Originally posted by Sparko
View Post
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
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
Life after the eclipse (sign of Jonah)
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Obsidian View PostWhat happens on earth/sea isn't a sign. What happens on earth/sea is the fulfillment of what the sign predicted. You don't seem very good at this.
The disciples asked for signs of the times, and Jesus gave them. I'm very good at reading, unlike you.
Comment
-
-
-
Originally posted by Obsidian View PostThe answer to that question is here:
Luke 21:20
And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
The sea roaring isn't a sign. When has the sea ever not roared?
Comment
-
Originally posted by DarfiusJerusalem will be compassed with armies in the end days, too. Welcome to the glory of double fulfillment.
Luke 21:24
And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
You're the one whose 'interpretation' turns the entire chapter into nonsense. The chronology of the chapter makes it quite clear that the sea roaring occurs after the temple has already been destroyed, so it couldn't possibly be a sign of the coming temple destruction. By denying the chronology of the chapter where some of the events happen before the destruction of Jerusalem and some of the events happen after, you are actually making the exact same mistake as the "preterists" whom you hate so much.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Obsidian View PostWill they use swords?
Luke 21:24
And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
You're the one whose 'interpretation' turns the entire chapter into nonsense. The chronology of the chapter makes it quite clear that the sea roaring occurs after the temple has already been destroyed, so it couldn't possibly be a sign of the coming temple destruction. By denying the chronology of the chapter where some of the events happen before the destruction of Jerusalem and some of the events happen after, you are actually making the exact same mistake as the "preterists" whom you hate so much.
First you said the sea roaring wasn't a sign and now you're attempting to dictate when it happens. You're making it up as you go along and you had the poor fortune of encountering someone who knows both what they're talking about and how to expose such BS.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Darfius View PostBunkers won't help anyone.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Darfius View PostI'm curious how you make that leap in logic, outside of the Scripture you provided where you jump between literal and symbolic interpretations. Besides, Jesus said "signs", not sign. He also mentioned earthquakes, famines and "the seas roaring." Did the Mediterranean Sea act real cray cray, too?
Comment
-
Originally posted by DarfiusFirst you said the sea roaring wasn't a sign and now you're attempting to dictate when it happens.
1. Wars, famines, persecution, etc.
2. Jerusalem surrounded by armies
3. Destruction of Jerusalem
4. Powers of the heavens shaken
5. People on earth/sea afraid about what's coming next (the sea roaring)
And then Matthew says that the next step is sending out angels with trumpets.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Obsidian View PostYour quote from Hippolytus said effectively nothing.
BTW, speaking of different opinions, I think William Craig's comments on N.T Wright are very interesting.
On N.T. Wright's View of the Second Coming of Christ, Youtube.
https://youtu.be/NjkjjSp27TY
Comment
-
@Eschaton
It isn't true that the return of Christ is necessarily associated with the resurrection of the dead. Christ is said to return in Revelation 2-3, and again in Revelation 6 (arguably the same time). The resurrection of the dead isn't mentioned until Revelation 20 -- which even if you take the text completely literally, is at LEAST 3.5 calendar YEARS later (1003.5 if you're a postmillennialist).
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment