Is there justification for adding anything to the discussion of end times besides what the bible tell us.?

[DeighAnn]

Those who seem to know the Letter of the Word miss so much of the SPIRIT of the Word,  

Its like earth arguing with air sometimes.  Ah, fruit.  
 

[Starise]

On 1/6/2021 at 12:11 AM, Riverwalker said:

Pardon this clumsy Analogy, but a lot of end times discussion reminds of evolution discussions, an unconnected sparseness of facts that is assembled and held together by the gossamer web of supposition. The bible says WHAT will happen, very clearly. But its rather vague on the how and when, and it would seem purposefully so, because God doesn't make mistakes.

Are we really free to take our theology beyond what is explicitly stated.

I myself find hints in the bible that make me think we are going pre-trib or at the latest mid-trib (I will save you from the trial that is to come upon the WHOLE Earth) but I cannot allow myself to become dogmatic about it, because God did not clearly state it and clearly he does not want me focusing on that. But rather on keeping my lamp full, my wick trimmed and my eye on the prize.

 

I do not have all the answers here, I am opened to being enlightened if I am in the dark

Jumping back to the OP. I would only say not to allow others to do the thinking for you. Even though teachers are especially helpful and are gifted of God to teach.  

It's ok to get opinions. I would beg you to disagree with me ( or anyone else) if you find contradiction to scriptures in anything I say. The Bible does tell us a lot about what will happen. There are those who say certain comments in scripture were only applicable to certain groups of people at certain times. While this is true in some cases, it can be taken too far and we can eliminate portions of the word that are very relevant to us today.

Some of it is pretty simple to figure out. Jesus has not yet come again. Living Christians are all still here on the earth. We don't have anything even closely resembling a better world yet. Evil has been hard at work right along with the good. Satan or Lucifer is the present god of this world, even God said it. I think if we look around we can see this is very apparent.

I would recommend you compare anything said here to ALL scriptures. Probably best not to go reading a bunch of books on it by "experts". Pray. Ask God to reveal His word to you. The end times takes intense study and spiritual understanding. Even then we still won't know, don't know exactly how everything is going to go down. Cover yourself with the armor of God. Never believe everything that comes along calling itself Christian, yes even here on Worthy. 

[seeking the lost]

On 1/5/2021 at 11:11 PM, Riverwalker said:

Pardon this clumsy Analogy, but a lot of end times discussion reminds of evolution discussions, an unconnected sparseness of facts that is assembled and held together by the gossamer web of supposition. The bible says WHAT will happen, very clearly. But its rather vague on the how and when, and it would seem purposefully so, because God doesn't make mistakes.

Are we really free to take our theology beyond what is explicitly stated.

I myself find hints in the bible that make me think we are going pre-trib or at the latest mid-trib (I will save you from the trial that is to come upon the WHOLE Earth) but I cannot allow myself to become dogmatic about it, because God did not clearly state it and clearly he does not want me focusing on that. But rather on keeping my lamp full, my wick trimmed and my eye on the prize.

 

I do not have all the answers here, I am opened to being enlightened if I am in the dark

Adding to the scripture is not good because there is a warning against doing that.  What ever your interpretation it is not allowable to add resurrections or raptures. There are only two resurrections listed and there can only be one time of the rapture.  The rapture follows the resurrection at the end of the thousand years.  Consider the primary text that tells of the rapture.  1 Thess. 4:13-18

13But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. 14For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. 15For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. 18Therefore encourage one another with these words.
Jesus Himself told us the time that believers will be raised in the gospel of John chapter 6.

  40For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” 

It is not a coincidence that there is a resurrection at the last day of the thousand years.  This is the time that believer are raised and the time of the rapture

[Starise]

11 minutes ago, Josheb said:

It is in all the history books!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That last statement is an indication 1) history has not been read, 2) others claims have been blindly accepted and believed without investigating the veracity of those claims. 

