|
Post by Heart4Him on Jul 19, 2003 8:40:53 GMT -5
I guess it must have!
|
|
|
Post by larrygn on Jul 19, 2003 11:02:57 GMT -5
Heart4Him: your theology, and history are very strong, what is your background? You seem like the type of person that can take us forward better than I. I have to go to libraries to get my sources, as I have few personal books, but you seem to have a great deal avaiable, or has a tremendous recall of what you have read. Yours in the Ever Living Christ, Larry
|
|
|
Post by Heart4Him on Jul 19, 2003 22:21:01 GMT -5
Thanks for the nice comment, Larry. I am a professional who has a strong interest in prophecy and a desire to learn. My memory is just ok...I rely alot on notes for everything in my life. It comes in handy to write down scripture in organized manner - like by topics like salvation, antichrist, the Day of the Lord, topics like that - and quotes. There are lots of online resources. www.crosswalk.com has a Bible study tools section and this furthur subdivides into commentaries, lexicons, and history, etc. The writings of the ECF are in the history section. I have found many of them to be rather boring to read, but key names come up and I have checked them out. There are other online sources for their writings. I have to say, Larry, I really don't agree with you about a rapture about 500 A.D. I'm a futurist.
|
|
|
Post by parousia70 on Jul 20, 2003 18:37:34 GMT -5
And the church at Sardis did not exist during Paul's time..so Revelation had to be written after 68 A.D....and since it was well established at the time of the letter to them in Revelation, some years must have gone by since it was established....like 30. Bringing us to 95 A.D.! Yet you still maintain Jesus Lied to them? Also, please show your source that The Church at Sardis was not in existance in 68AD.
|
|
|
Post by parousia70 on Jul 20, 2003 18:48:06 GMT -5
huh...I used quotes in another thread showing the basis for the 95A.D. date...and you just criticized. Irenaeus' quote is listed below: "We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the Revelation. For ('he' [John?] or 'it' [Revelation?]) was seen...towards the end of Domitian's reign." (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5:30:3) All belief in the late date rests upon this one cryptic statment of Irenaeus, the Bishop of Lyons (130-200AD) who wrote his "Against Heresies" around AD 174. All those that hold to the late date do so because of this one uncertain phrase by Irenaeus, and it is highly controversial as to what Irenaeus said. Apologist Daniel Denham, a late-date advocate, admitted that the testimony of Irenaeus is considered the bastion of the evidence for the late date, and goes on to admit some problems with this "bastion of evidence." First, the Greek language of Irenaeus can be understood to refer not to the Revelation, but to John being seen on Patmos. Second, he observes it is possible that Irenaeus has been misunderstood. As I mentioned before, Scholar Robert Young stated that the name Domitianou, referring actually to Nero, was mistaken by later writers for Domitian. The evidence, internal and external, favor the early date. The following points are evidences from within the Book of Revelation itself that confirm the early date of its writing: (1) The time statements refer to soon events of cataclysmic Jewish importance. If it was written in 96 AD, there are no events soon from that time that could even remotely fit. If, however, it was before 70 AD, then the destruction of Jerusalem rises to the occasion as both Jewish and cataclysmic. The time statements demand we look here, and there is no historic support for a persecution of the Church under Domitian in the 90s. (2) According to the epistles to the churches, the Judaizers were persecuting the churches (Revelation 2:9; 3:9). This assigns the book to the pre-AD 70 era, for the Jewish persecution of the Church dissolved at AD 70. (3) The temple and the city were apparently still standing in Revelation chapter 11. John is sent to measure the city and temple, and Jerusalem is said to be under siege at the time of writing. It would not be possible for John to speak of these as still standing after 70 AD, for they were utterly destroyed at that date. And, if John is referring to some rebuilt temple in the far distant future, and he is writing in 96 AD, then his complete silence about the destruction of the temple and city in 70 AD is deafening--the destruction of Jerusalem is perhaps the greatest disaster in antiquity, and surely the greatest disaster in Israel's history. To imagine St. John overlooking the apocalyptic destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple while he discusses both as if they were still standing, is impossible. Rather, St. John is prophesing their impending doom just two or three years before they were made utterly desolate. (4) There were "other apostles" still around according to Revelation 2:2. Tradition has it that all the apostles were dead before 70 AD and John was the only original possibly surviving past that time. (5) Caesar Nero's name in Hebrew gematria adds up to 666. Since this was written about soon events, no other person can be found within this time scope whose name fits this requirement and description. For certain, none can be found in the soon future of 96 AD. (6) Almost all scholars believe Revelation is inextricably linked directly to the Olivet Discourse. Since the best commentaries on the Olivet Discourse demonstrate that it is speaking of the events leading up to AD 70, so must Revelation be speaking of these same events. (7) The 6th king in Revelation 17 is the one that persecutes the saints. The Roman emperors as listed by Josephus and Tacitus are as follows: (1) Julius, (2) Augustus, (3) Tiberius, (4) Caligula, (5) Claudius, then (6) Nero. Nero was the first and only Roman Caesar of the Julian line to persecute Christians. Nero's death ended the Julian dynasty. The one ruling after him reigned only a little while--Galba, for 6 months. If the 6th king is indeed Nero, he would be the one that "now is" according to the prophecy, and this would date the writing before 68 AD when Nero supposedly committed suicide. Nero also persecuted Christians for 42 months as is stated in the prophecy.
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on Jul 21, 2003 17:18:15 GMT -5
Larry,
I don't believe that the "Second Coming" has already occured. For one, the Earth we've lived on with a historical and architectural record of at least past Christ's "First Coming" is still intact. The New Testement says that with Christ's "Second Coming," the Earth will be destroyed ...
"But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare." 2 Peter 3:10 (NIV)
If the Earth hasn't been destroyed since Christ's first coming ... therefore there hasn't been a second coming.
In the mean time, the point is not to wonder about it ... but to do God's will ... obey Him ...
Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness. So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. 2 Peter 3:11-14 (NIV)
TarueBeliever
|
|
|
Post by parousia70 on Jul 22, 2003 11:26:30 GMT -5
Larry, I don't believe that the "Second Coming" has already occured. For one, the Earth we've lived on with a historical and architectural record of at least past Christ's "First Coming" is still intact. The New Testement says that with Christ's "Second Coming," the Earth will be destroyed ... "But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare." 2 Peter 3:10 (NIV) If the Earth hasn't been destroyed since Christ's first coming ... therefore there hasn't been a second coming. TarueBeliever Tarue, Since The OT , over and over and over, uses This type of language (Earth burned, Heavens dissolved, sun blackening, stars falling, mountains melted, etc..) to describe the judgements of nations, empires, and peoples, and NOT the destruction of the cosmos, you need to show some kind of support for your application of a polar opposite interpratation for it's use in the NT. If we were to apply your stated interpratation consistantly, across the board, whenever the Bible uses this language, we shouldn't be here today, because we would be forced to conclude that the earth and heavens were already burned and dissolved several times over before Christ was even born! Interestingly, your quote of 2 Peter 3:10, when cross referenced with Revelation 3:3, actually proves a 1st century parousia. Peter called Christ's 2nd coming a "coming as a theif" Paul also uses this "theif" analogy for the 2nd coming, therefore we can be certain that there is only one coming of Christ "as a theif", the one and only "2nd coming" or "Parousia" of Christ. In Revelation 3:3, Christ makes a promise, that He would come "as a theif" to those 1st century Christians at the Church of Sardis: Revelation 3:3 "Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on THEE as a thief , and THOU shalt not know what hour I will come upon THEE." Tarue, the inescapable conclusion for the Bible believing Christian is this: If Christ did not Keep His promise to returm to them [Christians at the Church of Sardis] "as a theif" back in the 1st century, then He lied and is to be considered a false prophet per the guidlines of Deuteronomy 18:22: "When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pkmtyolp, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him."The Jesus I follow is no Liar. He returned on time, as promised.
