-trib rapture guys OVERlook some very, very important facts: 1) The DAY of the judgment of Pharaoh and his armies = the deliverance of the redeemed (same day). 2) The DAY of the judgment of Sodom = the deliverance of Lot (same day). 3) The DAY the floodwaters were poured out = the deliverance of Noah, because the judgment-floodwaters is what lifted the ark "out of" the world, and Noah and the redeemed family were IN the world UNTIL the seventh of those final seven days. 4) It was for refusal to worship "the image of the beast" (Nebuchadnezzar's image) that God's FAITHFUL REMNANT who refused to worship it WERE THROWN INTO the burning fiery furnace - and the heat of the furnace was INCREASED SEVEN-FOLD to add to Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego's tribulation, BEFORE they were delivered out of it, and the Son of God walked among them in it and helped them endure it without being harmed BEFORE they were delivered out of it: Then Nebuchadnezzar came near the door of the burning fiery furnace. He answered and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, servants of the Most High God, come forth and come here. Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, came forth from the middle of the fire." (Dan 3:26) "And when they complete their testimony, the beast coming up out of the abyss will make war against them and will overcome them and kill them... And they heard a great voice from Heaven saying to them, Come up here. And they went up to Heaven in a cloud, and their enemies watched them." (Rev 11:7-12). 5). The affliction of the Israelites at the hand of Pharaoh and the Egyptians WAS INCREASED BEFORE the judgment of Pharaoh and his armies came to = the deliverance of the redeemed, AND the Israelites were STILL IN EGYPT while the judgment-plagues were being poured oout upon Egypt, BUT like the Lord's promise to keep His Church from the hour of trial that is to come upon the world, the Israelites were kept from being harmed by the judgment plagues that were being poured out upon Egypt. You simply cannot use Biblical history as a "precedent" for a PRE-trib rapture. It just does not work. BUT THAT'S NOT THE ONLY PROBLEM: The other problem is that GREAT tribulation (Greek: MEGAS tlipsis) is only mentioned 3 times in the New Testament: i) The Olivet Discourse, where the Lord stated that FOR THE ELECT'S SAKE, the days of the great tribulation will be shortened (Mat.21: 21-22). ii) The Lord's warning to the Christians of Thyatira that if THEY did not repent of following the doctrines of a false prophetess (aptly named Jezebel), HE would throw them into GREAT tribulation (GreeK: MEGAS thlipsis) (Rev.2: 18-22), and Jesus issued this warning to them AFTER He had commended them for their love, faith, patience, service and their works. iii) John's reference in the Revelation to the saints who had come OUT OF the great tribulation (Rev.7: 14). LIKE SHADRACH, MESHACH AND ABEDNEGO, they were only delivered AFTER they had been thrown into it. The final problem with the pre-trib rapture stuff is that ALL THE OTHER NEW TESTAMENT REFERENCES TO TRIBULATION, AFFLICTION ETC (WITH THE EXCEPTION OF TWO VERSES), are in reference to the tribulation, affliction etc experienced in some way or another BY THE SAINTS (normally at the hand of the authorities of this world). ONE OF THOSE EXCEPTIONS speaks about at the time of Jesus, the world being REPAID with tribulation for the tribulation the world had brought upon the saints (just like Pharaoh and his armies were REPAID on the same day as the deliverance of the redeemed chosen people) (2Thes.1: 5-8). The only other exception to the rule is Paul's reference to tribulation and anguish on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Greek (Rom.2: 9). As I mentioned, ALL the other 35+ New Testament references to tribulation. affliction, etc are in reference to the tribulation, affliction etc experienced in some way or another BY THE SAINTS (normally at the hand of the authorities of this world). ALL the above facts point to the many, many BIG holes in the pre-trib position. But hey, the pre-tribbers love God and His Messiah and His return, and are filled with zeal for God. So, no problem Lekh

Yes I agree and this is why I have bible that show both the Greek and the Hebrew side by side with the English. My studies have showm me that even the King James has been changed and just as you have said it was changed to with the idea of helping people to better understand the bible. But compared to what is out there today. The KJV is the best that can be found. We must grab hold of something because if we do nothing but think that all versions are corrupted what do we believe? Which one is correct? That is why I hang with the KJV because it has been (as imperfect as it might be) the number one best selling book in the world for 400 years and that would not have happened without the blessings of God and God would never have given that kind of blessing unless it was exceptable in his eyes. What's your view of the New King James, Massorite? Have you seen it? I've been using the New King James for many years, alongside the Complete Jewish Bible and the New Living Translation and other versions. I've found it good, but I don't know if there is error through using different words. I agree that words are very important and can carry vastly different meanings, like "bear your iniquity" not being the same as "suffer for your sins". Another example is Rev2: 22 "Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds." The N.I.V says "I will cause you to suffer intensely (or something like that), yet the words "great tribulation" are from the Greek words "megas thlipsis" and it's only the King James and New King James which translate those words directly each time they are found in the New Testament - therefore only the KJV and NKJV reflect the fact that "great tribulation" (as opposed to "tribulation") is spoken of only 3 times in the N.T - each time by Jesus Himself: 1) In the Olivet Discourse mention of the great tribulation (Mat.24: 21-22). 2) In the warning to the Thyatira Christians that He Himself would throw them into great tribulation if they did not repent of following the doctrines of a false prophetess, aptly named Jezebel. 3) In John's mention of the multitude of saints who had come out from the great tribulation and had washed their robes and were seen in heaven by John (Rev.7: 14). Because they're careful to translate the words as literally as possible, it's only the KJV and the NKJV which reflect the fact that great tribulation was mentioned only 3 times - each time by Jesus. I do like reading other translations as well, and although I'm fully aware of the many flaws of the New Living Translation, I like to compare it's translation of Old Testament passages with the KJV's translation of the same passages, because the New Living Translation does a lot to bring out the meaning of archaic idioms etc which you would otherwise need a commentary to bring out. I also think the KJV is the best. But I find the New KJV much easier to read, because it does away with the thee's and thou's and a lot of other archaic language, using the modern words instead, without paraphrasing. I'd like to know what you and others think of the New KJV though. Lekh.

I sleep over 9 hours a night and take a 1-2 hour nap each day. I also exercise regularly. Hey, Or'el. You wanna cool it on the sleep. 9 hours + 2 hours - 11 hours sleep a day - that's too much You don't need more than 8 hours, and you need at least 7 hours Hope you know I'm pulling your leg. I think maybe you're experiencing this because you're making your walk in Jesus something that's produced in the flesh - human attempts at growth in righteousness. The flesh can't make the flesh submit to the Spirit of Christ - the Spirit (not "makes", but causes) the flesh to submit like this: "Come to Me all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke on you and learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and you shall find rest to your souls. For My yoke is easy, and My burden is light." (Mat 11:28-30) The more you concentrate on self-effort (instead of faith) in your walk with Jesus, the more power the flesh will gain over you, and you will feel as though demons are attacking you. Cool it. Jesus isn't standing over you with a rod waiting to beat you up if you don't read your Bible and spend time studying it today. Just remember Him quietly in your heart and speak quietly to Him in prayer and ask Him to let His Spirit prompt you again to want to read and study the Word. If the Holy Spirit isn't prompting you to want to (like you start feeling hungry for the Word), then reading the Bible "'cause you feel guilty if you don't" is walking in the flesh and not in the Spirit. Cool it: "Come to Me all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke on you and learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and you shall find rest to your souls. For My yoke is easy, and My burden is light." (Mat 11:28-30) Fear not, young one, for You are of God, little children, and you have overcome them, because He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world." (1Jn 4:4) You have already overcome, because you're in Jesus, the One who has already overcome.

Thanks, 'e lansing. But okay, let me try and explain what I mean like this, but first, try not to think in terms of "one prophecy, one fulfillment" with regards to either Dan.9: 26-27 or the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24, Luke 21, Mark 13). Daniel 9: 24-25 opens by speaking about the coming of the Messiah - so the passage is about the coming of the Messiah - but the Messiah doesn't have only one coming - He has two. Verse 26 shows that AFTER the first 7 weeks + 62 weeks, the Messiah would be cut off. The word used for "after" is a very definite Hebrew word - "achar", meaning following after (following after the first 7 weeks + 62 weeks), which means the Messiah would be cut off in the final week. Don't lose me yet - just keep concentrating - look at part of this as happening TWICE: The prophecy opens by speaking about the coming of the Messiah but closes by speaking about the coming of the antichrist? No - verse 26 says that the prince who shall come shall destroy the sanctuary. Verse 27 says that the Messiah will cause the sacrifice to cease in the middle of the final week - because He is cut off AFTER the first 7 weeks + 69 weeks. I know you're losing me now - but don't - keep concentrating: Look at part of this as happening TWICE: The veil is rent because the Lamb of God has been sacrificed - but most of the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob who were eternally elected by God, reject the sacrifice and continue/RESUME sacrificing animals as sin-offerings - and so God allows "the prince (prince #1, the Roman prince) who shall come" to destroy the temple by fire - on the exact same day of the Biblical calendar that the first temple was destroyed by fire by the Babylonian armies, and the surviving Jews and their leaders are taken captive by the prince of Roman 666 years (to the year) after the Jewish klng, Jehoiachin, was taken captive by the king of Babylon, along with the prophet Daniel and other Jewish leaders. (The temple was only destroyed a few years later). And so Jesus gives the same sign to BOTH (a) the generation who saw this happen in 70 A.D; and (b) the generation who will see this happen: "Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place (whoever reads, let him understand) Then let those in Judea flee into the mountains. Let him on the housetop not come down to take anything out of his house; nor let him in the field turn back to take his clothes. And woe to those who are with child, and to those who give suck in those days! But pray that your flight is not in the winter, nor on the sabbath day; for then shall be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world to this time; no, nor ever shall be. And unless those days should be shortened, no flesh would be saved. But for the elect's sake, those days shall be shortened." (Mat 24:15-22). When "the (Roman) prince who would come" destroyed the temple in 70 A.D, there was great tribulation. When "the prince who shall come" destroys the next temple, there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning...to that time." Right? The Messiah was cut off in the middle of the week, and the prophecy does open and close by speaking about the coming of the Messiah - but Messiah came is is coming again. And the history of Israel repeats itself, so prophecy gets fulfilled more than once - except that when the armies of "the prince who shall come" destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D, it did not cause the Jews to look on Him whom they pierced (Zech.12: 9-10), neither did the Messiah come and set His feet on the Mount of Olives to deliver them from that particular "time of Jacob's trouble". But next time, He will - because when the Jews see that "the prince who shall come" has come and destroyed the temple (again), they will realize, finally, that Messiah has come, and is waiting for them to repent so that He can come back. So it's all about the fact that the Messiah HAS come and been cut off and brought and end to sacrifice, and the fact that the Jews will not have the sacrifice of the Lamb of God and will continue/resume their own sacrifices for sins in the "sacred location" (hagios topos). Yes, the clock stopped - but the two circles of the first century and the last century overlap when animal sacrifices are continued/resumed in a temple in the "sacred location" in Jerusalem - and in that overlap, you can insert Dan.9: 26-27 and Matthew 24 and Luke 21 and Mark 13 (the Olivet Discourse). I hope you understand what I'm trying to explain now. But I could be wrong. Lekh

I thought the Satanic infiltrator accusation was possibly directed against me and one or two others - but certainly nor you or any other newer poster. It shows you what general accusations about Satanic infiltration can do when no names are mentioned - everyone jumps to the conclusion "He's talking about me", and it also shows how such accusations can cause a great deal of harm to Christian Forums such as this one and in the long run do exactly what Satan wants. Talk about Satanic infiltration! I think that we should act like the apostles taught us if we become offended by someone on the boards - PM him/her privately. If he doesn't accept, take 2 or 3 witnesses, and if he doesn't accept, take him to the Mods, and if he still doesn't accept, simply put him on "ignore". But most people are a little too lazy to follow that long "grievance procedure", so I may as well have said nothing about that

What's interesting about the Greek words for temple in the New Testament is that there are four Greek words referring to the temple in Jerusalem: hieron, naos, oikos ("house", as in the house of God), and hagios topos (as in holy/sacred location). Hieron Until the verses describing (a) the tearing of the veil; and (b) Judas throwing the 30 pices of silver back into the temple, the word hieron is used only in reference to the temple building in Jerusalem and its outer court, with one exception (which is perhaps an important exception, which I will come to in a minute). Naos Likewise, until the verses describing (a) the tearing of the veil; and (b) Judas throwing the 30 pieces of silver back into the temple, the word naos is only used in reference to: 1. The holy place/most holy place of the Jerusalem temple. 2. Christ's reference to His body as the temple. After the tearing of the veil, the word naos is only used in reference to our individual bodies or the church as the temple of God, with two exceptions (if they be exceptions): 2Thes.2: 4 and Rev.11: 1-2. Oikos ("house") Only until the tearing of the veil, the word oikos ("house") is also used once in reference to the holy place/most holy place of the Jerusalem temple (in a verse which parallels the same verse in another gospel, which uses the word noas) And until the tearing of the veil (but not after that), the word oikos is also used in the phrase "house of God", and it is used in reference to the holy place/most holy place. But after the tearing of the veil, the word oikos and phrase "house of God is always referring to the church, and never to the temple in Jerusalem. After the tearing of the veil, only the word hieron is used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem, with three exceptions (if they are exceptions): 1. 2Thes2: 4 2 Rev.11: 1-2. BUT HERE'S THE THING: hagios topos (holy/sacred location) After the tearing of the veil, when the unbelieving Jews accused Paul of defiling "this holy place", the Greek DOES NOT use the words naos or oikos to translate those words (because after the tearing of the veil, the Greek does not use those words to describe the Jerusalem temple). But NEITHER does the Greek use the word hieron to translate those words (because the word hieron referred only to the temple building in Jerusalem with its outer courts, and not the holy place). So what words does the Greek use to describe the Jews' reference to the Jerusalem temple as the "holy place" AFTER the tearing of the veil? THE SAME WORDS used in the only exception in the gospels up until the tearing of the veil where neither hieron, nor naos, nor oikos are used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem: The words hagios topos: "Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place (Greek: hagios topos) (whoever reads, let him understand)." (Mat 24:15). That's the same words used in Acts in reference to the Jerusalem temple AFTER the tearing of the veil when the Jews accused Paul of defiling "the holy place" in Jerusalem. So the GREEK words used for "temple" in the New Testament DO suggest that a "temple" will be built in Jerusalem - but that it will not be regarded by God as holy - rather as an abomination - and it will be the sign that the Lord Jesus Christ is about to return. I don't know what to make of the fact that 2Thes.2: 4 and Rev.11: 1-2 are the only exceptions to the rule that from the tearing of the veil onwards, the word naos is used only reference to our individual bodies and the church as the temple of God. Hopefully someone can suggest a reason to me? Lekh Lekh, this is very intresting. Its my opinion that 2thess2:4 and rev 11:12 are prophectic and have not yet been fulfilled, and should be taken literaly. So technicaly it would be before the tearing of the veil. In Dan 9:25 is when it was given in terms of a later temple, prince to come[man of lawlessness], and the event of the abomination that cause desolation. What say you? I say I dunno. I believe there is a strong possibility that those who reject the sacrifice of Christ are going to build another temple, and IF THAT happens, then that temple will fulfill Mat.24: 15. But Dan: 27 I think was fulfilled by Messiah, who was cut off AFTER the first 69 weeks (therefore in the 70th week), and I don't see why Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy pens by speaking about the coming of the Messiah and closes by speaking abouot the coming of the antichrist. But I believe the history of Israel repeats itself, and that what took place 40 years after the tearing of the veil (70 A.D) will happen again (the gathering of the armies against Jerusalem), and I believe that the last half of the week is what is written about in Dan.7: 25 and Rev.13: 5. I don't believe in a 7-year tribulation, I believe in a three and a half year tribulation. I believe that the continuation of animal sacrifices in the temple after the tearing of the veil eventually resulted in the desolation of the temple 40 years later (in 70 A.D), and "to the end of the war" (of the Romans against Israel), the desolations determined, actually occurred. But I believe it's all going to repeat itself - except that Jesus won't be crucified again and the veil won't be rent a second time, of course - but the temple will be built again and the sacrifices will again constitute an abomination that causes desolation. I don't mind if you don't agree, because I don't like to get into arguments about prophecy, because who says I'm right? So it's just my opinion about Dan.9: 27, for the reasons above. But I don't know about 2Thes.2: 4 and Rev.11: 1-2. Don't understand why those verses use the Greek word "naos". Lekh

What's interesting about the Greek words for temple in the New Testament is that there are four Greek words referring to the temple in Jerusalem: hieron, naos, oikos ("house", as in the house of God), and hagios topos (as in holy/sacred location). Hieron Until the verses describing (a) the tearing of the veil; and (b) Judas throwing the 30 pices of silver back into the temple, the word hieron is used only in reference to the temple building in Jerusalem and its outer court, with one exception (which is perhaps an important exception, which I will come to in a minute). Naos Likewise, until the verses describing (a) the tearing of the veil; and (b) Judas throwing the 30 pieces of silver back into the temple, the word naos is only used in reference to: 1. The holy place/most holy place of the Jerusalem temple. 2. Christ's reference to His body as the temple. After the tearing of the veil, the word naos is only used in reference to our individual bodies or the church as the temple of God, with two exceptions (if they be exceptions): 2Thes.2: 4 and Rev.11: 1-2. Oikos ("house") Only until the tearing of the veil, the word oikos ("house") is also used once in reference to the holy place/most holy place of the Jerusalem temple (in a verse which parallels the same verse in another gospel, which uses the word noas) And until the tearing of the veil (but not after that), the word oikos is also used in the phrase "house of God", and it is used in reference to the holy place/most holy place. But after the tearing of the veil, the word oikos and phrase "house of God is always referring to the church, and never to the temple in Jerusalem. After the tearing of the veil, only the word hieron is used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem, with three exceptions (if they are exceptions): 1. 2Thes2: 4 2 Rev.11: 1-2. BUT HERE'S THE THING: hagios topos (holy/sacred location) After the tearing of the veil, when the unbelieving Jews accused Paul of defiling "this holy place", the Greek DOES NOT use the words naos or oikos to translate those words (because after the tearing of the veil, the Greek does not use those words to describe the Jerusalem temple). But NEITHER does the Greek use the word hieron to translate those words (because the word hieron referred only to the temple building in Jerusalem with its outer courts, and not the holy place). So what words does the Greek use to describe the Jews' reference to the Jerusalem temple as the "holy place" AFTER the tearing of the veil? THE SAME WORDS used in the only exception in the gospels up until the tearing of the veil where neither hieron, nor naos, nor oikos are used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem: The words hagios topos: "Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place (Greek: hagios topos) (whoever reads, let him understand)." (Mat 24:15). That's the same words used in Acts in reference to the Jerusalem temple AFTER the tearing of the veil when the Jews accused Paul of defiling "the holy place" in Jerusalem. So the GREEK words used for "temple" in the New Testament DO suggest that a "temple" will be built in Jerusalem - but that it will not be regarded by God as holy - rather as an abomination - and it will be the sign that the Lord Jesus Christ is about to return. I don't know what to make of the fact that 2Thes.2: 4 and Rev.11: 1-2 are the only exceptions to the rule that from the tearing of the veil onwards, the word naos is used only reference to our individual bodies and the church as the temple of God. Hopefully someone can suggest a reason to me? Lekh

