Announcement

Collapse

Eschatology 201 Guidelines

This area of the forum is primarily for Christian theists to discuss orthodox views of Eschatology. Other theist participation is welcome within that framework, but only within orthodoxy. Posts from nontheists that do not promote atheism or seek to undermine the faith of others will be permitted at the Moderator's discretion - such posters should contact the area moderators before posting.


Without turning this forum into a 'hill of foreskins' (Joshua 5:3), I believe we can still have fun with this 'sensitive' topic.

However, don't be misled, dispensationalism has only partly to do with circumcision issues. So, let's not forget about Innocence, Conscience, Promises, Kingdoms and so on.

End time -isms within orthodox Christianity also discussed here. Clearly unorthodox doctrines, such as those advocating "pantelism/full preterism/Neo-Hymenaeanism" or the denial of any essential of the historic Christian faith are not permitted in this section but can be discussed in Comparative Religions 101 without restriction. Any such threads, as well as any that within the moderator's discretions fall outside mainstream evangelical belief, will be moved to the appropriate area.

Millennialism- post-, pre- a-

Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and Preterism, or just your garden variety Zionism.

From the tribulation to the anichrist. Whether your tastes run from Gary DeMar to Tim LaHaye or anywhere in between, your input is welcome here.

OK folks, let's roll!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

2nd Coming

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by 3 Resurrections View Post
    We simply believe scripture meant what it said for those it was written to back then,.
    Clearly the irony is lost on you here. Still think the "angels bound at the river Euphrates" are some Jewish dudes outside a gate?

    You also haven't addressed the OP. Is Rev 19 the 2nd coming? Who is the beast in the context of Rev 19?

    Comment


    • #17
      No irony going on at all, Darfius…and that was IDUMEAN dudes who were restricted from entrance, impatiently waiting outside the gates of Jerusalem (aka “that great city” called “Babylon” in Revelation) until some of the rebellious Zealot army secretly managed to sneak out of the temple area and saw the bars of Jerusalem’s locked gates open. This released the horde of 20,000 Idumean warriors (the “two myriads of myriads”) into the city with their 4 commanders (the “four angels” or “messengers”), thereby destroying Ananus’s whole moderate party within the city.

      You are missing the entire metaphoric connection that John was making which linked Cyrus’s one-night takedown of ancient Babylon through its Euphrates River gates with the Zealots’ and Idumeans’ one-night takedown of Ananus’s moderate faction in Jerusalem via its front gate entrance.

      And YES, that WAS Christ’s second coming in Revelation 19. The result of that coming was Christ “shepherding the nations with a rod of iron” (Rev. 19:15). This “iron rod” of Christ’s deathless high priesthood is a reality which all nations have access to. It is an unbreakable, unchanging one.

      We know this Rev. 19 coming of Christ is an event long past to us, because Revelation 12 said that the “man child” that was caught up to God’s throne (the ascended Christ in AD 33) “IS *ABOUT TO* shepherd all nations with a rod of iron.” This meant that all of the “weak and beggarly elements” of a rivalrous high priesthood system in Jerusalem were SOON to be eliminated - for those originally hearing or reading Revelation for the first time.

      The particular “Beast” in Rev. 19 that joined the “False Prophet” SECOND beast of Rev. 13 in the Lake of Fire was the THIRD Scarlet Beast of Rev. 17 - NOT the FIRST Sea Beast of Rev. 13.

      Revelation 19:19-20 makes mention of the actions of ALL THREE BEASTS in Revelation. The ones Rev. 19:19 refers to as “HIS army” waging war against the (Rev. 17) Beast and the (Rev. 13) False Prophet were the Roman armies of the (Rev. 13) Sea Beast being used by an avenging Christ for His purposes of judgment against faithless Jerusalem.

      Jesus actually made a prediction of the Roman armies finally burning up Jerusalem by the close of AD 70 by likewise calling them “HIS armies” in the parable found in Matthew 22:7. Remember the angry “king” who sent out “HIS armies” to destroy those who had murdered his servants and rejected His marriage feast celebration? The King’s avenging armies would “burn up their city” in retribution for those murderers’ evil actions. This parable and others the Pharisees knew very well were spoken against them in particular (Rev. 21:45).

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by 3 Resurrections View Post
        No irony going on at all, Darfius…and that was IDUMEAN dudes who were restricted from entrance, impatiently waiting outside the gates of Jerusalem (aka “that great city” called “Babylon” in Revelation) until some of the rebellious Zealot army secretly managed to sneak out of the temple area and saw the bars of Jerusalem’s locked gates open. This released the horde of 20,000 Idumean warriors (the “two myriads of myriads”) into the city with their 4 commanders (the “four angels” or “messengers”), thereby destroying Ananus’s whole moderate party within the city.
        This is you "simply believing scripture means what it says", right?

        And YES, that WAS Christ’s second coming in Revelation 19. The result of that coming was Christ “shepherding the nations with a rod of iron” (Rev. 19:15). This “iron rod” of Christ’s deathless high priesthood is a reality which all nations have access to. It is an unbreakable, unchanging one.
        The "rod of iron" is an allusion to this:

        Scripture Verse: Psalm 2


        1 Why do the nations conspire
        and the peoples plot in vain?
        2 The kings of the earth rise up
        and the rulers band together
        against the Lord and against his anointed, saying,
        3 “Let us break their chains
        and throw off their shackles.”


