Question for Amillennialists

[Truth7t7]

You try to turn everything into a spiritual fulfillment. You are the opposite of the hyper-literalist. I guess that would be a hyper-spiritualist. You lack objectivity and balance in your thinking just like them.

Just like your denial regarding the future literal human man as (The Beast) in Revelation chapter 13

AND

The future literal prophets returned (Two Witnesses) in physical bodies that die as seen in Revelation chapter 11

 

[TribulationSigns]

Stop It Right There? BIG SMILES!

I Disagree With Your Claims

"Deceive The Nations" is to battle in Revelation 20:1-8 as was clearly explained in post #76 above

Are you saying that you believe your version of one-man antichrist will deceive the nations and bring the countries like Mexico, South Africa and Switzerland with their armies down to Israel to battle God? Seriously? Battle with what, exactly?

 

[TribulationSigns]

Sorry, but you are wrong.

Doubtfully.

The context is very clearly about the destruction of the temple buildings standing at that time.

According to who? God or you?
See... the Jewish Temple is Christ. Christ is not a physical/literal building of bricks, but the building "represented" Christ. And actually, it was God's Holy Temple, God's Holy Place, the Jews just worshipped there illustrating they were in the presence of God. The Holy Temple was established long ago specifically to "represent" Christ. Physically no, Christ wasn't that Old Testament Holy Temple in Matthew 24 any more than He is our New Testament Holy Temple we read of in 2nd Thessalonians 2. As previously stated, both these Holy Temples are a figure of the assembly (body of believers) "representing" Christ's body. They can and will fall away or go into apostasy.

Hebrews 6:6

• "If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."

"This" falling away of these people of the corporate church/congregation is like doing what Old Testament Israel did in crucifying Christ. By being a church that falls away, they (representing Him) literally put Him to an open shame. This is the intimate relationship Christ has established with His assembly that He so closely identifies Himself with them. What corporate Israel did outwardly in falling away, those today who fall away also do the exact same thing. They virtually crucify again the Son of God. If you don't think the corporate church of God is represented by the Holy Temple with unsaved sinners in it, read again 2nd Thessalonians 2. As Israel the Holy Temple of old fell for her abominations, when abominations or anathema stands in any of these holy places (as in Matthew 24 and 2nd Thessalonians 2), it represents the detestation and abhorrence against the body of Christ. Nothing to do with bricks pushed over in 70 AD, but also including the men who fell as stones of that Holy City and Temple building of 33 AD. The deeper Spiritual meaning, Christ came to restore this that had fallen down. ...and He did. Likewise, there shall come a falling away in the New Testament Holy Temple. That also having nothing to do with a literal Holy Temple building where a sinful man sits. It also represents the congregation of God.

2nd Thessalonians 2:3-4

• "Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
• Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."

Can sinful man sit in Christ, since we know He is the New Testament Holy Temple? No, not at all. But this Holy Temple "represents" Christ because it is the New Testament congregation, just as the Old Testament Holy Temple represented Him. Abominations will stand in this Holy Temple by sinful man ruling there exactly as it did in Christ's day. Matthew 24 is an illustration signifying both are intimately related. One mirroring the other, since there is nothing new under the sun. When I look at the fall of the Holy Temple representing Christ in 33 AD, I see in the rest of Matthew 24 the fall of the Holy Temple representing Christ in the time of the end. God has designed it that way. You just don't understand it...yet.

Your attempts to prove how spiritual you are prevent you from seeing when things are fulfilled literally. You try to turn everything into a spiritual fulfillment. You are the opposite of the hyper-literalist. I guess that would be a hyper-spiritualist. You lack objectivity and balance in your thinking just like them.

Ahhh...There's always an alternative view. Even the Scribes and Pharisees had an alternative view. The question is, does this view harmonize with the word of God or does it contradict it. That is the pertinent question.

You are showing a suprising lack of discernment if you don't think that the Romans were also the enemies of the Jews. I'd love for you to try to tell them that. But, the Roman armies did as God wanted because they carried out His wrath against the unbelieving Jews without even realizing it. Which shows God's sovereignty in that situation.

Nowhere God used Roman armies to destroy a physical city and the temple. The Jews are their own enemies when they have rejected their Messiah the Prince and did destroy the temple (Christ) which they are part of his body. You need to see it from God's perspective according to His Word. Not world history.

It's both. The Jews had Him sentenced to death, so they bore the responsibility of destroying the city and the sanctuary and it was the Roman armies who physically destroyed the city and the sanctuary. You lack objectivity, so you only focus on the spiritual aspect of what happened.

Sorry, you are looking at the wrong city and the sanctuary. It was not the physical building or stones Christ talked about. I have shown you the Scripture exactly what Christ saw the stones as!

I don't believe that you are sorry. I'm not sorry to say that you're wrong.

Like I said often in the past, the Lord judges and I am comfortable with that. He will decide which testimony is correct. I can't convince everyone. It's the Holy Spirit's job.

What we see today does not reflect what was there almost 2,000 years ago. The boundaries are different now than they were back then. New things have been built there since then. You're not even thinking about this rationally.

Ever hear of the Western wall? King Herod built this wall in 20 BCE during an expansion of the Second Temple. When the Romans destroyed the temple in 70 CE, the support wall survived. For hundreds of years, people prayed in the small area of the wall that could be seen.

Rationally much?

Does everything prophesied in scripture have to be recorded in scripture? What about the earthquakes, wars, pestilences, etc. that Jesus prophesied about in the Olivet Discourse? Those can't happen unless there is details in scripture about them (when they happened, what happened exactly, etc.)? You're making statements that can't be supported by scripture itself. There is no reason why something prophesied in scripture couldn't be fulfilled in history that we get information about in a history book. Don't be so silly.

I am not being silly. I say that you are reading the chapter of Matthew 24 literally thinking Christ was talking about physical war, famine, pestilences, etc. And you don't even believe that the chapter was talking about the New Testament congregation prior to Second Coming. I have explained Matthew 24 before and you still don't accept it. Not going to waste my time with you on this.

Jesus talked about both. Your lack of objectivity continues to shine through.

Its up to Jesus Christ to decide if my testimony is false. What I see so far is that you have not refuted me biblically so far.

When did I say it did, hummmmm???

You tell me.

I am. You are not the one to judge that. By acting as if every prophecy has a spiritual fulfillment does not make you spiritual, it makes you biased and not objective.

I testified with Scripture. Where's yours?

Seeing a physical fulfillment of a prophecy doesn't make me carnal. That is ridiculous. Zechariah 9:9 prophesies about Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a donkey, does it not? Does seeing that as having been literally, physically fulfilled as written mean I'm looking at it through a carnal lens? Of course not. Such nonsense.

Strawmen argument. I never said that Zechariah 9:9 needed to be understood spiritually.

Yes, He did. When He said "See these things" He was referring to the same things (the temple buildings) that the disciples were pointing at.

Prophesy has never been subject to any man's historical observations, personal opinions, individual explanations or learned, scholarly suppositions. Interpretation is by God through God's word alone.

Matthew 24:1-2

• "And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
• And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

Of course, the natural man would look at this and think that God was speaking about a physical temple buildings, but the spiritual man knows God speaks of the congregation as a temple and those within it as the stones of that Temple. That's not something I made up, that's a Biblical fact.

Yes, the Lord judges, not you. Remember that.

That's what I said. LOL.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I would disagree with your assessment on me, and premils, in regards to ignoring on 1 Peter 5:9.

Of course you would. But, I stand by what I said regardless.

The “camp of saints” in vs 9 of revelation 20 who resisted being deceived by Satan would be those very same saints that can resist according to 1 Peter 5:9.

What is your point here?

The gospels and epistles make it clear that 1.) the works of Satan were destroyed in the first century 2.) satan was actively working against the church

I simply believe 1.) refers to satans binding

So do I. His binding has allowed the gospel to be preached through the power of the Holy Spirit throughout the world, which continues on today.

2.) refers to satans deceiving and making war on the church.

No. He was not loosed in the first century already. He was making war on the church from the beginning, so if that marks the time when he was loosed that would mean he was bound for a very short time which makes no sense. That turns the thousand years into a very short time instead. Why would a thousand years symbolically represent a very short time? That's impossible.

Satan deceiving, hindering and leading astray, but soon to be crushed, as stated by Paul is difficult to reconcile with the traditional amil position that satan is now bound and will be released.

Like premils, you give Satan way too much credit and make him out to be more powerful than what he actually is. Does Hebrews 2:14-15 not say that the power of death that he held before Christ's death was taken away from him which led to people being set free from their fear of death? In your view it seems that the power of death was given right back to him shortly after it was taken away. I can't make any sense of your view at all.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

According to who? God or you?

We both believe we get our understanding from God, of course. These types of questions are pointless and useless.

