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

What's a good source for learning eschatology?

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

  • Originally posted by Faber View Post




    You have to assume John had his vision and wrote it down prior to 70 AD. That's a rather tall order, unless you're arguing historicism? And even then, I don't don't understand why the image is described so cryptically in either case. John would have no problem describing Roman armies in his time.
    "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

      That doesn't answer the question. Why does God believe we can accurately interpret the crazy images in Rev 9 but not Rev 13? There's an inconsistency problem with your exegesis, as there is inconsistency in most of your arguments -- i.e. the devil is chained so as not to deceive believers, but believers must also proactively prevent themselves from being deceived by a chained devil.
      I think the reason you believe there is inconsistency is that you see the millennium as an earthly time period. I see it as a spiritual reality. In Jesus, there is no deception. In the world there is tribulation. That is consistent with Matthew 13 and the growing seasons. The idea of an earthly social or political kingdom is not. That's what I understand from the scriptures I've given. Where would you put a 1000 year earthly kingdom in the parable of the wheat and tares, or in the Olivet discourse?
      666 And The Name

      http://https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08D1M48M4/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&qid=1594855398&refinements=p_2 7%3AAlan+Fuller&s=digital-text&sr=1-1&text=Alan+Fuller

      https://sites.google.com/site/apocalypticwisdom/

      Comment


      • Originally posted by seanD View Post

        You have to assume John had his vision and wrote it down prior to 70 AD. That's a rather tall order, unless you're arguing historicism? And even then, I don't don't understand why the image is described so cryptically in either case. John would have no problem describing Roman armies in his time.
        Let the Scripture speak for itself:

        "The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction. And those who dwell on the earth, whose name has not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder when they see the beast, that he was and is not and will come. Here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits, and they are seven kings; five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain a little while. The beast which was and is not, is himself also an eighth and is one of the seven, and he goes to destruction." (Revelation 17:8-11, NASB)
        Technically, Rome didn’t have kings, at least since the last one died in 509 BC. Gaius Julius Caesar was appointed dictator for life by authority of the Roman senate, which in 44 BC assassinated him. Following a civil war, there was a line of five Julio-Claudian emperors, the last being Nero. The emperor, or imperator in Latin, was actually a position consisting of several powers granted to a person by the Senate. He was president of the senate, high priest (pontifex maximus) of the Roman religion, manager of provincial affairs, sometimes a consul, sometimes a tribune. Originally the emperor was established by the approval of the senate, with the support of the Praetorian Guards and the armies of Rome, but gradually the senate became nothing more than symbolism.

        Nero had become more oppressive in his last days, causing the praetorian guard and some of the legions to cast their support for Servius Sulpicius Galba. He awoke one night to find the Praetorian Guards had abandoned him, his friends in the palace had deserted him, all but a few servants gone. He fled to a friend outside the city, only to learn that the senate had declared him a public enemy. Finally, he asked a companion to kill him, unable to do it himself. His last words were, “What an artist dies in me.” He died on June 9, AD 68.

        The senate and the praetorian guard were quick to declare Servius Sulpicius Galba, governor of the northeastern part of Spain, the next emperor. Galba was already considered a cruel emperor before he arrived at Rome in October of that year. He fell under the control of a group of corrupt advisors, and eventually lost the support of some of the legions. On January 1, AD 69, The seven German legions recognized their local governor, Aulus Vitellius, as emperor of Rome. Legions in Gaul and Britain followed suit, and plans were made for an invasion of Rome to overthrow Galba.

        But the praetorian guards supported Marcus Salvius Otho. On the morning of January 15, AD 69, the Praetorian Guards met with Otho and declared him emperor. Otho then led them to the palace, where they murdered Galba. Galba had been emperor for only six months and six days. The senate immediately declared Otho the next emperor. But the legions in Germany had already declared Aulus Vitellius as the next emperor back on January 3 when Galba was still alive, and planned their invasion on Rome.