I think the above works of the Holy Spirit in us are all part of what it means to be sealed with the Holy Spirit. And if someone isn't sealed with the Holy Spirit, he doesn't belong to Christ. The good thing about it is He reproves us individually as well for the wrong we do or for the wrong things we say. Some of us don't learn so quickly, others do, but without the Holy Spirit's works you described above we cannot be disciples of Jesus, because Jesus sent the Holy Spirit in His own stead so that, in His own words, His disciples will not be left orphans. Praise God.

I'm talking about from Ishmael's perspective, the way it must have made him feel to have been sent away. The Biblical account shows that he must have loved his father, and his father loved him, even petitioning God that Ishmael be the one through whom the promise would come, but God said no, and for good reason - because the hand of man cannot force the work of God, and Ishmael was born as a result of the hand of man trying to force the work of God. But that wasn't Ishmael's fault. And I doubt that Hagar, though a born of heathen people, was a Godless woman - she cried out to God in her distress, and God heard her. Also, Ishmael would have been brought up by his father Abraham to believe in God, not in the gods of the heathen - and God blessed Ishmael also as a result of Abraham's request. Exactly - they were as human as we are, but despite their failings, God used them for His purpose.

I agree that the current conflict is really about's Islam and its thirst for domination, but Muslims are taught that it was Ishmael Abraham was going to sacrifice on the mountain, not Isaac, and they are taught that they are descended from Ishmael, and that's maybe why so many Muslims are given that name. The point is, who was behind Abraham and Sarah's idea to have God's promise fulfilled through Hagar? Certainly not God - ever since the Garden of Eden, the serpent has been planting seeds of thought in the minds of humans which cause them to do things which have enormous and tragic consequences. Look to the spirit behind Sarah telling Abraham to have the son of promise come through Hagar, and you'll find the same spirit behind the birth of Islam, and the same spirit behind Adam and Eve's eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. This is why Muslims are taught and believe that Islam is the "original" faith of Abraham, and that Abraham and Ishmael, as well as Isaac, Jacob, Moses and all the prophets + Jesus were all devout Muslims, but the Jews and Christians corrupted their message and changed the Bible, which Mohammad then corrected. This is why it's so difficult to penetrate the hearts and minds of the deceived Muslims with the gospel. In the same way, Roman Catholics are taught and believe that the R.C.C is the "original" church, and this is also why it's so difficult to penetrate the hearts and minds of the deceived Roman Catholics with the real gospel. The same spirit which is behind all these deceptions is also behind the the deception of Replacement Theology, which teaches that the church, which is nothing more than the temple of Israel, which is the temple of God, has replaced God's chosen nation which is ethnically descended from Isaac and Jacob.

Welcome back! Hope your trip was great

I agree that satan is having a field day, and I don't think he has ever stopped, and won't until he is. It is for this reason that I repeat myself over and over on these boards, it's about Jesus and His grace under which we live. Trouble is, it is such a simple message that some think that there has to be more. But in reality, there does not have to be, it really is that simple. You have your calling Fresno Joe also. I really miss his posts. Don't see them so often anymore. Or maybe I'm just reading the wrong boards? Traveller is also pretty silent these days. What's going on? Are they sick and tired of (some of) us?

What do politicians do? They will simply ignore all facts presented to them which show the falsehood and untruthfulness of any claims or statements they make, or they will divert the subject away from those facts, and then they will come back later making the same false claims and statements again and again. It's A.K.A intellectual dishonesty.