Christ warns the end comes suddenly, like a trap

[xXChristPeripheralXx]

The Pope calling himself the vicar of Christ is a doctrinal issue, which really is not an issue with me. I reject that.

This is what I don't agree with.

The woman is apostate Israel! The purple and scarlet refers to the levitical priesthood of Israel as well as the tabernacle.

It goes back to the very colors God gave for them in Exodus 26:1:
“Moreover you shall make the tabernacle with ten curtains of fine twisted linen and blue and purple and scarlet material; you shall make them with cherubim, the work of a skillful workman.

Aaron's garments were the same color as Exodus 28:5, 6 says:
5 They shall take the gold and the blue and the purple and the scarlet material and the fine linen.
6 “They shall also make the ephod of gold, of blue and purple and scarlet material and fine twisted linen, the work of the skillful workman.

This is why I don't hold the idea this is Rome. In Revelation 12 "the woman is Israel. In Revelation 12:14 we see this woman go off into the wilderness:
14 But the two wings of the great eagle were given to the woman, so that she could fly into the wilderness to her place, where she *was nourished for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent.

We never see this woman again until Revelation 17 where John IS TAKEN INTO THE WILDERNESS to see her. Revelation 17:3 says:
3 And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness; and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast, full of blasphemous names, having seven heads and ten horns.

This is Israel gone fully apostate persecuting the church in the power of...and in agreement with Rome (NOT the RCC).

That's why I hold the woman to be apostate Israel...they still have the priesthood and the temple, even though Christ has come...and that temple is about to be destroyed.

Interesting.. Id like some time to contrast what you are saying if you dont mind.

You are placing the prophecy in the past tense according to what you are saying..

Am I correct?

 

[bibletruth469]

Back to topic. Christ says the end comes suddenly, as a trap. Why has Christ taken so long to return? What is it that finally convinces him to return?

We have been living in the church age for 2000 plus years. This time period will come to a close at the rapture of the church. I believe that this will happen when the fulness of the Gentiles takes place. It is not necessarily date sensitive but number sensitive . When that last person comes to receive Christ, the Father will have Him call His bride home. People can still be saved during the 7 year tribulation period , however it will not be easy for them. The enemy will come in with deceit and lying wonders.

I strongly believe in a pre- tribulation rapture . I also believe in the literal interpretation of the scripture.

Christ will come suddenly at a time that people will not expect Him. It will only be a trap to those who have not received Christ as their Lord and Savior . The rapture will happen and the tribulation will soon start.

God the Father is a loving and a patient God and wishes that none should perish . IMO , I think he has been waiting for that last person to come to himself. However, His patience will not last forever because He is also a just God.

 

[ebedmelech]

Interesting.. Id like some time to contrast what you are saying if you dont mind.

You are placing the prophecy in the past tense according to what you are saying..

Am I correct?

Yes. I believe Revelation 1-18 are fulfilled and climaxes with the destruction of Jerusalem.

 

[Interplanner]

To ChristPeriph:
you only have to answer "whose future?" (or whose past?). You know from a numberline that at one point what John saw and wrote was in someone's future, but now it is past.

The 1st page of the Rev says it will happen quickly , shortly, twice.

But even then, it may just be a description of what is going on in the 1st century that is rich in images that practicing Jewish people would have known.

 

[Interplanner]

BT:
Is the literal interp futurist? If Christ says he will raise his temple back up in 3 days, is he literal?

If the "trib" comes, why did it wait for now instead of afflicting, let's say, the first generation of Islam after slaughtering so many people, or the Mayan rulers who killed so many people when their kingdom was running out of food? It's apparently the 'wrath of God' but what about the iniquitous people right before it starts who die peacefully in their sleep?

 

[bibletruth469]

BT: Is the literal interp futurist? If Christ says he will raise his temple back up in 3 days, is he literal? If the "trib" comes, why did it wait for now instead of afflicting, let's say, the first generation of Islam after slaughtering so many people, or the Mayan rulers who killed so many people when their kingdom was running out of food? It's apparently the 'wrath of God' but what about the iniquitous people right before it starts who die peacefully in their sleep?

Most futurists take the scripture in a literal context. Yes, I believe that Christ rose again after a literal 3 days. I also believe that symbols in the scripture stand for literal things . For example, the book of revelation has symbols throughout and they are interpreted to mean literal things. I think there us a huge difference in a person who spiritualizes the scripture and the one who believes it for what it says.

Like I mentioned above , our God is a loving and merciful God and wants no one to perish, however people must make a choice on who they are going to follow . One must choose Jesus . Making no choice at all is the same as choosing the enemy.

 

[Interplanner]

And so when he said someone is here who is greater than the temple, there would be no further need to look for a temple as we know it. when he said he was the lamb of God, the sacrificial system sort of looked obsolete from that point on. When Hebrews says he brought the Sabbath of God, it changes what it would be.

"Take it for what it says"--well, yes. But don't build your assumptions into that. Find the meaning that is closest, not furthest, to its time. The 1st page says it is quickly, shortly happening. It is full of pastoral remarks for them. There are very intelligent reasons to think that "what it says" is about their times; that the woman/harlot is Jerusalem/Judaism; that the beast is Rome; that Nero is virtually named; that the beast devours the woman and then the bride of Christ has peace.

Between that and the reasons why Mt 24A is about the 1st century, the 490 years concludes in the 1st century, the whole thing may look very different from "literalism" (read: futurism).

Did you happen to interact with "Understanding Jn 11-12"? Lots of rich content there that could shift you. Taken literally (read: historically). Wouldn't you agree: it would be really helpful to know what they were thinking about eschatology before we invent a square wheel all over?

 

[xXChristPeripheralXx]

Yes. I believe Revelation 1-18 are fulfilled and climaxes with the destruction of Jerusalem.

Then perhaps, if you wish to bring me over to your line of thinking, you could explain a few other verses.. fair?

How do you reconcile the "harlot" in these verses as Israel?

*Rev 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

*Rev 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

*Rev 17:18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, WHICH REIGNETH over the kings of the earth.

Israel doent fit the bill to considered a great city that reigns over the kings of the earth..

Can you address these verses specifically?

So you know who youre talking to, Id like to offer a statement of faith, so you dont think I am just spinning your wheels..

"I fully accept that Jesus Christ, Emmanuel, Son of God, was sent to die for our sins, and that upon his crucifixion, rose from the dead 3 days after and ascended to his place with God in heaven. I pray to God in the Holy name of Jesus Christ."

 

[xXChristPeripheralXx]

To ChristPeriph:
you only have to answer "whose future?" (or whose past?). You know from a numberline that at one point what John saw and wrote was in someone's future, but now it is past.

The 1st page of the Rev says it will happen quickly , shortly, twice.

But even then, it may just be a description of what is going on in the 1st century that is rich in images that practicing Jewish people would have known.

What do you mean "whos future"?

Your post isnt comprehensible enough for me to grasp what you are attempting to convey to me, can you break it down?

 

[Interplanner]

Let's compare a person in 30 AD, 80 AD and 1980 AD.

The Rev was in the future of a person in 30 AD but Mt24A was given. But if the events the Rev is concerned with (or many of them) occurred in the 60s and you were there in 80AD it would be your past. In 30 AD Mt24A was in your future, but in 80AD it was in your past.

So "whose future" asks who are we talking about. The original readers? And was it a prophecy or was it commentary for them to understand what was happening before their eyes. There are strong reasons why it can be seen as written in the midst of it all.

The modern assumption of the person in 1980 is to pick up something this old and think it is about their future, which is pretty hilarious. Now, I don't mean the total change of the world into the new heavens and earth; I don't mean Mt 24B. I mean Mt24A and the calamitous chapters of the Rev.

If the beast is Rome devouring the harlot Jerusalem/Israel that rode on it for a while, we have material that is definitely from the 7th decade, and we understand the great rejoicing when she is defeated from her persecution of Christians.

 

[xXChristPeripheralXx]

Let's compare a person in 30 AD, 80 AD and 1980 AD.

The Rev was in the future of a person in 30 AD but Mt24A was given. But if the events the Rev is concerned with (or many of them) occurred in the 60s and you were there in 80AD it would be your past. In 30 AD Mt24A was in your future, but in 80AD it was in your past.

So "whose future" asks who are we talking about. The original readers? And was it a prophecy or was it commentary for them to understand what was happening before their eyes. There are strong reasons why it can be seen as written in the midst of it all.

The modern assumption of the person in 1980 is to pick up something this old and think it is about their future, which is pretty hilarious. Now, I don't mean the total change of the world into the new heavens and earth; I don't mean Mt 24B. I mean Mt24A and the calamitous chapters of the Rev.

If the beast is Rome devouring the harlot Jerusalem/Israel that rode on it for a while, we have material that is definitely from the 7th decade, and we understand the great rejoicing when she is defeated from her persecution of Christians.

Lots of new theory involving prophecy in this thread.. I took none of this away from scripture..

How do you account for these two passages as a past time event?

Rev 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
Rev 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

 

[Interplanner]

There were some harsh conditions in some parts of the Roman empire. Or it could be a comment on Caesar coins that announced him as deity. The Rev was written to create an effect, not to be taken literally.

You "didn't take any of this away from Scripture" because you have probably never checked your assumptions out. The 'magic' of prophecy speakers/teachers is that you never check their assumptions.

Dr. Walvoord personally told me an example of this at a family Bible camp 30 years ago. I said Acts 1 says the future kingdom of Israel is a non-topic, none of our business. He said "it can't possibly mean that." That is an assumption he never investigated. But you would never conclude it was correct from Acts 1. Not if you read the Bible in the ordinary, non-futurist sense.

The futurist sense is that they hardly said anything but what it was about 2013.

 

[xXChristPeripheralXx]

There were some harsh conditions in some parts of the Roman empire. Or it could be a comment on Caesar coins that announced him as deity. The Rev was written to create an effect, not to be taken literally.

You "didn't take any of this away from Scripture" because you have probably never checked your assumptions out. The 'magic' of prophecy speakers/teachers is that you never check their assumptions.

Dr. Walvoord personally told me an example of this at a family Bible camp 30 years ago. I said Acts 1 says the future kingdom of Israel is a non-topic, none of our business. He said "it can't possibly mean that." That is an assumption he never investigated. But you would never conclude it was correct from Acts 1. Not if you read the Bible in the ordinary, non-futurist sense.

The futurist sense is that they hardly said anything but what it was about 2013.

Sorry, the roman emporer doesnt fit the bill for this prophecy.. And Tiberius wasnt the man of lawlessness.

 

[ebedmelech]

Sorry, the roman emporer doesnt fit the bill for this prophecy.. And Tiberius wasnt the man of lawlessness.

That's because it was Nero!

We are told in Revelation of the 7 kings. Five if them have fallen...one is...and and the other had not yet come.

These are the Emperors of Rome over Israel:

*Julius Caesar

*Augustus Caesar

*Tiberius Caesar

*Caligula Caesar

*Claudius Caesar

*Nero Caesar (He is reigning as 6th king and has banished John to Patmos)

*Galba Caesar (the king who reigns for a little while)

After these 7 Rome is in disarray between Otho, and Vitellius. I think this is the 'head wound" of the beast because Rome had 3 emperors in one year and Rome almost broke up. Both Otho and Vitellius took power and I don't believe the passage counts them

*Vespasian Caesar

Vespasian is the 8th king who actually reigned and his son Titus (the "prince who is to come") destroyed Jerusalem.