See... the Jewish Temple is Christ. Christ is not a physical/literal building of bricks, but the building "represented" Christ. And actually, it was God's Holy Temple, God's Holy Place, the Jews just worshipped there illustrating they were in the presence of God. The Holy Temple was established long ago specifically to "represent" Christ. Physically no, Christ wasn't that Old Testament Holy Temple in Matthew 24 any more than He is our New Testament Holy Temple we read of in 2nd Thessalonians 2. As previously stated, both these Holy Temples are a figure of the assembly (body of believers) "representing" Christ's body. They can and will fall away or go into apostasy.

You can't just act as if the physical temple buildings didn't exist. And they are not there still today no matter how desperately you try to act as if they are. So, Jesus's prophecy of their destruction was dead on and He deserves our praise for it.

Hebrews 6:6

• "If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."

"This" falling away of these people of the corporate church/congregation is like doing what Old Testament Israel did in crucifying Christ. By being a church that falls away, they (representing Him) literally put Him to an open shame. This is the intimate relationship Christ has established with His assembly that He so closely identifies Himself with them. What corporate Israel did outwardly in falling away, those today who fall away also do the exact same thing. They virtually crucify again the Son of God. If you don't think the corporate church of God is represented by the Holy Temple with unsaved sinners in it, read again 2nd Thessalonians 2.

I never said that I believe the temple of God in 2 Thess 2 is a physical temple. You waste so much time telling me things that I already know. You can't get that time back. Just stick to what we're actually talking about and stop making assumptions that I am not aware of spiritual things. That isn't the issue. The issue is that you turn every prophecy into having spiritual fulfillments when that is not the case. You lack objectivity. You are a hyper-spiritualist. I believe what happened to you is that you used to be a hyper-literalist and you then overcompensated for that and became a hyper-spiritualist.

Matthew 24 is an illustration signifying both are intimately related. One mirroring the other, since there is nothing new under the sun. When I look at the fall of the Holy Temple representing Christ in 33 AD, I see in the rest of Matthew 24 the fall of the Holy Temple representing Christ in the time of the end. God has designed it that way. You just don't understand it...yet.

I'm not ever going to agree with you on that, so give that idea up.

Ahhh...There's always an alternative view. Even the Scribes and Pharisees had an alternative view. The question is, does this view harmonize with the word of God or does it contradict it. That is the pertinent question.

Obviously, I believe yours does not and you believe that about mine. We already know all this. Stop wasting time saying things that we both already know. It serves no purpose.

Nowhere God used Roman armies to destroy a physical city and the temple. The Jews are their own enemies when they have rejected their Messiah the Prince and did destroy the temple (Christ) which they are part of his body. You need to see it from God's perspective according to His Word. Not world history.

But He did. And why wouldn't He? Look at how Jesus criticized the Pharisees and scribes in Matthew 23. Clearly, God was angry with them. It was only a matter of time before His wrath would come down on them. Their rejection of Christ and their insistence on foolishly continuing the animal sacrifices and such at the temple had to be stopped and God did that.

Sorry, you are looking at the wrong city and the sanctuary. It was not the physical building or stones Christ talked about. I have shown you the Scripture exactly what Christ saw the stones as!

Let's stop playing games and break down the text itself.

Matthew 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.

Do you believe the disciples were showing Jesus the physical temple buildings?

Matthew 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Immediately after they showed Him the temple buildings He asked "See ye not all these things"? He was clearly talking about something they could see. How could He not have been talking about the same things (the temple buildings) that they had just showed Him? That makes no sense. The context of this passage is not the same as a passage like John 2:19-21.

Like I said often in the past, the Lord judges and I am comfortable with that. He will decide which testimony is correct. I can't convince everyone. It's the Holy Spirit's job.

Of course. You continue to say things like this as if I don't already know things like this myself. I suggest not wasting your time doing that. I don't need you to tell me things like this.

Ever hear of the Western wall? King Herod built this wall in 20 BCE during an expansion of the Second Temple. When the Romans destroyed the temple in 70 CE, the support wall survived. For hundreds of years, people prayed in the small area of the wall that could be seen.

Rationally much?

Give me a break. The Western Wall was not part of the temple buildings themselves. The disciples were not marveling at the Western Wall, they were marveling at the temple buildings themselves. The Western Wall is not a building. The text specifically references the buildings which were the places that had 4 walls and people could go inside. Those are "these things" that Jesus said would be destroyed. And they were. This is such a dishonest and desperate attempt to keep your interpretation afloat. Don't you want to approach God's word honestly and objectively?

I am not being silly. I say that you are reading the chapter of Matthew 24 literally thinking Christ was talking about physical war, famine, pestilences, etc.