        4 The One enthroned in heaven laughs;
        the Lord scoffs at them.
        5 He rebukes them in his anger
        and terrifies them in his wrath, saying,
        6 “I have installed my king
        on Zion, my holy mountain.”



        7 I will proclaim the Lord’s decree:

        He said to me, “You are my son;
        today I have become your father.
        8 Ask me,
        and I will make the nations your inheritance,
        the ends of the earth your possession.
        9 You will break them with a rod of iron;
        you will dash them to pieces like pottery.”

        © Copyright Original Source



        It refers to Christ defeating the "nations" and the "kings of the earth" who have conspired against Him, ya know, the beast and his armies. The Bible is consistent. What it DOESN'T refer to is Jerusalem.

        We know this Rev. 19 coming of Christ is an event long past to us, because Revelation 12 said that the “man child” that was caught up to God’s throne (the ascended Christ in AD 33) “IS *ABOUT TO* shepherd all nations with a rod of iron.” This meant that all of the “weak and beggarly elements” of a rivalrous high priesthood system in Jerusalem were SOON to be eliminated - for those originally hearing or reading Revelation for the first time.
        Revelation 12 clearly does not refer to Jesus because it references the child's "mother" as being protected for 3.5 years, which is the time period for the events in Revelation and had nothing to do with Mary. The "woman" is clearly referring to Israel (recall Joseph's dream of the sun, moon and stars where his father--Israel--saw himself as either the sun or moon and his sons as the "12 stars"). Reference is also made to the "rest of her children", which clearly disqualifies Mary as being the woman in question.

        The particular “Beast” in Rev. 19 that joined the “False Prophet” SECOND beast of Rev. 13 in the Lake of Fire was the THIRD Scarlet Beast of Rev. 17 - NOT the FIRST Sea Beast of Rev. 13.

        Revelation 19:19-20 makes mention of the actions of ALL THREE BEASTS in Revelation. The ones Rev. 19:19 refers to as “HIS army” waging war against the (Rev. 17) Beast and the (Rev. 13) False Prophet were the Roman armies of the (Rev. 13) Sea Beast being used by an avenging Christ for His purposes of judgment against faithless Jerusalem.
        The words "third beast" never appear in Revelation. That's your imagination. And you've jumped the shark calling the Roman armies the "armies of heaven...dressed in white robes (which stand for the righteous acts of the saints)".

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by 3 Resurrections View Post
          SeanD, that is a very common misperception of Peter’s words in II Peter 3:8. To paraphrase Peter, he was saying “Listen up everyone! If you guys don’t catch anything else I say, you need to at least understand this one vitally important fact: whether God makes a promise one literal day prior to fulfilling something, or makes a promise one thousand years in advance…both will come to pass at the exact stipulated time.”

          You are attempting to deduce that time in scripture is an irrelevant thing to God that is meaningless. On the contrary, when God relates to man, His very divinity is proved by His “calling the shots” beforehand, and fulfilling prophesied events to the very day or the very year they were predicted to happen.

          Through Isaiah 46:9-10, God said, “Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My council shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure.”

          Preterists do not “capitalize” on the time-relevant statements in NT scripture. We simply believe scripture meant what it said for those it was written to back then, complete with its warnings of imminent events before all of them Christ spoke to in that generation would have died. Many and varied are the terms and ways this urgency was expressed to those first-century Christians. So many that I am astounded that it took me 40 plus years of Bible study as a believer to see what was in front of me all the time.
          It's not a misperception, it's what the context clearly shows. The impression is that there were scoffers/mockers (he literally used that specific word) making fun of Christians thinking the Lord was going to return. But as the decades (depending upon when that letter was written, which was probably around the 60s) more and more scoffers were giving them a hard time about it. The whole context is clear as day that it was an issue about why the Lord wasn't returning as they were expecting. Much like there are mockers (including on the Christian side unfortunately) to this day.

          This is actually one among many passages that debunks preterism. Nowhere in the scripture is there indication they were interpreting the "Lord's return" or "His coming" as somehow being a fulfillment of the 70 AD war. That's a bonkers invention preterists invented later.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by 3 Resurrections View Post

            The particular “Beast” in Rev. 19 that joined the “False Prophet” SECOND beast of Rev. 13 in the Lake of Fire was the THIRD Scarlet Beast of Rev. 17 - NOT the FIRST Sea Beast of Rev. 13.

            Revelation 19:19-20 makes mention of the actions of ALL THREE BEASTS in Revelation. The ones Rev. 19:19 refers to as “HIS army” waging war against the (Rev. 17) Beast and the (Rev. 13) False Prophet were the Roman armies of the (Rev. 13) Sea Beast being used by an avenging Christ for His purposes of judgment against faithless Jerusalem.

            Jesus actually made a prediction of the Roman armies finally burning up Jerusalem by the close of AD 70 by likewise calling them “HIS armies” in the parable found in Matthew 22:7. Remember the angry “king” who sent out “HIS armies” to destroy those who had murdered his servants and rejected His marriage feast celebration? The King’s avenging armies would “burn up their city” in retribution for those murderers’ evil actions. This parable and others the Pharisees knew very well were spoken against them in particular (Rev. 21:45).
            ONE OF the critical questions is whether, at any time in history, the world circumstances described in Revelation 13 have actually been fulfilled. Even after bending the allegory to breaking point, nothing presents as viably meeting those conditions. "Coming soon" seems to be relative to the events described in Revelation.

            Matthew 22:7 probably does refer to the sack of Jerusalem, but it doesn't go beyond that event.
            1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
            .
            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
            Scripture before Tradition:
            but that won't prevent others from
            taking it upon themselves to deprive you
            of the right to call yourself Christian.

            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

            Comment


            • #21
              To Darfius:

              You and I are in agreement that the "woman" in Rev. 12 is NOT Mary, but ISRAEL - the faithful remnant part of ethnic Israel, that is, which had been waiting (like Simeon and Anna) in expectation for the Savior prophesied to come through the tribe of Judah's lineage.

              Where we do not agree is in scripture's definition of "the kings of the earth" (the former high priests of the land of Israel), which was something totally different from "the kings of the whole habitable world". Revelation 16:14 makes this particular distinction between these two sets of "kings", with both sets of "kings" being deceived by Satan at that time.

              Those "kings of the earth" / high priest rulers in Israel were indeed the ones Psalms 2 spoke of. In Acts 3:24-28, the church freely acknowledged this connection of the "kings of the earth" and the "rulers" of the people as the high priesthood colluding with the people of Israel and the Gentiles, in order to put Christ to death, in fulfillment of the Psalms 2:1-3 prophecy.

              The returning Christ did indeed break that high priesthood into pieces with a shepherd's rod of iron by the end of AD 70. No paltry remaining elements of the high priesthood system were left after that time to offer feeble competition with Christ's already-established, superior high priesthood after the order of Melchizedek, anointed by God to serve in that role of our high priest "king" in Zion on the day of His resurrection in AD 33.

              That "woman" fleeing into the wilderness for a 3-1/2 year protection was the scattering members of the early church in Jerusalem, fleeing into the Judean wilderness from the persecution perpetrated by the high priests from Jerusalem, launched on the very day of Stephen's martyrdom. Saul / Paul was part of that "flood" that the dragon cast out of his mouth to try overcoming the fleeing "woman". Paul's astounding conversion on the road to Damascus swallowed up that "flood". So an infuriated Dragon who had lost one of his main oppressive tools against the early church then went out to make war with the faithful Jewish remnant of believers.

              And I never put the words THIRD BEAST in quotes, Darfius. I agree, those particular words THIRD BEAST are not found in scripture, (as the word TRINITY is never found in scripture either). Yet Revelation does delineate no less than THREE BEASTS found in Rev. 13 and 17. All THREE BEASTS have differing biographies, characteristics, and activities separate from one another.

              And you are assuming that I called the "armies in heaven" the Roman armies. Two different things. The "armies in heaven" were supporting what Jesus called "HIS armies" on earth (the Roman armies, in fulfillment of the Matthew 22:7 parable), in order to bring about God's avenging purposes against faithless Jerusalem in the AD 70 era. Spiritual army backup, using earthly Roman army agents as God's tool to accomplish His plans; a practice of God's since ancient times, and often repeated in history. God can make even the wrath of men to praise Him, you know.


              To SeanD:

              What the context of II Peter 3:8 clearly shows is a follow-up corollary to his statement in I Peter 4:7 that "THE END OF ALL THINGS IS *AT HAND*". Same author. Same subject of Christ's SOON appearing for that first-century generation. Same time of composition for both I Peter and II Peter in the AD 60's, as you freely admit for the book of II Peter.

              Far from II Peter 3:8 being a slam dunk that "debunks Preterism", as you claim, this text supports it to the hilt. Just as in Noah's day when the scoffers uttered scorn for Noah's message of warning right up until the day the skies vomited rain upon the earth, just so did the scoffers in the AD 60's offer scorn for the apostles' messages of imminent judgment coming upon them in the AD 66-70 era, before that generation had passed. Call this "bonkers" if you wish. But you would have to be deliberately obtuse to miss the message of imminent judgment at Christ's soon-coming return for that generation that breathes throughout the entire New Testament writings.



              For tabibito:

              The Revelation 13 events certainly have been fulfilled in history, since Revelation 1:19 says that all those prophecies given were revealing events that had either happened in the PAST ("the things which thou HAST SEEN"), events that were ONGOING for John's immediate audience ("the things that ARE"), and prophecies that were SOON to unfold for John's first-century readers ("the things that are ABOUT TO BE hereafter").

              Tabibito, if you have never encountered a "viable" match of world circumstances for those Revelation 13 events in history, that does not mean no one else has. Do you need dates that match? Events that match? Identities that match? I can supply a good number of them from historical and scriptural accounts that align with Revelation 13's descriptions perfectly. You may not recognize them as being a match, but they are there in history none-the-less.


              Last edited by 3 Resurrections; 07-20-2021, 12:38 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by 3 Resurrections View Post
                To Darfius:

                You and I are in agreement that the "woman" in Rev. 12 is NOT Mary, but ISRAEL - the faithful remnant part of ethnic Israel, that is, which had been waiting (like Simeon and Anna) in expectation for the Savior prophesied to come through the tribe of Judah's lineage.
                I also said that the child was not Jesus. He is "the overcomer", embodied most in the two witnesses but also referring to the corporate body of overcomers in the end days addressed directly by the Lord in the letters to the churches. Also called the 144,000.

                Where we do not agree is in scripture's definition of "the kings of the earth" (the former high priests of the land of Israel), which was something totally different from "the kings of the whole habitable world". Revelation 16:14 makes this particular distinction between these two sets of "kings", with both sets of "kings" being deceived by Satan at that time.

                Those "kings of the earth" / high priest rulers in Israel were indeed the ones Psalms 2 spoke of. In Acts 3:24-28, the church freely acknowledged this connection of the "kings of the earth" and the "rulers" of the people as the high priesthood colluding with the people of Israel and the Gentiles, in order to put Christ to death, in fulfillment of the Psalms 2:1-3 prophecy.

                The returning Christ did indeed break that high priesthood into pieces with a shepherd's rod of iron by the end of AD 70. No paltry remaining elements of the high priesthood system were left after that time to offer feeble competition with Christ's already-established, superior high priesthood after the order of Melchizedek, anointed by God to serve in that role of our high priest "king" in Zion on the day of His resurrection in AD 33.
                Can you cite a passage in Scripture where the high priests are explicitly referred to as "king"? That is, without begging the question, so something like, "the high priest is king in Israel".

                That "woman" fleeing into the wilderness for a 3-1/2 year protection was the scattering members of the early church in Jerusalem, fleeing into the Judean wilderness from the persecution perpetrated by the high priests from Jerusalem, launched on the very day of Stephen's martyrdom. Saul / Paul was part of that "flood" that the dragon cast out of his mouth to try overcoming the fleeing "woman". Paul's astounding conversion on the road to Damascus swallowed up that "flood". So an infuriated Dragon who had lost one of his main oppressive tools against the early church then went out to make war with the faithful Jewish remnant of believers.
                Here is more of you "simply believing scripture means what it says". I'm starting to doubt your sanity. There is no verse that says the persecution of the church lasted precisely three and a half years or refers to Paul as a flood or refers to his conversion as "the earth swallowing up the flood." Just utter nonsense.

                And I never put the words THIRD BEAST in quotes, Darfius. I agree, those particular words THIRD BEAST are not found in scripture, (as the word TRINITY is never found in scripture either). Yet Revelation does delineate no less than THREE BEASTS found in Rev. 13 and 17. All THREE BEASTS have differing biographies, characteristics, and activities separate from one another.
                The beast of Revelation is the same as the last "beast" in Daniel which is not destroyed until Christ's kingdom is established on earth. The "first" and "second" beasts in Revelation 13 are not depiciting seperate beast KINGDOMS, but rather different elements of that system (State and Church respectively).

                There is no break between chapters 17, 18 and 19 and indeed 19 begins with "after this" showing the continuity. And in Revelation 19 we get this:

                Scripture Verse: Revelation 19

                20 But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur.

                © Copyright Original Source



                This proves that it is the same beast in Revelation 13, 17 and 19, despite your absurd claims to the contrary.

                And you are assuming that I called the "armies in heaven" the Roman armies. Two different things. The "armies in heaven" were supporting what Jesus called "HIS armies" on earth (the Roman armies, in fulfillment of the Matthew 22:7 parable), in order to bring about God's avenging purposes against faithless Jerusalem in the AD 70 era. Spiritual army backup, using earthly Roman army agents as God's tool to accomplish His plans; a practice of God's since ancient times, and often repeated in history. God can make even the wrath of men to praise Him, you know.
                This is sophistry and equivocation. No "armies on earth" are mentioned, in fact, it specifically SAYS "the armies of heaven" (not "in" as you falsely claim) who explicitly follow the Lord Jesus OUT of heaven onto earth. It is an absolute joke at this point for you to claim you "merely believe scripture means what it says."

                Comment


                • #23
                  Hi again Darfius,

                  Christ most definitely is "thy holy child Jesus" that was caught up to His Father's throne at His ascension. If I'm reading your statements correctly, Christ is not the 144,000. The 144,000 were said to stand *WITH* THE LAMB on Mount Zion - meaning they could not be one and the same as the Lamb Himself. I agree that Christ IS called the First-fruits, as well as the 144,000 First-fruits having that title, but that just means they shared together in being raised from the dead at the same time at the First Resurrection in AD 33 (the Matthew 27 saints raised along with Christ).

                  Neither is Christ the embodiment of the 2 witnesses, because those 2 witnesses were left unburied, lying in the streets of Jerusalem for 3 AND A HALF days. As you very well know, Christ was entombed for an exact 3 days and 3 nights in a new, hewn-rock sepulchre, wrapped in linen burial cloth.

                  You asked for verses identifying "kings of the earth" as being high priests. I just gave you the set of verses in Psalms 2 that refer to the high priests in Jerusalem as the "kings of the earth" and "rulers"; verses interpreted for us by the believers in Acts 4:24-29. Annas and Caiphas and all the kindred of the high priests were threatening the disciples, telling them not to speak in Christ's name. The believers recognized those very threats as coming from the "kings of the earth" prophesied in Psalms 2. These "kings of the earth" and "rulers" of the people had conspired against God's anointed "king" Jesus, whom God would set upon His holy hill of Zion as our high priest representative in spite of their conspiring. Can you not compare scripture with scripture and figure this out, Darfius?

                  If that's too much work for you, try Matthew 17:25, where Jesus refers to the "kings of the earth" and their sons who were exempt from paying the yearly Temple Tax; a half-shekel that the rest of Israel's adult men over 20 were obliged to pay for the Temple maintenance. Don't you remember Exodus 30:12-16 when the half-shekel payment was set up for every adult male that was numbered in Israel? The priesthood was exempt from payment of this yearly half-shekel, because God forbad the Levites being numbered (Numbers 1:47-49). The Levites were the ones benefitting from the half-shekel payment - not the ones paying it.

