Jump to content

Diaste

Royal Member
  • Content Count

    2,548
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Diaste last won the day on June 5 2018

Diaste had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,270 Excellent

8 Followers

About Diaste

  • Rank
    Royal Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    WY, USA
  • Interests
    The Advent of the Beast.
    The Sign of the Coming of the Son of Man.
    The Gathering of the Elect.
    My Children.
    Motorcycles.
    Mountains.
    Chess.

Recent Profile Visitors

3,746 profile views
  1. First we are talking about whether or not there is a literal 1000 year reign of Jesus with those who got the victory over the beast and his image and the mark and the number of his name. If you want to talk about chains open another discussion. Again, nothing suggests a metaphor for eternity in the passage Rev 20:1-7 concerning the 1000 years. In Psalm 90:4 1000 years becomes a metaphor for eternity. That language does not exist in Rev 20:1-7 indicating the 1000 years is anything other than literal. Ah... now we attempt to demean. Would you say the same to the Bereans? Are you saying the Spirit cannot guide in a book written through the power of the Holy Spirit? Maybe you think the Spirit just goes about superseding the Words of the Spirit? Sure...the above is true. Are you saying that if there is a 1000 year reign of Christ with the victors over the beast that he's not really reigning forever? Or forever cannot begin if there is a 1000 year reign with the victors? So a literal time period of 1000 years where it's clearly said Christ reigns somehow negates reigning forever, or the forever nature of His reign must cancel a literal 1000 year reign? The most logical explanation is that when Christ takes back the earth and sets up His immortal Lordship He grants special privilege to a group of exceptional ability, character and accomplishments for a set period of time. The 1000 years isn't about Jesus' forever reign, it's about the victors receiving a reward for their overcoming patience. I hear this all the time and it's weak every time I hear it. Of course there is a realm beyond our knowing; one of unimaginable beauty, power and of the Spirit. But, Jesus has a body. The Spirit created the physical realm. Jesus accomplished the needs of the Spirit through a physical death and shedding of blood, and His physical body was resurrected. He fed people both Spiritual food and physical food. Listen to this: "What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead." - James 2 Literally connecting the Spirit with the physical. Faith is given by God and it requires action in the physical realm to realize that faith of the Spirit given to nus by our Father. The two are interconnected, inseparable; the Spirit animates the flesh, we are spirit beings encased in flesh. Lets look at 1 Cor 2: " What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words." Words which are contained in scripture. It sounds as though you cherry pick the scriptures that prove your point and discount the others. If one begins using scripture to prove spiritual provenance and preeminence over the words of scripture using special revelation or special spiritual insight to supersede scripture, then their own proof is negated. Where do you think you got the ideas and truths that are spirit based? In scripture of course.
  2. There are many places in scripture where the ideas behind the images are symbolic. For instance two literal concepts, 'a thousand years' and 'watch in the night' from Psalm 90 are both similes, not literal, revealing the timeless existence of the Lord God. Some say 'a thousand years' are exactly equivalent to one day for the Lord, as though a 24 hour day passes for Him and it's a thousand years for us. But that's incorrect as one day for the Lord is also compared to a watch in the night, about 2-4 hours, in the same breath. Since it's both in the poem's 4th verse then it's the eternal timeless existence of out Creator. But the evidence and context of the text lead me there. Not so with Rev 20:1-7. No language in this passage to lead us to the idea it's a metaphor, simile, analogy, or allegory. A simile is identified by the words 'like' or 'as', like we see in Psalm 90:4. A metaphor is like, "The Lord is my shepherd..." a metaphor for the Lord's love and care for His people, he watches over us like a shepherd over a flock of sheep. No such language exists like the above in Rev 20:1-7. Even without a logical examination just normal everyday reading makes it apparent one thousand years is just that, one thousand years of 360 days each, give or take I suppose. The above quote is from the NIV, I believe. "...and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years." is from the KJV. "and they ZAO and reigned with Christ a thousand years." Zao is: ' I live, am alive.' Doesn't matter what translation, this is the word that appears in the Greek. They were not alive, hence the need for resurrection, then they are alive, therefore 'to live' or 'came to life' are both appropriate.
  3. Everything is allegory so it can fit a twisted scenario. One must understand that while the spiritual realm reigns supreme and will soon be ever present, spiritual ideas, actions and consequences occur in the physical realm. Jesus released us all from the curse of sin and death. That is a spiritual truth and a spiritual reality adjudicated in the heavenlies, abrogating the sin of the world. But Jesus appeared in the flesh. Preached in the flesh. Suffered and died in the flesh in order to remit the sin of the world according to spiritual precepts and requirements in the high heavenlies. The same is true of the evil in the world. It's spiritual death and rebellion begun in heaven, transferred to earth, entering the physical bodies of mankind, and most noticeable in hate for each other. A spiritual force manifest in the flesh. As is Babylon. A deep, unreasoning spiritual hate seething in a physical city. You seem to be willfully blind to this.
  4. Diaste