You even deny that He was talking about physical earthquakes, wars, famines, pestilences, etc.? You have lost all objectivity. The solution for getting out of one extreme false doctrine that you used to believe (pre-trib dispensationalism) is not to go completely the other way to another extreme doctrine. You have no balance or objectivity in your approach to scripture. Instead of looking at it with a hyper-literal approach like you used to, you know look at it with a hyper-spiritual approach. So, you have overcompensated. There's no reason to be so extreme in your approach.

And you don't even believe that the chapter was talking about the New Testament congregation prior to Second Coming. I have explained Matthew 24 before and you still don't accept it. Not going to waste my time with you on this.

Good. I don't want you to waste your time with me on this. My made is made up on this just as yours is. And that's okay. We have not come to believe what we do after only a short time studying scripture. We have each studied it a long time and it makes sense to eventually make up your mind on some things, which is fine. We disagree on these things we're talking about here and agree on a number of other things. So be it. You're not going to find anyone who agrees with you on everything.

Its up to Jesus Christ to decide if my testimony is false. What I see so far is that you have not refuted me biblically so far.

Of course you don't. And I don't see that you have refuted me biblically so far, either. And that is not likely to change for either of us. So be it. We can agree to disagree respectfully on this, keeping in mind that we do agree on a good number of other things.

You tell me.

I never said that Revelation 12 had anything to do with what happened in 70 AD. So, there you go. Stop making assumptions about how I interpret any given passage. Just ask if you don't know.

I testified with Scripture. Where's yours?

You can't be serious here. You have seen many of my posts, have you not? Not just in this thread, but others. Do you seriously think I don't back up my views with scripture? You know that I do. So, I don't need you questioning me like this. It's ridiculous.

Strawmen argument. I never said that Zechariah 9:9 needed to be understood spiritually.

The point was that you come across as if all prophecy has a spiritual fulfillment, but I gave you one example where that wasn't the case. I don't see why Matthew 24:1-2 couldn't have a literal, physical fulfillment.

Prophesy has never been subject to any man's historical observations, personal opinions, individual explanations or learned, scholarly suppositions. Interpretation is by God through God's word alone.

Again, you tell me something I already know. Stop wasting your time doing that. You are not more spiritual than I am as if you understand spiritual things and I don't. That's not the case.

Matthew 24:1-2

• "And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
• And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

Of course, the natural man would look at this and think that God was speaking about a physical temple buildings, but the spiritual man knows God speaks of the congregation as a temple and those within it as the stones of that Temple. That's not something I made up, that's a Biblical fact.

This is ridiculous. That's like saying I'm being like the natural man by seeing Zechariah 9:9 as having a literal, physical fulfillment. Stop this nonsense already.

That's what I said. LOL.

No kidding. Obviously. I didn't say otherwise. I'm just saying to not forget what you said because we all need to remember it and keep it in mind, including you.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

And your explanation above has absolutely no relationship to Satan's binding seen in Revelation 20:1-3 "None"

Yes, it does. One difference between our views of Revelation 20 is that I believe that all of the things referenced there are also referenced in other scripture, but you don't.

Christ's reign is referenced in other scripture, right? Though we disagree in our understanding of the first resurrection, we agree that it's referenced elsewhere in scripture, right? Believers reigning with Christ as priests is referenced in other scripture (1 Peter 2:9, Rev 1:5-6), right? The resurrection of the dead is referenced in other scripture and the judgment is referenced in other scripture. Agree? But, despite all that, you think Satan's binding and his loosing is not referenced in any other scripture? Why wouldn't it be, considering that the rest of what is described in Revelation 20 is all referenced in other scripture?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Just like your denial regarding the future literal human man as (The Beast) in Revelation chapter 13

AND

The future literal prophets returned (Two Witnesses) in physical bodies that die as seen in Revelation chapter 11

Why are you so childish? Seeing those two prophecies as having spiritual fulfillments means I see all prophecy as having spiritual fulfillments? Hardly. Grow up.

 

[parousia70]

The Bible clearly teaches that humans are possessed by devils, this is seen throughout the scripture, just one example being the man in the caves inhabitants by a legion that were dealt into the swine

These devils are part of Satan's Kingdom on this earth, your suggestion Satan isn't active today is a big smile

What Power do you believe Satan has over the elect today?

 

[parousia70]

There are scriptures that point to satan still being around. That he is not hidden away in a bottomless pit right now and nor is he bound.

So this scripture is false?
Matthew 12:28-29
If I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you...how can anyone enter the strong man's house and carry off his property, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house.

Jesus here claims to have bound satan and plundered his house. Was He Mistaken?

I asked this of another member above, but I'll ask it of you as well.

What power do you say satan has over the elect today? Any?

 

[Truth7t7]

What Power do you believe Satan has over the elect today?

What do you believe?

 

[claninja]

What is your point here?

That I don’t overlook 1 Peter 5:9.

Why would 1 Peter 5:9 not apply to the camp of saints upon Satan going out, deceiving the “ends of the earth” and battling against the them?

No. He was not loosed in the first century already. He was making war on the church from the beginning, so if that marks the time when he was loosed that would mean he was bound for a very short time which makes no sense. That turns the thousand years into a very short time instead. Why would a thousand years symbolically represent a very short time? That's impossible.

It’s a symbolic vision. It’s ironic to call one interpretation ridiculous while also symbolically interpreting the Vision.

Point to any gospel or epistolic passage that specifically states Satan will be released from the abyss after a long period of time , and then we can talk seriously about your interpretation of the symbolic passage.

Like premils, you give Satan way too much credit and make him out to be more powerful than what he actually is. Does Hebrews 2:14-15 not say that the power of death that he held before Christ's death was taken away from him which led to people being set free from their fear of death? In your view it seems that the power of death was given right back to him shortly after it was taken away. I can't make any sense of your view at all.

In regards to Satans “power”, I’ve not gone beyond what the epistles give us about what he can do.

1.) Satan deceiving as angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14)

2.) Satan being the prince of the power of the air, working through the sons of disobedience (Ephesians 2:2).

3.) satan hindering the spread of the gospel (1 Thessalonians 2:18)

4.) Satan having authority in Asia Minor to kill the saints and throw them in jail (revelation 2:10,13)

5.) Satan leading those astray (1 Timothy 5:15).

6.) Satan prowling and looking to devour (1 Peter 5:8).

In regards to “death”, I don’t know what your position is, but mine is that satans “power over death” is related to law. Satan’s power to accuse the saints and bring charges of death came from the law. But when Christ died, his righteousness was imputed to us, thus Satan no longer had the power of death to hold against the saints.

1 Corinthians 15:56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.

Hebrews 2:14 so that by His death He might destroy him who holds the power of death, that is, the devil

Revelation 12:10-11
the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down—he who accuses them day and night before our God.
11They have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony.

Your misunderstanding seems to think Im conflating satans war on the church with his power over death. Such is by no means true.

my view is that revelation 20 is simply a symbolic story containing elements of the gospel truths: Christ was victorious, Satan would persecute the church, but ultimately, the church is vindicated by God, sharing in Christs inheritance as a kingdom of priests to never face the 2nd death.

As far as Satan:

Satan was bound at the first resurrection (Jesus’ resurrection), right?


Satan was prowling looking to devour, working through the sons of disobedience, deceiving as angel of light, leading many astray, killing the saints, and throwing them in prison, FOLLOWING the first resurrection (Christs resurrection), right?

 

[parousia70]

What do you believe?

None.
How about you?

 

[claninja]

Please refer to post #27

Jesus Is The Lord

I have no disagreement that within the context of the Vision, Satan is bound from deceiving the nations to battle against the saints. Such is plain from a literal reading of the text.

The NT describe satan as actively deceiving as an angel of light, working through the sons of sons of disobedience, prowling like a lion and looking to devour, hindering the gospel to the nations, killing the saints, throwing the saints In prison, and leading many astray AFTER the resurrection of Christ, BUT Satan would soon be crushed (Romans 16:20).

So where should these events associated with satans activity be placed, during the first resurrection/millennium, or after the first resurrection/satans little season?

 

[TribulationSigns]

We both believe we get our understanding from God, of course. These types of questions are pointless and useless.

But I can see that you did NOT get an understanding from God concerning Matthew 24:1-2. Or at least not yet.

You can't just act as if the physical temple buildings didn't exist.

It was. Only as a type.

And they are not there still today no matter how desperately you try to act as if they are.

I did my researching. Have you?

So, Jesus's prophecy of their destruction was dead on and He deserves our praise for it.

Jesus' prophecy of the fall of Old Testament congregation at the Cross was dead on and He deserves our praise for it. The Lord Judges and I am comfortable with it.

I never said that I believe the temple of God in 2 Thess 2 is a physical temple. You waste so much time telling me things that I already know. You can't get that time back. Just stick to what we're actually talking about and stop making assumptions that I am not aware of spiritual things. That isn't the issue. The issue is that you turn every prophecy into having spiritual fulfillments when that is not the case. You lack objectivity. You are a hyper-spiritualist. I believe what happened to you is that you used to be a hyper-literalist and you then overcompensated for that and became a hyper-spiritualist.

Learn to compare Scripture with Scripture and you probably will be closer to the Truth. Not interested in the labeling game you are playing with.

I'm not ever going to agree with you on that, so give that idea up.

Too bad. I used to believe exactly what you believe in three books covering Olivet Discourse. I can see why you are not yet enlightened on the books yet. Praying for you.

Obviously, I believe yours does not and you believe that about mine. We already know all this. Stop wasting time saying things that we both already know. It serves no purpose.

Does God agree with you? Only one of both is the Truth.

But He did. And why wouldn't He? Look at how Jesus criticized the Pharisees and scribes in Matthew 23. Clearly, God was angry with them.
It was only a matter of time before His wrath would come down on them. Their rejection of Christ and their insistence on foolishly continuing the animal sacrifices and such at the temple had to be stopped and God did that.

Of course. Don't you realize that Christ clearly told the JEWS to destroy the temple and in three days he will rise it up? The Jews thought he was talking about physical temple but he was talking about THEM, His people! But you still cannot see this truth because you are so stuck with the idea that Christ used the Romans instead to destroy the physical temple and the city in 70AD. You are wrong.

Let's stop playing games and break down the text itself.

Matthew 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.

Do you believe the disciples were showing Jesus the physical temple buildings?

Yes, the disciples with their natural thinking about the physical city but they were not enlightened with the Holy Spirit yet.

Matthew 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Immediately after they showed Him the temple buildings He asked "See ye not all these things"? He was clearly talking about something they could see. How could He not have been talking about the same things (the temple buildings) that they had just showed Him? That makes no sense. The context of this passage is not the same as a passage like John 2:19-21.

Of course, the natural man would look at this and think that God was speaking about a physical temple building, but the spiritual man knows God speaks of the congregation as a temple and those within it as the stones of that Temple. That's not something I made up, that's a Biblical fact.

Of course. You continue to say things like this as if I don't already know things like this myself. I suggest not wasting your time doing that. I don't need you to tell me things like this.

I am just saying something that is true. You seem to get offended and defensive easily.

Give me a break. The Western Wall was not part of the temple buildings themselves. The disciples were not marveling at the Western Wall, they were marveling at the temple buildings themselves. The Western Wall is not a building. The text specifically references the buildings which were the places that had 4 walls and people could go inside. Those are "these things" that Jesus said would be destroyed. And they were. This is such a dishonest and desperate attempt to keep your interpretation afloat. Don't you want to approach God's word honestly and objectively?

Buy yourself a flight ticket to Jerusalem and talk with historic experts on the city and see the stones for yourself.

You even deny that He was talking about physical earthquakes, wars, famines, pestilences, etc.? You have lost all objectivity.

You don't get it. The prophecy is about the fall of the NEW testament congregation. Remember the destruction old Testament congregation was already discussed in Matthew 24:1-2. The old testament congregation is done with. Then the rest of the chapter, Christ is now talking about His new testament congregation in the future with the rise of false prophets and christs, earthquakes, famines, etc. right prior to Second Coming with the great tribulation:

Here is a little lesson, if not full expositions of Matthew 24:

Wars and Rumors of Wars:

Verse seven is illustrating a time when it is brother against brother, kingdom against kingdom and nation against nation. It is a symbolic illustration of spiritual warfare where those ruled by one king are adversarial to those ruled by another king.

Matthew 10:34

• "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."

Christ was not talking about a literal, physical warfare, but spiritual war where the people who are not of God would be at odds against the people who are of God. And whosoever would not take up the sword which is the Word of God (Ephesians 6:17; Hebews 4:12), is not worthy of God. i.e., it's not talking about a literal war, and this is not talking about a literal peace or peace between earthly nations.

The believers are represented as the chosen, the spiritual Israel, the spiritual Jews, the holy nation, the people of the kingdom of Christ. And the unbelievers are represented spiritually as the reprobates, the the nation of gentiles, the kingdom of Satan. This is one Holy nation and kingdom against the unholy nation and Kingdom of Satan. This is the war spoken of in the preceding verse, not war between literal nation or people. Spiritual war and rumors of wars between spiritual people, nations and kingdoms.

Exodus 19:5

• "Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
• And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel."

1st Peter 2:9

• "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:"

We are that royal kingship (kingdom of Priests), and that holy nation. One kingdom and nation that is adversarial against another.

Famine:

The famine is symbolic language to signify a famine (lack of) hearing the word of God. Not literal/physical earthly famines.

Amos 8:11-12

• "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:
• And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the LORD, and shall not find it."

