Revelation was written during Nero's reign before 70AD

Interplanner · Jul 6, 2013

sorry BW, but the fig tree/generation usage you are putting forth is just mistaken. What your version of the Bible has is some sort of 'lining' that says 'Jesus would never dare talk about his own generation, about any thing right at hand, life/death risks, with vital instructions to them. THEREFORE all these remarks must be cut loose from history and have to do with things thousands of years away.'

Talk about imagined problems with the text!

I've looked everywhere and don't see this 'lining' anywhere. It's just a form of modern a-historical thinking about which it is in denial.

There would not be a better way for Jesus to distance himself from the problem of the Galilean rebels (a problem for Rome) than to give these direct, vital warnings to his own followers and grieve at the same time for the rest of his people. Which is what he did.

Biblewriter · Jul 6, 2013

Interplanner said:
sorry BW, but the fig tree/generation usage you are putting forth is just mistaken. What your version of the Bible has is some sort of 'lining' that says 'Jesus would never dare talk about his own generation, about any thing right at hand, life/death risks, with vital instructions to them. THEREFORE all these remarks must be cut loose from history and have to do with things thousands of years away.'

Talk about imagined problems with the text!

I've looked everywhere and don't see this 'lining' anywhere. It's just a form of modern a-historical thinking about which it is in denial.

There would not be a better way for Jesus to distance himself from the problem of the Galilean rebels (a problem for Rome) than to give these direct, vital warnings to his own followers and grieve at the same time for the rest of his people. Which is what he did.

In case you did not notice, I very clearly said that Jesus was talking about first century events in Matthew 23 and Luke 21, just not in Matthew 24. You are adding the "Lining" to the Bible by claiming that Jesus was only talking about first century events.

Codger · Jul 6, 2013

Biblewriter;63504372 This disinformation was evidently started by J. Stuart Russell said:
Right - Josephus said that the city was built on two hills - in his day. The city was founded on three hills; but during the reign of Simon the Hasmonian - the Akra, Or Mount Zion, on which the city of David stood was cut down to bedrock. After that this area was called "the lower city." A few buildings from the old city of David (fortress of Zion) were moved to the west to the new location. The fact is that David never set foot on the present "City of David" archeological site.

Jerusalem is surrounded by hills so if our viewpoint requires seven hills - all we have to do is add four of the surrounding hills in order to get the count. Those who do so usually start with the Mount of Olives, which has three peaks and they count each peak. Two problems here - the MoO was outside of the city of Jerusalem. The MoO was a burial ground and there were no houses or buildings on the SW slope - so I don't know how anyone could say that Jerusalem was built upon seven hills.

We're looking at the situation as John saw it in the first century. The MoO has been a graveyard for over 3,000 years and today there are over 150,000 known graves there - and counting. They even have a website now; and in 10 years they say the graveyard will be full, but already they are building multiple level structures. Like a sort of permanent parking garage.

Rome on the other hand was physically built on all seven hills; and this has been validated in many sources in history including Josephus as I recall.

Biblewriter · Jul 6, 2013

Codger said:
Right - Josephus said that the city was built on two hills - in his day. The city was founded on three hills; but during the reign of Simon the Hasmonian - the Akra, Or Mount Zion, on which the city of David stood was cut down to bedrock. After that this area was called "the lower city." A few buildings from the old city of David (fortress of Zion) were moved to the west to the new location. The fact is that David never set foot on the present "City of David" archeological site.

Jerusalem is surrounded by hills so if our viewpoint requires seven hills - all we have to do is add four of the surrounding hills in order to get the count. Those who do so usually start with the Mount of Olives, which has three peaks and they count each peak. Two problems here - the MoO was outside of the city of Jerusalem. The MoO was a burial ground and there were no houses or buildings on the SW slope - so I don't know how anyone could say that Jerusalem was built upon seven hills.

We're looking at the situation as John saw it in the first century. The MoO has been a graveyard for over 3,000 years and today there are over 150,000 known graves there - and counting. They even have a website now; and in 10 years they say the graveyard will be full, but already they are building multiple level structures. Like a sort of permanent parking garage.