There are numerous people who have entered the temple and declared themselves god in one way or another. There were scores of occasions when Romans placed Imperial standards in the temple, many of them commemorating Caesars who had been deified. In the NT-era Vespasian, Titus and Tiberius entered the temple. Vespasian self-deified. Titus was later deified on coin (common practice among the Romans). But I again direct readers to the Zealots; Jerusalem, not Rome. When the Zealots took over the temple they acted like maniacs. They sat on the bema seat and judged other, sentencing their Jewish opponents to death. They made mockery of the Levitical order and the sacrificial system. They killed humans. The blood was so thick from the plethora of killing that it had splashed thigh-high up the walls and the blood was so thick on the floor that as it congealed in the heat it pulled the sandals off anyone daring to walk upon it. 

Any man who sat in judgment over others regarding their faithfulness to God has set himself up as God. 

That prophesy was easily fulfilled in the NT era. 

But teachers of dispensational-style eschatologies either haven't read their history or they don't want those they teach to know. It is in the history books. 

Big Fail.

 

 

Look it up and see. Verify what I just wrote. 

Then adjust your thinking, doctrine, and practice accordingly. 

 

 

 

PS: be wary of the person who says, "Yeah, but...." and seeks to find excuses before accepting the fact of the "yeah." That person is not being objective. 

This does not meet the criteria of the man of lawlessness. That "person" will do great signs and lying wonders. Doesn't matter if all the other things click.

We do agree on one thing. There is a cyclical nature to some events. I would say there is a similarity . Take Hitler for instance. He was an archetype of the anti-christ. Yet he didn't do great signs and lying wonders.

I gather you don't have a specific name because this is a specific person who comes as the one of lawlessness. You prefer to bury the identity in an explanation that attempts to distribute the meanings over cyclical historical references, IOW you won't allow yourself to be pinned down to a name, yet this is one individual spoken of. This person WILL have a name and be easily identified. 

I think it's bad hermeneutics to attempt to fit multiple people into an explanation that by your own admission was isolated to a present individual of that time. Not only that. You are intentionally overlooking the future aspect of the text.

[Starise]

 

25 minutes ago, Josheb said:

No, that is not what the text says. You are again making stuff up and adding stuff that is not in the text. What the text states the MOL is coming in accordance with satan's power. It does NOT state the MOL will have satan's power. What they text also states is specific qualifiers of that power: deception. Nothing more. He's not a mystical, magical, fantastical superbeing. 

I'm not denying that this is a man. I already said as much. We went from the idea ( yours) that men all through history have met the criteria for the man of lawlessness.  Onward to the idea that this person or persons according to you, works in Satan's power yet somehow is detached from it.  A person can be fully led by Satan yet not be under his power? Ok so you said "in accordance with". Same difference. Deception is a part of  being led by and filled with Satan. People filled with the devil do the devil's bidding.

Let's dissect this some more. The Bible speaks of the spirit of anti-christ being alive and well all through history cf John . In that sense  the spirit of anti-christ been around, and yes worked through various men. This is the "spirit of lawlessness" that has plagued men. The ONE individual who hasn't been revealed yet will be different than all the others. He will in fact be filled with the devil. Remember, this is Lucifer's last stand before he is dealt with. This is a spiritual war that totally affects the physical. Why wouldn't this person have Satan's power? It would not make sense to think otherwise.

 

48 minutes ago, Josheb said:

The "wonders" of 2 Thes. 2 are "false wonders"Hi Kaira,

2 Thess. 2:9-10

9 The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, 10 and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 

See your statement and look at the text. Nowhere does the text say these are false wonders. Nowhere. It says they serve the lie. Make no mistake the devil can do wonders too. I see you trying to skirt the importance of this. These are REAL wonders done through evil not good. This person of lawlessness will do these wonders. 

54 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Jude 1:6
"And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day," 

According to Jude satan has been bond from the day of his rebellion. According to Isaiah he's been stripped of his glory. According to Calvary he is a defeated enemy, and as I have already noted according to James and Paul he flees from those who resist him and are able to extinguish ALL his schemes with the armor of God. 

Except we know this scripture is out of context because Satan goes back and forth between earth and heaven. We know he goes to and fro in the earth. Satan is alive and well along with a great entourage of his followers.. Yes he is defeated but he is taking as many of us as he can along the way. How could you possibly think Satan or Lucifer is chained and powerless? If the devil and all his followers were chained up right now there would be no spiritual war there would be no references to angelic wars happening as we speak. Far too many scriptures support an alive and busy team of evil on the loose.

