Why are we divided on eschatology?

[traveller]

This thread is a hair's breath from being closed people. Tone it down or lose the privilege.

[Xan]

The problem is, you are arguing retroactively. The causal link between the events cited and the passages used as evidence of fulfillment is nonexistant. And no, you don't get to use the old "The Holy Spirit tells me.." cliche. For each one of the events cited, one can point to an event much closer in time from the writing of the prophecy as the fulfillment. What is the objective contextual point of control for supposing that fulfillment is thousands of years in the future? The answer is, there is none. It's poor scholarship based on wishful thinking, a lack of historical knowledge and selective interpretation which ignores inconvenient truth.

And, by the way, there is no "third temple" prophecy. To suggest that the temple must be rebuilt and animal sacrifice reinstituted is to nullify everything Christ did for us at Calvary. That's the Galatian heresy repackaged. Read Hebrews 10:11-18.

Wow.. Another opinion based on what? What knowledge can you bring to this discussion?

To suggest that the temple must be rebuilt and animal sacrifice reinstituted is to nullify everything Christ did for us at Calvary

And if you know anything about Jewish history, they did not accept Christ as their Savior, nor do they today, yes, some have been converted to Christianity, but the majority of the Jews deny Christ as their Messiah, that is simple Biblical knowledge.. Thus this is why there will be a Great Tribulation period in the land of Israel.

How long have you been studding prophecy? Not long enough we can see

You have not studied Daniel have you? You might have read it. But forgot to study it. There will be a third temple built and animal sacrifice will be a implemented.

Dan 8:12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.

Dan 8:13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary (temple) and the host to be trodden under foot?

Dan 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary (temple) of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

Dan 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

What is this abomination of desolation?

The phrase abomination of desolation refers to Matthew 24:15: So when you see standing in the holy place (the third temple) 'the abomination that causes desolation,' spoken of through the prophet Daniel - let the reader understand. This Scripture is referring to Daniel 9:27, He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing [of the temple] he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.

You want to know a little history? Alright here is some history.. In 167 B.C., a Greek ruler by the name of Antiochus Epiphanes set up an altar to Zeus over the altar of burnt offerings in the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. He also sacrificed a pig on the altar in the temple in Jerusalem. This event is known as the abomination of desolation.

In Matthew 24:15, Jesus was speaking some 200 years after the abomination of desolation described above had occurred. So, Jesus must have been prophesying that some time in the future another abomination of desolation would occur in a Jewish temple in Jerusalem.

As I stated before, give a man enough time and they dig themselves into a hole. I see your Biblical knowledge needs improvement before you try to rebuttal my position. I'll run circles around you.. You know very little about prophecy and I see why it's not that important to you..

...none of which answers the question, what is the objective contextual point of control for supposing that Daniel (or any other prophet, for that matter) is speaking of matters that will not be fulfilled for millenia, instead of decades? There is no basis for that supposition and you are still arguing retroactively.

All of which serves to illustrate and answer the OP's question as to why we're divided on eschatology; speaking for myself, I refuse to accept fuzzy, illogical thinking as a valid technique for defining doctrine.

Agreed.. It's only fuzzy to you and your position. I, like you, also dislike fuzzy, illogical, barnyard, backdoor, harebrained, imbecilic, uninformed, asinine, nonsensical, obtuse thinking to prophecy (and any other words you would like to add to it). Now you think Daniel will be fulfilled during the millennia, LOL.. My on My.. You have A LOT of studding to do before you come here and expect anyone who studies prophecy to accept your view. Plain and Simple

How does one speak to a brother like that? You cannot accuse someone with a historical viewpoint as having not studied prophesy and scriptures. It's very sad how disrespectful Christians treat one another.

[Press Forward]

It just makes me wonder, I know that one's stand on the end times does not determine one's eternal destination. But why is the church so divided when it comes to eschatology? I can understand how one denomination will differ from another when it comes to things like what type of worship music should be played or how one should dress up for Sunday, but why are we so divided regarding something as huge and important as eschatology? Is it God's intention? Aren't we all led by the same Spirit?

Matthew 24:44 NIV

[Guest man]

But this discussion like many others (i.e baptism, tithing, once saved always saved) etc. these will always cause much adverse conflict within the Christian community. And the sad thing is, most Christians do not seem to be Christian as they answer. They have so much anger, pride or selfishness to accept they might be wrong or attempt to accept another theory. So one must take these topics with a grain of salt and look at the spirit behind the posts. Understanding that lowering oneself to be "right" by degrating, insulting, backbiting other Christians looks worse on them even if they are right. And if they are right, who would want to accept that by how that person conducted themself when answering it in truth?

(Atonement @ Jul 15 2008, 04:59 PM)

Agreed.. It's only fuzzy to you and your position. I, like you, also dislike fuzzy, illogical, barnyard, backdoor, harebrained, imbecilic, uninformed, asinine, nonsensical, obtuse thinking to prophecy (and any other words you would like to add to it). Now you think Daniel will be fulfilled during the millennia, LOL.. My on My.. You have A LOT of studding to do before you come here and expect anyone who studies prophecy to accept your view. Plain and Simple

[Atonement]

But this discussion like many others (i.e baptism, tithing, once saved always saved) etc. these will always cause much adverse conflict within the Christian community. And the sad thing is, most Christians do not seem to be Christian as they answer. They have so much anger, pride or selfishness to accept they might be wrong or attempt to accept another theory. So one must take these topics with a grain of salt and look at the spirit behind the posts. Understanding that lowering oneself to be "right" by degrating, insulting, backbiting other Christians looks worse on them even if they are right. And if they are right, who would want to accept that by how that person conducted themself when answering it in truth?

