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

Generation Y and Z Confirms Futurism is true

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

  • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    What the heck are you talking about? Does your hand look like the one on the left? Are you a chimp or something? My hand looks like the one on the right. I can draw a "turkey" just fine, I have no idea what you are going on about with the "L" - my thumb angles a bit upwards when I try it. I can put my palm on a table and angle my arm so that it is perpendicular to the surface. On the other hand (pun) if I put my hand on the table palm upward, I have a harder time keeping it flat on the table and angling my arm perpendicular. And my second toe is about the same length as my big toe and the rest are smaller and angle down. Just like they always did.

    Are you trolling or completely insane? People have different flexibility in their joints. And some people have different length second toes. My sister's 2nd toe is longer than her big toe. Mine is about the same, and others have shorter than their big toe.

    I suppose your big toe sticks out of the side of your foot like a chimps, right?
    Poor guy needs some serious help. Paranoid schizophrenia?
    If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
      Poor guy needs some serious help. Paranoid schizophrenia?
      I can't tell if he is insane or trolling. I am hoping the latter but I suspect the former.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        I can't tell if he is insane or trolling. I am hoping the latter but I suspect the former.
        Agreed. Either way, he needs to be prayed for, right?
        If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Darfius View Post
          Hold your hand up about a foot from your face, palm outward. Look at your thumb. It's now lower down on your hand. If you tried to paint a turkey hand now, the turkey would have a broken neck. Your index finger and thumb can now make a complete 'L' with no trouble and very little webbing. Your wrist also now bends forward much easier than it does backwards. Put your hand facedown on a table and try to put your arm perpendicular to your flat hand...no can do. Now try with the back of your wrist on the table and try bending it forward...easier. Also, our toes now angle downward from the big toe, pretty universally. Overall, they seem to have given us a rather more simian appearance.

          [ATTACH=CONFIG]38030[/ATTACH]
          I'm confused. What does this have to do with anything?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
            I'm confused. What does this have to do with anything?
            It shows that Darfius should probably change his name to Daffy.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
              The idea that Christianity on earth would be extinguished is refuted by Matthew 16:18, when Jesus said "On this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
              Don't know why I missed this, but I thought I'd address this and try and get this thread back on track a bit.

              You can argue that there is a temporary (or temporal) prevailing, and a permanent (or eternal) prevailing, and that Jesus was referring to the latter. You can easily come to this conclusion by comparing it with other scripture that seems to blatantly contradict the former.

              Jesus himself said that we'd experience persecution, even death in some cases. All the apostles were killed (save John who was kept in exile), and most of them in terrible ways. Isn't that hell prevailing? The apostles also talked about the church going through tribulations, persecution, falling away, etc. Rev talks about the Beast "overcoming" the saints. Isn't that prevailing? What did Jesus mean by "...will I find faith in the earth" since such a question is completely antithetical to "hell will not prevail."

              Even hell prevailed against Jesus himself when he was Messiah crucified (temporary), until he was resurrected (permanent), which is a clear spiritual sign of what is to come for us, but in a future event, both in this age ("a servant is not above his master"), and the next.

              So the logical conclusion is that, temporarily speaking, hell will prevail, until the ultimate victory is won in eternity (or as furturists believe, when Christ returns and rules and reigns here on earth and we're all resurrected), and that Jesus was referring to the ultimate (eternal) victory in the end.
              Last edited by seanD; 07-03-2019, 05:42 PM.
              "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

              Comment


              • Originally posted by seanD View Post
                Don't know why I missed this, but I thought I'd address this and try and get this thread back on track a bit.

                You can argue that there is a temporary (or temporal) prevailing, and a permanent (or eternal) prevailing, and that Jesus was referring to the latter. You can easily come to this conclusion by comparing it with other scripture that seems to blatantly contradict the former.

                Jesus himself said that we'd experience persecution, even death in some cases. All the apostles were killed (save John who was kept in exile), and most of them in terrible ways. Isn't that hell prevailing? The apostles also talked about the church going through tribulations, persecution, falling away, etc. Rev talks about the Beast "overcoming" the saints. Isn't that prevailing? What did Jesus mean by "...will I find faith in the earth" since such a question is completely antithetical to "hell will not prevail."

                Even hell prevailed against Jesus himself when he was Messiah crucified (temporary), until he was resurrected (permanent), which is a clear spiritual sign of what is to come for us, but in a future event, both in this age ("a servant is not above his master"), and the next.

                So the logical conclusion is that, temporarily speaking, hell will prevail, until the ultimate victory is won in eternity (or as furturists believe, when Christ returns and rules and reigns here on earth and we're all resurrected), and that Jesus was referring to the ultimate (eternal) victory in the end.
                This explanation has some plausibility and I'll probably need to mull over it at work tonight. I suspect it depends on what is meant by "hell prevailing". It's not hard to establish that evil forces run the world, but how I have understood it to mean is that at least some remnant will remain at all times.

                If we were to adopt your view, it would be problematic for the Catholic view of the passage (of an unbroken papal succession beginning with Peter), but I would argue that view already has problems considering how wicked some Popes have been (one pope in particular worshipped Satan and sodomized boys while serving as Pope).