Rome on the other hand was physically built on all seven hills; and this has been validated in many sources in history – including Josephus as I recall.

In support of what you said, here is a Roman coin that depicts Rome as a woman sitting on seven hills (count them.) This coin is called the Roma sestertius of Vespacian, and is extremely rare. It is thought to have been minted in 71 A.D.

This picture is my own mosaic from several photos. A much better image is available at:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/antiquitiesproject/5906496802/sizes/o/in/photostream/

interpreter · Jul 6, 2013

All of the Church fathers say the Revelation was written in 95 or 96AD. Some of the Asian churches did not exist until then. The first seal was opened shortly after that, in 312 AD when the sign of the Son of Man appeared in the clouds, and Jesus came into power through St. Constantine who rode a white horse and conquered with a bow.

Biblewriter · Jul 6, 2013

interpreter said:
All of the Church fathers say the Revelation was written in 95 or 96AD. Some of the Asian churches did not exist until then. The first seal was opened shortly after that, in 312 AD when the sign of the Son of Man appeared in the clouds, and Jesus came into power through St. Constantine who rode a white horse and conquered with a bow.

It would be more accurate to say, many of them said things leading to that conclusion.

Interplanner · Jul 6, 2013

you're very stubborn, BW. If he was talking about the desolation at the end of 23 and then they ask about it, and then he goes on it with, then....duh?

Besides I'm the person who says it is about that time until v29 (prob in 100 posts), and then he is talking about the future--or allowing for distant future. You have an obsession that the 1st half is catapulted (no pun on Roman military hardware) to the future. I can't imagine any reason why Jesus would suddenly be talking about that.

Imagine the Havasupi near Lake Mead in 800 AD (I think). They can't make it; the lake is drying, they've tried everything, even homes half buried in the ground to keep cool. But there is a prophet (or a nut-case) in the group who says that 2000 years from then, man will they have trouble! But he talks about the future trouble like it is all there is to be concerned about now. Wars, and famines, and relocating. Nothing practical about what to do then, but man, is he an expert on what they will need to do 2000 years from then!

I refuse to find Jesus in that category of prophet/nut-case. Everything about futurism puts him there. It makes a nut-case of him, because of the assumption that a "prophet" is totally disconnected to his times--even if he was right about the distant future. Why have language that 'swerves' close to the current situation, like teasing the audience, only to frustrate them, but not really mean anything about what was happening then? Yuck. Makes me puke. You can have your detached, space-case, insulting "Jesus."

He was not like that nor did he used OT to validate that. When he warned the women and their children in Lk 23:28, he was quoting Hosea, because that is what it was about--the cataclysm at the end of that generation would be worse than his own suffering. He was a real man; a real soldier; always thinking of those victims first.

As long as futurism is like this, it will be bankrupt and will only present a dessicated version of Jesus, compared to what he was really like in terms of his times.

btw, it is worthless to say Lk 21 is current times and Mt 24 is not. Very shoddy work.

AJCServant · Jul 14, 2013

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Hi all,[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Would anyone who would eventually read this besides myself have ever re-considered their previous view of our Father God's sovereign decisions concerning apocalyptic scripture after doing a study on the Greek word katargeo-fail in 1 Corinthians 13, especially since this is what Paul was obviously referring to when he used this particular word? [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]OR has anyone ever seen anything posted concerning how the word katargeō-fail might be applied to promote a best-case interpretation of apocalyptic scripture? Whereby some “lay-evangelists” might more convincingly use it to proclaim Jesus' good-news-gospel of mercy, peace and reconciliation towards “all” of prodigal mankind, whenever our Father God's sovereignty would allow many “judgment” prophecies that fallible but inerrantly inspired men wrote 2000 years ago to katargeo-fail.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]OR has anyone ever seen anything posted concerning this particular word katargeō-fail and how it would likely apply to our Father God's sovereign choices to glorify Himself with how He will eventually “use” apocalyptic prophetic scriptures to become a good-news-gospel “blessing” to “all” of His prodigal children? Especially since I who am not a miniscule of “good” as our Father God is “good” would also hope that Revelation 1:3 would be fulfilled in this way.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Thank you everyone for your posts. They will eventually be helpful to everyone who might someday read this thread.