59 minutes ago, Josheb said:

The only one deceived in 2 Thessalonians 2 are those who do not believe

"Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness[a] is revealed, the man doomed to destruction."

There is a sequence to events here some might question and loose hope. This will seem very bad to some believers as per the REBELLION- Note this is instruction to believers. Things will get bad and then they will get worse.  1st the rebellion which I think we are beginning to see now. Then the coming of the man of lawlessness.

One person. One set of events. Prophetic words from Thessalonians to the future church. Correlated in other scriptures.

[Starise]

47 minutes ago, Josheb said:

ou gather incorrectly. My vagary is designed to get you curious, to get you to do the work - your own work because one person giving another person is not a solution and it is human nature to dismiss that which is not earned. You do the work and you'll persuade yourself and you'll do so based on the evidence you yourself gathered and not merely because the answer was handed to you.

Please stop playing these little games with me. If you know the name just tell me and we can look at the connections. You alluded to people who all through history have met the same criteria. This is totally baseless. You haven't shown me one shred of evidence to prove it. You attempted to make it look as if the "great signs and wonders" were superficial magic tricks. Fail.

*The person did have a name. 

Does have a name.

*History, not scripture, identifies him. 

Scripture is our main reference

*The reason we cannot look to scripture for the name is because the canon of scripture is closed. This is a problem ALL eschatologies share. 

We don't specifically have a name for someone who hasn't yet come to power. The scripture gives us EVERYTHING we need to know who he will be.

*It is an assumption on your part the man will be "easily" identified; nowhere does scripture ever say any such thing.

When he comes to power the scriptures tell us how to identify him.Scripture says EVERYTHING we need to know.

*I have provided a list of first century people who - ironically - do easily qualify. 

I have yet to see one single name of ANYONE who meets the criteria.

*I provided those people so you'd do your own work - with my encouragement! 

That's great to know. You have my encouragement to work further on this as well!

*I provided that list so it can be seen there is plenty of reason NOT to futurize.

Show me just one good argument?

*The person is a man.

Yes we know this.

*The person was a man known about in the first century.

Great now we're getting somewhere. Who do you think it is?

*The person was a man known about in the first century when the mystery of lawlessness was already at work. 

We have already discussed :"anti christs" I am talking about THE anti-christ.

*The person is related to the persecutory affliction the Thessalonians were experiencing at the time of Pail's letter (c.

Ok if this is your view. I am not onboard with it unless I have many more facts which you have not provided.Everything I studied so far looks to a future person.

47 minutes ago, Josheb said:

"Assuming these prophecies were indeed all fulfilled. We still don't have a "when" for the famous 2 Thessalonian passage. This explanation only tells us when something began. The closest "when "I have is at the "end". That's like saying when will you die? Answer- At the end of physical life. The "end" has some pretty extreme things happening, sun darkened, huge earthquakes...and obviously we are still here...so this still leads us in a prophetic direction."

I was solicited about the "when" and I have addressed the when. You have failed to engage the answers provided, preferring instead to move the goal posts and comment on various other aspects, despite the fact I have repeatedly tried to get you to stick with your own original request. I, unlike you, have responded to most of your tangents AND asked you to deal with the "when," the original concern over which I was first solicited. 

I have in fact, engaged all of the information I could get so far. Let it be seen here you DID NOT engage the "when" to any plausible explanation. I never veered from my original request. Let this also be seen clearly here. The only thing you have repeatedly tried to do is distract from a concrete answer.

Edited January 11, 2021 by Starise

[Revelation Man]

On 1/10/2021 at 4:31 PM, Josheb said:

 

Matthew 24:9 states what it states and what it states is this: the disciples will be handed over to tribulation. I believe what is stated without adding or subtracting anything to it. What is stated is what I believe. 

You say something to the effect of, "Well I prefer to go with a verse in Revelation about being prevented from an hour, and I interpret the "hour" to be the same as the tribulation, even though the verse never states any such thing, but I'm gonna accuse you of what I'm doing (interpreting) because I don't read scripture as stated, won't tolerate scripture that way, and think you're wrong. 