                I don't think Luke 18:8 (will I find faith in the earth) is a strong argument here, at least under a normal futurist paradigm, because Revelation 7:9 mentions the great multitude of believers from every nation, and Luke 18:8 can be understood as a rhetorical question rather than an actual prediction that there will be few believers.
                "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                Comment


                • Originally posted by seanD View Post
                  Don't know why I missed this, but I thought I'd address this and try and get this thread back on track a bit.

                  You can argue that there is a temporary (or temporal) prevailing, and a permanent (or eternal) prevailing, and that Jesus was referring to the latter. You can easily come to this conclusion by comparing it with other scripture that seems to blatantly contradict the former.

                  Jesus himself said that we'd experience persecution, even death in some cases. All the apostles were killed (save John who was kept in exile), and most of them in terrible ways. Isn't that hell prevailing? The apostles also talked about the church going through tribulations, persecution, falling away, etc.
                  None of which is the gates of hell (or more accurately, hades) "prevailing" because the church wasn't wiped out, even if particular members of it were killed.

                  Rev talks about the Beast "overcoming" the saints. Isn't that prevailing?
                  This refers to the beast overcoming two particular saints (and, depending on one's interpretation of Revelation, may not even be two individual people).

                  What did Jesus mean by "...will I find faith in the earth" since such a question is completely antithetical to "hell will not prevail."
                  It is clearly a hypothetical/rhetorical question.

                  Even hell prevailed against Jesus himself when he was Messiah crucified (temporary), until he was resurrected (permanent), which is a clear spiritual sign of what is to come for us, but in a future event, both in this age ("a servant is not above his master"), and the next.
                  Jesus's statement in Matthew 16:18 was "upon this rock I will build my church". In other words, it wasn't built at the time he said that. The church wasn't actually "built" until after the Resurrection.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
                    None of which is the gates of hell (or more accurately, hades) "prevailing" because the church wasn't wiped out, even if particular members of it were killed.

                    This refers to the beast overcoming two particular saints (and, depending on one's interpretation of Revelation, may not even be two individual people).

                    It is clearly a hypothetical/rhetorical question.


                    Jesus's statement in Matthew 16:18 was "upon this rock I will build my church". In other words, it wasn't built at the time he said that. The church wasn't actually "built" until after the Resurrection.

                    "Saints" is in this context:

                    If any man have an ear, let him hear.
                    He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.
                    Then is proceeded by the fact that the Beast and his associates kills everyone not accepting the mark he's forcing on the whole populace. I'm not sure how from the entire context you get just two or less saints. In fact, I've never heard that interpretation before.

                    As far as Jesus being "rhetorical," you need to explain what you mean. The context was once again about persecution and the fact he would return and avenge their persecution. I don't see why it was necessary to ask that question there if it was rhetorical, unless he was perhaps using hyperbole (not rhetoric) to actually describe how awful things would be for the church during the time he would return.
                    Last edited by seanD; 07-03-2019, 07:55 PM.
                    "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                      This explanation has some plausibility and I'll probably need to mull over it at work tonight. I suspect it depends on what is meant by "hell prevailing". It's not hard to establish that evil forces run the world, but how I have understood it to mean is that at least some remnant will remain at all times.

                      If we were to adopt your view, it would be problematic for the Catholic view of the passage (of an unbroken papal succession beginning with Peter), but I would argue that view already has problems considering how wicked some Popes have been (one pope in particular worshipped Satan and sodomized boys while serving as Pope).

                      I don't think Luke 18:8 (will I find faith in the earth) is a strong argument here, at least under a normal futurist paradigm, because Revelation 7:9 mentions the great multitude of believers from every nation, and Luke 18:8 can be understood as a rhetorical question rather than an actual prediction that there will be few believers.
                      I believe Jesus was actually referring to himself as "The Rock," especially considering how God seemed to shift from Peter to Paul in early stages of the church because of Peter's shortcomings described in Galatians 2. Whether that's true or not, I don't put much stock in that Catholic tradition about Peter at all. Not only the iffy claim by a CF tradition that Peter was some kind of bishop in Rome, but the fact that the RCC has engaged in some pretty unspeakably heinous and evil things for me to even consider such a tradition as plausible.

                      As far as the multitude is concerned, they are coming out of the tribulation. Just so you know, I don't hold a pre-trib belief. I do believe the church will go through the tribulation, so this just confirms my argument that masses of Christians will lose their lives during this time. I would imagine there are a whole lot of Christians that would fall away during this time -- especially here in the west -- rather than face that circumstance. Whether it's the entire church or not is definitely debatable.
                      Last edited by seanD; 07-03-2019, 07:54 PM.
                      "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by seanD View Post
                        "Saints" is in this context:



                        Then is proceeded by the fact that the Beast and his associates kills everyone not accepting the mark he's forcing on the whole populace. I'm not sure how from the entire context you get just two or less saints. In fact, I've never heard that interpretation before.
                        Your reference was so vague that I thought you were referring to Revelation 11:7 which is about the two witnesses.