        By the time the legions supporting Vitellius clashed with the Senate-appointed emperor’s forces, it was against Otho, instead of Galba. The opposing legions met on April 14, AD 69 at the First Battle of Bedriacum. Otho’s army was defeated, and upon their surrender they gave their support to Vitellius. On April 16, Otho killed himself. A few days later the armies of Europe and the Senate declared Vitellius emperor. But the legions in Egypt declared their support for none other than Titus Flavius Vespasianus, Vespasian, in June. By the time Vitellius entered Rome in the middle of July, the other legions of the east, including Judea and Syria, gave their support to Vespasian, and declared him emperor on July 1, AD 69.

        Vespasian sent Gaius Lucinius Mucianus, governor of Syria, with an army of 20,000 soldiers to battle the armies of Vitellius. Meanwhile, Vespasian went to Egypt to block shipments of badly needed wheat to Rome in an attempt to deprive the city of food.

        Mucianus’s Legions fought the legions supporting Vitellius on October 24, at the Second Battle of Bedriacum. Mucianus’s forces won, and proceeded to Rome. They arrived on December 20. Vitellius disguised himself in dirty clothes and barricaded himself in the palace door-keeper’s lodge. But the soldiers managed to break in, arrest him, and drag him to the Roman Forum, where he was tortured and killed. His lifeless body was tossed into the Danube River.

        On the next day, December 21, AD 69, the Senate confirmed Vespasian as the next emperor, eleven days before the end of the year which became known as the “Year of the Four Emperors”. Otho and Vitellius had been confirmed by the Senate, and thus are counted among the emperors, even though they never had full support of the Legions. Vespasian held to the claim that his reign as emperor began on July 1, when he was chosen by the legions. He stated that the true authority to appoint an emperor lay with the army, not with the Senate.

        The fifth king, during which time John wrote the Book of Revelation, would have been Nero. And he beast would have been Vespasian.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Faber View Post

          Let the Scripture speak for itself:



          Technically, Rome didn’t have kings, at least since the last one died in 509 BC. Gaius Julius Caesar was appointed dictator for life by authority of the Roman senate, which in 44 BC assassinated him. Following a civil war, there was a line of five Julio-Claudian emperors, the last being Nero. The emperor, or imperator in Latin, was actually a position consisting of several powers granted to a person by the Senate. He was president of the senate, high priest (pontifex maximus) of the Roman religion, manager of provincial affairs, sometimes a consul, sometimes a tribune. Originally the emperor was established by the approval of the senate, with the support of the Praetorian Guards and the armies of Rome, but gradually the senate became nothing more than symbolism.

          Nero had become more oppressive in his last days, causing the praetorian guard and some of the legions to cast their support for Servius Sulpicius Galba. He awoke one night to find the Praetorian Guards had abandoned him, his friends in the palace had deserted him, all but a few servants gone. He fled to a friend outside the city, only to learn that the senate had declared him a public enemy. Finally, he asked a companion to kill him, unable to do it himself. His last words were, “What an artist dies in me.” He died on June 9, AD 68.

          The senate and the praetorian guard were quick to declare Servius Sulpicius Galba, governor of the northeastern part of Spain, the next emperor. Galba was already considered a cruel emperor before he arrived at Rome in October of that year. He fell under the control of a group of corrupt advisors, and eventually lost the support of some of the legions. On January 1, AD 69, The seven German legions recognized their local governor, Aulus Vitellius, as emperor of Rome. Legions in Gaul and Britain followed suit, and plans were made for an invasion of Rome to overthrow Galba.

          But the praetorian guards supported Marcus Salvius Otho. On the morning of January 15, AD 69, the Praetorian Guards met with Otho and declared him emperor. Otho then led them to the palace, where they murdered Galba. Galba had been emperor for only six months and six days. The senate immediately declared Otho the next emperor. But the legions in Germany had already declared Aulus Vitellius as the next emperor back on January 3 when Galba was still alive, and planned their invasion on Rome.

          By the time the legions supporting Vitellius clashed with the Senate-appointed emperor’s forces, it was against Otho, instead of Galba. The opposing legions met on April 14, AD 69 at the First Battle of Bedriacum. Otho’s army was defeated, and upon their surrender they gave their support to Vitellius. On April 16, Otho killed himself. A few days later the armies of Europe and the Senate declared Vitellius emperor. But the legions in Egypt declared their support for none other than Titus Flavius Vespasianus, Vespasian, in June. By the time Vitellius entered Rome in the middle of July, the other legions of the east, including Judea and Syria, gave their support to Vespasian, and declared him emperor on July 1, AD 69.

          Vespasian sent Gaius Lucinius Mucianus, governor of Syria, with an army of 20,000 soldiers to battle the armies of Vitellius. Meanwhile, Vespasian went to Egypt to block shipments of badly needed wheat to Rome in an attempt to deprive the city of food.

          Mucianus’s Legions fought the legions supporting Vitellius on October 24, at the Second Battle of Bedriacum. Mucianus’s forces won, and proceeded to Rome. They arrived on December 20. Vitellius disguised himself in dirty clothes and barricaded himself in the palace door-keeper’s lodge. But the soldiers managed to break in, arrest him, and drag him to the Roman Forum, where he was tortured and killed. His lifeless body was tossed into the Danube River.

          On the next day, December 21, AD 69, the Senate confirmed Vespasian as the next emperor, eleven days before the end of the year which became known as the “Year of the Four Emperors”. Otho and Vitellius had been confirmed by the Senate, and thus are counted among the emperors, even though they never had full support of the Legions. Vespasian held to the claim that his reign as emperor began on July 1, when he was chosen by the legions. He stated that the true authority to appoint an emperor lay with the army, not with the Senate.

          The fifth king, during which time John wrote the Book of Revelation, would have been Nero. And he beast would have been Vespasian.
          Okay, you're arguing for a fulfillment of Rev 13 (which can be disputed), but what does that have to do with Rev 9, because that's the passage you initially quoted?
          "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 Faber View Post
            The fifth king, during which time John wrote the Book of Revelation, would have been Nero. And he beast would have been Vespasian.
            When did Vespasian kill Christians and require "everyone" to take a mark in their hand or forehead to buy or sell?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by seanD View Post

              Okay, you're arguing for a fulfillment of Rev 13 (which can be disputed), but what does that have to do with Rev 9, because that's the passage you initially quoted?
              Yes, but the thread has been meandering from its original question about sources for learning eschatology, then had been resurrected a few times over the issue of literal/symbolic. I'm just suggesting that maybe a good source for understanding eschatology might be in the ancient historical books.

              Comment


              • sean D,
                I'll ask my question in the Binding Satan thread since it's more appropriate there.
                666 And The Name

                http://https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08D1M48M4/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&qid=1594855398&refinements=p_2 7%3AAlan+Fuller&s=digital-text&sr=1-1&text=Alan+Fuller

                https://sites.google.com/site/apocalypticwisdom/

                Comment


                • Originally posted by eschaton View Post
                  sean D,
                  I'll ask my question in the Binding Satan thread since it's more appropriate there.
                  I'm not responding because I'm kind of growing weary of the discussion, and you didn't really address the question I was asking. If you're talking about post #107, I don't see a problem with either instances. In the Olivet Discourse Jesus also doesn't discuss a new Jerusalem and new heaven and earth. It stops at Jesus returning and gathering his elect, he doesn't go into any detail of what proceeds that. As far as the wheat and tares parable, the Lake of Fire sure sounds like tares being burned to me.
                  "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

                    I'm not responding because I'm kind of growing weary of the discussion, and you didn't really address the question I was asking. If you're talking about post #107, I don't see a problem with either instances. In the Olivet Discourse Jesus also doesn't discuss a new Jerusalem and new heaven and earth. It stops at Jesus returning and gathering his elect, he doesn't go into any detail of what proceeds that. As far as the wheat and tares parable, the Lake of Fire sure sounds like tares being burned to me.
                    I answered #101 with the scriptures I gave in #102. I'll try to make it a little more clear. Those whose minds are on earthly things aren't worthy of understanding the symbolism. That's why Jesus taught in parables and that's why apocalypses are symbolic. It's not rocket science. The old man doesn't understand the new creation in Christ. In the Olivet Discourse Jesus discussed the sign of His coming and the end of the world. The parable of the wheat and tares is about the end of the world. If the New Jerusalem isn't found at the end of the world why is it in Revelation 21 after the world has fled away in Revelation 20? Why does Jesus say He has told us everything? (Mark 13:23) I find the New Jerusalem, heaven, and earth in Matthew 24:28.