                  You also said that there are no verses that speak of a 3-1/2 year persecution period. Yes, there are, but you have to be able to recognize the dates for Daniel's last, 70th week of the intact 70-week prophecy correctly to see this. That particular 3-1/2-year period of persecution for the early church was the last 3-1/2 years of the 70th week. It lasted from the day of Stephen's martyrdom until Acts 9:31. Saul / Paul played a major part in this, "being exceedingly mad against them", as Paul described his own virulent hatred of the believers at the beginning.

                  That 3-1/2 year persecution episode that Saul launched against the church with the aid and support of the high priests did have a concluding point, as Acts 9:31 indicates. "THEN had the churches REST throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied." Just when did that point of rest referred to as "THEN" occur on the calendar? It was just after Paul had come to Jerusalem in AD 37 and received the Temple vision with God commissioning Paul to go far hence to the Gentiles. God gave the early church a brief period in history after AD 37 to "catch its breath", so to speak, before the next major persecution in Asia erupted in AD 57, just after the Ephesian riot. For that next persecution period of the churches in Asia, Paul said it was severe enough that "we despaired, even of life".

                  Here is one place we agree, Darfius. We both recognize that Revelation 13's Sea Beast is the last, "dreadful and terrible" Beast of Daniel 7:7. We also agree that the "First" and "Second" Beasts of Rev. 13 would represent a governmental and religious aspect respectively. But they are not two parts of the same kingdom. The 666-year-old Sea Beast was most definitely in its last Roman phase of existence as John was writing, and the Beast from the Land was most definitely Judean, and connected with the religious leadership of Israel (with its two horns being the Sadducee and Pharisee power structure of the Sanhedrin).

                  I have already said that I agree that the second (Rev. 13) Land Beast and the (Rev. 17) Scarlet Beast were both thrown together alive into the Lake of Fire. But the Roman phase of the first Rev. 13 Sea Beast was not the one thrown in with them. Rather, it was on the outside of Jerusalem, being used as "HIS armies" to "burn up their city", in fulfillment of the Matthew 22:7 parable.

                  The "armies in heaven" were actually seen in the skies and recorded as being seen by the high priest Matthias' son, (Josephus), and the historian Tacitus. Not the first time this type of vision happened either, as the prophet Elisha and his servant saw them, and the Maccabean period also experienced this. To quote Josephus, even Titus gave credit for conquering Jerusalem to the God who had given the victory over the city into his hands, against the odds. It is not "sophistry and equivocation" to note that God uses human agencies on earth and empowers them with heavenly forces to accomplish His purposes. The Old Testament is replete with examples of this.
                  Last edited by 3 Resurrections; 07-20-2021, 05:00 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by 3 Resurrections View Post
                    Hi again Darfius,

                    Christ most definitely is "thy holy child Jesus" that was caught up to His Father's throne at His ascension. If I'm reading your statements correctly, Christ is not the 144,000. The 144,000 were said to stand *WITH* THE LAMB on Mount Zion - meaning they could not be one and the same as the Lamb Himself. I agree that Christ IS called the First-fruits, as well as the 144,000 First-fruits having that title, but that just means they shared together in being raised from the dead at the same time at the First Resurrection in AD 33 (the Matthew 27 saints raised along with Christ).

                    Neither is Christ the embodiment of the 2 witnesses, because those 2 witnesses were left unburied, lying in the streets of Jerusalem for 3 AND A HALF days. As you very well know, Christ was entombed for an exact 3 days and 3 nights in a new, hewn-rock sepulchre, wrapped in linen burial cloth.
                    The overcomer presented in Revelation 12 is not Jesus Christ. The similarities between this "child" and Jesus are intentional to display THAT they have overcome by "the blood of the Lamb" (Rev 12:11, some versions say 'triumphed", but the Greek is nikao which is translated overcome elsewhere and the KJV says overcome).

                    Revelation as a whole is Hebrew chiasm with Revelation 10-13 representing the central "breaking point" that is pointed forwards to in Rev 1-9 and backwards to in Rev 14-22. 10-13 represent an "interlude" introducing the primary characters, their missions and the "stakes", with everything else in Revelation elucidating upon these.

                    Scripture Verse: Deuteronomy 13

                    1 If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the Lord your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. That prophet or dreamer tried to turn you from the way the Lord your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.

                    © Copyright Original Source



                    Again, tribulation means testing. If you do not understand this, you do not understand Revelation. The "Jewish high priesthood" was not being tested in the first century. Christians will be tested when the ultimate Deuteronomy false prophet appears to convince them to worship "other gods", namely the beast. Since God does not leave His servants as orphans, two "overcomers" in the form of the two witnesses, who we learn in Zechariah 4 are the "two olives branches" who are "anointed to serve the Lord of all the earth" will lead those who pass the test and overcome to become like their King Jesus Christ against the false witness of the false prophet, the beast system and the head of said system, the beast. Two Jewish priests were not the two witnesses, nor could they have been. It ignores the context of the Bible.

                    You asked for verses identifying "kings of the earth" as being high priests. I just gave you the set of verses in Psalms 2 that refer to the high priests in Jerusalem as the "kings of the earth" and "rulers"; verses interpreted for us by the believers in Acts 4:24-29. Annas and Caiphas and all the kindred of the high priests were threatening the disciples, telling them not to speak in Christ's name. The believers recognized those very threats as coming from the "kings of the earth" prophesied in Psalms 2. These "kings of the earth" and "rulers" of the people had conspired against God's anointed "king" Jesus, whom God would set upon His holy hill of Zion as our high priest representative in spite of their conspiring. Can you not compare scripture with scripture and figure this out, Darfius?
                    The verses you cite mention Pilate alongside the priests, which you conveniently omit mentioning. Was Pilate a Jewish priest? If not, then Jewish priests were only a subset of the "kings of the earth" group Pilate was also a member of, and certainly Jewish priests are not interchangeable with "kings of the earth".

