the literal interpretation of scripture

nolidad said:

YOU need to reread Josephus- He declared the abomination of desolation was Antiochus Epiphenes!

Click to expand...

Does that even matter?
I am pretty sure he was not a believer/ not Ekklesia/ not born again ? Did he get saved sometime ?

David Kent said:

That is a lie. Nothing about dispensationalism in the bible.
The first christian writers taught that the let and hindrance of 2 Thessalonians 2 was the Roman Empire and the Emperor. WHY? Because Paul told the Church. 2 Thessalonians 2:5

"You Know" said Paul. "We know" said Tertullian.

Click to expand...

So let us look at your hypotheses in light of Scripture.

2 Thessalonians 2 King James Version (KJV)
2 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

3 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;

4 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.

5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

So you are alleging that Paul taught that the mystery of Iniquity and THE WICKED One was being held back because of the Roman Empire?

Well The Empire fell in the fifth century so where is the man of sin????

nolidad said:

And there is definitely nothing that even remotely implies God is done with Israel as a nation!

Click to expand...

THIS IS TRUTH, by God's Word -
no matter what Josephus says ... or anyone else really....

yeshuaslavejeff said:

Does that even matter?
I am pretty sure he was not a believer/ not Ekklesia/ not born again ? Did he get saved sometime ?

Click to expand...

Well misquoting someone by one who says they are a believer is a big thing! But Josephus erred and that is well established- He did not write infallible scripture but an personal view of history.

yeshuaslavejeff said:

THIS IS TRUTH, by God's Word -
no matter what Josephus says ... or anyone else really....

Click to expand...

Absolutely!

But many of our beloved brethren have been led astray by past false teachers and I will fight until god says stop to show them Gods Word versus these "new revelations".

nolidad said:

YOU need to reread Josephus- He declared the abomination of desolation was Antiochus Epiphenes!

Click to expand...

He may well have done but he was not correct, as Jesus said it was still future. Josephus, in his chapter on a brief history of Jerusalem said that it was only desolated twice. Once by Nebuchadnezzar and once by Titus.

Biblewriter said:

This is completely incorrect. Every Christian Who wrote on this subject during the first two centuries of the church taught that the seventieth week was separated from the sixty-ninth week. and all but one of them put the seventieth week in the end times.

Click to expand...

Well I don't know which ones you read but I remember reading that they thought the first 3½ years were completed but did'nt seem to know what to do with the rest. I know one thought that the 7 years was separate, but I can't remember which one.

The 69 weeks ran out at the baptism of Jesus. There were 3½ years to the crucifixion, another 3½ years to the conversion of Cornelius and his household. Fulfilled.

nolidad said:

5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

Click to expand...

Paul told the early Christians, and they told us.

nolidad said:

6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

Click to expand...

That which withholdeth was the Roman Empire.

nolidad said:

7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

Click to expand...

He that letteth or hinders was the Emperor who was taken out of the way when Constantine removed the seat of the empire to the east. That dave the papacy its opportunity to rule from Rome. No one else ruled from Rome from then till 1870 when the papal states were lost ot him. Partgially restored in 1926 when Mussolini gave him the Vatican State. The Pope is Antichrist, The Wldenses recognised it, John Huss recognised it, the Lollards recognised it, the reformers as well as the Baptists did, till the false Jesuit teaching of futurism took hold.

David Kent said:

He may well have done but he was not correct, as Jesus said it was still future. Josephus, in his chapter on a brief history of Jerusalem said that it was only desolated twice. Once by Nebuchadnezzar and once by Titus.

Click to expand...

But neither antiochus nor Titus stood in the holy place!

He that letteth or hinders was the Emperor who was taken out of the way when Constantine removed the seat of the empire to the east. That dave the papacy its opportunity to rule from Rome. No one else ruled from Rome from then till 1870 when the papal states were lost ot him. Partgially restored in 1926 when Mussolini gave him the Vatican State. The Pope is Antichrist, The Wldenses recognised it, John Huss recognised it, the Lollards recognised it, the reformers as well as the Baptists did, till the false Jesuit teaching of futurism took hold.

Popes, unless they gain political and military power again can at most only be the false prophet. Remember the antichrist conquers three kingdoms and rules the world and moves the world capital to the restored babylon!
The anrtichrist is a Roman gentile who arises politically and militarily

And I do not know of the Jesuits restoring what you call futurism to the church. It was Augustine who popularized covenant theology and the allegorical reinterpretation of Scripture and the Catholic Church has held to that since as well as Presbytarians, Episcopals, Methodists and many others.

nolidad said:

But neither antiochus nor Titus stood in the holy place!

He that letteth or hinders was the Emperor who was taken out of the way when Constantine removed the seat of the empire to the east. That gave the papacy its opportunity to rule from Rome. No one else ruled from Rome from then till 1870 when the papal states were lost ot him. Partgially restored in 1926 when Mussolini gave him the Vatican State. The Pope is Antichrist, The Wldenses recognised it, John Huss recognised it, the Lollards recognised it, the reformers as well as the Baptists did, till the false Jesuit teaching of futurism took hold.

Popes, unless they gain political and military power again can at most only be the false prophet. Remember the antichrist conquers three kingdoms and rules the world and moves the world capital to the restored babylon!
The anrtichrist is a Roman gentile who arises politically and militarily

Click to expand...

Neither Antiochus nor Titus were the antichrist. Titus did stand in the Holy place as did Pompey before him. Pompey wanted to see what the Jews worhipped and in amazement said, "The Jews worship nothing,"
I didn't say the antichrist is a Roman gentile. It is not the antichrist that was to set the abomination of deasolation, but the armies that surrounded Jerusalem. remember Luke said "When see Jerusalem surrounded by armies." (it's desolation was near.) it was desolated at that time by the Roman armies. Remember that it was not the prince who would come (Titus) who was to destroy the city and sanctuary, but his people. Josephus records that the soldiers of Titus set the temple on fire against his orders. None of that is anything to do with the antichrist.