Shalom in Jesus,
A Servant of Jesus Christ
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] 10&15&17 & Revelation 21 & [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John 16:13-14[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] 16:13-14 Howbeit when [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]the Spirit of truth[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], is come, [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] will guide you into all truth[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: for [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall not speak of [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Himself[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]; but whatsoever [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall hear, that shall [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] speak: and [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] will shew you things to come[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]glorify me[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: for [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall receive of me, and shall shew it unto you.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]PS any further "edifying", "wholesome" and helpful comments anyone?[/FONT]

Interplanner · Jul 14, 2013

Let me simplify your question and see if I have it: Paul said prophecy will 'katargeo.' Does this mean there is prophecy that will not be fulfilled as expected in its literal sense?

Biblewriter · Jul 14, 2013

Interplanner said:
Let me simplify your question and see if I have it: Paul said prophecy will 'katargeo.' Does this mean there is prophecy that will not be fulfilled as expected in its literal sense?

No, it meant that there would come a time when there would be no more new prophecies.

If it meant that even one prophecy that came from God would not be fulfilled, that would have been a flat contradiction of other inspired scriptures.

If even one statement inspired by God directly contradicted any other statement inspired by God, then God would have been a liar.

shturt678 · Jul 14, 2013

AJCServant said:
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Hi all,[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Would anyone who would eventually read this besides myself have ever re-considered their previous view of our Father God's sovereign decisions concerning apocalyptic scripture after doing a study on the Greek word katargeo-fail in 1 Corinthians 13, especially since this is what Paul was obviously referring to when he used this particular word? [/FONT]

katargew grammatically and contextually dealing with "prophecies" are either the charismatic gifts themselves or the exercise or there gifts, actual acts of prophesying, but not the facts or the truths prophesied, for they, too, endure. Have to stop as my gift of the Spirit is to tell Christians what they don't want to hear, ie, figured the former didn't have too much vinegar, although not many will agree, great!

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]OR has anyone ever seen anything posted concerning how the word katargeō-fail might be applied to promote a best-case interpretation of apocalyptic scripture? Whereby some lay-evangelists might more convincingly use it to proclaim Jesus' good-news-gospel of mercy, peace and reconciliation towards all of prodigal mankind, whenever our Father God's sovereignty would allow many judgment prophecies that fallible but inerrantly inspired men wrote 2000 years ago to katargeo-fail.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]OR has anyone ever seen anything posted concerning this particular word katargeō-fail and how it would likely apply to our Father God's sovereign choices to glorify Himself with how He will eventually use apocalyptic prophetic scriptures to become a good-news-gospel blessing to all of His prodigal children? Especially since I who am not a miniscule of good as our Father God is good would also hope that Revelation 1:3 would be fulfilled in this way.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Thank you everyone for your posts. They will eventually be helpful to everyone who might someday read this thread.

Shalom in Jesus,
A Servant of Jesus Christ
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] 10&15&17 & Revelation 21 & [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John 16:13-14[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] 16:13-14 Howbeit when [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]the Spirit of truth[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], is come, [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] will guide you into all truth[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: for [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall not speak of [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Himself[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]; but whatsoever [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall hear, that shall [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] speak: and [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] will shew you things to come[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]glorify me[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: for [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall receive of me, and shall shew it unto you.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]PS any further "edifying", "wholesome" and helpful comments anyone?[/FONT]

AJCServant · Jul 15, 2013

Biblewriter said:
No, it meant that there would come a time when there would be no more new prophecies.

If it meant that even one prophecy that came from God would not be fulfilled, that would have been a flat contradiction of other inspired scriptures.

If even one statement inspired by God directly contradicted any other statement inspired by God, then God would have been a liar.

Thanks you two for your helpfulness to straightforwardly re-frame my question and to straightforwardly answer it with your view.

My hope and prayer is that perhaps some other Berean type disciples, (which most might agree is a rare few in some cultures), will weigh in on their own views in the days ahead; and "perhaps" would agree that God's sovereignty to glorify himself in the greatest measure possible on every occasion, should always trump any prophetic judgments with His mercy, as the anointed Apostle James prophecies should always occur via James 2:13 (NIV), and so our Father God's infinite mercy towards "all" of His prodigal children would always supersede any doctrines of men, or "ancient" judgement prophecies of fallible-men, when they are no longer necessary since repentance and maturity has occurred as written in 1 Corinthians 13:8.

James 2:13 (NIV) Because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment.

<><>1Corinthians 13:8-11<><>
Charity never faileth: but whether [there be] prophecies, they shall fail (katargeō [(-:] whether [there be] tongues, they shall cease; whether [there be] knowledge, it shall vanish away (i.e. fail - katargeo). For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect (mature) is come, then that which is in part shall be done away (katargeo). When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away (katargeō) childish things. <><>

Mercy is what occurred with Jonah's prophetic judgements against Ninevah, after wicked Ninevah repented during Jonah's day, since Jonah made their choice of God's judgement versus God's mercy "plain" to the Ninevites, and he was truly inspired by God's Holy Spirit when he spoke in His behalf. I have seen that the difference between infallibly inspired and inerrant prophecies from God and prophecies from men, is that men sometimes in their bitterness may not offer a possibility for repentance to avert any of "their" prophetic judgements, even though continual repentance towards maturity and Holiness in Christ Jesus our Lord is truly the only thing our Shekhinah Father God is eternally interested in.

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Thank you everyone for your posts. They will eventually be helpful to everyone who might someday read this thread.

Shalom in Jesus,
A Servant of Jesus Christ
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] 10&15&17 & Revelation 21 & [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John 16:13-14[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] 16:13-14 Howbeit when [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]the Spirit of truth[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], is come, [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] will guide you into all truth[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: for [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall not speak of [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Himself[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]; but whatsoever [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall hear, that shall [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] speak: and [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] will shew you things to come[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]glorify me[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: for [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall receive of me, and shall shew it unto you.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]PS any further "edifying", "wholesome" and helpful comments anyone?[/FONT]

AJCServant · Jul 22, 2013

Biblewriter said:
. . . then God would have been a liar.

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]PPS[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Whenever God's Holy Spirit first began to teach me to rightly divide various doctrines-of-men that would promote bigotries, bitterness, arrogance and unholiness that resulted from various men's interpretations of the scriptures, from all the eternal logos-rhema-doctrines-from-God, that would promote loving-holiness towards our Father God and all of mankind, the following verses in Romans 3 were enlightened to me in a strong way; Which then helped me to more easily discern the various burnable tares and weeds within all the infallible scriptures in the sixty-six books of our modern Bible.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Romans 3: 3-4, 10-12, 17 (3) For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? (4) God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar. . . . (10) As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: (11) there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. (12) They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. . . . (17) And the way of peace have they not known. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]So when Paul taught that God is true and every man a liar, I took his prophecy very very literally. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]And then I was able to understand that the Old Testament scriptures as they had been modified or initially written by various unholy men and scribes is what the devil Beelzebub used to seduce Paul concerning our Father God to not be good and loving and unchanging all-the-time, when at one time he saw our eternal God as a warrior-God, and being oftentimes unloving, and oftentimes whimsically legalistic, and where merciful-love had no large share of our Father God's character and eternal nature. [/FONT] [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Yet after Paul saw Jesus personally, his former view of Jesus' Father God in Heaven rapidly began to radically change until the Gentile world was substantially transformed as a result of his life efforts when he began to continuously yield himself to our Father God's Holy Spirit of prudent-wisdom and understanding. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Jesus promised that greater things would we do than HE was able to see accomplished, after the Holy Spirit would come and begin to reveal the truth about God's love into the hearts of good men. This is my hope today. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Thank you everyone for your posts. They will eventually be helpful to everyone who might someday read this thread.

Shalom in Jesus,
A Servant of Jesus Christ
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] 10&15&17 & Revelation 21 & [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John 16:13-14[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]John[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] 16:13-14 Howbeit when [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]the Spirit of truth[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], is come, [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] will guide you into all truth[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: for [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall not speak of [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Himself[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]; but whatsoever [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall hear, that shall [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] speak: and [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] will shew you things to come[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]glorify me[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: for [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]He[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] shall receive of me, and shall shew it unto you.

[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]PS any further "edifying", "wholesome" and helpful comments anyone?[/FONT][/FONT]

Interplanner · Jul 23, 2013

When Isaiah says the coming kingdom after the exile will have walls of Praise and gates of Salvation, I don't see what the lie is. BW would have us think God was lying because the temple Paul talked about was a living, growing thing of people in Eph 2. But I don't see what the lie would be. Paul's talking about the same thing as Isaiah, and BW, Doug, Yeshua, Bible2 are trying to be literal.

shturt678 · Jul 23, 2013

Interplanner said:
When Isaiah says the coming kingdom after the exile will have walls of Praise and gates of Salvation, I don't see what the lie is. BW would have us think God was lying because the temple Paul talked about was a living, growing thing of people in Eph 2. But I don't see what the lie would be. Paul's talking about the same thing as Isaiah, and BW, Doug, Yeshua, Bible2 are trying to be literal.

Eph.2 with the "Sanctuary", ie, not "temple," where its suppose to be built together into a habitation of God by the Holy Spirit. :o I'm with you my friend not nit picking, but we need to understand that partial truths are more damnable than just lies, ie, more difficult to detect leading too many into perdition, eg, Matt.18:6.

interpreter · Jul 23, 2013

The sixth head on the beast to trample Jerusalem was pagan Rome.

Biblewriter · Jul 23, 2013

Interplanner said:
When Isaiah says the coming kingdom after the exile will have walls of Praise and gates of Salvation, I don't see what the lie is. BW would have us think God was lying because the temple Paul talked about was a living, growing thing of people in Eph 2. But I don't see what the lie would be. Paul's talking about the same thing as Isaiah, and BW, Doug, Yeshua, Bible2 are trying to be literal.

If you read that more carefully, you would see that this was not what Isiah said at all. What he said was, "Violence shall no longer be heard in your land, Neither wasting nor destruction within your borders; But you shall call your walls Salvation, And your gates Praise." (Isaiah 60:18 NKJV)

He did not say that the walls would be salvation and the gates praise, (you had it backwards in your post) he said that 'you will call your walls salvation and your gates praise." That is a very different statement.

But in reading literally we do not discount the usage of figures of speech. They were obviously used. We simply insist, and insist is exactly what we mean, that, without a single exception, everything God ever said would happen either has already happened or will happen, exactly as He said it would.

Interplanner · Jul 25, 2013

Not very different as far as I can see. Just like another passage where the great enemy of Israel mentioned by the prophet turns out to be death itself. It sure sounded like it was Lebanon or Idumea.

Interplanner · Jul 25, 2013

Let's say you're right. Then the 'lie' would be that Paul came along telling about a living building that wasn't supposed to happen and so Paul is lying.

"sacrifices and offering I do not desire" is not a lie. It is about how all finite things in this world cannot contain the infinite, and so must be left behind after their season. That's what d'ism should be about but most of the guys are just amateurs about finding the passages that matter like Gal 3-4 or 2 Cor 3-5 and what they are saying.

Interplanner · Jul 25, 2013

Ie, was the thing Paul talked about never there in the OT even though he said it was embedded there until now and used phrase after phrase from those kinds of passages?

Revelation was written during Nero's reign before 70AD

Newbie

Senior Member

Regular Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Newbie

Active Member

Newbie

Senior Member

Senior Veteran

Active Member

Active Member

Newbie

Senior Veteran

Senior Member

Senior Member

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Similar threads