Jump to content
IGNORED

Pre-Tribulation Proofs


KiwiChristian

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  13
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,192
  • Content Per Day:  0.48
  • Reputation:   429
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  06/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/12/1957

But notice the difference. The 24 Elders have crowns of gold, but the locust reference in 9:7 says they are “something like gold”.   

Revelation 9:7
The shape of the locusts was like horses prepared for battle. On their heads were crowns of something like gold, and their faces were like the faces of men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  3,490
  • Content Per Day:  0.96
  • Reputation:   88
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  04/29/2014
  • Status:  Offline

10 minutes ago, OldCoot said:

But notice the difference. The 24 Elders have crowns of gold, but the locust reference in 9:7 says they are “something like gold”.   

Revelation 9:7
The shape of the locusts was like horses prepared for battle. On their heads were crowns of something like gold, and their faces were like the faces of men.

stephanoi is stephanoi and it's not exclusive to believers, as shown in Rev 6 with the white horse and then with the demon locusts 

That phrase "something like" is not in the original text, it's added in

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  13
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,192
  • Content Per Day:  0.48
  • Reputation:   429
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  06/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/12/1957

16 minutes ago, inchrist said:

stephanoi is stephanoi and it's not exclusive to believers, as shown in Rev 6 with the white horse and then with the demon locusts 

That phrase "something like" is not in the original text, it's added in

You err.  G3664 “homoios” is the word translated as “like”.  Definition is “similar”.  That implies not gold like the Elder’s crowns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  3,490
  • Content Per Day:  0.96
  • Reputation:   88
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  04/29/2014
  • Status:  Offline

20 minutes ago, OldCoot said:

You err.  G3664 “homoios” is the word translated as “like”.  Definition is “similar”.  That implies not gold like the Elder’s crowns.

5613. hós ►

Strong's Concordance

hós: as, like as, even as, when, since, as long as

Original Word: ὡς
Part of Speech: Adverb
Transliteration: hós
Phonetic Spelling: (hoce)
Short Definition: as, like as, how, while, so that
Definition: as, like as, about, as it were, according as, how, when, while, as soon as, so that.

NAS Exhaustive Concordance

Word Origin
adverb from hos,
Definition
as, like as, even as, when, since, as long as
NASB Translation
about (20), according (2), affected (1), after (2), appear* (1), appeared (1), effect (1), how (20), however* (1), if (10), just (6), just like (1), like (106), like* (1), namely (1), one (2), same way (1), seeing (1), since (2), size (1), so (3), so* (1), though (15), way (1), when (53), whenever* (1), where (1), while (10)

The shape of the locusts was like horses prepared for battle. On their heads were crowns of (according to) gold, and their faces were like the faces of men

The adverb there does not change the noun

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  13
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,192
  • Content Per Day:  0.48
  • Reputation:   429
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  06/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/12/1957

Not quite sure where you pulled that one from, inchrist.   I am getting old and don't have the time or desire to type it all out like you, so here is a snapshot of what I was referring to....

Screenshot 2018-05-04_18-10-30.jpg

 

resembling, similar, like, etc grammatically would imply that they are not the same thing.

Kinda like having two coins.  Sure, they are both coins, but one is Gold and the other polished brass.  Close in resemblance, but they are not the same thing.  One has value, the other a trinket. 

Either way... you stated the text did not originally include "something like" and was added later.  Well, that is what the meaning of the Greek word is.  I know modern textual critics like to dismiss sections they are not comfortable with, but you erred.  And like some others, failed to acknowledge it and went on word chase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  3,490
  • Content Per Day:  0.96
  • Reputation:   88
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  04/29/2014
  • Status:  Offline

5 hours ago, OldCoot said:

Not quite sure where you pulled that one from, inchrist.   I am getting old and don't have the time or desire to type it all out like you, so here is a snapshot of what I was referring to....

Screenshot 2018-05-04_18-10-30.jpg

 

resembling, similar, like, etc grammatically would imply that they are not the same thing.

Kinda like having two coins.  Sure, they are both coins, but one is Gold and the other polished brass.  Close in resemblance, but they are not the same thing.  One has value, the other a trinket. 

Either way... you stated the text did not originally include "something like" and was added later.  Well, that is what the meaning of the Greek word is.  I know modern textual critics like to dismiss sections they are not comfortable with, but you erred.  And like some others, failed to acknowledge it and went on word chase.

100% I did err, but not where you think I did.

[Were somthing] like crowns is where I focused on, instead of like gold

"Like" crowns is Hos in Ntgreek and it is an adverb, adverbs don't modify nouns.

Certainly "like" gold is homoios in Ntgreek and yes that is an adjective which does modify the noun. And yes similar to gold.

Nevertheless homoios

like i. e. corresponding or equivalent to, the same as: ὅμοιον τούτοις τρόπον, Jude 1:7; equal in strength, Revelation 13:4; in power and attractions, Revelation 18:18; in authority, 

Is enough to refute your statement 

 crowns, the latter being exclusive posession of believers

Is not exclusive to believers.

However were you erred was not recognizing the earthly priesthood was patterned after the 24 elders already existing in heaven and not the otherway round - the 24 elders patterned after the Aaron 24 courses.

Where you also erred is failer to recognize the four living creatures and the 24 elders are not singing of their own redemption.

And lastly we are NOT promised to sit round the fathers throne, We are promised to sit ON the fathers throne

To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I was victorious and sat down with my Father on his throne.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  14
  • Topic Count:  66
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  6,599
  • Content Per Day:  2.00
  • Reputation:   2,355
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  03/17/2015
  • Status:  Offline

15 hours ago, OldCoot said:

Nope.  Not in danger of adding anything. Just commenting on what is there.   The 24 Elders are there. I didn’t add them. Just speculating on who they are.

This is where the defection occurs. In such engagements this argument is a logical fallacy called a 'red herring'. The interrogatory seeks the identity of the elders, not the existence, as well as the biblical fact of the identity of the 24 elders.

15 hours ago, OldCoot said:
  16 hours ago, Diaste said:

No one knows if crowns of any kind are exclusive to overcoming believers. Where in scripture are the elders equated as representative of the church?

Since 'nowhere' is the answer, you are in danger of adding to the prophecies of Revelation.

The above is the response to your contention that crowns are the "exclusive posession of believers."

16 hours ago, Diaste said:
  On 5/3/2018 at 6:08 AM, OldCoot said:

The other problem still is that group of 24 elders. They have been there since chapter 4 and they have white robes and crowns, the latter being exclusive posession of believers.  Crown of Life, Crown of righteousness, Crown of Glory, etc. per the Epistles, and in Revelation 2 & 3, Yeshua has been mentioning rewards of white robes and crowns in His letters to the Churches

My response had nothing to do with the existence of elders wearing crowns and white robes in the throne room. It's obvious this is a reality as it's written in scripture. What's not written is your declaration crowns are the "exclusive posession of believers.". Just because we know, as followers of Christ, we will receive crowns, does not mean it's ONLY believers that have crowns of gold. So where is the scriptural justification for such a statement? And where is the scriptural link equating the elders as representative of the church?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  75
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,399
  • Content Per Day:  0.43
  • Reputation:   1,307
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/01/2002
  • Status:  Offline

18 hours ago, Diaste said:

Not denying this could be true. But how do we know? For sure Jesus experienced sexual desire as scripture says he was tempted as we are, just without sin.

So what do you have that proves Jesus never married? I am of the mind he did not, but I have no proof. Proof by omission is not good enough, very difficult to prove nonexistence. 

You asking me to prove something that was never recorded?  I believe in the Word of God and if the Holy Bible never delares Jesus as ever being married i believe it.. 

It's like me asking you to prove that aliens never landed on mercury in the year 2320 bc...  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  14
  • Topic Count:  66
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  6,599
  • Content Per Day:  2.00
  • Reputation:   2,355
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  03/17/2015
  • Status:  Offline

22 hours ago, Adstar said:

You asking me to prove something that was never recorded?  I believe in the Word of God and if the Holy Bible never delares Jesus as ever being married i believe it.. 

It's like me asking you to prove that aliens never landed on mercury in the year 2320 bc...  

But that's the rub, isn't it? How to prove truth with no fact. I mean, if a thing was not recorded then it didn't happen, and if no record exists specifically affirming or denying a thing, then we can draw no conclusion.

I believe in the Word of God and if the Holy Bible never delares Jesus as ever being married i believe it.. 

Does the bible declare Jesus never married? I believe scripture is silent on this except one place of which I know:

John 21:25

And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

This is so open ended even the context doesn't give clarification of these, "... other things..." Jesus did. And if the world could not contain the books that could be written, then Jesus did a great many things of which we do not know. 

The point is a conclusion should never be drawn over lack of evidence. Ever. That's called speculation and it's a rampant virus in the Christian community. We need to reason with each other over the evidence in the source material. The source material comes from an unimpeachable and unreproachable, immortal, omniscient, perfect being. Who are we to speculate about that which is not given to us? We have enough struggle with what is written and we do not need to add to our problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  75
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,399
  • Content Per Day:  0.43
  • Reputation:   1,307
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/01/2002
  • Status:  Offline

6 minutes ago, Diaste said:

But that's the rub, isn't it? How to prove truth with no fact. I mean, if a thing was not recorded then it didn't happen, and if no record exists specifically affirming or denying a thing, then we can draw no conclusion.

I believe in the Word of God and if the Holy Bible never delares Jesus as ever being married i believe it.. 

Does the bible declare Jesus never married? I believe scripture is silent on this except one place of which I know:

John 21:25

And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

This is so open ended even the context doesn't give clarification of these, "... other things..." Jesus did. And if the world could not contain the books that could be written, then Jesus did a great many things of which we do not know. 

The point is a conclusion should never be drawn over lack of evidence. Ever. That's called speculation and it's a rampant virus in the Christian community. We need to reason with each other over the evidence in the source material. The source material comes from an unimpeachable and unreproachable, immortal, omniscient, perfect being. Who are we to speculate about that which is not given to us? We have enough struggle with what is written and we do not need to add to our problems.

So using this scripture ::

John 21:25

And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

You can try to justify any claim to what Jesus did.. I could claim Jesus was a homosexual basketball player who could score a basket at 500 yards..  Or that Jesus morphed into a pink flying elephant and was so fast that he hit mark 3 as he was flying to china to pick up his order of take away chinese food..

I will not be wasting my time trying to respond to claims about Jesus not supported by scripture.. Except to say the claims are not supported by scripture..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...