Who is the Whore of babylon

[iamlamad]

On 1/3/2019 at 9:38 AM, Royff said:

You just admitted that it was you who called it Paul's rapture, so since you called it a rapture all I was doing was trying to get you to clear it up, but instead of you doing that you tell me to read Paul's words and then report back to you. You say you are not going to do my work for me, here you are copying what I told you about your behavior. I never told you to go read something and report back to me, that's your game. Whatever I believe I try to take my time and explain it to the best of my ability, never do I tell you to go and read something and explain it for me, I ask you to explain what you wrote, is that asking too mush? Again, it was you who brought up Paul's trip to heaven and he being to death, as a rapture and as evidence of your pre tribulation theory. 

After you stepped in it you claim that I blundered. Now you contradict yourself, here's what you say today:

"Paul was the ONLY writer of the New Testament that received revelation about the rapture."

Just yesterday you said John saw the rapture, and that's one of your selling points, that when the Lord told John to come up here that he is calling the church to the rapture of the church, now don't you try to deny that that's one of the verses of scripture  the rapture people try to use as evidence, so you agree with that false assumption because you use the same line they use. They always bring up John, Noah, and Paul as evidence of rapture, that is until they have to stand and defend it then they gets confused because they know its about to be picked apart. Then when this happens, just like you, they begin to back track and claim they didn't mean it it the way it sound, just what you are doing here. Now had I not inform you that I knew where you were going with this John witnessing the rapture thing you would have ran with it as evidence of a pre tribulation rapture.

Now you can play that game with someone who doesn't know any better, You just did like all pre tribulators do, throw it out there and if it doesn't work and someone exposes it, reel it back in and create the excuse like you just did I didn't mean it the way it sound. Every game you are trying to play here I've seen it before. 

 

It is amazing how your brotherly love  - or lack thereof - shows. Did John received a revelation of the rapture? Of course not! He only saw the raptured church in heaven and wrote of it. It seems you cannot tell the difference. I can see you really don't like to be corrected. I get that. 

Now get this: since pretrib is TRUTH, it cannot be "picked apart." The real way to defeat error is to teach the truth- yet this you have completely failed to do.  Since you disagree with the pretrib rapture, why not show is the truth, with scripture correctly understood. That way, others can join in. 

You are STILL in error: YOU brought up Paul's trip to heaven, and only you know why. We were talking about the RAPTURE. 

From the TINY bit of teaching apart from your rambling, it seems you are prewrath. If not, please tell us briefly where you stand on the timing of the rapture. You already know I am pretrib. I am VERY pretrib - because I know where the "trib" is in John's book, and I know where the rapture is. Most pretribbers don't. I also know, Paul - the ONE MAN who received revealed knowledge of the rapture - told us that the Day of the Lord would follow the rapture - so that the two could not be separated: the moment after the rapture, it is DAY OF THE LORD. 

If you imagine this is a game, you are mistaken. People READ these posts. We all will be held accountable.

[iamlamad]

On 1/3/2019 at 8:59 AM, Royff said:

I bring up what you stated that Paul was raptured when he witness things in heaven, go back and read your earlier post. I was responding to what you stated. You brought up Paul and then realized it was a mistake. That's why I asked is that your evidence of the rapture. What was I supposed to do with that but ask you to clear it up? I'm not trying to deny what I said, but where is it in here that I said anything about Paul being stone to death?  Here's what you said:

"I TOLD you, read 1 Thes. chapter 4 & 5. Please don't write any more until you at least read it? It is the rapture. I call it PAUL's rapture because HE WROTE IT. I think you are pulling my leg talking about Paul when He was stoned to death visiting heaven. If you would read and understand 1 Thes 4 & 5, Paul explains how the church will be caught up, and tells us WHEN in chapter 5. But you have to UNDERSTAND it." 

All I'm asking is when did I state that Paul was stone to death, there it is your words, now don't you try to deny it. You made false accusations it either your mistake or deception or you are just trying to confuse the issue. Again I ask you; when did I say Paul was stone to death? There is nothing in the quote you posted that shows that I said anything about Paul being stone to death. You must have saw that somewhere and in your confusion you applied to me and my statement.

Roy,. you seem very defensive. I wonder why? We are two brothers in Christ discussing scripture. There is no need to be defensive. The truth is, we were talking about the rapture: I called in Paul's rapture because he wrote it. I apologize. You thought I was talking about Paul visiting heaven. I was not. I was talking about 1 thes. chapters 4 & 5.  I personally believe Paul visited heaven because he was stoned to death. If you don't agree, that is fine: Paul visiting heaven is not our topic - never should have been. However, since we are talking about the rapture, lets quit talking about Paul's life - shall we?  Now that this is cleared up, can we discuss our disagreements with the real rapture - the rapture of the church?  Please don't be so defensive. 

Edited January 4, 2019 by iamlamad

[other one]

are you all familiar with Jack Parsons and L. Ron Hubbard?