(Atonement @ Jul 15 2008, 04:59 PM)

Agreed.. It's only fuzzy to you and your position. I, like you, also dislike fuzzy, illogical, barnyard, backdoor, harebrained, imbecilic, uninformed, asinine, nonsensical, obtuse thinking to prophecy (and any other words you would like to add to it). Now you think Daniel will be fulfilled during the millennia, LOL.. My on My.. You have A LOT of studding to do before you come here and expect anyone who studies prophecy to accept your view. Plain and Simple

Yep, he stated and I quote

I refuse to accept fuzzy, illogical thinking as a valid technique for defining doctrine.

As to say, I am being illogical or my logic is fuzzy (my position)... So I got out my thesaurus and quoted every Synonym and related word with fuzzy and illogical.. So your point is? If he can not handle the heat with words, then maybe the man should not use them in the first place to defend his position?? Ahh, but I did not see any of you quote his .. Yet I said the exact same thing he did, but just used every meaning in the sentence. WOW how some people just don't get it..

[Guest man]

But this discussion like many others (i.e baptism, tithing, once saved always saved) etc. these will always cause much adverse conflict within the Christian community. And the sad thing is, most Christians do not seem to be Christian as they answer. They have so much anger, pride or selfishness to accept they might be wrong or attempt to accept another theory. So one must take these topics with a grain of salt and look at the spirit behind the posts. Understanding that lowering oneself to be "right" by degrating, insulting, backbiting other Christians looks worse on them even if they are right. And if they are right, who would want to accept that by how that person conducted themself when answering it in truth?

(Atonement @ Jul 15 2008, 04:59 PM)

Agreed.. It's only fuzzy to you and your position. I, like you, also dislike fuzzy, illogical, barnyard, backdoor, harebrained, imbecilic, uninformed, asinine, nonsensical, obtuse thinking to prophecy (and any other words you would like to add to it). Now you think Daniel will be fulfilled during the millennia, LOL.. My on My.. You have A LOT of studding to do before you come here and expect anyone who studies prophecy to accept your view. Plain and Simple

Yep, he stated and I quote

I refuse to accept fuzzy, illogical thinking as a valid technique for defining doctrine.

As to say, I am being illogical or my logic is fuzzy (my position)... So I got out my thesaurus and quoted every Synonym and related word with fuzzy and illogical.. So your point is? If he can not handle the heat with words, then maybe the man should not use them in the first place to defend his position?? Ahh, but I did not see any of you quote his .. Yet I said the exact same thing he did, but just used every meaning in the sentence. WOW how some people just don't get it..

Exactly!

[Guest yod]

So the anwer to the question about why we are so divided has more to do with us than with prophecy.

Few seem to understand what grace and patience mean when discussing disputable matters evidently.

sad, really...

[Xan]

So the anwer to the question about why we are so divided has more to do with us than with prophecy.

Few seem to understand what grace and patience mean when discussing disputable matters evidently.

sad, really...

Yod, that is the perfect and most accurate answer to the OP.

[Guest yod]

So the anwer to the question about why we are so divided has more to do with us than with prophecy.

Few seem to understand what grace and patience mean when discussing disputable matters evidently.

sad, really...

Yod, that is the perfect and most accurate answer to the OP.

this is one instance where I really wouldn't mind being wrong...

[Atonement]

But this discussion like many others (i.e baptism, tithing, once saved always saved) etc. these will always cause much adverse conflict within the Christian community. And the sad thing is, most Christians do not seem to be Christian as they answer. They have so much anger, pride or selfishness to accept they might be wrong or attempt to accept another theory. So one must take these topics with a grain of salt and look at the spirit behind the posts. Understanding that lowering oneself to be "right" by degrating, insulting, backbiting other Christians looks worse on them even if they are right. And if they are right, who would want to accept that by how that person conducted themself when answering it in truth?

(Atonement @ Jul 15 2008, 04:59 PM)

Agreed.. It's only fuzzy to you and your position. I, like you, also dislike fuzzy, illogical, barnyard, backdoor, harebrained, imbecilic, uninformed, asinine, nonsensical, obtuse thinking to prophecy (and any other words you would like to add to it). Now you think Daniel will be fulfilled during the millennia, LOL.. My on My.. You have A LOT of studding to do before you come here and expect anyone who studies prophecy to accept your view. Plain and Simple

Yep, he stated and I quote

I refuse to accept fuzzy, illogical thinking as a valid technique for defining doctrine.

As to say, I am being illogical or my logic is fuzzy (my position)... So I got out my thesaurus and quoted every Synonym and related word with fuzzy and illogical.. So your point is? If he can not handle the heat with words, then maybe the man should not use them in the first place to defend his position?? Ahh, but I did not see any of you quote his .. Yet I said the exact same thing he did, but just used every meaning in the sentence. WOW how some people just don't get it..

Exactly!

Exactly!