ENOCH2010

The blood stains happen at  Edom/Bozrah  (sp?)

10 minutes ago, missmuffet said:

If you read the verse literally it is not adding or deleting from scripture. It simply means that God will take the true Christians out of this world before the 7 year tribulation. 

The verse in question says no such thing, that is only your hope to what says.

2 hours ago, Electric Earth said:

 

"Reader pay attention!" There is a reason why Christ said those words. It is the second half of the week that God's people will be given into the hands of the Beast for a period of 1260 days, and "Jerusalem" (modern-day Christians) will be trampled underfoot (Rev. 11:2). According to Daniel 12:11, the desolation occurs 1290 days after the continual sacrifice (of public preaching work) ends. The public preaching work was halted due to coronavirus in March 2020. Count 1290 days from that point (which was the start of the seven year tribulation) and we reach October 2023. That is the time that the Great Tribulation will commence and the "two" witnesses will begin their prophesying in sackcloth as a way of mourning the desolation of the Christian congregation and God's earthly organization.

 

At least we wont have long to wait to see if he is a true prophet

4 hours ago, The Light said:

Because we are not appointed to wrath.

I think you missed the point. 

Why would God teach this if the pre-trib rapture takes all the saints away before any of it happens?

The blessed hope is the resurrection  

To question # 2 - Who knows what the new Earth will be like? People may just live on one side, who knows? 

8 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

And where does it say that the NJ will be ON the earth?

 And how will those all over the earth walk in its light if they are round the other side of the planet?

Start reading at Rev:19 and continue through 20,21,and 22. That should give you a clear picture of what's ahead of us, if you will let the Word teach you and not listen to any man made doctrine.

2 hours ago, Uriah said:

Wow! OK, how will that work? Crush His own people...land?

I have read that if it were as seen below (an attempt at scale) one would need to excavate to the depth of 70 miles at its center so the entire base would be at ground level.

My belief is that it will remain above the Earth.

I understand that, but I'm still going with what the Bible plainly says. All I can say is there will be some major geographical changes with the new Earth.

4 hours ago, Uriah said:

Not sure what this means, Enoch. Are you thinking the city will come down and squash thes nations beneath?

Yes again 

Yes 

8 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Enoch,

That`s correct. The Lord Jesus Christ will rule from His own throne in the highest, (Rev. 3: 21) not from His footstool, the earth. (Isa. 66: 1)

He will rule through the nation of Israel over the other nations of the earth in the millennium and also in the New Earth. That was promised to Israel. (Micah 4: 1 - 3)

The Bible clearly says the New Jerusalem comes down from the heavens to the new Earth where the Lord will dwell with man. Rev: 21 

Read Isaiah 17 and get back to me. 

If all is past, when was Damascus destroyed? 

Marilyn, clear would be you don't believe Christ will reign on this earth for 1000 years.

Satan 

7 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

Are you that sure I am wrong? Paul's "rapture" sequence starts with people UNDER the earth - so EARTH must be included. 
Next, Paul's rapture sequence does not start in heaven. The spirits He may or may not "gather" in heaven before he comes cannot be included in the rapture sequence on earth. 

Therefore, ANY "gathering" that says from heaven, cannot be Paul's rapture. 
Any gathering that gathers from the furthest part of heaven to the furthest part of earth is not talking about Paul's rapture. Do you find it IMPOSSIBLE God could have TWO gatherings? 

How many times must I tell you the word "heaven" in that verse means SKY.

Just now, iamlamad said:

Then you are still in error, if the gathering is after we are all up in the air, NO NEED to say earth." Sorry, your argument is a poor one. It simply does not fit Paul's rapture. Again, there is the timing issue. 

Are you that dense, we leave the earth and meet in the sky, at the second coming, just as the Bible plainly says. 

2 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

I don't think that takes in the entire meaning in the Greek. In Mark it is from the furthermost parts of heaven to the furthermost parts of earth. That just does not SOUND like Paul's rapture. Since Paul's gathering is ONLY from the air we breath on earth, it would see MUCH more likely this is a different gathering. But when we consider the timing, it CANNOT be Paul's rapture which will come just before wrath. 

The rapture gathers from heaven and earth, it's simple we meet the Lord in the air. The sky is a big place, the angels gather the group to a single location. 

6 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

Certainly there are verses that speak of EVENTS posttrib. But that was not the subject. We were talking of the RAPTURE. There is no simple verse that proves Paul's rapture is posttrib or any other trib. 

Case in point: in verse 31 above, or verse 27 in Mark, no one has EVER proved this is Paul's rapture. Indeed, it cannot be: it gathers from heaven while Paul's rapture gathers from earth. It comes after the trib' of those days, while Paul's rapture comes before wrath. 

The gathering from heaven means the gathering in the sky where those in Christ meet the Lord. 

1 hour ago, iamlamad said:

I think "falling away" is a bad translation. I don't think it fits the context of the passage. Why? Because whatever Paul meant by "apostasia" it also has to be the restrainer "taken out of the way." (the man of sin IS revealed at the end of verse 3).  I therefore thing "departing" is a much better translation and that Paul is referring to the Holy Spirit (gone with the church) being taken out of the way.  It has to be a VERY SIGNIFICANT "departing," one that all would recognize as: "Ah! So that is what Paul was talking about." If a falling away was Paul's intention, how would anyone know that "enough" had fallen away to be significant? I think it would have to be something sudden and significant. Anyway, Paul did not include what was being departed from what. 

Perhaps the falling away is a lot of pre-tribbers get discouraged when they see they are still here for the tribulation. 

2 hours ago, iamlamad said:

I can only guess: you don't even want to try and answer the questions Jesus asked me. 

They will always be there for people to wonder about.

It is an absolute fact: when John first saw the vision of the throne room, He did NOT see Jesus at the right hand of the Father.
It is an absolute fact: John saw the Holy Spirit there in the throne room in chapter 4 - as the 7 spirits of God.
It is an absolute fact: John watched a search for one worthy to take the book and open the seals - and that search ended in failure. No man was found.

Nope that's your interpretation, it's not "absolute fact".

On 7/7/2020 at 8:38 AM, ENOCH2010 said:

If we are living in the 1000 year reign today, why is Christ not ruling with a rod of iron? If I understand the scriptures concerning the 1000 year reign, it sounds like the ruling government will be a theocracy, today the world is a far cry from a theocracy with a king ruling with a rod of iron.

Still waiting on Josh or Jag to reply on this.

2 hours ago, ENOCH2010 said:

If we are living in the 1000 year reign today, why is Christ not ruling with a rod of iron? If I understand the scriptures concerning the 1000 year reign, it sounds like the ruling government will be a theocracy, today the world is a far cry from a theocracy with a king ruling with a rod of iron.

Waiting for an answer on this from the postmillennial crew.