wingnut-
-
Posts
7,673 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
67
Posts posted by wingnut-
-
-
2 minutes ago, JacquelineDeane55 said:
What is your favorite animal and why?
I like most any animal really, dogs are a particular favorite. By the way, your link doesn't work.
-
1
-
-
On 8/9/2020 at 10:02 PM, not an echo said:
Relating (for now) to Jesus' parable of the fig tree, I think something is missed when what Luke says is not considered. He says that Jesus said, "and all the trees" (Lk. 21:29). Whatever the specific characteristics of the fig tree, we need to find the common denominator that is here being alluded to.
The common denominator in all three accounts is the parable of the fig tree, and the specifics that are referred to are in relation to the fig tree and the fruit it produces as well as the season.
23 hours ago, not an echo said:I almost see your strait-jacketing of the meaning of the word "sign" as being a sign to me
of your resistance to really consider what I am saying. I think a better example of a sign (and more related to our discussion) might be what we find in Isaiah 7:
14 Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel.
Interestingly, here we have a sign preceding Christ's First Advent. I don't know why it should seem to be an odd thing that the appearance of "the sign of the Son of man in heaven" would precede Christ's Second Advent.
Still not seeing this the same, as you can see from Isaiah's prophecy the sign was in regards to the Messiah, and it involved Him actually being born. The sign was recognized after His birth to others, Mary knew ahead of time because she was told, as was Joseph.
23 hours ago, not an echo said:When my wife was great with our first and only child (28 years ago), she was standing in the kitchen and all of a sudden water started streaming down her legs into the floor! Now, that right there was "an event in and of itself" let me tell you! And a sure sign that we better be getting ourselves to the hospital. The son was born shortly.
Well I'm glad you all got to the hospital in time, but again the water breaking is a sign that the child is coming. You didn't celebrate it, but I wager you celebrated the birth of your son.
Signs as I stated previously point us to something.
23 hours ago, not an echo said:I hope you understand my spirit.
I think I do brother, I hope you understand mine lol.
23 hours ago, not an echo said:(Well, I was fixing to sign off and the Lord just kinda put it on my heart to let you know that I am always prayerful about my replies. Hoping that you are prayerful too...)
Always my friend, I look forward to the next installment.
-
On 8/9/2020 at 11:13 PM, not an echo said:
Concerning 1.
According to my understanding, Matthew 24:27-28, is of Christ's Second Coming (Rev. 19:11-21), which concludes what Jesus says in His discourse relating to Daniel's 70th Week, the account of which begins in verse 15. Then, verses 29-31 begins His focus on what I have been calling the intersecting event of the appearance of "the sign of the Son of man in heaven," which will occur with the opening of the 6th Seal. My scriptural support for this position revolves partly around how all of this dovetails with what we see in The Revelation.
Well you lost me right there, and it doesn't matter how many times you say it. You are reading something into scripture that just isn't there and have built a theory around that rather than just reading what scripture actually says. What I believe fits perfectly, and I don't have to change a thing or read anything into scripture to get there. Our biggest point of difference is that you read something in that isn't there, and what I believe is based on what scripture actually says.
On 8/9/2020 at 11:13 PM, not an echo said:Said another way, I see a dividing line of thought between verse 28 and 29, because we see the appearance of "the sign of the Son of man in heaven" happening with the opening of the 6th Seal, in Revelation 6, but His coming "as the lightning" for the battle of Armageddon coming much later, in Revelation 19.
That's strange, considering where in the Olivet discourse it is found. When you read it in context, funny how Jesus relates it to people trying to mislead others regarding whether the Lord has arrived or not. It would seem He is making it clear that there is no mistaking His coming.
Matthew 24:21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. 22 And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short. 23 Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24 For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand. 26 So, if they say to you, ‘Look, he is in the wilderness,’ do not go out. If they say, ‘Look, he is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. 27 For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 28 Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather.
Then of course there is what Paul said, and ironically this is one of the passages you have attempted to change His coming into your alternate event.
II Thessalonians 2 Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, 2 not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming.
Please explain how your alternate event can result in the end of the lawless one, just by the appearance of His coming, and then 7 years of tribulation follow in which the lawless one would be a crucial figure?
Can't have it both ways, it is either one or the other. This is why attempting to change a known event such as His coming into anything else falls apart.
On 8/9/2020 at 11:13 PM, not an echo said:Concerning 2.
No. Just because it is a sign primarily for the Israelites, this does not mean that they alone will see it. But, only the 144,000 will be converted, or sealed. They will be the firstfruits of the Israelite nation (Rev. 14:1-4, esp. vs. 4), which will experience salvation at Christ's Second Coming.
Concerning your last sentence, I have been looking for a place in the Bible where the word "tribes" refers to Gentiles. Maybe I will find it when I have more time. Have you found a place? Of course, we know that the word "tribes" is used repeatedly concerning the Jews, and "all the tribes" spoken of by Jesus in Matthew 24:30 is another point of convergence with "all the tribes" spoken of by John in Revelation 7:4.
My friend, you cannot conclude that the 6th seal is the same event as the one in the Olivet discourse and then disregard what is said from one of those two accounts. The fact is simple, in Revelation it specifically states that EVERYONE sees this and reacts to it. Why are you trying to split the Jewish people off as though what is said at the 6th seal has no application, or that what is said in the Olivet discourse has no application for Gentiles? It is either the same event or it is not, and either way everyone is addressed. In regards to the Jews specifically, maybe the question you should ask yourself is why if what you say is true they would wait around in Judea to "SEE" the abomination of desolation if they are aware of what is going on 3.5 years before it takes place?
On 8/9/2020 at 11:13 PM, not an echo said:Further, there is the gathered "elect" (the Church) spoken of by Jesus in Matthew 24:31, which is another point of convergence with the "great multitude" spoken of by John in Revelation 7:9.
Again, you are reading something into scripture that is not there. The great multitude are people who have died during the tribulation as a result of the war on the saints. At some point you need to address Revelation 12 and the group that "holds to the testimony of Jesus" while the Jewish remnant is protected in the wilderness. Or the saints from chapter 13 the beast is waging war on, where do you think they go after they are killed?
On 8/9/2020 at 11:13 PM, not an echo said:Any thing that I say that appears to stem from dispensationalism is merely incidental.
The reason I bring it up is because your theory is largely based on the exact same principles, mainly viewing or dividing up the great tribulation based on the Jewish people. The great tribulation has nothing to do with race, it has everything to do with judgement on the wicked, doesn't matter what nationality. In fact, when you see the 144,000 sealed, what you should see is that they are being protected from the judgments, not subjected to them. When you read Revelation 12, you see the remnant being taken out of the dragon's reach, not subjected to it. Protected from God's actions, protected from the enemies actions, yet somehow the tribulation is all about their race and not about who is wicked and who belongs to God?
On 8/9/2020 at 11:13 PM, not an echo said:If you will notice, what you have in bold puts what Jesus says in verses 12-19 before the "sights" and "signs" of verse 11---with the part that I have been referring to as the first section. I see the sights and signs of which Jesus speaks in verse 11 as linking this section to the event he gives his account of in verses 25-27. Very important to notice. Now, notice how what Jesus said in verses 25-27 harmonizes with Matthew 24:29-31 and is like a paraphrase of John's account of the 6th Seal. All of this revolves around the event of the appearance of "the sign of the Son of man in heaven," the intersecting event between the era of the Church (of which we are a part) and the Day of the Lord (which includes Daniel's 70th Week).
Ok great, although there still seems to be some difference perhaps. In relation to the great signs and terrors from heaven, don't you think that includes more than just the events you mention? For example, how about the two witnesses and the false prophet who can bring fire down from heaven, or stopping rain from falling? How about the angels flying overhead giving warnings? How about wormwood?
It is about more than just a sign.
Luke 21:10 Then he said to them, “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. 11 There will be great earthquakes, and in various places famines and pestilences. And there will be terrors and great signs from heaven.
Note how signs is plural, not singular, and don't forget the terrors.
-
On 8/9/2020 at 9:08 PM, not an echo said:
I believe you would have to know that I would not suggest that Jesus gave bad information.
Of course, I don't believe for a moment you would think that. Which is why it makes no sense that you would suggest that when He says it is after the tribulation of those days you seem to read it as before the tribulation of those days. As I've pointed out now several times, nowhere after this point is there any more talk about tribulation, so there is no scriptural reason for you to do so.
On 8/9/2020 at 9:08 PM, not an echo said:A lot revolves around the many differing views of what I have been referring to as "the intersecting event"
Because it appears to be an invisible event you speak of so it is unconvincing to all of us who are still waiting for a single scripture to support it. All those Old Testament prophecies regarding the Israelites, and still not one single offering to illustrate what you have claimed.
On 8/9/2020 at 9:08 PM, not an echo said:According to my understanding, there is coming a time (and it may be before I click on Submit Reply) when God will determine that it has been enough.
If you are referring to imminency, that has more holes in it than swiss cheese as well. The disciples certainly did not teach it or believe it, I could list numerous examples of things they were told would happen that make this impossible. For example, they knew Peter would die beforehand, they knew the temple and the city would be destroyed beforehand, and so on.
-
On 8/9/2020 at 7:54 PM, not an echo said:
I believe we will agree that just because a prophecy has been fulfilled in part, this doesn't mean that it has been wholly fulfilled.
I am not sure what you mean to know if I agree or not because you did not reference a prophetic example.
On 8/9/2020 at 7:54 PM, not an echo said:I wish I knew more about how you are seeing it. I was surprised to learn that you feel it has been fulfilled. I guess one of my first questions would concern your thinking relating to the covenant that will be confirmed for the "one week" (Dan. 9:27).
Well, I am certainly willing to discuss that which is why I asked you those three questions. You quoted them, so I know you saw them, yet you chose not to address them.
On 8/9/2020 at 7:54 PM, not an echo said:When I consider the 70 Weeks prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27, the surrounding chapters with what is said in the last chapter, Jesus' words in Matthew 24:15, and Revelation 10 through Christ's Second Coming, I can't unsee the relation to the 70th Week.