                    2 Corinthians 5:17
                    Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
                    666 And The Name

                    http://https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08D1M48M4/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&qid=1594855398&refinements=p_2 7%3AAlan+Fuller&s=digital-text&sr=1-1&text=Alan+Fuller

                    https://sites.google.com/site/apocalypticwisdom/

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by eschaton View Post

                      I answered #101 with the scriptures I gave in #102. I'll try to make it a little more clear. Those whose minds are on earthly things aren't worthy of understanding the symbolism. That's why Jesus taught in parables and that's why apocalypses are symbolic. It's not rocket science. The old man doesn't understand the new creation in Christ. In the Olivet Discourse Jesus discussed the sign of His coming and the end of the world. The parable of the wheat and tares is about the end of the world. If the New Jerusalem isn't found at the end of the world why is it in Revelation 21 after the world has fled away in Revelation 20? Why does Jesus say He has told us everything? (Mark 13:23) I find the New Jerusalem, heaven, and earth in Matthew 24:28.

                      2 Corinthians 5:17
                      Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
                      You seem to be committing the mistake some futurists also have made in confusing "world" with the literal Greek translation "age," and even preterists recognize this distinction. Jesus referenced Rev 21 briefly -- "heaven and earth will pass away" -- but didn't go into any detail about a new Jerusalem or new heaven and earth or any of the details in Rev 21. Why is that? Probably the same reason he didn't go into detail about Rev 20, though he did reference a fiery judgement. You still haven't answered my question, but it's cool, I'm pretty much done for now.
                      "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

                        You seem to be committing the mistake some futurists also have made in confusing "world" with the literal Greek translation "age," and even preterists recognize this distinction. Jesus referenced Rev 21 briefly -- "heaven and earth will pass away" -- but didn't go into any detail about a new Jerusalem or new heaven and earth or any of the details in Rev 21. Why is that? Probably the same reason he didn't go into detail about Rev 20, though he did reference a fiery judgement. You still haven't answered my question, but it's cool, I'm pretty much done for now.
                        Whether it is age or world doesn't have anything to do with it unless you don't have spiritual eyes. Hebrews says we are in the presence of the Heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22) which is shown coming to earth (Revelation 21:1-2) Jesus gave all the details in Revelation 21. What do you think He is talking about in Revelation 21? I know you can't answer.
                        666 And The Name

                        http://https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08D1M48M4/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&qid=1594855398&refinements=p_2 7%3AAlan+Fuller&s=digital-text&sr=1-1&text=Alan+Fuller

                        https://sites.google.com/site/apocalypticwisdom/

                        Comment


                        • More Than Conquerors- William Hendriksen.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by hamster View Post
                            I've been watching youtubes of this "September 23" "Rapture Puzzle" stuff, and I realized that I don't really know how to examine their claims at all. Is there an objective source, like a book, or something, that explains biblical prophecy well? I have almost entirely neglected this aspect of my religion and I'd like to catch up. You know, before the 23rd when the rapture happens
                            Learn from Scripture that Jesus' kingdom came when Daniel said it would. That only the born-again could see it because of its spiritual nature. That the spiritually blind rejected the Gospel of the kingdom, as they do today. And that they sided with the Pharisees who preached Millennialism.

                            By the time of Acts 2, The disciples caught on and Peter preached the gospel of the kingdom which is called Amillennialism today.

                            Comment


                            • For Revelation, the Geneva Bible notes help identify the Roman Empire and keep it separate from the Papacy, identified as the man of sin and Antichrist by historic Protestanism.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by eschaton, 05-08-2020, 10:59 PM
                              60 responses
                              3,865 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Dave L
                              by Dave L
                               
                              Started by seanD, 03-26-2020, 12:05 PM
                              67 responses
                              5,085 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seanD
                              by seanD
                               
                              Started by hamster, 07-05-2015, 01:07 PM
                              118 responses
                              31,472 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Dave L
                              by Dave L
                               
                              Started by seanD, 02-05-2014, 03:15 PM
                              58 responses
                              9,610 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Working...
                              X