COVID-19: Rev 6:8 and 9:18

[Don19]

3 hours ago, Josheb said:

Perhaps, but this op is about COVID-19 and the disease as fulfillment of Rev. 6:8 and 9:18. A number of people speculate COVID-19 is thusly related so I have asked, 

 

What, specifically, is it in scripture that is necessarily applicable to right this moment in the 21st century, as opposed to any other century? 

 

Which, I suppose is a question anyone could answer if there is such scripture, even if they are not premil. As far was the "regathering" of the Jews that might be a good conversation but it is not related to whether COVID-19 fulfills Rev. 6:8 and 9:18. Same thing regarding the tenure of the earth (which could last until the sun burns out in 4.5 billion years (coincidentally, about the same amount of time it would take for a third of the stars to fall to earth ), and the persistence of at least a few 100,000 or maybe even a few million humans. We are, after all, fairly resilient creatures created in God's image and He does love us (apparently, some more than others ). Besides, I don't read anything in scripture saying the earth will be eradicated from existence any time soon. My Bible ends with the new city of peace coming to earth, full of God's people. Difficult to do if there's no humans and no world.

But for now, the over-arching inquiry is whether or not COIVD-19 is the fulfillment of Rev. 6:8 and 9:18 and I'm wondering, 

 

What, specifically, is it in scripture that is necessarily applicable to right this moment in the 21st century, as opposed to any other century?  

Paul uses the term travail in reference to the the 2nd coming  in 1 Thess 5:3. This suggests the 2nd coming may be preceded by birth pangs. Could COVID be a birth pang? It certainly could. Interestingly, the WHO, CDC, and President Trump all downplayed it (“peace and safety” perhaps). 

And the sun won’t last billions of years. It’s roughly 6500 years. It’s not billions of years old. For instance, it rotates 200 times more slowly than it should if the nebular hypothesis (old universe model) were true, violating the conservation of angular momentum. God created it about 6000-6500 years ago, as He did the rest of the cosmos. 

http://creationwiki.org/Sun

 

[Sower]

5 hours ago, Josheb said:

What, specifically, is it in scripture that is necessarily applicable to right this moment in the 21st century as opposed to any other century? 

Shucks, I don't know.
Any ideas?..........

PS   (I really do not know!)

[Don19]

5 minutes ago, Josheb said:

I suppose anything could be a birth pang. That certainly seems to be the approach of some posters: anything can be one!

Personally, I stay couched in in the original intent, the original readers' understanding, the stated contexts, the implicit urgency and imminence, and the temporal markers (where stated). These are some of the basic precepts of sound exegesis. Because of this I'm not inclined to copy and splice parts of epistles into apocalyptics without warrant such as already-existing inherent connects. In the case of 1 Thes. 5 Paul stated the day would overtake his first century readers. They are the "you" of the text, not people in the 21st century Paul never met. Paul did not say "they will be overtaken..." he quite plainly stated "But you, brethren, are not in darkness that the day would overtake you like a thief."

So...

1) They were not in darkness, 

...and as a consequence of not being in the dark...

2) they would not be overtaken like a thief.

They would KNOW! 

Which logic dictates would preclude..... speculation  .

I'm inclined to think the op's question is irrelevant to the 21st century but if it were relevant we'd KNOW because we're not in darkness. We're not of the night,asleep or drunk; we are of the day with faith and the hope of salvation. At least that's what the 1 Thes. 5 text states. I believe it. 

 

But what "day" is under consideration if not the 2nd coming? It's clearly the 2nd coming. Surely Paul is not talking about 70 AD, which would not affect the Thessalonians. So the "you" can be applied to believers of all generations, just like the "we" in 1 Thess 4:17:

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.

Again, clearly a text dealing with the 2nd coming.

[Don19]

1 minute ago, Josheb said:

Can you show me where scripture mentions something specifically called "the second coming"? 

1 Thess 4:15-17 works for me:

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.

The only missing word is "second" but that is not a big deal.

[Fidei Defensor]

44 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Can you show me where scripture mentions something specifically called "the second coming"? 

“Men of Galilee, why do you stand here looking up into the sky? This same Jesus who has been taken up from you into heaven will come back in the same way you saw him go into heaven.” (Acts 1:11) Come Back is come again is Second Coming. 

Its called The Second Coming because Christ’s first coming in the flesh was as a baby in Bethelehem (Luke 2, Matthew 1:1-28, III Corinthians). 

Edited July 16, 2020 by Fidei Defensor

[Don19]

58 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Yes, that mentions "the coming," but it does not mention "the second coming," especially not as some construe it nowadays. The author of Hebrews mentioned Jesus coming "a second time" and he stated that second coming was for a salvation apart from sin. What do suppose that might be? What, exactly would a "salvation apart from sin" be? What is that was the coming of the Lord to which Paul was referring when he wrote the Thessalonians? 

Because Heb 9:26 says at His first appearance, He appeared to put away sin.

For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself

He Who knew no sin was made sin. His first appearance was in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom 8:3). So I believe verse 28, then, which speaks of His second appearance, will be "without sin" in a manner that contrasts with His first appearance. He will judge the world then. But at His first appearance, He said He did not come to judge the world (John 12:47).

 

Quote

This is important, Don, because the kind of salvation inherent to a pre-trib rapture is definitely one involving sin. 

I don't subscribe to a pre-trip rapture. I believe the "rapture," as it were--plainly spoken of in places such as 1 Thess 4--occurs at the end of the world.

 

Quote

We know Jesus comes many times in many ways because Jesus came back from the grave to meet the men on the road to Emmaus, again on the beach, and again to show Thomas his scars. We know he appeared again when he ascended. We know he came back after that to convert Saul. He came in judgement in 70 AD to flatten Jerusalem.

Yes, He did come in judgment against Jerusalem, but that is clearly not the coming of 1 Thess 4, or 1 Cor 15:51-52:

51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Compare to 1 Thess 4:16:

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:

So this is when the dead are raised. That's what I mean by the 2nd coming.

Maybe our president's surname is a sign. We can hope...

 

Quote

The NT writers believed they were living in the last days (plural)

 

There's a future element of the last days spoken of, however. Consider 2 Thess 2:3, 2 Peter 3:3, 2 Tim 3:1-13.

2 Peter 3 is especially pertinent to the end of the world.

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

This is not symbolic or metaphorical language, and it didn't happen in 70 AD. The events of the first century were a shaking of the heavens and the earth (Haggai 2:6), not a melting of the elements.

 

Quote

You cite verse 15 of 1 Thes. 4 but that cannot be cited apart from all the other verses, which as I have already shown, indicate a time during the lifetime of the first century readers in Thessalonica. That is true of both chapter 4 and chapter 5.

 

But then Paul in 2nd Thess 2 tells them that the day is not at hand!

1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

² That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

³ Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

 

I believe, clearly, the man of sin is the pope, and the restraining power spoken of was pagan Rome.

Furthermore, the Thessalonians in the 1st century were not caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air (or "raptured") as Paul described.

Quote

 

The fact is the 1 Thes. 5 text does not say anything specifically about the second coming but it does contain language pinning the coming of the Lord to the lifetime of its original readers, whether eschatological or not. Neglecting verses 1 through 11 for the sake of proof-texting verse 4:15 is bad form. 

I believe I've shown otherwise.

 

Edited July 16, 2020 by Don19

[BeauJangles]

10 hours ago, Josheb said:

For the record, Beau...

For documentation purposes Josheb, it's not records I'm looking for. I'm more interested in whether your faith in Christ is simply another one of your loquaciously articulated in well worded tabulated vocabulary of intellectual pursuits, being impressively brainy, or if you really have a zealous and passionate heart after God. You seem to thrive, almost feed, on topping all who encounter your biblical topics and doctrinal issues. Sure, you're a very smart guy. I'll give you all the credit on being impressive. It surely is. 

That's all besides the point for me. I intensely LOVE Jesus! I enjoy sharing His goodness and interacting in fellowship accordingly. Giving and taking of the wonders of His Spirit in my life and heart. Not merely a "head thing" where you appear to be from seeing enough of your style and demeanor in how you post. Have you made any endearing friendships in Christ here yet? These jabs you use aren't scoring any points other than being a "know-it-all". Respectfully saying, it would by all means be indicative of this. 

It's one of your favorite words. Here it is.  

  

FAIL

Where IS your heart, man? Where? So far I haven't seen it yet. 

 

 

Edited July 17, 2020 by BeauJangles

[Fidei Defensor]

2 hours ago, Don19 said:

I believe, clearly, the man of sin is the pope, and the restraining power spoken of was pagan Rome.

How can the pope be the Man of Sin? For one, not even during the High Middle Ages did the Papacy crush and rule all nations: 

“And the beast was allowed to wage war against God’s holy people and to conquer them. And he was given authority to rule over every tribe and people and language and nation” (Revelation 13:7). 

China, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Iran, India, Japan, Russia, and many more were untouched by papal power, most were pagan, except Russia which was a different Church than Roman Catholicism called Russian Orthodox. 

Today the Pope has less control of nations than he did. He has embraced the Reformation, marking it a holiday. I cannot see Pope Francis I  raising an army and conquering the world, he’s liberal and more inclined to surrender Vatican City if it would save lives. 

The Man of Sin hasn’t risen.

He wasn’t a Roman Emperor because the Roman gave up on Albion or Britian, and built Hadrian’s Wall to keep the barbarians in check they couldn’t conquer. 

The Man of Sin/ Man of Lawlessness/ Beast of the Sea has yet to rise. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by Fidei Defensor

[Don19]

38 minutes ago, Fidei Defensor said:

How can the pope be the Man of Sin? For one, not even during the High Middle Ages did the Papacy crush and rule all nations: 

“And the beast was allowed to wage war against God’s holy people and to conquer them. And he was given authority to rule over every tribe and people and language and nation” (Revelation 13:7). 

China, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Iran, India, Japan, Russia, and many more were untouched by papal power, most were pagan, except Russia which was a different Church than Roman Catholicism called Russian Orthodox. 

Today the Pooe has less control of nations than he did. He has embraced the Reformation, marking it a holiday. I cannot see Pope Francis I  raising an army and conquering the world, he’s liberal and more inclined to surrender Vatican City if it would save lives. 

The Man of Sin hasn’t risen. He wasn’t a Roman Emperor because the Roman gave up on Albion or Britian, and built Hadrian’s Wall to keep the barbarians in check they couldn’t conquer. 

The Man of Sin/ Man of Lawlessness/ Beast of the Sea has yet to rise. 

Because some statements in the Bible that appear universal are actually more limited.

Case in point... Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed.

Kind of like how we have "The World Series" in baseball.

The papacy is not as strong as it once was. Indeed. And as Paul said:

And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: (2 Thess 2:8)

The reference to the man of sin being consumed by the spirit of His mouth should be interpreted to mean that the gospel has undermined Rome. And indeed it has. So the only thing that still needs to happen now is for the pope to be destroyed by Jesus when He returns. Maranatha!

Edited July 17, 2020 by Don19

[Fidei Defensor]

2 hours ago, Don19 said:

Because some statements in the Bible that appear universal are actually more limited.

Case in point... Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed.

Kind of like how we have "The World Series" in baseball.

The papacy is not as strong as it once was. Indeed. And as Paul said:

And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: (2 Thess 2:8)

The reference to the man of sin being consumed by the spirit of His mouth should be interpreted to mean that the gospel has undermined Rome. And indeed it has. So the only thing that still needs to happen now is for the pope to be destroyed by Jesus when He returns. Maranatha!

Interesting interpretations. I do not see the Pope entering the temple:

 ”the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.  He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.” (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4) 

Maybe under Vatican I, when the pope could cry “infallibility” making himself sinless and God thinking for him, but Vatican II seriously curbed all of this.