What you need to do is look at Daniel's prophecy on its own merit, what it says, and whether or not those things have taken place. If your desire is truth, then you will have to address those questions regarding what is prophesied, objectively.
On 8/9/2020 at 7:54 PM, not an echo said:So, I am in disagreement that Daniel's 70th Week (the last week) has been fulfilled at all. Strong disagreement.
Strong disagreement but no answers. In this case silence is deafening. They aren't difficult questions, all yes or no, and all directly related to what is stated in the prophesy. So I wonder what it is you disagree with?
-
On 8/9/2020 at 6:30 PM, not an echo said:
Concerning your question, I am speaking about that that will occur at the appearance of "the sign of the Son of man in heaven," when the Church will be gathered (Matt. 24:31). This is also at the same time Paul speaks of in I Thessalonians 5 when the Church will escape the period of the Day of the Lord (which is not Daniel's 70th Week, but includes it). This happens with the opening of the 6th Seal.
All of which Jesus says is, "Immediately after the tribulation of those days...", so you continue to try and change it to immediately before the tribulation of those days rather than accept what He said.
As for I Thessalonians 5, there is not one mention of the gathering in that chapter, not one. It would however have been a perfect place for Paul to have said something like, you won't be surprised like a thief, because you won't be here for it, rather than saying that it won't surprise them because they are not in darkness.
On 8/9/2020 at 6:30 PM, not an echo said:The thing of the Church being raptured prior to Daniel's 70th Week is a matter of the fulfilling of Bible prophecy, and has less to do with the nature of the tribulation that the Church will experience and more to do with what has been prophesied concerning the Israelite nation.
If the church being gathered prior to the tribulation is a matter of fulfilling bible prophecy, then it shouldn't be so difficult to produce the scripture that states that, right? As far as what was prophesied concerning the Israelite nation, I've already shown you that regarding the remnant that will be saved it is not tribulation, but restoration. You have yet to address Revelation 12, or Hosea's prophecy.
On 8/9/2020 at 6:30 PM, not an echo said:For example, do you not think that Jesus' words in Matthew 24:15-21 pertain to the Israelites?
There are only two groups of people, saved and unsaved. For example, do you think that passage would have pertained to Luke, a Greek, if he happened to be there when these events unfolded? Those who want to separate the Israelites from the Gentiles with this passage do so on the basis of those in Judea being told to flee, do you think it matters as to nationality or to what one believes?
On 8/9/2020 at 6:30 PM, not an echo said:As far as the Church, I believe we are in full agreement that it is one body, whether a saved Jew or Gentile. All that come to Christ are a part of the same body. Also, at the time of Christ's Second Advent, when the Israelites as a nation will experience salvation, I see them as becoming a part of the body of Christ as well...all equally God's children. Same during Christ's Millennial Reign. All who are saved will be equally God's children, and in my thinking, none will be "shunned from the marriage supper."
Ok, so for the sake of clarity, you don't see the marriage supper as taking place for those gathered while the tribulation is ongoing? Typically this is a standard for pre-trib as to what they will be doing during this time, so I am just wanting to know if you disagree with that. Because if you believe the marriage supper is taking place while the tribulation is happening on earth, then you are in fact shunning all those not present.
-
15 minutes ago, pawz said:
thank you all for your attempts to help. My disappointment is rooted in the longing I have for the Lord to return so that the terrible suffering on this earth can be addressed and ended.
Don't be discouraged about gaining understanding, I know it takes some getting used to a different outcome than you were expecting. Rather think of the opportunities that may present themselves for you to witness each day to those who are not prepared to meet the Lord. And also, whatever purposes the Lord has for your life, you were chosen for those purposes and times because you are an overcomer in Him.
-
2
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
49 minutes ago, pawz said:I have been a believer in a pretrib rapture for all of my Christian life - many years - and for the past twelve have been watching daily for our Lord's return. A few days ago I came across the passage in Rev 20 where it says that those that are beheaded and who did not take the mark of the beast are the ones that live and reign with Christ for a thousand years and that theirs is the first resurrection - which sounds like the rapture to me, which means, if that is so, that we have to wait at least another three and a half years for the Lord's return and have to go through the tribulation. The rest of the dead do not come back to life until the thousand years are gone. I really want to explain this away but I cannot. Can you help?
I once believed in a pre-trib rapture as well, and scripture such as what you have noticed and mention above revealed otherwise to me. That being said, you should not be troubled about what the future holds, our hope is in Him and it speaks to what is to come, not the life we currently live, but the one to come.
-
6
-
1 hour ago, Retrobyter said:
Allow me to give you a more practical and historic answer. I would strongly advise you to look up the following:
Read through the whole article. (And, for the record, I had absolutely NO hand in writing it!) It was well researched and presented in such a way as to AVOID the unnecessary lure to see any portion of the chapter as being in OUR future. It's not until chapter 12 that the text extends into the distant future, part of which is still our future, too.