[iamlamad]

On 1/3/2019 at 8:57 AM, Royff said:

I bring up what you stated that Paul was raptured when he witness things in heaven, go back and read your earlier post. I was responding to what you stated. You brought up Paul and then realized it was a mistake. That's why I asked is that your evidence of the rapture. What was I supposed to do with that but ask you to clear it up? I'm not trying to deny what I said, but where is it in here that I said anything about Paul being stone to death?  Here's what you said:

"I TOLD you, read 1 Thes. chapter 4 & 5. Please don't write any more until you at least read it? It is the rapture. I call it PAUL's rapture because HE WROTE IT. I think you are pulling my leg talking about Paul when He was stoned to death visiting heaven. If you would read and understand 1 Thes 4 & 5, Paul explains how the church will be caught up, and tells us WHEN in chapter 5. But you have to UNDERSTAND it." 

All I'm asking is when did I state that Paul was stone to death, there it is your words, now don't you try to deny it. You made false accusations it either your mistake or deception or you are just trying to confuse the issue. Again I ask you; when did I say Paul was stone to death? There is nothing in the quote you posted that shows that I said anything about Paul being stone to death. You must have saw that somewhere and in your confusion you applied to me and my statement.

Now you say you don't know what I've been asking, that's obvious you are displaying your confused thinking here. I'll make this as simple, just show me where I stated that Paul was stone to death or are you pulling my let. Get off that trying to tell me what to read and when to post, Paul says we will all be caught up to be with the Lord, one does not proceed the other, all are raptures at the same time no one before the other, so Paul destroys your theory that there was an earlier rapture of some of the saints. Its you need to read Paul's words with better understanding, take your own advice. So, you see, it doesn't matter how many times I read it you still have limited understanding of what Paul really meant when he stated what he did. That's why I refused to read  Paul's words and then report back to you, So you can begin to say yourself what Paul say and dig a whole for yourself. Just look at how confused you became in trying to explain Paul words, so confused that you claim that I said Paul was stone to death.

You are good at cutting and pasting scripture but when pinned down and asked to explain what you post you began to go around in circle just cutting and pasting scripture and gets confused and begging someone to read and explain them for you. You say I don't understand, but how am I supposed to understand what you say when you don't seems to understand what you think? Now, show me where I stated the Paul was stone to death or is that too confusing?  

You really do like to ramble! 

Paul says we will all be caught up to be with the Lord, one does not proceed the other, all are raptures at the same time no one before the other, so Paul destroys your theory that there was an earlier rapture of some of the saints.

Now you have written something we can work with. I guess you are not familiar with this verse:

 

¹⁵ For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

¹⁶ For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

¹⁷ Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Please notice the highlighted words. Are they not TIMING words, showing that the dead in Christ rise first, and then AFTER that, those that are alive rise? In other words, you are mistaken once again. 

(By the way, I admit, I DID cut and paste: but the computer does that without error - so no worries.)

In a small way, you were right, for after those alive in Christ meet the dead in Christ in the air, THEN TOGETHER they rise up to meet Jesus in the air. Got it?

it doesn't matter how many times I read it  Sorry, but it seems you needed to read it at least one more time. You missed this detail.

so confused that you claim that I said Paul was stone to death.  You are the one confused: I SAID Paul was stoned to death. I believe he was. I never claimed you said it! But let's get off this topic. It is possible you can concentrate on the rapture? Why do you wish to concentrated on side issues?

You are good at cutting and pasting scripture but when pinned down and asked to explain what you post you began to go around in circle just cutting and pasting scripture and gets confused and begging someone to read and explain them for you.    You really have a WILD imagination! None of that is true. Just stop being so defensive! We are brothers in Christ discussing the rapture. I do hope we can get on with it. No more red herrings! 

 

[iamlamad]

On 1/3/2019 at 5:20 AM, SelahSong said:

There is no rapture; only Jesus' Second Coming at the 7th Trump. 

<><

1. There Is a rapture clearly delineated in 1 thes. 4.

2. Jesus does NOT return at the 7th trump. That is myth. His coming is CLEARLY written in Rev. 19. Are you trying to add yet another coming?

Edited January 4, 2019 by George
Removed snide comment. This is the only warning. Come on people ... stay on topic, no need for snide comments!

[iamlamad]

33 minutes ago, other one said:

are you all familiar with Jack Parsons and L. Ron Hubbard?

I am not. I had to look them up. Why would you ask?

[iamlamad]

On 1/3/2019 at 2:59 AM, n2thelight said:

Where?

It's all in the bible: we just need to read and understand.

[iamlamad]

On 1/3/2019 at 2:51 AM, n2thelight said:

What part you missing?

Daniel 8:23 "And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and under standing dark sentences, shall stand up."

This is talking about satan,the antichrist ,if you can't see this kinda wondering why I'm talking to you...

Frankly, I would be embarrassed to make such an incorrect statement. Always remember, you can make a verse say most anything if you pull it out of context. maybe you should "wonder."

[George]

It's starting to get a little personal ... let's remember this is why people get removed from threads.  Keep it on the subject. 

[iamlamad]

On 1/2/2019 at 8:26 PM, noblenut said:

i am just saying the trigs have gotten tender and to know the signs of the times.  yes there's always been conquest war famine and plague but the horsemen are extreme world wide events and during the 17 to into the 20th century the european powers conquered most of the world and then we had a time of extreme war for 100 years and now we have climate change and global warming.  

This is still wrong; the 2nd, 3rd and 4th seals, the Red horse and rider, the black horse and rider, and the pale horse and rider were LIMITED in their theater of operation to 1/4th of the earth. It is not written, but that 1/4 will certainly be centered on Jerusalem.