|
|
|
Post by guidemeLord on Jul 22, 2003 14:40:48 GMT -5
Tarue, Since The OT , over and over and over, uses This type of language (Earth burned, Heavens dissolved, sun blackening, stars falling, mountains melted, etc..) to describe the judgements of nations, empires, and peoples, and NOT the destruction of the cosmos, you need to show some kind of support for your application of a polar opposite interpratation for it's use in the NT. If we were to apply your stated interpratation consistantly, across the board, whenever the Bible uses this language, we shouldn't be here today, because we would be forced to conclude that the earth and heavens were already burned and dissolved several times over before Christ was even born! Interestingly, your quote of 2 Peter 3:10, when cross referenced with Revelation 3:3, actually proves a 1st century parousia. Peter called Christ's 2nd coming a "coming as a theif" Paul also uses this "theif" analogy for the 2nd coming, therefore we can be certain that there is only one coming of Christ "as a theif", the one and only "2nd coming" or "Parousia" of Christ. In Revelation 3:3, Christ makes a promise, that He would come "as a theif" to those 1st century Christians at the Church of Sardis: Revelation 3:3 "Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on THEE as a thief , and THOU shalt not know what hour I will come upon THEE." Tarue, the inescapable conclusion for the Bible believing Christian is this: If Christ did not Keep His promise to returm to them [Christians at the Church of Sardis] "as a theif" back in the 1st century, then He lied and is to be considered a false prophet per the guidlines of Deuteronomy 18:22: "When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pkmtyolp, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him."The Jesus I follow is no Liar. He returned on time, as promised. Amen! Jesus RULES! Our God reigns!
|
|
|
Post by AJoyfulHeart on Jul 22, 2003 14:46:11 GMT -5
if everything that happened in the book of Revelation has happened than we are living in the new heaven and earth and everything is perfect! I don't think so!
|
|
|
Post by guidemeLord on Jul 22, 2003 15:06:27 GMT -5
Larry, I don't believe that the "Second Coming" has already occured. For one, the Earth we've lived on with a historical and architectural record of at least past Christ's "First Coming" is still intact. The New Testement says that with Christ's "Second Coming," the Earth will be destroyed ... "But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare." 2 Peter 3:10 (NIV) If the Earth hasn't been destroyed since Christ's first coming ... therefore there hasn't been a second coming. In the mean time, the point is not to wonder about it ... but to do God's will ... obey Him ... Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness. So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him.2 Peter 3:11-14 (NIV) TarueBeliever For an alternate view of 2 Peter 3 Click Here!I highly recommend reading through the page for an understanding of the verses from another point of view... It is, if nothing else, thoroughly enjoyable to read!
|
|
|
Post by guidemeLord on Jul 22, 2003 16:04:10 GMT -5
if everything that happened in the book of Revelation has happened than we are living in the new heaven and earth and everything is perfect! I don't think so! Everything is made new! We are new creatures serving a living God and our Saviour King. Doesn't Christ abide in you and you in His Kingdom? What then are we waiting for? A real live new city where we can dwell? Just like the pharisees thought there would be a literal king come rather than our King of kings and they missed the Messiah! All you may be missing is the "no tears and fountain of Living Waters" but that is by choice not because Jesus didn't finish the work He started.
|
|
|
Post by AJoyfulHeart on Jul 22, 2003 16:12:38 GMT -5
Everything is made new! We are new creatures serving a living God and our Saviour King. Doesn't Christ abide in you and you in His Kingdom? What then are we waiting for? A real live new city where we can dwell? Just like the pharisees thought there would be a literal king come rather than our King of kings and they missed the Messiah! All you may be missing is the "no tears and fountain of Living Waters" but that is by choice not because Jesus didn't finish the work He started. so we can live forever here on earth if we choose to?
|
|
|
Post by AJoyfulHeart on Jul 22, 2003 16:16:39 GMT -5
so we can live forever here on earth if we choose to? oh and if my child tried to lead a lion around he would be eaten!
|
|
|
Post by Shirley on Jul 23, 2003 7:53:32 GMT -5
oh and if my child tried to lead a lion around he would be eaten! A good point! And there are not anymore wars, too!
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on Jul 23, 2003 16:19:16 GMT -5
givemelord,
I don't find the words of Revelation 3 as evidence of the 2nd Coming as already having happened.
Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; obey it, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you. Revelation 3:2-3 (NIV)
Christ said, "if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief ... " This is a logical proposition, as in if -A then B. In such a proposition, B can be false even if the propostion is valid ... only A needs to be true (the folks in Sardis woke up, repented, etc.)
TarueBeliever
|
|