                    If that's too much work for you, try Matthew 17:25, where Jesus refers to the "kings of the earth" and their sons who were exempt from paying the yearly Temple Tax; a half-shekel that the rest of Israel's adult men over 20 were obliged to pay for the Temple maintenance. Don't you remember Exodus 30:12-16 when the half-shekel payment was set up for every adult male that was numbered in Israel? The priesthood was exempt from payment of this yearly half-shekel, because God forbad the Levites being numbered (Numbers 1:47-49). The Levites were the ones benefitting from the half-shekel payment - not the ones paying it.
                    This does not show that "kings of the earth" refers exclusively to Jewish priests. Jesus also spoke of "rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's" with regard to taxes.

                    Here is one place we agree, Darfius. We both recognize that Revelation 13's Sea Beast is the last, "dreadful and terrible" Beast of Daniel 7:7. We also agree that the "First" and "Second" Beasts of Rev. 13 would represent a governmental and religious aspect respectively. But they are not two parts of the same kingdom. The 666-year-old Sea Beast was most definitely in its last Roman phase of existence as John was writing, and the Beast from the Land was most definitely Judean, and connected with the religious leadership of Israel (with its two horns being the Sadducee and Pharisee power structure of the Sanhedrin).

                    I have already said that I agree that the second (Rev. 13) Land Beast and the (Rev. 17) Scarlet Beast were both thrown together alive into the Lake of Fire. But the Roman phase of the first Rev. 13 Sea Beast was not the one thrown in with them. Rather, it was on the outside of Jerusalem, being used as "HIS armies" to "burn up their city", in fulfillment of the Matthew 22:7 parable.
                    Rev 19 refers to those who had "taken the mark of the beast", which shows it is the "Rev 13 sea beast" (using your vernacular).

                    The "armies in heaven" were actually seen in the skies and recorded as being seen by the high priest Matthias' son, (Josephus), and the historian Tacitus. Not the first time this type of vision happened either, as the prophet Elisha and his servant saw them, and the Maccabean period also experienced this. To quote Josephus, even Titus gave credit for conquering Jerusalem to the God who had given the victory over the city into his hands, against the odds. It is not "sophistry and equivocation" to note that God uses human agencies on earth and empowers them with heavenly forces to accomplish His purposes. The Old Testament is replete with examples of this.
                    This does not represent a plain reading of the text, which depicts the armies OF heaven coming TO earth behind the Lord Jesus IN THE FLESH. Your insistence about the time texts being taken "literally" are meaningless with mental acrobatics like this.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Darfius, it is not Jewish priests that are called "kings of the earth". It is specifically the HIGH PRIESTS that are referred to by that title. Only the HIGH PRIEST wore a gold crown with the engraving "Holiness to the Lord" on it.

                      You are still missing the context of those who were threatening the disciples in Acts 4. It was undeniably the high priests Annas and Caiphas and all their kindred who were doing the threatening. Neither Pilate nor Herod were the "kings of the earth" who originated the plot against Christ. Pilate (as one of the heathen GENTILES mentioned in Ps. 2) only reluctantly conceded to the high priests' desires to put Christ to death, but he was not one of the "kings of the earth" that wanted to "cast away His cords from us" as the high priests desired to get rid of Christ's influence among the people. The believers understood the high priests' threats against Christ and His church to be the fulfillment of the "kings of the earth" and the "rulers" of the people "taking counsel together against the Lord and against His anointed" in Psalms 2:1-3. Didn't Paul when on trial in Acts 23:5 before the high priest Ananias specifically call the high priest the "RULER of thy people" when he quoted from OT law?

                      And you are missing the peculiar significance of the particular coin required for tribute in Matthew 17:24-27. It was the Tyrian half-shekel - a coin with pagan abominable inscriptions lauding the Baal-worshipping city of Tyre as "holy", and with the demi-god image of Herakles (Hercules) on it, which was strictly forbidden under Mosaic law. Yet Jerusalem's high priesthood "kings of the earth" had been REQUIRING the use of this Tyrian shekel coin to pay the yearly Temple Tax, as well as requiring it for all purchases and sales of sacrificial animals for Temple worship. No buying or selling in the Temple without using the Tyrian shekel. Sound familiar? It was the Second Beast from the Land in Rev. 13 (the religious leadership in Israel) which was having their own people make an image to the Sea Beast. This was a Jerusalem-minted version of the Tyrian shekel, which gave homage to the Rev. 13 Sea Beast in the process (because these new Jerusalem-minted coins had the initials "KP" struck on the reverse side, meaning "power of the Romans" - showing that Rome's authority was sanctioning their use).

                      Ever since 19 BC, the high priesthood in Israel had made an arrangement with the Romans that they would be allowed the unique privilege of minting their own currency in Jerusalem for use in the Temple, just as long as they continued to strike those coins with the same identical pagan images and inscriptions that the mint at Tyre had been using. This was against God's expressed hatred in the OT for this type of image, but in spite of that, the high priesthood forced their own people to use it anyway - everyone from the high to the low - and raked in a steady stream of profits from every time foreign currency was exchanged for the required Tyrian shekel. It wasn't the first Rev. 13 Sea Beast which required this "mark of the Beast"; it was the second Rev. 13 Land Beast (Israel's religious leadership) which required the use of that mark from THEIR OWN PEOPLE, and in the process gave homage to the Rev. 13 Roman phase of the Sea Beast.