Pestilence:

Pestilence is symbolic of spiritual sickness or disease that as a plague comes upon spiritual Egypt comes from God. Egypt, that nation that held the children of God in bondage. As we see in Revelation where God is pouring out these spiritual plagues upon God's congregation that is now spiritually is called Egypt. He's not making the world physically sick or diseased, but in Loosening Satan he allows the unfaithful of the church to become spiritually sick. Remember, Christ came as the Physician (Matthew 9:12; Mark 2:17) illustrating to heal sin, our spiritual sickness. Selah!

Revelation 15:8

• "And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from his power; and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled."

Revelation 16:9

• "And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory."

Revelation 18:4

• "And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues."

Revelation 18:8

• "Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her."

Earthquakes:

Earthquakes symbolize the shaking of the Lord upon the earth, and His judgments upon the world.

Isaiah 24:19-21

• "The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly.
• The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage; and the transgression thereof shall be heavy upon it; and it shall fall, and not rise again.
• And it shall come to pass in that day, that the LORD shall punish the host of the high ones that are on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth."

Haggai 2:21-22

• "Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, I will shake the heavens and the earth;
• And I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms, and I will destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the heathen; and I will overthrow the chariots, and those that ride in them; and the horses and their riders shall come down, every one by the sword of his brother."

Verse seven is an illustration of the shaking in the judgment of the Lord upon the Kingdoms. Famine and Plagues, are symbolisms of the end-time events which precede the Second Advent of Christ. Let me ask you something, Christ talked about the rise of false prophets and christs, did it happen in Israel before 70AD? Humm? Do you even understand who is a mother with those who sucks?

Good. I don't want you to waste your time with me on this.

No need to waste your breath if you do not agree. My correct I against your position is here for anyone ELSE to read for their edification.

My made is made up on this just as yours is. And that's okay.

That is between you and God.

You're not going to find anyone who agrees with you on everything.

Have I said this before?

Of course you don't. And I don't see that you have refuted me biblically so far, either. And that is not likely to change for either of us. So be it. We can agree to disagree respectfully on this, keeping in mind that we do agree on a good number of other things.

I never said that Revelation 12 had anything to do with what happened in 70 AD.

Praise the Lord.

So, there you go. Stop making assumptions about how I interpret any given passage. Just ask if you don't know.

Okay...

You can't be serious here. You have seen many of my posts, have you not?
Not just in this thread, but others. Do you seriously think I don't back up my views with scripture? You know that I do. So, I don't need you questioning me like this. It's ridiculous.

My apology if you feel that way.

The point was that you come across as if all prophecy has a spiritual fulfillment, but I gave you one example where that wasn't the case. I don't see why Matthew 24:1-2 couldn't have a literal, physical fulfillment.

Keep in mind that I do not read everything in Scripture spiritually. Only when the context warrants it. And I can SEE why Matthew 24:1-2 was NOT fulfilled literally as you believe. Like I said.... spiritual discernment.

This is ridiculous. That's like saying I'm being like the natural man by seeing Zechariah 9:9 as having a literal, physical fulfillment. Stop this nonsense already.

The truth is that you still have natural eyes as far as Matthew 24 is concerned...like the Preterists that I found their doctrine concerning temple and the city in 70AD to be FALSE.

 

[Truth7t7]

I have no disagreement that within the context of the Vision, Satan is bound from deceiving the nations to battle against the saints. Such is plain from a literal reading of the text.

The NT describe satan as actively deceiving as an angel of light, working through the sons of sons of disobedience, prowling like a lion and looking to devour, hindering the gospel to the nations, killing the saints, throwing the saints In prison, and leading many astray AFTER the resurrection of Christ, BUT Satan would soon be crushed (Romans 16:20).

So where should these events associated with satans activity be placed, during the first resurrection/millennium, or after the first resurrection/satans little season?

As my response clearly stated, Satan is "Presently" bound from (deceiving the nations) to battle

Satan will be loosed at the end of the tribulation for a season, when the 6th vial is poured out

 

[parousia70]

Wait... how do you reconcile THIS:

your suggestion Satan isn't active today is a big smile

With THIS:

Satan is "Presently" bound

??

Aren't these two statements Polar Opposite from one another?

 

[Truth7t7]

Wait... how do you reconcile THIS:



With THIS:

??

Aren't these two statements Polar Opposite from one another?

Please read and respond to post #27 with your question on Satan being presently bound?

 

[parousia70]

Please read and respond to post #27 with your question on Satan being presently bound?

I'd prefer a little give and take instead of me just ansewering your questions.... besides, your post #27 isn't addressed to me.

