Jump to content
IGNORED

The Difference between Dan. 70th week & the Tribulation.


Marilyn C

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  9
  • Topic Count:  40
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  6,540
  • Content Per Day:  1.07
  • Reputation:   2,427
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  06/28/2007
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/28/1957

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

That's interesting. I have never heard the pretrib camp say such a thing about this passage. I have only heard them cite Jude and Revelation to support their claim Jesus is bringing the church back from heaven to earth. If what you say is true it would be twisting most foul to render this passage as a return FROM heaven when it's abundantly clear Paul is speaking about the DEAD in Christ being raised; a thing which is easy to comprehend sans parsing.

Shalom, Diaste.

My father, an "Independent, Bible-believing, Fellowship Baptist" minister, as well as other ministers in our state fellowship, taught that 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 was the Resurrection of those "in Christ" that will happen at the Rapture.

The teaching was that we - our souls, the REAL us - go immediately to heaven when we die. Our bodies are then "empty shells" that are placed in the graves. 

Then at the Rapture, we are brought back with Christ to receive our resurrected, glorified bodies, and then Christ turns around and takes us all - resurrected and transformed dead and transformed living - back to Heaven for the next seven years, taking us out of the way, so to speak, so God can "lower the boom" on the earth during the tribulation period. "He who letteth, will let, until He be taken out of the way" was a reference to the Holy Spirit who lives in each one of the Christians that make up His Body.

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

I'm not going to wade into those waters with anyone. The problem with that is there is no 'convention' on the definitions of these terms. It all depends on personal dogma shaped by membership in a community, some large, some small; or outlandish definitions, divorced from context, of the lone wolf convinced he's an outcast based on superior knowledge or special revelation. I simply do not want to research and retain such things. Since the word is spiritual in origin, carries spiritual truth, is revealed by the Spirit and only the Spirit, I will let the superior power in my life sort out the definitions and defeat the personal dogma as He sees fit.

Yeah, I suppose that definitions are different for different people, even within classes of people. However, then the person called to reach a particular person or group of persons must deal with the definitions that are important to each person in order to communicate with the person or persons reasonably. 

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

I had a similar discussion with an atheist over the definition of the concept of faith. This was in a biblical context as I was preaching. The opposition adamantly insisted faith was defined as 'believing in something that wasn't real'. The proposition defined the term as 'the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.' My understanding of the opposition in no way influences the way I think or speak and in this case was an impregnable fortress, impossible to storm, and a waste of time and effort; the same as it had been in my visits with Mormons and JW's.

I'm just glad you're not called to be a missionary to the Mormons or JW's, then. As far as the atheist is concerned, correct his definition: "Faith is TRUST in a Person who is very much real!" You mentioned Hebrews 11:1. Use the analogy of sitting on a chair! One can BELIEVE that the chair would hold him up if he sat upon it, but FAITH is SITTING ON THE CHAIR, TRUSTING the chair to hold him up!

Hebrews 11:1 (KJV)

1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Other versions don't do this verse justice. Notice that "faith" is NOT equated to "things hoped for" or "things not seen"; it's equated with "SUBSTANCE" and "EVIDENCE!"

What "substance?" The actual BOOKS of the Bible, which used to be on scrolls and today is in bound books! What "evidence?" The ACCOUNTS of all the people written about in these books, and summarized in the rest of this chapter 11!

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

It happens here all the time and once in while I get sucked into it. It's stimulating in some respects but detracts from the positive message. I have found the translations to be accurate and every idea simple to understand, clearly and objectively presented, and not one iota of word study has furthered my understanding past the written word, with one exception. But even that exception is nothing more than an iteration of a previous verse and turns out it's an exhortation to stand patiently strong.

Some in depth study may help to clarify ideas as we all learn and understand in various ways, but I'm certain there in no new insight gained from word study not written in the plain language of Holy writ.

Invoke the name of Jesus, speak to the gift of forgiveness of sins and the resurrection. That's the message that must not get lost in the wilderness of word study; all that matters is the Gospel is preached and the King is returning.

But, that's only HALF of the message of the "Gospel!" FOCUS on "the King is returning" part! People have made a GRAVE mistake regarding the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24:

Many read Matthew 24:14 like this:

14 And this gospel (of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ) shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

However, the REAL text says,

14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached (Greek: keeruchtheesetai = there shall be heralded as by a public crier) in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

2784 keerussoo (kay-roos'-so). Of uncertain affinity; to herald (as a public crier), especially divine truth (the gospel)
-- preach(-er), proclaim, publish.

They think they've made great strides to share the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ worldwide, but when one realizes that this verse is talking about something else, one will come to see that we've not even scratched the surface of the goal!