    Question

    I got that. The converse is true as well as I posted above. One coming. One gathering. Antichrist, the beast, on the scene at the time of the gathering and Coming of the Lord.
  5. Diaste

    Question

    Since the pretrib rapture does not exist you are correct. But I think you should reread your post above, slowly, several times. Then relate it to rational thought.
  6. So, back to OT liturgy? All I see is this about the worship of the Lord in the kingdom: Then all the survivors from the nations that came against Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the LORD of Hosts, and to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles. And should any of the families of the earth not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of Hosts, the rain will not fall on them. And if the people of Egypt will not go up and enter in, then rain will not fall on them; this will be the plague with which the LORD strikes the nations who do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles. This will be the punishment of Egypt and of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles. On that day, HOLY TO THE LORD will be inscribed on the bells of the horses, and the cooking pots in the house of the LORD will be like the sprinkling bowls before the altar. Indeed, every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the LORD of Hosts, and all who sacrifice will come and take some pots and cook in them. And on that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the LORD of Hosts.
  7. I see the gaps as well. Don't understand it. Not a scripture is explicit. But there is enough evidence in unfulfilled prophecy to make this conclusion of a time gap accurate. So what do you have, other than just belief in a gap in Eze 38-39, that leads you in that direction. In the case of the last week as described in Matt 24 there is quite a bit of unfulfilled prophecy, 69 weeks being fulfilled in the past and 7 years of unfulfilled prophecy coming.
  8. "The tombs broke open, and the bodies of many saints who had fallen asleep were raised. 53After Jesus’ resurrection, when they had come out of the tombs, they entered the holy city and appeared to many people." This is one resurrection. "And they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years." This is another. "The rest of the dead did not come back to life until the thousand years were complete." And yet another. Already explained the logic here in the other reply. But for that to be true one has to conclude the 1000 years is forever therefore Satan is never released as there is no end to the 1000 years and the rest of the dead not raised in verse 4 also never come back to life since again, you say 1000 years is forever. I'm sorry, that's just...tortured. The blessing and curse of moral free agency. We get to believe anything we choose.
  9. Objection. This is a distraction. I know and understand releasing Satan is the same event. However, by your definition of the 1000 years, 'completeness', this verse; "The rest of the dead did not come back to life until the thousand years were complete." would read, "The rest of the dead did not come back to life until the completeness were complete." And if as you say, "God's chosen will live and reign with Him forever (a "thousand years", v.6) in heaven and the new earth." then there is no time at which Satan could be released as the 1000 years is defined by you as 'forever'. The 'first resurrection' in verse 5 is clearly referring to verse 4 as we see in verse 4, "And they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years." Then in verse 5 we see the rest of the dead hence, not resurrected, so the 'first resurrection' of verse 5 can only refer to those in verse 4 who, "...had been beheaded for their testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image, and had not received its mark on their foreheads or hands." The rest of the dead in verse 5 are not described this way and are not of this group. And it seems plain to me we have two distinct resurrections," And they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come back to life until the thousand years were complete." There must be a distinct period of time here with a beginning and end. If your definition of '1000 years' holds then the verse 4 people live and reign forever, the rest of the dead only come back to life after this 'forever', which would be never as in your eyes '1000 years' is forever. I don't see how the rest of the dead could come back to life of those living and reigning do so forever as the time of 1000 years is never reached.
  10. Diaste

    Question

    Great point. Hadn't noticed that before you brought it up. So then the antichrist has to be on the scene when this supposed pretrib rapture occurs since he's destroyed when Jesus comes, which is what Paul is saying in verse 1, "...concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus and our gathering to Him..." Excellent.
  11. All evidence to the contrary: Rev 18 All the nations have drunk the wine of the passion of her immorality. The kings of the earth were immoral with her, and the merchants of the earth have grown wealthy from the extravagance of her luxury.” (So the Kings of the earth were immoral with themselves? Even the text says the kings were immoral with an entity not of themselves.) Lament over Babylon Then the kings of the earth who committed sexual immorality and lived in luxury with her will weep and wail at the sight of the smoke rising from the fire that consumes her. (So the kings of the earth lament their own death when the text says they lament another's death?) In fear of her torment, they will stand at a distance and cry out: “Woe, woe to the great city, the mighty city of Babylon! (Called a city twice here. 'Polis': a city. 'Ge': the earth. Not even close to the same.) “Woe, woe to the great city, (Again called a city.) Every shipmaster, passenger, and sailor, and all who make their living from the sea, will stand at a distance and cry out at the sight of the smoke rising from the fire that consumes her. ‘What city was ever like this great city?’ they will exclaim. Then they will throw dust on their heads as they weep and mourn and cry out: “Woe, woe to the great city, (So you would have us believe the people lamenting the fall of Babylon are here on the high seas lamenting the burning of the earth, ge, when Babylon is clearly labeled as a city, polis. And you would have us believe this about the kings of the earth lamenting their own demise.) For in a single hour she has been destroyed.” (Here hour could be an indeterminate period of time, not simply 60 minutes. But from the reactions of the merchants and kings of the earth it's a sudden, shocking demise. So sudden that it occurs quickly and not over months or years. ) And the sound of harpists and musicians, of flute players and trumpeters, will never ring out in you again. Nor will any craftsmen of any trade be found in you again, nor the sound of a millstone be heard in you again. The light of a lamp will never shine in you again, and the voices of a bride and bridegroom will never call out in you again. (I don't believe this can said about the entire earth. Unless you have some proof the entire earth and all the cites are void of the above forever. You don't, but I have to ask.) For your merchants were the great ones of the earth, (Here you present an unjustified tautology. Your idea is that the merchants were their own merchants. The great ones of the earth were their own merchants? Or Babylon was it's own merchant? The merchants of Babylon were outside of Babylon; clearly depicted here.) Yes, makes perfect sense the ships on the seas and all the kings of the earth and all who were made rich by Babylon are going to mourn before the destruction of Babylon, during and after, for 42 months. Really? They will mourn before destruction occurs? And for 3.5 years? Quite the expansion. Actually, hemera is a single day from sunrise to sunset. Even the Day of the Lord is a single day. He will come in a day marked by a sunrise and a sunset. The Lord stays and commences the Fathers work which is referred to as the Wrath of the Lamb. So yes, Babylon is a city and it is destroyed on a day, in an hour, just as scripture presents.
  12. I see your point. It's true that a serial criminal would commit their crimes at various time and places. My idea here is to liken the event as the same based on similar evidence from multiple accounts. It's the similar evidence of two witnesses to the same event that's important. It's the building of the profile of a future event by gathering info from multiple sources historical and current. Doesn't that change a few things? If it is those who dwell in the cities of Israel then the assault isn't limited to a single mount or a range. It's every mountain in Israel and in proximity to all the cities. Israel is overrun in toto just as Joel and Rev record in agreement with Ezekiel.
  13. "Then I saw an angel standing in the sun, and he cried out in a loud voice to all the birds flying overhead, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, so that you may eat the flesh of kings and commanders and mighty men, of horses and riders, of all men slave and free, small and great.”" -Rev 19 "And as for you, son of man, this is what the Lord GOD says: Call out to every kind of bird and to every beast of the field: ‘Assemble and come together from all around to the sacrificial feast that I am preparing for you, a great feast on the mountains of Israel. There you will eat flesh and drink blood. You will eat the flesh of the mighty and drink the blood of the princes of the earth...you will eat your fill of horses and riders, of mighty men and warriors of every kind,’ declares the Lord GOD." - Ezekiel 39 So then you are saying this happens twice; once at the onset of the 70th week and once again at the end of the 70th week.
  14. That's a new one for me. I have not heard before just now there will be blood sacrifices in the Millennium. That seems prima facie contradictory. Perhaps you could elaborate?
  15. I don't see anything to contradict this at present. My feeling is that even though Gog comes against Israel ostensibly it is the Lord which they fight against. Mainly because Israel is the land of God and the people of God. That's likely the reason for every action against Israel; everyone attacking the promised just hates God and if the wipe out Israel they in effect kill God.
×
×
  • Create New...