Thanks retro,
This is one of the best posts I've ever read, the article is excellent, and the events are laid out in an undeniable detailed review that show this prophecy was fulfilled. You may not remember, but a few years ago we discussed this and I argued against you. I just wanted you to know that the word of God did not return void in that conversation and that since that time I have come to see the truth about this. Keep sharing the truth brother, good stuff!
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Markesmith said:
I dont find any rapture in the bible! Where is it? Thanks
The word rapture is not actually a real word. Back in the dark ages, people were illiterate and their source regarding biblical teaching came through the church itself, mainly in Europe this was the Catholic church. The Catholic church used Latin at that time, which made it doubly hard on illiterate people, particularly those who did not understand Latin.
The Latin word raptio was a translation from the Greek text for the word harpazo. The word harpazo appears I believe 14 times in the original text from which the Latin translation was made, and later the King James Version. Rapture came about when people who could not read for themselves and did not understand Latin created their own equivalent of the Latin word raptio. When people became literate and knew the difference, the word rapture should have ceased to exist since it is not actually a word, instead it has taken on a life of its own and caused a lot of confusion.
The actual English translation of harpazo is catching up, snatching away, or a more modern way of saying it would be gathering. As Jayne pointed out from the Thessalonians passage, this is one of the examples of where the Greek word harpazo was used in the original text.
-
7 hours ago, Diaste said:
I do think the Discourse aligns in total. A thought exercise leads me to the conclusion that anything in the Discourse is giant leap from anything from before. Since it's in the end of the age context, not the last days, it should be distinguishable from what came before; probably in terms of scale and severity.
I agree with you in regards to the discourse aligning, where we begin to drift is in regards to your overall view, as far as it being end of age context. I would offer this for your consideration.
Mark 13 And as he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!” 2 And Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”
3 And as he sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are about to be accomplished?”
From Luke
Luke 21:5 And while some were speaking of the temple, how it was adorned with noble stones and offerings, he said, 6 “As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” 7 And they asked him, “Teacher, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when these things are about to take place?”
So as you can see from these two accounts we get some information that Matthew does not include. The point is, they were not just asking about the sign of His coming and the end of the age, but their questions came about as a result of what would become of the temple and the buildings around it. So based on that, we should view all of this as beginning at that time because His answer includes the temple's destruction as well because it was part of their question.
7 hours ago, Diaste said:If you are referring to 2 Thess 2 here's my take on that: The two events are related as occurring in conjunction; the falling away and the revealing, and occurring before the Coming and the gathering.
I agree, but would you say the falling away comes before the revealing since Paul says them in that order? I've always considered them to appear as listed, similar to how he always puts His coming before the gathering.
7 hours ago, Diaste said:So the falling away will center around the time of the revealing. I have no idea what sort of time frame we would be looking at. How long does it take for there be a legitimate defection of this type? It is my understanding the defection will occur both before and after the mark is required. It will be quite different from a backsliding we see all the time. It should be in the form of mass defection. Whole denominations at once will declare allegiance to the beast.
Obviously I agree with your sentiment regarding defections prior to as I see them as having existed all along, so that would be nothing new. However, in regards to a mass defection or one more noticeable than the norm, to me it seems to point to that being a result of the mark of the beast, or at the very least the false prophet being on stage. I come to that conclusion from the passage in I Timothy.
I Timothy 4 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,
If this is the later times as it is said, then I would expect the deceitful spirits and doctrine of demons has something to do with the false prophet.
-
22 minutes ago, Diaste said:
Was she saying they didn't apply? Maybe I have wildly misunderstood. Yes, of course they applied to the 1st century church. I apologize if I got off at the wrong stop here.
Of course I agree. What I didn't agree with, and what I may have misunderstood, is an allusion the 1st century is the end of the application.
And why wouldn't the examples given apply to everyone down through the ages? That's not this discussion but I'm betting we need to be on guard for the same. The teachings of Balaam, the Nicolaitans, Jezebel, the cause of martyrs, Satan's seat, etc., are all spirit driven. I feel this is all relevant. Even if a specific event is ancient it's lesson is timeless.
They, and we, are in the last days. We have not yet reached the end of the age.
Again, I apologize for any misunderstanding. I do that sometimes.
No worries brother, and honestly I am not sure if she meant it in the way that it is written, or if the original question just didn't lack clarity. Perhaps in my responses I lacked clarity as well in that I am not saying that the truth in those letters has no relevance beyond just those immediate churches. Only that they were most definitely relevant to those people who first received them.
I also agree that many of those specific things mentioned in the letters are spirit driven and that they too could be a condition that has continued to exist through the present only existing in a more veiled appearance. There are many things for example that lead people into sexual immorality right now, internet porn is a great example of this, what spirit is behind that?
But we do know, not only from the letters in Revelation, but also from Paul's epistles that the early church had issues with members that would fall back into former patterns involving the false gods of their times, the warnings against that and his encouragement to remove it from the church are evident throughout the New Testament, and in the same way God through the prophets in the Old Testament took issue with the same problems regarding the Israelites. There is nothing new under the sun.
-
8 minutes ago, Diaste said:
It might be relevant but I wouldn't see it as a limiter. If we begin to limit scripture to a finite set where does it end?
I agree completely, and that is what I am saying, it is not limited to the future when we know it already happened and continues to happen and will happen again very similar to the manner in which it first happened.
12 minutes ago, Diaste said:Agreed, it's not limited. What's "before all this"? I see Luke 21:12-19 as the conditions and events of GT in relation to followers of Jesus. What's happening in that passage can exist or begin with the events and conditions of Luke 21:10-11 ongoing during the same period. In my mind the end is the Return of Jesus and the gathering. In that context the previous scenario is unforced. I used to think that the prophecies would come to pass as stated in a strict order, one begins and ends and the next begins then ends, and so on. That's not a demand in any of the end of the age prophecies. There is constant overlap of the fulfillment. Even when specific duration is mentioned no prohibition of overlap is seen.
I agree with what you are saying, but at the end of verse 11 in Luke, would you agree that the terrors and great signs from heaven align with events we see in Revelation? Such as, the wormwood event, the signs in heaven at the sixth seal, two witnesses that can bring fire down from heaven and stop the rain from coming, a false prophet that can also bring fire down from heaven, etc. Did those type of events come before or after what Luke describes in verses 12-19? From a historical aspect, did those celestial events occur in the life of the disciples, or MUST they come after what we know did occur in their lives?
So for example from Matthew's account, he mentions the lightning in the sky from east to west and associates that with the Coming of the Son of Man, and this is said before the section regarding the AoD. We know that the AoD comes first, so the chronology aspect of the Olivet discourse is still dependent on the sequence of events. In other words, the Olivet discourse is not laid out chronologically either, we still have to use the verbal clues given throughout scripture that construct the sequence.
32 minutes ago, Diaste said:Not sure that would cancel the same warnings for the terminal generation.
I am not saying that they don't, what I am saying is the sequence still has to follow what is written. So here is my question, when the falling away that you see as future occurs, would you say it comes before or after the implementation of the mark of the beast? Will the mark of the beast have any effect on people departing from the faith?
-
5 hours ago, Diaste said:
It's obvious the letters to the churches were to existing congregations circa 95 AD but they apply to all ages.
I never said that there is truth in those letters that cannot be applied over the ages, I said that those letters were written for those churches in that time and the truth within those letters directly applied to them.
5 hours ago, Diaste said:Taken as whole, which must be done as very few teachings in scripture, if any, are fully realized by cherry picking desirable verses, we should understand the letters in relation to the entire Revelation of Jesus Christ. It doesn't seem reasonable to me to isolate the letters; divorcing the encouragement and warnings and rewards from the book of which they are a part.
The question that I responded to was, WHY would the 7 churches receive letters about the end times prophecy?
The answer is simple really, because they were living in the end times, and so has everyone from the 1st century until the return of Christ. The individuals at those churches were facing heavy persecution and many of them would be killed in the near future, so their eternal state rested in the balance of them getting right with the Lord, thus all the admonitions.
The implication, whether intended or not, was that these things had nothing to do with them. Yet there are parts of those letters that are not applicable today, nor to anyone since that time, so producing verses regarding the death of Antipas or food sacrificed to idols and used to trick Jews are very clear examples of things that cannot and do not apply to everyone through the ages. It is not cherry picking to point these facts out when someone is implying these letters were not applicable to those people.
Trying to disprove this by introducing arguments I never made, such as exhortations or messages of repentance not applying to future generations does not refute the facts that I stated. The letters applied to the people that first received them, which you seem to agree with, and if that is the case then you don't disagree with me about the letters.
-
5 hours ago, Diaste said:
"Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened." - Matt 24:34
"Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened." - Mark 13:30
"Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened." - Luke 21:32
Highly significant to the entire discourse.
I agree.
5 hours ago, Diaste said:The entire teaching from the question:
“Tell us,” they said, “when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?” - Matt 24:3
“Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to be fulfilled?” - Mark 13:4
“Teacher,” they asked, “when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?” - Luke 21:7
Who is the "US" that is asking? That matters too don't you think?
5 hours ago, Diaste said:to the conclusion is a whole and it's for the generation that sees all the things in the discourse. Certainly the 1st century disciples experienced trials, etc., but this discourse falls under the umbrella of the terminal generation, 'that sees all these things'.
If a condition exists, and continues to exist from the time it began until the time of the end, then doesn't every generation from the beginning of that condition until the end see it?
5 hours ago, Diaste said:That cannot be the 1st century as none of the events in the discourse have happened in relation to the return of Jesus in the sight of a single generation. That one sentence in all three gospels cements the discourse in the time/space continuum as future.
It is not limited to the future when it occurred in the 1st century, when Luke says "But before all this" that is very specific timing in which the event would occur. It would precede what Matthew and Mark defined as birth pains or the beginning of sorrows, and it did. We see this played out in the lives of the very 4 men whom Jesus was speaking to, and one of them, being John, tells us that not only did people depart from the faith, he calls them many anti-christs.
Jesus told them, some of you will be put to death, Peter was crucified, James was beheaded, my memory fails me on what fate Andrew suffered, but John would survive being boiled in oil and go on to write Revelation later. As Jesus said, some of them were in fact put to death. Being crucified or beheaded is no less significant in the 1st century than it would be in the future, and I am sure you would agree with that.