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

Yeah, not remotely. I was 16 when I heard about the return of Jesus, never had a clue before that. I was fed a steady diet of Lindsey in those days, we all were. In reading other authors of the same ilk I found they all said the same thing. But there was so much more and I could feel the steady pressure moving my mind to want more than what I was reading. Since all these authors cited copious amounts of passages I decided to get the source material and do some reading from the wellspring. I found out quickly pretrib was a hodgepodge void of context, inundated with personal dogma, outside of spiritual reality.

I very much doubt I'm out of context in the narrow concept of the gathering, nor the larger context of the Word: God's desire for His people, salvation, resurrection, the Return of the King. That's the guide for everything spiritual. Feel free to mount opposition, critique, suggestions, guidance, etc,. I'm open to all of it.

I've done so above, and there's more. One mustn't forget that the Return of the King involves the RESCUE of His people, the nation of Israel, both the Jews who inhabit the Land and the rest of the earth (including the USA), and the rest of Israel's tribes who were scattered abroad. We may not know who they are today, but I'm confident that the Messiah will know.

The "gathering" is NOT to some place called "Heaven"; rather, it serves a purpose of building an army for that RESCUE, even if they are merely an army of medics and nurses to tend to the needs of those rescued! The prophecy says that Yeshua` the Messiah shall be appalled at how He gets no help in the actual fighting! And yet, such a no-show doesn't slow Him down!

Isaiah 63:1-7 (KJV)

1 "Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah? this that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength?" 

"I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save (rescue)."

2 "Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth in the winefat (wine vat)?"

3 "I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment. 4 For the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come. 5 And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation (rescue) unto me; and my fury, it upheld me. 6 And I will tread down the people in mine anger, and make them drunk in my fury, and I will bring down their strength to the earth."

7 I will mention the lovingkindnesses of the LORD (Hebrew: chaacdeey YHWH), and the praises of the LORD, according to all that the LORD hath bestowed on us, and the great goodness toward the house of Israel, which he hath bestowed on them according to his mercies, and according to the multitude of his lovingkindnesses (Hebrew: chacaadaayn).

Both of these highlighted words in verse 7 come from the Hebrew word "checed," which although often translated "lovingkindness," also carries with it the meaning of "covenant keeping!" In other words, the way that the LORD shows His lovingkindness is to keep His covenants with His people, Israel, particularly to the Patiarchs and for their sakes.

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

7 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

However, then the person called to reach a particular person or group of persons must deal with the definitions that are important to each person in order to communicate with the person or persons reasonably. 

I don't agree. It's no ones responsibility to assure others have a correct definition of any particular concept, especially so regarding the Gospel and the Return of the King. The only concepts that are meaningful are those of the King and it's His definitions that are paramount, not those of a group or individual. 

"I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.  So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase." - Corinthians

Do not assume that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn

‘A man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. A man’s enemies will be the members of his own household." - Matt 10

The last thing any of us should want is to ingratiate ourselves in to any other group other than that of fellowship with Jesus. I do not care to be part of a group beyond the friends of Jesus and the brotherhood of Christ. That will generally mean I will not be a part of any organized religion. And they have a hard time hearing. Speak the truth and they go away or the speaker is shunned. Follow their guidelines of speech and concepts and you're in, disgusting to me. Even Worthy abuts that pillar, though it's better than most.

If I am a missionary, I am a missionary FOR Christ, not TO any particular group. 

"Others were tortured and refused their release, so that they might gain a better resurrection. Still others endured mocking and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment.

They were stoned, they were sawed in two, they were put to death by the sword. They went around in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, oppressed, and mistreated.

 The world was not worthy of them.

They wandered in deserts and mountains, and hid in caves and holes in the ground." -Heb 11

Let that sink in then compare it to western 'christianity'.

8 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

I've done so above, and there's more. One mustn't forget that the Return of the King involves the RESCUE of His people, the nation of Israel, both the Jews who inhabit the Land and the rest of the earth (including the USA), and the rest of Israel's tribes who were scattered abroad. We may not know who they are today, but I'm confident that the Messiah will know.

I think it's less of a critique of content and more an attempt to sway my opinion. That's a typical mode of dialogue here. It's not usually content that's assailed, it's more an attempt at conversion. The fall back is, "Well, that's what I believe." and the world is now their oyster. Anything is now possible. 

But with the rest I agree. It is a rescue, what good leader would not do so? But the main objective is to install Jesus as the rightful King over all creation and to remit justice over the whole earth in love and compassion in righteous judgement. All of which are lacking today. And we wonder why a correction is coming...smh.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  145
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   23
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  09/09/2019
  • Status:  Offline

the difference in my understanding is about 1,000 years. Daniel's prophecy makes it explicit the full 70 weeks of years is Daniel's people and city. The city of the last 70 weeks can't be Rome or some other Gentile city unless Daniel was a false prophet it must be with the apostate portion of Israel in that Day and the city of Jerusalem

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...