 

If that's what you're really saying then I'm going to make note of that here in front of all the readers and then treat it as the dross it is. Matthew 24:9 states what it states and what it states is the disciples will be handed over to tribulation and verse 29 states it is after the tribulation that the sign of Christ's coming occurs. That's what the text states. No interpretation. No adding to the text. No subtracting from the text. Just reading what is stated and accepting what is stated as written. 

Jesus told us in John's gospel that we would have CONTINUAL TRIBULATIONS, so we have Church Age tribulation (which John in Rev. 7 describes as the GREAT TRIBULATION, as in 2000 is greater than 7 or 2000>7. Then we have the 70th week tribulation, where the Church is in Heaven and the Anti-Christ has 3.5 years of FAKE PEACE, but of course, any world without Jesus has Troubles and Tribulations, then we have the 3.5 Years of the GREATEST TROUBLES EVER SEEN. 

You see, God is not bound by His descriptions, the Church Age Tribulation Period can AND IS described as Greater than the 70th week period because 2000 years is GREATER than 7 years, AND God can also describe the Greatest Ever Troubles on earth as a 3.5 year period of time, BOTH can be true and are true. The Multitude seen in Rev. 7:9-17 came out of the Great Church Age Tribulation that saw MILLIONS of Christians die for the faith. 

As per Matt. 24:29, that is the Second Coming, not the Rapture, the Church comes back with Jesus at that time (see Rev. 19) so of course that happens after the 3.5 year Tribulation period. 

Edited January 12, 2021 by Revelation Man

[Revelation Man]

 

Quote

And you, Rev Man are 1) off-topic, 2) making an ad hominem argument, and 3) not actually refuting anything I actually posted. Scripture and 35 years of preaching should have taught you the ungodly, fleshly nature of such things so the posts serves only to be self-indicting. 

We werr talking about the claim Jesus' gifts did not come until only after his wilderness temptation. How about we stick to that? Posts, not posters? [QUOTE/]

We don't need tags to divide us that was the point.

Edited January 12, 2021 by Revelation Man

[Diaste]

On 1/5/2021 at 10:11 PM, Riverwalker said:

Pardon this clumsy Analogy, but a lot of end times discussion reminds of evolution discussions, an unconnected sparseness of facts that is assembled and held together by the gossamer web of supposition. The bible says WHAT will happen, very clearly. But its rather vague on the how and when, and it would seem purposefully so, because God doesn't make mistakes.

I think the prophecies are quite clear on the 'when'. It's not in hidden dates but in conditions and events, conditions and events which are explicit and numerous.

On 1/5/2021 at 10:11 PM, Riverwalker said:

I myself find hints in the bible that make me think we are going pre-trib or at the latest mid-trib (I will save you from the trial that is to come upon the WHOLE Earth) but I cannot allow myself to become dogmatic about it, because God did not clearly state it and clearly he does not want me focusing on that. But rather on keeping my lamp full, my wick trimmed and my eye on the prize.

We should be dogmatic. There is an entire book about the end of the age as well as scores of passages from major and minor prophets in both old and new testament. As far as I'm concerned it is the area of study as it concerns ultimate destiny for everyone.

 

[Starise]

16 hours ago, Josheb said:

Not topically, you didn't.

We aren't talking lotion here bro. Topically tropically, call it whatever you want to call it. I have only attempted to see your view on this. So yes I did. You say I didn't but I did. Those were my only motives in asking. So far I can't even see the blueprint for your view other than you think it already happened. In what context or HOW I still don't see it because your explanation has been lacking. I really wanted to know how someone would see it that way and why. I'm beginning to wonder if you aren't just throwing up smoke screens. 

16 hours ago, Josheb said:

Fail. You're the one soliciting me. You're the one soliciting me bacuse you want to know my pov. If you alredy know the answers to all your solicitations and inquiry then your requests are disingenuous. If you don't already know those answers the you encouraging me to do homework is... disingenuous (and snarky).

Hmmmmm. I only looked at your methodology here and followed it. What does that say about you? This is EXACTLY what you do here every day day in and day out. 

You made an assumption too BTW. I don't know all the answers. I think I know many of the answers. I am always learning. 

16 hours ago, Josheb said:

I know the competing eschatologies. I have shelves of books on eschatology from all the major povs. I can cite and quote original sources on the whole line of historicist thought from Martyr to Blomberg. I can cite and quote original sources on amillennialist thought from Origen to Riddlebarger. I can cite and quote original sources on postmillennialist thought from Polycarp to Bahnsen or Gentry.  I can cite and quote original sources on the whole line of dispensational thought from Darby all the way up through Blaising and Bock. 

Good for you. I could tell you already think pretty highly of yourself. The important thing here though is what is the answer to the question? So far I don't have any concrete answers from you. Only accusations of my intent. You think I haven't read a few books? What are we into now a peeing contest? I just want answers to Biblical questions. I thought you could logically support your view. 

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

The MOL is a man. This has been acknowledged; it is a place of agreement. Where we part is over what that means in regards to the Thessalonians text and what that means temporally, or in regards to the "when." You have resorted to tangents - specifically the tangents of "who," tangents of the name of the MOL, the antichrist, and more; none of which engages the "when". I, on the other hand, have said if the MOL is a man, a human male, and a human male that was known of during the first century then that is temporally relevant information. 

This is a pure load of excrement. You are now back peddling on your original comments. All I have done is ask honest questions hoping for honest answers.

YOU were very generic and extremely vanilla in your descriptions of who you thought the MOL was. You at the very least insinuated  he was a person who lived in the 1st century. You led anyone who read your comments to believe you were not looking for a future event. Now you have added. "was known of during the first century". You never said that before. In other words, now he could be a future person but he was "known of" then. This completely changes what you said earlier. 

16 hours ago, Josheb said:

The MOL is a man, a human male known about in the first century. Deal with the temporal nature of that fact before assuming he's man who hadn't yet been born. Deal with the temporal nature of that fact before assuming he's man who hadn't yet been born.  

I'm not assuming anything ,I'm asking and have been for awhile now.

The closest I can come to what it is you're trying to say is that the spirit of anti-christ has existed for a very long time. I agree with this. Maybe people knew who he was way back then in some circles or at least had some idea who he was. I can't see where you get that this individual was around as a person in the 1st century. Can you cf me on something concrete?

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

I don't have to be able to name the man to not the temporal nature of the fact the MOL was a man of whom the Thessalonians already knew. His name or other identities are irrelevant to that fact. 

Here's a thought. "What if" in 2 Thess. The comments were both relevant to the times AND prophecy. This is how I see it. The  mystery that was held back existed THEN. When Him who holds back stops holding, a FUTURE event transpires. This is when THAT PERSON will be revealed called the beast in Revelation 13:5. 

 The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise its authority for forty-two months. 6 It opened its mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven

Correlates with 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4

  3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness[a] is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4 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.

16 hours ago, Josheb said:

You asked. You asked but you're not engaging the replies. "when the texts states "already at work" that is a temporal qualifier, a "when." You said there was no "when". There is. Not once have you come close to saying, "Yeah, these are aspects of 'when'. I guess I was mistaken; let's talk about them." 

I didn't say there wasn't a when, I said you didn't give your opinion of when that "when" was. THAT'S what I said. 

I find this almost comical. I have done nothing but ask and inquire. If that isn't desiring to talk about them I don't know what is.

The whole goal of my post was to see how someone, who from all outward evidence, doesn't come off like he thinks there's anything future about the 2 Thess. text in question. What would that person's timeline look like with respect to the end times? 

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

I additionally provided a list of people, not by name

Ok I think we would agree this comment is more than just a little generic. I have a list of people but we don't know who they are because they remain unnamed. lol. 

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

The antichrist is not in 2 Thes. 2.

Prove it. Beyond any doubt.

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

You cannot simply copy-and-paste separate verses together because you want to do so or because some other guy - some teacher selling his version - told you to do so.

You first accept what is stated. 
We first accept what is stated.
We first accept what is stated.
We first accept was is stated and believe it as stated. 

You don't do that with 2 Thes. 2 I have witnessed you doing so in other discussions with other passages but you're not doing it here. 

Josheb seriously stop talking down to me and make your point. I can read, I have concordances. I have dictionaries. I can cf different versions of the Bible. There's always something someone else isn't doing. What are you doing? Pointing out what you think I'm  not doing. Instead of giving me the theology 101 lesson how about telling me what you think it means in DETAIL.