That's what I think is going on there. Again I think the period of turmoil in Rome with Otho and Vittelius are not considered in the 7 kings...because the Roman Empire is in total disarray...that is the head wound of the beast in Revelation 13...which is a period when Rome almost lost the empire until Vespasian pulled it back together and Rome became unified and strong again.

 

[xXChristPeripheralXx]

That's because it was Nero!

We are told in Revelation of the 7 kings. Five if them have fallen...one is...and and the other had not yet come.

These are the Emperors of Rome over Israel:

*Julius Caesar

*Augustus Caesar

*Tiberius Caesar

*Caligula Caesar

*Claudius Caesar

*Nero Caesar (He is reigning as 6th king and has banished John to Patmos)

*Galba Caesar (the king who reigns for a little while)

After these 7 Rome is in disarray between Otho, and Vitellius. I think this is the 'head wound" of the beast because Rome had 3 emperors in one year and Rome almost broke up. Both Otho and Vitellius took power and I don't believe the passage counts them

*Vespasian Caesar

Vespasian is the 8th king who actually reigned and his son Titus (the "prince who is to come") destroyed Jerusalem.

That's what I think is going on there. Again I think the period of turmoil in Rome with Otho and Vittelius are not considered in the 7 kings...because the Roman Empire is in total disarray...that is the head wound of the beast in Revelation 13...which is a period when Rome almost lost the empire until Vespasian pulled it back together and Rome became unified and strong again.

Can you link me specific prophecy concerning Nero, and how he fits the bill?

Further, what evidence do we have that Nero directly fulfilled any of the prophecy?

Bible prophecy is infallible, so if a prophecy has been fulfilled, it should be able to be referenced objectively.

For example.

Zec 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

Mat 21:4 All this was done that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken by the Prophet, saying,
Mat 21:5 Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Beholde, thy King commeth vnto thee, meeke and sitting vpon an asse, and a colte, the foale of an asse vsed to the yoke.
Mat 21:6 So the disciples went, and did as Iesus had commaunded them,
Mat 21:7 And brought the asse and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and set him thereon.
Mat 21:8 And a great multitude spred their garments in the way: and other cut downe branches from the trees, and strawed them in the way.


You see, if what you claim is true, the Bible will verify it for itself.

So the prophecy heralding Neros coming, and the fulfillment of that prophecy should both be in the Bible and easily referenced.

The Bible is not difficult to interpret when done in Spirit, and through prayer.

Prayer is the most important aspect of understanding prophecy.

We pray while we read, asking for discernment and understanding in Jesus Holy name.

 

[ebedmelech]

Can you link me specific prophecy concerning Nero, and how he fits the bill?

Further, what evidence do we have that Nero directly fulfilled any of the prophecy?

Bible prophecy is infallible, so if a prophecy has been fulfilled, it should be able to be referenced objectively.

For example.

Zec 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

Mat 21:4 All this was done that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken by the Prophet, saying,
Mat 21:5 Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Beholde, thy King commeth vnto thee, meeke and sitting vpon an asse, and a colte, the foale of an asse vsed to the yoke.
Mat 21:6 So the disciples went, and did as Iesus had commaunded them,
Mat 21:7 And brought the asse and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and set him thereon.
Mat 21:8 And a great multitude spred their garments in the way: and other cut downe branches from the trees, and strawed them in the way.


You see, if what you claim is true, the Bible will verify it for itself.

So the prophecy heralding Neros coming, and the fulfillment of that prophecy should both be in the Bible and easily referenced.

The Bible is not difficult to interpret when done in Spirit, and through prayer.

Prayer is the most important aspect of understanding prophecy.

We pray while we read, asking for discernment and understanding in Jesus Holy name.

Revelation is a prophecy.

 

[xXChristPeripheralXx]

Revelation is a prophecy.

Oh, no, I get that..

If what you are saying is true, and the prophecies are fulfilled up until that point in Revelation, you could easily link me to a point in history that has an objective synchronicity with scriptural prophecy concerning how Revelation is laid out.

Instead, you are left with speculation, and a view on eschatology held by very few people in our faith.