Diaste Posted June 26, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 14 Topic Count: 67 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,629 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,368 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/17/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted June 26, 2019 12 hours ago, simplejeff said: That might happen, but remember meanwhile over a million have been slaughtered or denied their faith to save their own skin, in the last hundred years or so --- persecution and execution/ martyrs are quite numerous the last couple centuries and the last ten years too..... True. One of my main points against the western idea of the pretrib rapture. Where is the rapture for the many who die for Jesus every year? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Light Posted June 26, 2019 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,078 Content Per Day: 1.11 Reputation: 201 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/17/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted June 26, 2019 2 hours ago, Diaste said: It's iamlamad's whole theory. He seems to think that because white is a symbol of righteousness, the white horse means righteousness, therefore the gospel conquers and the 1st seal was opened 2000 years ago. Iamlamd and I have discussed it more than once. That can be easily proven false, but I've found that absolute, undeniable scriptural proof means nothing as he chooses to change the meaning words. When John is shown and told to write down the events that will occur AFTER, he says that I am inserting the word ONLY. What a bunch of malarkey. Words mean what they mean, not what you choose them to mean. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diaste Posted June 26, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 14 Topic Count: 67 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,629 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,368 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/17/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted June 26, 2019 2 hours ago, The Light said: That can be easily proven false, but I've found that absolute, undeniable scriptural proof means nothing as he chooses to change the meaning words. When John is shown and told to write down the events that will occur AFTER, he says that I am inserting the word ONLY. What a bunch of malarkey. Words mean what they mean, not what you choose them to mean. I agree, exactly what iamlamad does. Tough sledding with him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamlamad Posted June 26, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 23 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 8,272 Content Per Day: 2.08 Reputation: 689 Days Won: 4 Joined: 06/09/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted June 26, 2019 12 hours ago, The Light said: What? Surely no one thinks that the rider on the white horse is spreading the Gospel. The rider on the white horse goes forth conquering and to conquer. He carries a bow. See Apollo for the false Christ that caries a bow. Apollo is Horus. Horus is Tammuz. Dan 8 5 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand. The rider on the white horse is given the stephanos crown. That is not Jesus the Christ. He will stand against Jesus. You are lost in Greek Mythodology! John is not even remotely thinking of that. My friend, the white horse and rider REPRESENT the CHURCH taking the gospel. The victor's crown PROVES this overcoming and conquering will end in VICTORY. Nothing satan does is going to end in victory. And God simply would NEVER use white 16 times for righteousness and then once for evil - just never happen. Daniel 8 is about Antiochus Epiphanes. The devil USED him for much mischief. When Antiochus tried to FORCE them to quit following Moses Law, then he was coming against the PRINCE of Princes that sent the Law. Agreed: not Jesus: Jesus is the one OPENING that first seal. You do know, that seal was opened around 32 AD when Jesus first ascended? Surely you have read chapter 5? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamlamad Posted June 26, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 23 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 8,272 Content Per Day: 2.08 Reputation: 689 Days Won: 4 Joined: 06/09/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted June 26, 2019 Just now, iamlamad said: You are lost in Greek Mythology! John is not even remotely thinking of that. My friend, the white horse and rider REPRESENT the CHURCH taking the gospel. The victor's crown PROVES this overcoming and conquering will end in VICTORY. Nothing satan does is going to end in victory. And God simply would NEVER use white 16 times for righteousness and then once for evil - just never happen. Daniel 8 is about Antiochus Epiphanes. The devil USED him for much mischief. When Antiochus tried to FORCE them to quit following Moses Law, then he was coming against the PRINCE of Princes that sent the Law. Agreed: not Jesus: Jesus is the one OPENING that first seal. You do know, that seal was opened around 32 AD when Jesus first ascended? Surely you have read chapter 5? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamlamad Posted June 26, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 23 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 8,272 Content Per Day: 2.08 Reputation: 689 Days Won: 4 Joined: 06/09/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted June 26, 2019 1 hour ago, Diaste said: The Light said: When John is shown and told to write down the events that will occur AFTER, he says that I am inserting the word ONLY. What a bunch of malarkey. Words mean what they mean, not what you choose them to mean. I agree, exactly what iamlamad does. Tough sledding with him. When you INSIST that God cannot include "history" because He said John was to see things in the future, then you are, in effect, inserting ONLY in what John wrote. But John did NOT write Only things to come. You IMAGINE he did, so you can argue that the vision of chapters 4 & 5 cannot be a vision of the past. It is a VERY weak argument on your side. If God chose to add some history (AND HE DID) He is all powerful and able to do it. What you need to do is go through the verses of these two chapters and prove that John cannot be talking about history (a time before 95 AD). Sorry, but I don't have tough sledding! I know that this vision John saw was a vision of the past for him at that time. You don't know it yet, but you will. It will be extremely difficult for you to come up with a real good exegesis on your side, because the truth lies on my side. You will be arguing against the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamlamad Posted June 26, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 23 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 8,272 Content Per Day: 2.08 Reputation: 689 Days Won: 4 Joined: 06/09/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted June 26, 2019 4 hours ago, The Light said: That can be easily proven false, but I've found that absolute, undeniable scriptural proof means nothing as he chooses to change the meaning words. When John is shown and told to write down the events that will occur AFTER, he says that I am inserting the word ONLY. What a bunch of malarkey. Words mean what they mean, not what you choose them to mean. No one is changing the meaning of words. And it is impossible to prove TRUTH false. Good luck trying, but it is a waste of time. After this I looked, This "after" is only after God quite dictating to John what He was to write to each church. It is STILL 95 AD shen John is called up to heaven. I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. Question: DID God show John events that were to be future to Him? The answer is over course unequivocal YES. This should be "case closed." God did exactly what He said. However, some like to argue against the truth. I wonder why? Now, if God had had John to write, I will shew thee things which must be [ONLY] hereafter, then God would have limited Himself to only things in John's future. God SELDOM limits Himself! The truth is, God included some things history to John in 95 AD. Live with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamlamad Posted June 26, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 23 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 8,272 Content Per Day: 2.08 Reputation: 689 Days Won: 4 Joined: 06/09/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted June 26, 2019 (edited) 6 hours ago, Diaste said: True. One of my main points against the western idea of the pretrib rapture. Where is the rapture for the many who die for Jesus every year? WAKE UP! The rapture is a ONE TIME EVENT for the church! It is to take the church OUT OF EARTH before God pours out His wrath. I can assure you, God is NOT angry with the martyrs that are His own! Western? Where in the world did you get that idea? The pretrib rapture is believed around the world. Edited June 26, 2019 by iamlamad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diaste Posted June 26, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 14 Topic Count: 67 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,629 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,368 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/17/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted June 26, 2019 16 minutes ago, iamlamad said: When you INSIST that God cannot include "history" because He said John was to see things in the future, then you are, in effect, inserting ONLY in what John wrote. But John did NOT write Only things to come. You IMAGINE he did, so you can argue that the vision of chapters 4 & 5 cannot be a vision of the past. It is a VERY weak argument on your side. If God chose to add some history (AND HE DID) He is all powerful and able to do it. What you need to do is go through the verses of these two chapters and prove that John cannot be talking about history (a time before 95 AD). Sorry, but I don't have tough sledding! I know that this vision John saw was a vision of the past for him at that time. You don't know it yet, but you will. It will be extremely difficult for you to come up with a real good exegesis on your side, because the truth lies on my side. You will be arguing against the truth. The telling of past events is not prophecy, its just a story. And not exactly a 'revelation' either. Just be prepared with a ready answer when confronted on that day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diaste Posted June 26, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 14 Topic Count: 67 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,629 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,368 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/17/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted June 26, 2019 7 minutes ago, iamlamad said: WAKE UP! The rapture is a ONE TIME EVENT for the church! It is to take the church OUT OF EARTH before God pours out His wrath. I can assure you, God is NOT angry with the martyrs that are His own! Western? Where in the world did you get that idea? The pretrib rapture is believed around the world. Stop yelling, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts