|
Post by Jan on Aug 25, 2003 21:37:56 GMT -5
larry asked So as many as possible could/would come to know Christ as their Saviour b4 it becomes too late - to add to His Church <><
|
|
|
Post by semperfidelis on Aug 25, 2003 21:42:11 GMT -5
I think that all the seals have pkmtyolped, and that we are now in the middle of the New Jersulsem period of Revelations. I believe God has been going through with his plan for the future and the Christian church as it now stands is obvivious to it. The rapture took place, the 1000 years of everyting in the name of Christ, and the 2 saviors of the faith, who restored many to the Christ, all come and gone, and historically documentable. It jsut takes some research, and the church wanted the Christ to come in a mannor the Jews wanted the Messiah to come. Both made fatal mistakes, but the church can redeem itself,and had best get busy. Larry some research? no one has ever been able to prove and document that the prophecies of Revelation took place in the past. Dont you think if this were the case there would be more inspired writings about Johns revelation coming to pkmtyolp. It sounds like your teaching Preterism here.
|
|
|
Post by semperfidelis on Aug 25, 2003 21:43:39 GMT -5
larry asked So as many as possible could/would come to know Christ as their Saviour b4 it becomes too late - to add to His Church <>< Amen Jan. And the word will be preached to all nations and the end will come. Matthew 24. God wants everyone to have the opportunity to come and worship him freely, that is why he is giving us time.
|
|
|
Post by larrygn on Aug 26, 2003 9:47:23 GMT -5
If the world had ended, then people would not have been born, and needed saving. I think in the last 2000 years we lost more souls than we saved, so that is illogical reasoning. As for proving the history of Revelations, well, one first needs to study and look at history, and then one needs to have a strong background in Christian theology. I would say this is rarely the case with any researchers. If it were, then they would see the logic of my historical references. There are records of events which could easily be the seals; but others seem not to have read, igonore, of just put them off because it is not their preconceived ideas. Well, history, is history, not preconceived ideas twisted to show what one wishes. Semperfi, I expected more from you than this, you have at least been giving me good theological reasoning in the past.
Actually, for good history, we should all take the other persons position, and try to prove them correct. In so doing, we understand where they come from, and can at least see their aruguements correctly.
Yours in the Ever Living Christ,
Larry
|
|
|
Post by semperfidelis on Aug 26, 2003 10:10:01 GMT -5
If the world had ended, then people would not have been born, and needed saving. I think in the last 2000 years we lost more souls than we saved, so that is illogical reasoning. As for proving the history of Revelations, well, one first needs to study and look at history, and then one needs to have a strong background in Christian theology. I would say this is rarely the case with any researchers. If it were, then they would see the logic of my historical references. There are records of events which could easily be the seals; but others seem not to have read, igonore, of just put them off because it is not their preconceived ideas. Well, history, is history, not preconceived ideas twisted to show what one wishes. Semperfi, I expected more from you than this, you have at least been giving me good theological reasoning in the past. Actually, for good history, we should all take the other persons position, and try to prove them correct. In so doing, we understand where they come from, and can at least see their aruguements correctly. Yours in the Ever Living Christ, Larry Larry, I once heard a wise man say that if you torture scripture long enough it will say and mean whatever you want it to say. If you stare in the dark with the lights on long enough you can see about whatever you want to see or more of what your mind wants to see. There are certain prophecies that cannot be mistaken as "might have happened already" For example, the two witnesses preaching from the wailing wall with the power to stop it from raining and the ability to turn water into blood. Lets examine why this could not have happened yet. Notice that it says that they will consume enemies with fire from their mouths.. Revelation 11 3And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth." 4These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth. 5If anyone tries to harm them, fire comes from their mouths and devours their enemies. This is how anyone who wants to harm them must die. 6These men have power to shut up the sky so that it will not rain during the time they are prophesying; and they have power to turn the waters into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague as often as they want. Now take a look at this. 7Now when they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them. 8Their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified. 9For three and a half days men from every people, tribe, language and nation will gaze on their bodies and refuse them burial. 10The inhabitants of the earth will gloat over them and will celebrate by sending each other gifts, because these two prophets had tormented those who live on the earth. Notice that it states that for three and a half days men from every people, tribe, language and nation will gaze on thier bodies. Think about that for a moment? How will people from every nation be able to see the witnesses and celebrate their deaths? The only way this would be able to happen is with the technology we have today in the media and it could not have happened before the mid 1900s, so this prophecy could not have possibly happened before now. Scholars before the 1900s used to be baffled by this prediction but now it makes perfect sense, imagine reading this in the 1600s and trying to figure out how people from every nation would gaze on their bodies. Now that we have CNN and global news networks we dont even consider how far fetched this verse was even 200 years ago. Its not hard to see that most of the tribulation prophecies have not been fulfilled Larry, you just have to really think about them.
|
|
|
Post by larrygn on Aug 26, 2003 10:29:05 GMT -5
semperfi:
I am not disappointed that you have excellent theology ready; however, nowhere does it mention the wailing wall, and I believe you know my position that the great Dr. Martin Luther was one of these, who restored many to the faith, and perserved the Chrsitain church, and even the RC church from a path of doom. The statement of consume many with fire from their mouth, is allagorical, and refers to the many woodprints showing the fire from their mouths destroying the agents of the anti-Christ. This is what John saw, and reports. John was only their for a maximum of a few hours, maybe even minutes, so could not comphrend all the background. They did destroy the agents of the antiChrist with their retoric, not actual fire. Our problem is, we can not start on equal basis, as you insist we read everythign literally, and I say, that the literal interpretations were there only as long as we did not have the understanding to know what they meant, so that the Bible would be a Living, Brething, ever changing Book for all generations. Yours in the Ever Living Christ, Larry
|
|
|
Post by semperfidelis on Aug 26, 2003 10:43:09 GMT -5
semperfi: I am not disappointed that you have excellent theology ready; however, nowhere does it mention the wailing wall, and I believe you know my position that the great Dr. Martin Luther was one of these, who restored many to the faith, and perserved the Chrsitain church, and even the RC church from a path of doom. The statement of consume many with fire from their mouth, is allagorical, and refers to the many woodprints showing the fire from their mouths destroying the agents of the anti-Christ. This is what John saw, and reports. John was only their for a maximum of a few hours, maybe even minutes, so could not comphrend all the background. They did destroy the agents of the antiChrist with their retoric, not actual fire. Our problem is, we can not start on equal basis, as you insist we read everythign literally, and I say, that the literal interpretations were there only as long as we did not have the understanding to know what they meant, so that the Bible would be a Living, Brething, ever changing Book for all generations. Yours in the Ever Living Christ, Larry Larry, you are nitpicking, It mentions the temple (which will be rebuilt and that it is in the place that Jesus was Crucified so it will be right by the wailing wall or around that area. I think we can safely say that it will be in that vicinity. Larry not reading everything literally is dangerous. It allows you to come up with just about whatever interpretation you want so there is much room for inaccuracy when interpretating what scripture means. That is why I brought up the saying of the wise man that said if you torture scripture long enough it will say about whatever you want it to say. Not taking the bible literally can allow 5 different people to come up with 5 different interpretations that all sound right because they are symbolic. I dont think God intended it to be like that. I think it says what it means and even though some of the prophecies are symbolic we should stick to the most literal translations we can lest we get sidetracked on some fantasy that has nothing to do with what is truly written. The point I was trying to make is that some of the prophecies cannot be mistaken for anything that has happened in the past. For example in Matthew 24 when it says a time of unequalled distress. People argue that this took place in 70 AD but I have no doubt that the predictions of the evil ruler to come and those prophecies will be a much darker time than anything the world has ever seen.
|
|
|
Post by parousia70 on Aug 26, 2003 19:02:11 GMT -5
Jesus told His generation -there would not be any signs from heaven to it yet then He also told of a last days generation that would see -there shall be signs in the sun and the moon and the stars and upon earth distress of nations Jesus told His generation -no sign but the sign of the prophet Jonas as Jonas was three days in the heart of the earth -so would the Son of man be Jesus lived and preached during the only one sign generation and that was sign as to His resurrection -not one of His coming for the church. The Glorified Christ promised the 1st century Church at Sardis that He would come "as a thief" TO THEM if they did not repent. (Revelation 3:3) The only coming of Christ "as a thief" taught in scripture ocourrs a the "day of the lord". The Glorified Christ could not have promised this coming "as a thief" to those 1st century people if it was not for those 1st century people. We must align our views with this truth and teach no other interpratation.
|
|
|
Post by larrygn on Aug 27, 2003 19:04:09 GMT -5
The great paradox = yes in my position, it is difficult, as I know that my position may be incorrect, I just need it proved; since if I am correct, then we have a great deal of work to do. Reading literally saves us from having to think, and reading in my manner requires that we do so in the best of faith, and that we discuss, and make certain that our positions hold water theologically, and are not in conflict with the Christ. Tthen we can bring them forth. This is what I am trying to do. I do not think any temple will be rebuilt in Jeruselem, as that city is no longer of any major relevance.
Look at this: there were 12 tribes of Isreal, they wer disperssed through 2 captivities, and one scattering over a period of 800 years. Those ethnic peoples still exist, but are not Isreal, Isreal consists of those who adhere in some way to the Jewish religion, most of which are unquestioned converts from 20-50-200-500 or more years ago, not from 700 B.C. Just who then gets to claim the title and homeland of the ancient Isreal, the current Jewish population, or the ethnically people who once lived there?
Yours in the Ever Living Christ,
Larry
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on Aug 31, 2003 7:45:30 GMT -5
The Glorified Christ promised the 1st century Church at Sardis that He would come "as a thief" TO THEM if they did not repent. (Revelation 3:3) The only coming of Christ "as a thief" taught in scripture ocourrs a the "day of the lord". The Glorified Christ could not have promised this coming "as a thief" to those 1st century people if it was not for those 1st century people. We must align our views with this truth and teach no other interpratation. Once again, the perpetual preterist peddles the proposed promise of parousia prior to the pkmtyolping of a particular people …
Your argument as usual: Jesus must be understood as having said through John and messengers to those persons who were then members of the church in Sardis at that time that He would “come like a thief” to them. (see Revelation 3:3) He could only have meant the “Day of the Lord” or the “Coming of the Lord” by the expression “come like a thief” because that expression is used in the New Testament only in conjunction with “Day of the Lord” or the “Coming of the Lord” (see Matthew 24:43, Luke 12:39, 1 Thessalonians 5:2-4, and 2 Peter 3:10). If Jesus says He will do it, it’s a promise. Therefore, Jesus promised to the persons who were members of the church in Sardis at that time that He would come to them. In order for this to happen, “Day of the Lord” or the “Coming of the Lord” would have had to occur within the natural lives of the persons who were members of the church in Sardis at that time. Therefore, “Day of the Lord” or the “Coming of the Lord” occurred very shortly within the writing of John’s Revelation. While this may seem like a valid argument, I don’t believe it to be so. First, I agree Jesus could only have meant the “Day of the Lord” or the “Coming of the Lord” by the expression “come like a thief.” Second, I agree if Jesus says He will do it, it’s a promise. Third I do not maintain Jesus must be understood as having said through John and messengers to those persons who were then members of the church in Sardis at that time that He would “come like a thief” to them. As most preterists have done, you’ve pulled out a verse (in this case, part of a verse) with words that seem to support your view and left the pkmtyolpage behind in the truth. Look at the whole pkmtyolpage. If a promise in the letter to Sardis had to be kept, wouldn’t a promise in a letter to another church in this pkmtyolpage have to be kept. Did Christ make any other promises to those seven churches? Yes … “Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place -- unless you repent.” (Revelation 2:5 NASV) We know from Revelation 1:20 the “lampstand” is Church at Ephesus. Using your methodology of interpretation, we see, Christ “promised” to come to the Church at Ephesus, and remove it. However, the Church (and I don’t mean just the stone building) remained in Ephesus for quite some time after AD 70. The Third Ecumenical Council was held in Ephesus in AD 431. Apparently, Christ didn’t go to them and “remove” their “lampstand out of its place.” Now, anyone with any sense will say, but Christ placed a condition on coming to them and removing their lampstand. It depended on their repenentance. Perhaps they repented. Perhaps that’s why the Church in Ephesus wasn’t removed. Christ placed a condition on the Church at Sardis also… “So remember what you have received and heard; and keep it, and repent. Therefore if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come to you.” (Revelation 3:3 NASV) Now see, Christ wasn’t making a promise to the members of the Church at Sardis that he would without a doubt return to them. The condition was “if you do not wake up, I will come like …” There was no clause in the condition as to how he would come if they did “wake up.” You may say that it’s implied. Well, we’re not working on implications here, but by the words themselves. I am not implying either that if the Ephesians and everyone else had repented, there would be no requirement for Christ’s Second Coming. His return is in judgment over all who came before those living then too. Bottom line, Christ didn’t “promise” those persons who were then members of the church in Sardis at that time that they would see “The Coming of the Lord.” This does not prove the “Second Coming” did not occur in AD 70. What it does show the line of reasoning that “Jesus promised the Church at Sardis He come to them” is invalid. TarueBeliever
|
|
|
Post by BlindFaith on Aug 31, 2003 15:36:38 GMT -5
we have not seen the first seal yet, it is coming though!
and as for the preterist views going on here, I have no comment...
|
|
|
Post by larrygn on Aug 31, 2003 20:08:40 GMT -5
I still have no responses to my questions. OT propheses stated Isreal is favored, and most of you on site agree. Then to whom was the promise given? The ethnically pure tribe Moses brought out, those of 600 BC, those of 1st centuyAD, or the relgious group of 21 st centuryAD, and where are the quotes supporting the group you claim favored? Are not the Arab states that surround Isreal, Iraq, and Iran just about as semectic in ethnic background, and DNA as Isreal? So who gets the promise? Of course, if you use my logic, then it is the New Jeruselem, and old Isreal is irrelevant.
Yours in the Ever Living Christ, Larry
|
|
|
Post by semperfidelis on Sept 3, 2003 9:17:33 GMT -5
As far as I know, a white horse was ridden into battle by the Leader. A peaceful entrance was signified by riding a young donkey as Jesus did into Jerusalem. So the rider of the white horse is not going forth as a peacemaker in disguise, but is truly bent on conquest from the beginning. This is Christ by the way..... Guidme, how can the white rider from the first seal be Jesus if he is the only worthy person to open the seals. So he is breaking the seals and riding out on the white horse. Who breaks the other 6 seals after he rides out?
|
|