                      Remember the money-changers? Jesus justifiably used a whip on them for this abominable practice of making profits off this oppression of the people. These Tyrian shekel and half-shekel coins gave tacit homage to the Roman phase of the Sea Beast, every time this "mark of the Beast" was exchanged and given in the right hand or on the forehead (since a set of these Tyrian shekel coins were also used at that time in a woman's headdress to denote her marital status - such as Christ's parable of the woman who lost one of her ten coins).

                      Though they expected everyone else to comply, the high priesthood and its sons were exempt from paying the yearly Temple tax, using that Tyrian shekel. As the True Son of His Father's house - the Temple - Christ, (who would eventually become our high priest), had every right to be exempt from paying the yearly Temple Tax. This was the very reason Christ asked Peter that question in Matthew 17:25 - "Of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? Of their own children or of others?" He was referring to the high priests as the "kings of the earth" in that context, requiring the Tyrian half-shekel tribute from everyone but their own children.

                      And I am not using "mental acrobatics" to refute the Lord Jesus coming in the flesh at His return. I believe He literally did that very thing in His AD 70 BODILY return to the Mount of Olives, as Zechariah 14 predicted would happen after Jerusalem's siege.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        This is one reason Paul did not permit women to instruct or have authority over men. You care more about the perceived glory your pet theory brings you than the truth which alone can save you or anyone else.

                        Scripture Verse: 2 Chronicles 9

                        22 King Solomon was greater in riches and wisdom than all the other kings of the earth. 23 All the kings of the earth sought audience with Solomon to hear the wisdom God had put in his heart. 24 Year after year, everyone who came brought a gift—articles of silver and gold, and robes, weapons and spices, and horses and mules.

                        © Copyright Original Source



                        Not the Jewish high priest.

                        And the Bible is consistent.

                        Priests are only ever called "princes":

                        Scripture Verse: 1 Chronicles 24:5

                        Thus were they divided by lot, one sort with another; for there were princes of the sanctuary, and princes of God, both of the sons of Eleazar, and of the sons of Ithamar.

                        © Copyright Original Source



                        Scripture Verse: Isaiah 43:28

                        Therefore I will profane the princes of the sanctuary, and deliver Jacob to utter destruction and Israel to reviling.

                        © Copyright Original Source



                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Darfius, I trust I have not given the impression that I have any glory to gain by the different views I present, because that has never been my goal. Truth is a gender-free possession that God has deigned to make available to both of us. I'm sorry you feel as if your toes are being stepped on by my countering some of your views openly and honestly. For myself, I believe Christ has made the ground at the foot of the cross level when it comes to men and women exchanging what they believe to be truth from scripture. Paul certainly had no problem with praising women who were laboring with him in the ministry. He only corrected those women in the Ephesian church who were trying to *oppressively* lord it over their brethren by teaching them with overbearing "authentein". Christ was equally opposed to the men of His disciples exercising strict authority over one another. "It shall NOT be so among you", He said.

                          If you were at my house, Darfius, I would be serving you snacks and coffee as we sat at my kitchen table with a Bible between us and my cats at our feet, talking over the scriptures we both love and the Savior who entrusted them to us. We may disagree strongly on points, but at the end of the day, you are my brother that Christ died for, and I will be privileged to share eternity in heaven one day with you.

                          As for the title of "prince" for the Jewish priests, I AGREE; that is the title given to them. But it was the high priest "king" who was OVER the "princes", who were the regular category of priests under their high priest "king".

                          Do you remember Zechariah 5 & 6, when Joshua the high priest was being cleansed and clothed in high priestly garments with a crown? Zechariah was told by God to "...take silver and gold, and make CROWNS, and set them upon the head of Joshua the son of Josedech, the HIGH PRIEST; and speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord; Even he shall build the temple of the Lord; and he shall bear the glory, and SHALL SIT AND RULE UPON HIS THRONE; and he shall be a PRIEST UPON HIS THRONE; and the counsel of peace shall be between them both."

                          This was Joshua the high priest being given crowns and a throne, upon which he would rule. If that isn't the picture of a high priest being described as a "king", I don't know what is.

                          The only reason I am hashing out this seemingly trivial point is that every prophecy in Revelation which involves the "kings of the earth" as high priests would absolutely have to take place while there were still high priests in Israel around to perform those actions. Meaning they would be events taking place before AD 70 erased for all time the "weak and beggarly elements" of the priesthood system of the physical Temple.
                          Last edited by 3 Resurrections; 07-21-2021, 12:37 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by 3 Resurrections View Post




                            To SeanD:

                            What the context of II Peter 3:8 clearly shows is a follow-up corollary to his statement in I Peter 4:7 that "THE END OF ALL THINGS IS *AT HAND*". Same author. Same subject of Christ's SOON appearing for that first-century generation. Same time of composition for both I Peter and II Peter in the AD 60's, as you freely admit for the book of II Peter.

