Postvieww
Believer
- Sep 29, 2014
- 7,118
- 2,666
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Glad you can at least recognise the symbols in this verse.Does Christ have 7 horns seems to be a catch phrase around here well let’s look at the verse. Revelation 5:6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth. This verse is full of symbols Jesus is not a literal “lamb” but with just a little common sense one can figure out what is meant by the symbols, the same for the seven horns and seven spirit of God.
And I stand by everything I said!The problem here in this discussion is symbols on steroids. You made this comment: “people want to rob it of theological power to be a sermon relevant to all Christians in all ages, and turn it into a literalistic timetable for our very special generation. But in wanting it to be all about us, they're robbing it from having anything relevant to say to 2000 years of Christian”.
You've never heard of Partial Preterism, the respected theological position of most of the Reformers?It appears to me preterism is designed to rob believers of the hope of a future resurrection, a literal return of our Lord, the ability to discern the signs of the times an know those promises are near.
Show me where I said that?It is claimed the resurrection took place in 70 AD.
Um, the entire genre of the entire book says it is not literal! It's like reading parts of a book of Shakespeare's sonnets as love poems, and then half way through suddenly shifting gears and declaring it is an engineering manual. Sorry pal, but with Jesus as a 7eyed 7horned space-lamb, the burden of proof is yours. You have to prove anything in the book being literal! That does not mean I'm saying nothing in the book is TRUE, please learn the difference between truth and the different genres that can express that truth!
Other that your aversion to anything in Revelation being literal, show me one scriptural or scientific fact, since you are a man of science, that says we cannot believe Revelation 13:16-17 can be taken literal.
Wow, you must not be reading much. There's far worse in these futurist forums right here!Your explanation of an arena ticket is about the worst attempt at undermining the validity of scripture I’ve ever witnessed.
Because Dr Paul Barnett, a man I have met, had a Phd in Ancient History, led tours of the Bible Lands, and was Bishop of North Sydney for many years. The symbolism here is about cowardly betrayers of the gospel who buy their way into the arena where the False Prophet, the Asia Minor leader of the Caesar cult, was killing Christians. Carrying that stone "ticket" bought them respect in the eyes of the Roman authorities, but pretending to cheer as their former Christian brothers and sisters were murdered before their eyes showed who they were really trusting, and really fearing, and really revering. Caesar! The mark on the forehead is a metaphor for being owned. (The irony here is they are owned by what they use to belong to the Roman society and own other things). How do we know the mark on the forehead is a metaphor? Because in the very next chapter, God's people are owned by Him, and marked on the forehead by him. So unless you're going to announce to us all that we're literally going to have 2 names written on our foreheads for all eternity, try to be consistent!This hopeless theory tries to have a literal ticket in hand and a symbolic mark in the forehead for ownership. How do you write this in good conscience?
You need to calm down a bit and read about Partial Preterism. Most Sydney Anglicans are Partial Preterists.My brother, Jesus did not return in 70 AD as described 1 Thess 4 and Rev 19 . There was no resurrection of the dead in Christ in 70 AD. Jesus will return , literally, and bodily in our future. That is what scripture teaches.
You speak as one who has great understanding, and ask us to believe John didn't mean SOON, TIME IS NEAR, and that he SHARED THEIR TRIBULATION? You want us to believe he basically said, "You guys think you have it rough? Wait till you hear what happens in 2000 years?" Really? Pull the other one, it plays jingle bells!You speak as one who has great understanding of scripture and ask us to believe Rev 13 is about an arena ticket????? God help you and all of us to have wisdom, understanding and discernment.
YES, Revelation shows us glimpses of the Lord's return. But it's a sermon of encouragement, not a timetable. It's reminding us of the FACT that the Lord will return, but in repeated images and metaphors, and from different angles. It was reminding the Roman Christians that one day the Lord would return and judge that great Babylon, Rome, along with all the other enemies of God down through the ages.
By the way, I know that, and they ARE real scientists, but they tend to be geologists or gynecologists or dental surgeons and NOT climatologists. It's very American Republican to doubt the settled science of climate change. It's a particular American and Australian right-wing problem. It's shameful.
Eclipsenow post #333
You've never heard of Partial Preterism, the respected theological position of most of the Reformers?
Parousia70 claims to be one and every coming of the Lord passage I posted he said was fulfilled. If I falsely accused you of claiming the Lord had already returned I publicly apologize right here. I do remember posting a list of coming of the Lord passages to you asking fulfilled or not and parousia70 answered and you did not, if you did and I missed it I apologize again. It would be helpful if you would clearly state your position on this topic, just list the reference to a few passages you believe show a future, literal, bodily return of Jesus and we can put this part to rest. While you are at it please clarify your position on the resurrection. Is that a literal resurrection of the dead in Christ in our future?
Um, the entire genre of the entire book says it is not literal! It's like reading parts of a book of Shakespeare's sonnets as love poems, and then half way through suddenly shifting gears and declaring it is an engineering manual. Sorry pal, but with Jesus as a 7eyed 7horned space-lamb, the burden of proof is yours. You have to prove anything in the book being literal! That does not mean I'm saying nothing in the book is TRUE, please learn the difference between truth and the different genres that can express that truth!
Are you sure you want to stand by the statement that nothing in the book is literal?
Because Dr Paul Barnett, a man I have met, had a Phd in Ancient History, led tours of the Bible Lands, and was Bishop of North Sydney for many years.
None of this proves he is correct. I still believe this is a very weak attempt at forcing history into a fulfillment of scripture. Then again when nothing is literal anything will work.
The symbolism here is about cowardly betrayers of the gospel who buy their way into the arena where the False Prophet,
Show me where this false prophet called fire down from heaven in the sight of men Revelation 13:13. What other miracles did this false prophet perform?
the Asia Minor leader of the Caesar cult, was killing Christians. Carrying that stone "ticket" bought them respect in the eyes of the Roman authorities, but pretending to cheer as their former Christian brothers and sisters were murdered before their eyes showed who they were really trusting, and really fearing, and really revering. Caesar! The mark on the forehead is a metaphor for being owned. (The irony here is they are owned by what they use to belong to the Roman society and own other things).
Show us where the people who refused this “stone ticket” or the metaphorical mark lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years, Revelation 20:4. When did that thousand years start and end?
How do we know the mark on the forehead is a metaphor? Because in the very next chapter, God's people are owned by Him, and marked on the forehead by him.
If God wants to put a mark on your forehead are you going to refuse?
So unless you're going to announce to us all that we're literally going to have 2 names written on our foreheads for all eternity, try to be consistent!
Where do you get 2 names? Revelation 22:4, those in Revelation 14:1 are a different group.
Maybe the burden of proof should be on you to prove these passages cannot be literal.
By the way, I know that, and they ARE real scientists, but they tend to be geologists or gynecologists or dental surgeons and NOT climatologists. It's very American Republican to doubt the settled science of climate change. It's a particular American and Australian right-wing problem. It's shameful.
Your facts are a little off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...tream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
Upvote
0