Please respond to my post # 92 before we move on.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

But I can see that you did NOT get an understanding from God concerning Matthew 24:1-2. Or at least not yet.

We both think that the other is not getting an understanding from God in the cases where we think the other person is wrong. But, we don't need to point that out every time we think the other person is wrong. Do you understand what I'm saying? Would you like it if I told you you're NOT getting an understanding from God every time I disagree with you about something? I'm sure you wouldn't. So, let's leave comments like that out of the discussion.

It was. Only as a type.

What do you suppose God thought of it when they foolishly continued to perform animal sacrifices there at the temple while not acknowledging Jesus's "once for all" sacrifice? Do you think God would want to punish them for that? I do. And He did.

I did my researching. Have you?

Of course I have. That's why I know you don't know what you're talking about.

Jesus' prophecy of the fall of Old Testament congregation at the Cross was dead on and He deserves our praise for it.

Yes, He deserves praise for that, too.

Learn to compare Scripture with Scripture and you probably will be closer to the Truth. Not interested in the labeling game you are playing with.

LOL. I tell others all the time that they should interpret scripture with scripture, so this was a ridiculous thing to say to me.

Too bad. I used to believe exactly what you believe in three books covering Olivet Discourse. I can see why you are not yet enlightened on the books yet. Praying for you.

LOL. I am the one who needs to pray for you. But, God isn't going to force you to see the truth about this. You have to be open to it.

Does God agree with you? Only one of both is the Truth.

Of course I believe that He does. Any other silly questions you'd like to ask me?

Of course. Don't you realize that Christ clearly told the JEWS to destroy the temple and in three days he will rise it up? The Jews thought he was talking about physical temple but he was talking about THEM, His people!

Of course. But, that is not the context of the Olivet Discourse.

But you still cannot see this truth

Who told you I don't see that truth? I see it and agree with it. But, I disagree that the Olivet Discourse has anything to do with that. Stop making assumptions about what I believe. It's making you look very bad. Take the time to find out what I believe if you don't know.

because you are so stuck with the idea that Christ used the Romans instead to destroy the physical temple and the city in 70AD. You are wrong.

I'm not suck with that idea. I'm fully aware of what was accomplished on the cross as well. It's possible to understand both, you know?

Of course, the natural man would look at this and think that God was speaking about a physical temple building, but the spiritual man knows God speaks of the congregation as a temple and those within it as the stones of that Temple. That's not something I made up, that's a Biblical fact.

The natural man doesn't know what the Olivet Discourse is about at all. The spiritual man understands that scripture contains both literal and spiritual fulfillments of Bible prophecy. You have become a hyper-spiritual extremist who thinks that everything has a spiritual fulfillment.

I am just saying something that is true. You seem to get offended and defensive easily.

If me not wanting to waste time means I'm offended easily, then so be it. If you can't understand not wanting to waste time with nonsense then I don't know what to tell you.

Buy yourself a flight ticket to Jerusalem and talk with historic experts on the city and see the stones for yourself.

LOL. You are just not getting it. Are you even trying? Do you understand that the city now is very different than it was in 70 AD? The borders aren't even the same as they were then. We'd have to take a time machine to 70 AD if we wanted to prove these things with 100% certainty.

Here is a little lesson

I don't need a lesson from you. Spiritualizing everything in the prophecy shows your lack of objectivity and I have nothing to learn from someone with no objectivity.

My apology if you feel that way.

If I feel that way? Of course I do or I wouldn't have said it. This doesn't come across as a sincere apology.

Keep in mind that I do not read everything in Scripture spiritually.

What part of the Olivet Discourse do you not read spiritually? From what you've said so far, I'm not aware of any part of it that you take literally.

Only when the context warrants it.

Why does the context warrant it at least 90% of the time in your view?

And I can SEE why Matthew 24:1-2 was NOT fulfilled literally as you believe. Like I said.... spiritual discernment.

Spiritual discernment has nothing to do with intepreting something as being spiritual rather than literal and physical. Spiritual discernment has to do with discerning if something is meant to be interpreted literally and/or physically or if it is meant to be interpreted spiritually or figuratively.

The truth is that you still have natural eyes as far as Matthew 24 is concerned

That's not the truth.

 

[parousia70]

Ever the optomist... I'll go ahead an honor your request that I comment on your post #27 below, as it exemplifies my question in posts 88 & 92

Satan Is Presently Bound As Is Clearly Seen In (Revelation) 20:7-8 Below That Interprets (Deceive The Nations) Is To Battle, Not General Evil In The World Presently.

In the context of "general evil in the world today", do the elect have any power over Satan presently?