                            Far from II Peter 3:8 being a slam dunk that "debunks Preterism", as you claim, this text supports it to the hilt. Just as in Noah's day when the scoffers uttered scorn for Noah's message of warning right up until the day the skies vomited rain upon the earth, just so did the scoffers in the AD 60's offer scorn for the apostles' messages of imminent judgment coming upon them in the AD 66-70 era, before that generation had passed. Call this "bonkers" if you wish. But you would have to be deliberately obtuse to miss the message of imminent judgment at Christ's soon-coming return for that generation that breathes throughout the entire New Testament writings.
                            It is bonkers to interpret parousia as the coming judgement on Jerusalem. To argue that's what parousia meant, IMO, is bordering on heresy.

                            But that aside, when we look at the context of Peter it's clear he wasn't talking about 70 AD. In fact, he makes pretty clear that the "scoffers" weren't even Jewish. He says they were ignorant about the first judgement -- the flood of Noah -- so they were likely Gentiles that didn't believe in the Genesis story. We also know that his use of the Greek word ge in 2 Peter 3:5 was a reference to the creation of the entire world, so he was talking about worldwide judgement, not a judgement on Jerusalem.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Darfius View Post
                              Scripture Verse: Revelation 19

                              19 Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to wage war against the rider on the horse and his army. 20 But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. 21 The rest were killed with the sword coming out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.

                              © Copyright Original Source



                              Questions for preterists: 1. Is this the 2nd Coming? 2. Who is the beast?
                              1. As in, Matthew 24 and parallels? Yes.
                              2. Gematria proves fairly conclusively that the beast is Nero (confirmed by the variant number of the beast 616, which works for Nero in Latin).

                              The passage appears to allude to Nero's failed persecution of the church.
                              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                              sigpic
                              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by 3 Resurrections View Post
                                Darfius, I trust I have not given the impression that I have any glory to gain by the different views I present, because that has never been my goal. Truth is a gender-free possession that God has deigned to make available to both of us. I'm sorry you feel as if your toes are being stepped on by my countering some of your views openly and honestly. For myself, I believe Christ has made the ground at the foot of the cross level when it comes to men and women exchanging what they believe to be truth from scripture. Paul certainly had no problem with praising women who were laboring with him in the ministry. He only corrected those women in the Ephesian church who were trying to *oppressively* lord it over their brethren by teaching them with overbearing "authentein". Christ was equally opposed to the men of His disciples exercising strict authority over one another. "It shall NOT be so among you", He said.
                                The heart is deceitful above all things, so said Jeremiah. We often don't know or understand our own motives, which reach far deeper into our beings than what we consciously call "ourselves". God alone can show us the secrets of our own hearts and Christ alone can help us turn the darkness in them to light. Of course truth is available to all, but woman was made for man and man's authority was implicit in creation even before the fall. While men and women are equally worthy of God's love, they are not equal in the roles they were created to enact, which roles reflect the loving authority of the Father and the loving submission of the Son.

                                To be clear, I am not at all denigrating your intelligence, which is both obvious and worthy of respect. But it is clear to me that you share the spiritual presumption common to most Western women these days and that undoubtedly plays a role in your refusal to suffer correction and in your zeal to sway others to your way of thinking. It's not clear what you mean by "strict" authority, but the Lord Himself assigned certain men to rule over His assembly and both the Old and New Testament are clear about the authority of a husband or father over a woman and the authority of women over children. God is a God of order and that authority is meant to establish, reflect and uphold that order.

                                I am not saying this to attempt to circumvent correcting you on the facts, but I've never believed that truth was a mere matter of facts. The condition of our hearts is also always relevant, whether or not we have "eyes to see" and "ears to hear". Pride can and does blind and deafen.

                                If you were at my house, Darfius, I would be serving you snacks and coffee as we sat at my kitchen table with a Bible between us and my cats at our feet, talking over the scriptures we both love and the Savior who entrusted them to us. We may disagree strongly on points, but at the end of the day, you are my brother that Christ died for, and I will be privileged to share eternity in heaven one day with you.
                                That honestly sounds lovely and of course I could afford to be less confrontational on the issue in such a private forum. And I certainly hope and pray that we will share eternity.

                                As for the title of "prince" for the Jewish priests, I AGREE; that is the title given to them. But it was the high priest "king" who was OVER the "princes", who were the regular category of priests under their high priest "king".

                                Do you remember Zechariah 5 & 6, when Joshua the high priest was being cleansed and clothed in high priestly garments with a crown? Zechariah was told by God to "...take silver and gold, and make CROWNS, and set them upon the head of Joshua the son of Josedech, the HIGH PRIEST; and speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord; Even he shall build the temple of the Lord; and he shall bear the glory, and SHALL SIT AND RULE UPON HIS THRONE; and he shall be a PRIEST UPON HIS THRONE; and the counsel of peace shall be between them both."

                                This was Joshua the high priest being given crowns and a throne, upon which he would rule. If that isn't the picture of a high priest being described as a "king", I don't know what is.

                                The only reason I am hashing out this seemingly trivial point is that every prophecy in Revelation which involves the "kings of the earth" as high priests would absolutely have to take place while there were still high priests in Israel around to perform those actions. Meaning they would be events taking place before AD 70 erased for all time the "weak and beggarly elements" of the priesthood system of the physical Temple.
                                The high priest was never referred to as king except by your begged question. In fact, the distinction between the king, priest and prophet were made explicit in the OT. Joshua was symbolic of Christ, who being "in the order of Melchizedek" combined the hitherto separate offices of king and priest.

                                Ezekiel details how the priesthood system of the physical Temple will be restored in the days preceding the Millennial reign. The Temple which will be desecrated by the "man of sin" (Antichrist). Who was that man in your philosophy?

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X