Jesus' Return II

[iamlamad]

9 hours ago, inchrist said:

Actually I did answer your question, you simply dont understand my response. 

Not at all, as I said to you, whether the word translated in english is coming, come or came is irrelevant. Its your rendering/interpretation of come, came or coming that is at fault.

As come, coming or came must be translated from the greek thought being  erchomenoi (V-PPM/P-NMP)    

Tense:  Present
Mood:  Participle
Voice:  Middle or Passive

Come - as in right now with the expectation of more to come ( inline with the greek thought of present progression action)

Came - as in more is expected to come as the ones that have already or previously arrived (in line with greek thought of present progression action)

Coming - as in more still to come ( In line with greek thought of present progression action)

Each 3 english renderings must stay inline with the original greek thought. 

Hence its irrelevant which 3 of the english words you wish to use. English translation does not superimpose itself over  greek thought.

You however have superimposed a english rendering to deliberately change the origional Greek thought.

And since you have no context to stop a continual progressive action by the greek thought in the context of Rev 7, you have therefore deliberately changed the word of God.

This specific greek thought ἐρχόμενοι (erchomenoi) only occurs in 4 Occurrences and in each of the other 3 it is a continual progressive action, the 4th we busy discussing.

elthontes V-APA-NMP

Not the same greek thought as

erchomenoi  V-PPM/P-NMP

Came : elthōn V-APA-NMS not the same greek thought as erchomenoi  V-PPM/P-NMP

Pay attention here

Called -  legomenēn V-PPM shares the same greek thought as erchomenoi  V-PPM/P-NMP. As nazarath is continually called nazarath.

erchetai - V-PIM/P-3S not the same greek thought as erchomenoi  V-PPM/P-NMP

I think you get the picture.....

which youve dismissed earlier as stating you you dont accept their interpretation of Revelation.....could you make you mind up then?

And if you going to trust an expert I would suggest one of the most leading authorities of NT greek grammar

Robertson, A.T. Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament was an instructor and professor of New Testament interpretation.

Compared to Fausset, A. R, Jamieson, R and David brown  who do not hold a doctorate in NT Greek interpretation.

You can either try go to a dentist for a heart transplant or actually try go to an actual practitioner in heart surgery. 

Dr AT Robertson was a practitioner in NT interpretation.  His works are still consulted today.

Now you can answer my question, show me any interlinear that states erchomenoi is not V-PPM/P-NMP in Rev 7:14??

I get the picture. Thanks for the Greek lesson.

"Come - as in right now with the expectation of more to come ( inline with the greek thought of present progression action)

Came - as in more is expected to come as the ones that have already or previously arrived (in line with greek thought of present progression action)"

Then the meaning is DOES fit the rapture.  These came and more are to follow later as the week gets underway.

[iamlamad]

8 hours ago, inchrist said:

Please stop throwing the word truth around like its free candy.

Ive already started seeing what with claim as truth ends up with no real substance, when asked for evidence you can not submit any.

 

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;

1 John 3:4

Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

Romans 6:15

What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means!

Once again something in the law changed and now something in the law was blotted out.

What was blotted out was simething that was added to the law

Galatians 3:19 Wherefore then serves the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

When was the first time someone broke the law or an instruction in scripture?

The only laws that were added because of transgression were the laws surrounding blood atonement and the laws surrounding the role of the high priest.

You are mistaken, yet again. It was all of the laws when Moses was leading the people: 613 commandments.  The purpose of this law was to show people that they really need a savior.

Adam broke the first command given to man.  You amazing me. God wrote the important laws in our hearts.   Of course, if we follow our conscience - the voice of our recreated spirit man - we will not sin. Yet, it seems sin runs rampant in todays churches. It should not be.

Acts 23:1 And Paul, earnestly beholding the council, said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.

Acts 24:16  And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void to offence toward God, and toward men.

Jesus did not come to abolish - He came to fulfill.  Yet, what happened to that law He came to fulfill? Paul wrote: (most people think it was Paul):

Hebrews 8:13

In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
What law? The written law? No, for that was nailed to the cross. Today, if someone sins, It is because they are temped by their own lust, and they disobey the law written in their hearts.

Surely you know what the finding was for the very first church "conference?"

¹⁹ Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

²⁰ But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

How did Paul write it?

Romans 8: ² For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Believers are FREE of that old law of sin and death.

 

Finally, it is a very dangerous thing for a New Testament believer to go back in the law and find something they believe they must do...that is making it a law for them.  For example, if someone went back and read the law of circumcision and believed it was a law for them, they will have put themselves back under the law, and then, as Paul said, they are a debtor to do the WHOLE law, which no one could do. They have placed themselves under the curse of the law. There are certain denominations that seem to be still living under that old law.

[iamlamad]

9 hours ago, inchrist said:

So we going to have not a single rapture event but "no man can count" number of raptures?

Then the word erchomenoi  V-PPM must be changed to elthōn V-APA-NMS since you are treating these that came as a single one event.

You changing the word of God

Not at all: before the Day of the Lord and His wrath, will come Paul's gathering. Then at the midpoint or close to there, the 144,000. Then at the end of the week, all the rest of the righteous, including the two witnesses, and the Old Testament saints. This is not "changing," it is understanding. 

By the way, did you notice that this great crowd was NOT IN THE THRONE ROOM in chapter 4?  It seems they all arrived very shortly thereafter.

[iamlamad]

9 hours ago, inchrist said:

What complete nonsense

Nicodemus was bewildered about Jesus' demand for new birth by the Spirit, Jesus responded (John 3:10), Are you a teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand this?

Christ wasnt teaching anything new by the birth of the holy spirit. 

The OT believers were saved the same way we are.

And you imagine I am teaching nonsense? I guess Jesus did not have to die. They were all saved without His death and resurrection.

Sorry, my friend, but the New Birth is a NEW TESTAMENT thing. A few of the Old Testament saints had the Holy Spirit come upon them. But NONE had a newly created human spirit  as in being "born again."

Oh, in a small way you are right, for we all, old and new, are saved by FAITH. They had faith in God, but we have faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Their salvation was on a charge card: the MASTERcard. Their sins were covered by not removed. The blood of bulls and goats could NEVER remove the guilt of sin. ONLY JESUS blood can remove the guild of sin and cause one to be as if they had never sinned. All the Old Testament saints had to remain in hades (Abraham's bosom) until Jesus conquered death and rose.  They had to wait until then to become born again. ALL had to wait until Jesus rose.  Remember, Paul wrote that if we believe God raised Christ from the dead, and we confess He is Lord, THEN we will be saved.

[Guest]

.How stupid you are wingnut.  Just ban me would you.  You're a full blown idiot, a perverter of God's Word, and a damn fool. I don't belong on a forum with stupid moderators who are full blown idiots who pervert God's Word.  Ban me would you, you're an embarrasment to what's left of Christianity.  I want nothing to do with you or any of the other demons on this forum." 

 

Why is this guy still here? Look at all the GLARING insults in this? There are SEVEN insults in this post alone. smh.... wow. 

 

[iamlamad]

10 minutes ago, inchrist said:

Are you unable to stay in context of Rev 7? 

You apparently speak truth and hold rev 7 as the rapture, Im still waiting for actual evidence in the context of Rev 7 

If this was a simply text, the entire church would be in agreement. They are not, and neither are we. I have very little  hope we will in the future either.  However, it is not a salvation issue.

[iamlamad]

14 minutes ago, inchrist said:

Becoming obsolete, which contradicts your statement of already being ended

For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Until everything in the law has been accompished, until then the law has not been made obsolete or has ended, but becoming obsolete.

Would you like to try again before I rip into the rest of your hearsy?

I wonder why

It has ended from the church, but we still have the 70th week of Israel's 70 weeks. They still imagine they are under that covenant.

Good exegesis is to find out WHO a verse is speaking to.

Why? How long has it been since you heard a good sermon on hellfire and how hot it will be? I remember such sermons. In fact, I was born again due to such a sermon, when I was 7 years old. People in general have lost any kind of fear of God.

[warrior12]

7 minutes ago, Blueyedjewel said:

.How stupid you are wingnut.  Just ban me would you.  You're a full blown idiot, a perverter of God's Word, and a damn fool. I don't belong on a forum with stupid moderators who are full blown idiots who pervert God's Word.  Ban me would you, you're an embarrasment to what's left of Christianity.  I want nothing to do with you or any of the other demons on this forum." 

 

Why is this guy still here? Look at all the GLARING insults in this? There are SEVEN insults in this post alone. smh.... wow. 

 

Hi Blueyedjewel.   Just as a caution.  Please include the poster name of the quote you reply with or others would  take it as your post in it's entirety and you certainly don't want that or you would have to make replies just to clarify your post and some may not read your clarification and see it as your post as not everyone follow up on the threads.  

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, warrior12 said:

Hi Blueyedjewel.   Just as a caution.  Please include the poster name of the quote you reply with or others would  take it as your post in it's entirety and you certainly don't want that or you would have to make replies just to clarify your post and some may not read your clarification and see it as your post as not everyone follow up on the threads.  

It was a post by fixerupper directed at wingnut. thnx for the heads up warrior

[warrior12]

14 minutes ago, Blueyedjewel said:

It was a post by fixerupper directed at wingnut. thnx for the heads up warrior

Yeh i knew that, but when you replied you did not state that it was fixerupper  quote and you just quoted his statement. People would see it as your statement, especially those who are not following the thread and its updates and or earlier post on the thread.  Hope you see what i am getting at.  You made your statement just below fixerupper quote, so readers would take it as your post in its entirety and it would paint you as mean and we don't want that mistake.  cheers.    

NOTE.  I only replied again to make sure others don't do the same thing and cause confusion.    fixerupper was doing this in the entire thread as he was quoting without including the poster name, so the reader would not know who really he was quoting unless he searched backward to see who make the post.

Edited July 1, 2017 by warrior12