-
11 hours ago, Retrobyter said:
Shalom, wingnut-.
Look, just ask for Wikipedia's article on "Seven churches of Asia" Here's a link: Seven churches of Asia. You'll get a nice map and a pretty good description of where each church was located. You can also follow the link on that page to Asia Minor (Anatolia) where one can get a map on which one may zoom in closer to read the names of the various cities.
Thanks brother for the links, it's good information for anyone not familiar with the locations. I have looked at this before, I think maybe we just saw the questions differently in that I was answering in regards to whether I thought the location had significance in regards to the future. In regards to it being significant in the past I think you and I agree that it surely did.
-
2 hours ago, DeighAnn said:
Here is the video link if you are interested.
-
1 hour ago, DeighAnn said:3 hours ago, wingnut- said:
Exactly, and don't you think the actual individuals who attended those actual churches would have accepted that it meant them?
No, not really. I believe many believe their church is a unit and by going to that church they are ok. If not why would so many believe in rapture PT.
Well let me put it this way then. If you attended a church which received a letter from the apostle John himself, and he said to your church in the letter.
“‘I know your works. You have the reputation of being alive, but you are dead. 2 Wake up, and strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have not found your works complete in the sight of my God. 3 Remember, then, what you received and heard. Keep it, and repent. If you will not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come against you. 4 Yet you have still a few names in Sardis, people who have not soiled their garments, and they will walk with me in white, for they are worthy. 5 The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life. I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels. 6 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’
If this arrived to your church, from John, and you knew it was a reliable source, you wouldn't feel it was sent to your church but some church thousands of years down the road? Then, consider this from another letter, and explain to me if this is in any way applicable to anyone alive today.
Revelation 2:13 “‘I know where you dwell, where Satan's throne is. Yet you hold fast my name, and you did not deny my faith even in the days of Antipas my faithful witness, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells.
How many people since the time Antipas was killed in Pergamum could this apply to?
-
1 hour ago, DeighAnn said:
First, I had to look up olivet discourse and that is? in Matt 24 (so prob Mk 13,Lk21 right?).
Yes, those are the three accounts of the Olivet discourse, you are correct.
1 hour ago, DeighAnn said:I don't know if I am reading you right or am I? you believe the great falling away happened to the disciples?
Yes, when you take into account all three examples from scripture, then we must apply facts established from any one of them to all three. In this instance, regarding the falling away you will find a very specific sequence given in Luke.
Luke 21:10 Then he said to them, “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. 11 There will be great earthquakes, and in various places famines and pestilences. And there will be terrors and great signs from heaven.
Now notice the last sentence from above, and does that sentence in your opinion speak to things we see within Revelation? Now look at what follows it.
Luke 21:12 But before all this they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors for my name's sake. 13 This will be your opportunity to bear witness. 14 Settle it therefore in your minds not to meditate beforehand how to answer, 15 for I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which none of your adversaries will be able to withstand or contradict. 16 You will be delivered up even by parents and brothers and relatives and friends, and some of you they will put to death. 17 You will be hated by all for my name's sake. 18 But not a hair of your head will perish. 19 By your endurance you will gain your lives.
Now these exact events as described by Luke took place to the disciples themselves, which we know not only through historical accounts but also scripture accounts. In Matthew's account, we see the same thing, some parts are said in different words but speak to the same things, and others such as "You will be hated by all for my name's sake" are nearly word for word. So per Luke, the events in verses 12-19 come before the more vaguely covered events in verses 10 and 11. From Matthew's account, these are some of the phrases I am referring to.
Matthew 24:9 “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name's sake. 10 And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. 11 And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. 12 And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But the one who endures to the end will be saved.
John in his writings, also tells us that these events took place.
I John 2:18 Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.
What John is describing in verse 19 is the falling away that was spoken of by Jesus, members of the early church departing the faith. The reason why studying all three accounts is important, is because we get details from one that we do not get from the others. Luke provides us with details that give us specific timing to this event, just as Mark gives us specific information as to who exactly was present. From Luke's account, one could think that a large number of followers were the audience, from Matthew it is narrowed down to the disciples asking privately, but Mark gives us the exact names of the four present.
Mark 13:3 And as he sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately,
1 hour ago, DeighAnn said:I am a little lost here. I understand faith waxing and waning but "the great falling away" is specific and for a specific time.
I'm not sure what you define as the great falling away, so I'll address what I think you might mean and if you have something else in mind just reference the passage.
II Thessalonians 2:3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,
In this passage, Paul relates in timing that the falling away and the man of lawlessness come prior to His coming and the gathering. Paul does not say they are in close proximity to each other, only a sequence of events. The falling away is the first order of the sequence, the man of lawlessness is second, but nothing specific as to how much time occurs between the two. He also does not say how much time comes between either of these two things and His coming and our gathering.
So if the falling away Paul speaks of in this passage is the same falling away spoken of by Jesus in the Olivet discourse, the sequence was correct as that event came first.