                        Now that I know you're referring to Revelation 13:9-10, I can give a more proper response. Where does it say that all saints were killed? It just says that they were going to be subjugated, no statement that every single one died. I suppose someone could try to claim Revelation 13:8's statement that "all inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast" indicates that no one would be left who doesn't, but that seems to be contradindicated by the fact immediately afterwards it qualifies the statement with "all whose names have not been written in the Lambís book of life" and subsequent passages also indicate there would still be believers (Revelation 14:12, Revelation 18:4).

                        As far as Jesus being "rhetorical," you need to explain what you mean. The context was once again about persecution and the fact he would return and avenge their persecution. I don't see why it was necessary to ask that question there if it was rhetorical, unless he was perhaps using hyperbole (not rhetoric) to actually describe how awful things would be for the church during the time he would return.
                        I said the question was rhetorical/hypothetical, as in not making an actual statement that there would be no one left. In any case, it's exactly what you said, that it was hyperbole.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
                          Your reference was so vague that I thought you were referring to Revelation 11:7 which is about the two witnesses.

                          Now that I know you're referring to Revelation 13:9-10, I can give a more proper response. Where does it say that all saints were killed? It just says that they were going to be subjugated, no statement that every single one died. I suppose someone could try to claim Revelation 13:8's statement that "all inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast" indicates that no one would be left who doesn't, but that seems to be contradindicated by the fact immediately afterwards it qualifies the statement with "all whose names have not been written in the Lambís book of life" and subsequent passages also indicate there would still be believers (Revelation 14:12, Revelation 18:4).

                          I said the question was rhetorical/hypothetical, as in not making an actual statement that there would be no one left. In any case, it's exactly what you said, that it was hyperbole.
                          I didn't say all Christians would be killed. I didn't even say that in the OP. I thought it was possible that Christianity as we know it now, would be wiped out due to a combination of persecution and falling away. That's been my argument since the beginning.
                          "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

                          Comment


                          • I'm going to have to retract part of my earlier post. I had been conflating two Popes - John XII (who was reported to have toasted the devil and pagan gods while gambling), and Julius III (reported to have had an underage male lover). The report of Julius III seems likely, but the main source for the specific John XII came from an anti-Catholic interlocutor. In the absence of hard evidence, I'm going to have to retract that claim. It's still undisputed that John XII was immoral - even the Catholic Encyclopedia describes "a coarse, immoral man, whose life was such that the Lateran was spoken of as a brothel", but I cannot defend the specific claim I made about Satanism.
                            "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                              I'm going to have to retract part of my earlier post. I had been conflating two Popes - John XII (who was reported to have toasted the devil and pagan gods while gambling), and Julius III (reported to have had an underage male lover). The report of Julius III seems likely, but the main source for the specific John XII came from an anti-Catholic interlocutor. In the absence of hard evidence, I'm going to have to retract that claim. It's still undisputed that John XII was immoral - even the Catholic Encyclopedia describes "a coarse, immoral man, whose life was such that the Lateran was spoken of as a brothel", but I cannot defend the specific claim I made about Satanism.
                              It's the rampant pedophilia and systemic cover-up that does it for me. And it wasn't just pedophilia, which is bad enough, but the creepy religious symbolism behind many of the instances. To me that clearly reeks of the demonic.
                              "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

                              Comment


                              • Just one example to reflect the OP:

                                I just graduated from St. Olaf College after receiving an education I didnít expect. Thatís because as a conservative at my small, Minnesota-based liberal arts institution, Iíve spent the last four years defending myself against personal and political attacks from professors and peers alike.

                                The most recent example came in late April as the St. Olaf College Republicans hosted scholar Heather Mac Donald for a talk on her new book, ďThe Diversity Delusion: How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine Our Culture.Ē

                                As chair of the group, I fielded many angry emails, including this from a theater professor: ďThis speaker is dangerous. Itís not about a difference in idealogical [sic] perspectives. This rhetoric is dangerous and puts my Black body in danger. This is antithetical to the St. Olaf mission statement. Iím not okay with thisÖ and you all shouldnít be either.Ē Several more professors emailed similar sentiments.

                                source
                                I argue that this will intensify exponentially in 10-20 years, but this stuff is happening now. There's no logical reason to think this will just pass as a cultural fad. And, apparently from the article, this is the result of a political perspective. Imagine what would happen to a Christian arguing against aberrant behavior like homosexuality, and that we need repentance for such sins, that Christ is returning to conquer sinners. This person would have gotten physically attacked, I'm sure.
                                Last edited by seanD; 07-06-2019, 12:35 PM.
                                "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by eschaton, 10-23-2020, 06:17 PM
                                0 responses
                                11 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post eschaton  
                                Started by eschaton, 10-19-2020, 02:05 PM
                                0 responses
                                24 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post eschaton  
                                Started by KingsGambit, 07-29-2018, 07:36 PM
                                72 responses
                                13,079 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post eschaton  
                                Started by Darfius, 07-26-2015, 12:35 AM
                                29 responses
                                17,462 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post eschaton  
                                Started by hamster, 07-05-2015, 01:07 PM
                                48 responses
                                31,105 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Dave L
                                by Dave L
                                 
                                Working...
                                X