I Timothy 4:Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,
In his letter to Timothy, Paul speaks of a falling away, (this time in the other term of departing from the faith) which talks about later times, as in the future. But his choice of words in regards to saying "some" doesn't equate to me as a "great falling away". A falling away no doubt, but doesn't appear to be any more significant in number than the one spoken of by Jesus.
As I said in my original response, I see a condition that has existed for as long as the church has existed, one that ebbs and flows in conjunction with periods of great revivals. For example, we have come through a period in recent times that many consider a time of great revival (70's and 80's). However, leading up to this period of revival the church went through some drastic changes regarding the altar call. The altar call prior to this was a very personal thing, done over a period of time that involved personal discipleship, but starting with the late Billy Sunday in more modern times, the altar call has morphed into more of an assembly line production. I posted a video years ago that covers this transformation of the church history, I will find the link and share it with you here. If you can find the time I think you will be glad you watched it, I believe it is about 45 minutes long, but well worth the watch.
In regards to where we are now, because of the changes in regards to how many came to the Lord, we are in a period rife for departure because so many were poorly rooted. And I am by no means indicting every congregation or pastor by pointing this out, but keep in mind we live in the days of the mega-churches. The church I attend is massive, and there is no humanly way possible for the pastor to have a personal handle on how each member of his flock is doing, in fact, there is no way he could even know each one of us personally.
In regards to your comments concerning the future, I have no doubt that a falling away will accompany the events we still consider future, but it has nothing to do with the falling away that happened in the first century which the disciples experienced themselves. As someone once said, those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
-
2 hours ago, DeighAnn said:
WHY would the 7 Churches of 2000 years ago be addressed in end time prophecy?
The apostles wrote and spoke in the terms of the last days as existing in their time. Per the Olivet discourse the events began in their lifetimes, which Jesus expressly told them they would personally experience specific events. So these first century churches were also part of that time. The end times began with the first advent of Jesus. He spoke during His ministry in terms of the last days being present tense. This is why those 7 churches would be addressed in end time prophecy, because they were living it, and so has everyone in history since that time. Take everything in the context it was written, right from the start of Revelation, look at John's words.
Revelation 1:9 I, John, your brother and partner in the tribulation and the kingdom and the patient endurance that are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos on account of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.
2 hours ago, DeighAnn said:Isn't it strange that they would be so detailed in the BOOK of the REVEALING of the return of CHRIST JESUS ?
You start here with a faulty premise, it is not the revealing of His return. It is the Revelation of Jesus Christ, from His first advent where He was first revealed up to the eternal state, because there is no end. Revelation includes all of this, it addresses things that precede His second coming, includes His second coming, and goes beyond His second coming.
The fact that these letters are so detailed in their specifics to those churches that existed at that time, it serves as evidence what John states, the letters were for those 7 churches.
2 hours ago, DeighAnn said:For me, common sense given me by GOD, tells me, if I can look around TODAY and find the same teachings being taught, it wasn't written to churches located in Turkey, 2000 yrs ago.
Have you ever heard a sermon on this?
Revelation 2:14 But I have a few things against you: you have some there who hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, so that they might eat food sacrificed to idols and practice sexual immorality.
or this similar occurrence in another one of these churches
Revelation 2:20 But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols.
Is this woman named Jezebel that claims to be a prophetess still around today? Is this practice of sacrificing food to idols and trying to trick Jews into eating it still a rampant problem in the church of today?
While what you say is true, and that there are in fact people taking things from these 7 letters and applying it in their modern sermons, would you say that every one of these instances they are applying it properly? Surely in your time on this forum you have seen or conversed with someone of a different eschatological position that wants to apply one specific verse from a letter to themselves, but not acknowledge anything from the other 6 letters at all, haven't you?
2 hours ago, DeighAnn said:Their locations were all in one place - their teaching all different.
They were all in one region of that time known as Pergamum, which had a city by the same name, in what is modern day Turkey. Interestingly, the area where the city Pergamum once sat is now in modern times more like a ghost town of ruins, where few people go. This happens to be the church that was said to be the place where "satan's throne is."
2 hours ago, DeighAnn said:Does the location matter?
I suspect so, but that is speculation on my part.
2 hours ago, DeighAnn said:Are all 7 locations still found today?
They do all still exist as far as being populated areas other than Pergamum itself, but I don't believe any of them go by the same names they had at that time.
2 hours ago, DeighAnn said:Are all 7 characteristics/teachings found today?
No, as I previously pointed out, and I suspect you would agree that not every application people use is correct either.
2 hours ago, DeighAnn said:Doesn't the "or else" tell us that TEMPTATION IS definitely going to come upon them to SEE whether they have or have not REPENTED?
Exactly, and don't you think the actual individuals who attended those actual churches would have accepted that it meant them?
2 hours ago, DeighAnn said:Can there be a GREAT FALLING AWAY, if there hasn't been a GREAT COMING TO?
Well when you apply the meaning to the actual Greek word used, which is apostia, then falling away is one way to say it, as is departing from the faith, or truth. So what it means is that one walks away from faith in Jesus to most likely preserve their physical continuation of life, or because their faith was poorly rooted to begin with. The falling away that is spoken of in the Olivet discourse was specified to apply to the disciples themselves and something they would experience personally. So it is a condition that began from the start of the gospel and continues today. Throughout history there have been peaks and valleys of both revival and departure.
-
8 hours ago, Josheb said:
And would you say the elect have been around long before Calvary or Pentecost under different labels beside "church"?
Yes, absolutely.
8 hours ago, Josheb said:If so, then would you say the elect/Church have been reigning in one form or another throughout what we call history.... even if they have done so imperfectly or what we/they may have perceived to be varying degrees of success? Did not Abraham reign victoriously over the small section of the world God brought to him? How about Moses? He's a curious figure because on one hand he got to see the remnant of God's glory as it passed but he did not make it into the promised land. How about Deborah? Gideon? Samson? Boaz? The murderous adulterer David? Isaiah? Jeremiah? They jammed that guy in a log and cut him in half! Did he reign? Hosea, the whore-marrying prophet?
This was interesting, because honestly I had never looked at it through this lens before. By that I am not referring to the individuals, but in regards to whether they were reigning. I had some time to carefully consider it throughout the day since you first posted, and I would answer affirmatively to all of the above.
-
3 hours ago, Josheb said:
Thanks. I agree.
How does that fact inform your understanding of 1) the Church and 2) the elect?
To me the church and the elect are synonymous, and one addition to the list you provided that I like to point to is Abel, because he takes us all the way back to Genesis and Jesus specifically makes a point to call him righteous.
Matthew 23:35 so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar.
Based on one of your previous posts I would say we have the same view in that there are only two groups of people, those who are elect, and those who are not.
-
6 hours ago, R. Hartono said:
Please explain what good is that for God to hide it with a Seal if the 1st Seal speaks about Jesus spreading the Gospel to win people ? John has already known this since 30 AD and John would not weep so much if the 1st Seal is Jesus spreading the Gospel. Its not a secret at all.
I am not sure where you get hiding it from, did I say anything about hiding anything? Do you know what a Revelation is? A revealing of something, at what point did the Revelation of Jesus Christ begin? Would you say that He was revealed when He first came to earth, or not until after He had been crucified and resurrected?
Of course John knows this, I never implied that He did not, it is in fact stated prior to this in the first chapter.
Revelation 1:19 Write therefore the things that you have seen, those that are and those that are to take place after this.
John is instructed to write the things that he has seen, things that are (as in, already in existence or having happened), and things that are still future.
6 hours ago, R. Hartono said:The crown : You keep insisting who is giving this rider a crown to begin with,
That's an important detail wouldn't you say, perhaps you need to consider where all of this is taking place according to John. How about we take a look at scripture just to verify where he is?Revelation 5 Then I saw in the right hand of him who was seated on the throne a scroll written within and on the back, sealed with seven seals. 2 And I saw a mighty angel proclaiming with a loud voice, “Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?”
Revelation 6 Now I watched when the Lamb opened one of the seven seals, and I heard one of the four living creatures say with a voice like thunder, “Come!” 2 And I looked, and behold, a white horse! And its rider had a bow, and a crown was given to him, and he came out conquering, and to conquer.
Did he leave the throne room? No. So again I ask, who does the rider get the crown from?
6 hours ago, R. Hartono said:the Revelation 13 explained the beast with 10 crowns and its the dragon who gave him that power and authority.
So now you have the beast in heaven? Isn't that a little strange that John doesn't mention the beast and the dragon being there? And on top of that, 1 crown has turned into 10 crowns?
6 hours ago, R. Hartono said:Regarding your question : At what point does the Lord cease being omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent? Please see below explanation from Bro. The Light.
Maybe you and bro light should take a stab at this one, and see if it resonates.
Hebrews 4:3 For we who have believed enter that rest, as he has said, “As I swore in my wrath, ‘They shall not enter my rest,’” although his works were finished from the foundation of the world.
Now, regardless of whether you accept or even bother to consider any of the above, perhaps one of you who claim the rider on the white horse is the beast can solve this riddle. I saved the best for last.
If the beast is given authority to wage war against the saints for a 3.5 year period, and he also controls the economy with the implementation of his mark as recorded later, and has authority to kill anyone that won't worship him, then how do you explain the next three riders? Is the beast riding all the horses? Does he go back and forth from the throne room changing colors and John just doesn't notice it?
-
On 7/30/2020 at 12:48 AM, DeighAnn said:
Did Christ or Paul teach this doctrine? Where do I find THEM teaching this?
I just asked this same question of someone recently, I will be so disappointed if I receive the same reply you got, which has absolutely nothing to do with material.
Daughter of Women
in Prophecy
Posted
I've had the same thoughts regarding Daniel 9, as have others I am sure, but as you will find in Daniel 11 the interpretation falls apart.
Daniel 11:31 Forces from him shall appear and profane the temple and fortress, and shall take away the regular burnt offering. And they shall set up the abomination that makes desolate. 32 He shall seduce with flattery those who violate the covenant, but the people who know their God shall stand firm and take action.