The papal antichrist did destroy three kingdoms, The Heruli under Odacer in 493, the Vandals in 534, the Ostogoths in 553, thus setting up the papal states which lasted till 1870 when Victor Emanuel took the Italian kingdom.

The anrtichrist is a Roman gentile who arises politically and militarily and sprititually, the papacy.

Antichrist will not restore ancient Babylon. Rome is the modern Mystery Babylon the Great, there was not mystery about Babylon her paganism was open. But Rome, Mystery Babylon is a mystery, claiming to be Christian, her paganism is hidden. The gods of Babylon have become the saints of Rome. The Pantheon temple to all the gods, is now seemingly a church dedicated to Mary and all the Martyrs. The same lump of metal that was worhipped as Jupiter, is now worshipped as Peter.

It helps to know history if you are going to study prophecy so you can know when it has been fulfilled? You take your information from teachers who have no idea about history or choose to ignore it.

David Kent said:

Paul told the early Christians, and they told us.



That which withholdeth was the Roman Empire.


He that letteth or hinders was the Emperor who was taken out of the way when Constantine removed the seat of the empire to the east. That dave the papacy its opportunity to rule from Rome. No one else ruled from Rome from then till 1870 when the papal states were lost ot him. Partgially restored in 1926 when Mussolini gave him the Vatican State. The Pope is Antichrist, The Wldenses recognised it, John Huss recognised it, the Lollards recognised it, the reformers as well as the Baptists did, till the false Jesuit teaching of futurism took hold.

Click to expand...

3 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;

4 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.

5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

He is third person singular not plural as Rome would be! And the Roman church did not become
official until 606 AD when Boniface was given the title universal bishop!

David Kent said:

I didn't say the antichrist is a Roman gentile. It is not the antichrist that was to set the abomination of deasolation, but the armies that surrounded Jerusalem. remember Luke said "When see Jerusalem surrounded by armies." (it's desolation was near.) it was desolated at that time by the Roman armies. Remember that it was not the prince who would come (Titus) who was to destroy the city and sanctuary, but his people. Josephus records that the soldiers of Titus set the temple on fire against his orders. None of that is anything to do with the antichrist.

Click to expand...

You didn't say- the bible does in Daniel 9:26-27.

And sorry Titus did not go into the holy of holies. Nor did He set up idols between 66-70 AD.

I Agree with you that what Titus did has anything to do with the antichrist!

But you need to read Danile 9 more carefully. Titus did not make a covenant with the many for 7 years and in the middle of that covenant cause the saccrifice and oblation to cease. The prince of Daniel 9 is still future!

David Kent said:

The papal antichrist did destroy three kingdoms, The Heruli under Odacer in 493, the Vandals in 534, the Ostogoths in 553, thus setting up the papal states which lasted till 1870 when Victor Emanuel took the Italian kingdom.

Click to expand...

C,mon man get real! people can bring many indictments against the Romansh church but this is just allegorizing way too far! Teh antichrist goes to war and conquers three of ten and the other 7 yield allegiance to him and he rules the WHOLE world and institutes a mark! that no one can buy or sell unless they had the mark!

nolidad said:

C,mon man get real! people can bring many indictments against the Romansh church but this is just allegorizing way too far! Teh antichrist goes to war and conquers three of ten and the other 7 yield allegiance to him and he rules the WHOLE world and institutes a mark! that no one can buy or sell unless they had the mark!

Click to expand...

nolidad said:

4 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.

Click to expand...

That is the pope.

nolidad said:

5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

Click to expand...

The "What" was the Roman Empire. Which was taken out of the way by Constantine.

nolidad said:

7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

Click to expand...

The Emperor was the he that letteth (or hinder) and was taken out ou the way by Constantine. Why would the empror of the greatest empire the world had known remove it from its power base? I did read somewhere that Constantine was taught that the antgichrist would be head of the Roman Church and moved the empire as he thought he may be antichrist.

nolidad said:

But you need to read Danile 9 more carefully. Titus did not make a covenant with the many for 7 years and in the middle of that covenant cause the saccrifice and oblation to cease. The prince of Daniel 9 is still future!

Click to expand...

The armies of Titus destroyed the city and temple. The bible does not say that the prince would confirm a covenant. He is not the subject of that verse, The people of the prince are. the subject. The He will confirm a covenant refers back to Messiah the Prince. Jesus caused the sacrifice to cease in the midst of the week by his death on the cross. The covenant is the new covenant that Jesus mad FOR MANY.
Actually I have of copy of the page of Daniel 9 from the1611 KJV wher it says "The abomination of desolation" The margin reads "or the desolating armies."

nolidad said:

C,mon man get real! people can bring many indictments against the Romansh church but this is just allegorizing way too far! Teh antichrist goes to war and conquers three of ten and the other 7 yield allegiance to him and he rules the WHOLE world and institutes a mark! that no one can buy or sell unless they had the mark!

Click to expand...

Not allegorising at all. It is history. You are allegorising when you bring antichrist into a prophecy which is about Messiah the Prince and turn it into a prophecy about antichrist. Just as the Jews did when they accused Jezsus of being the devil. A great sin.
As I said the papacy overthrew three of the ten gothic kingdoms that deposed the last western emperor. They gave power to the pope due to him showing forged documents mainly that Constantine left the empire to the popes. These ten then gave their allegiance to the pope, but he later overthrew three of them as I have shown over again.

Here is a question for you?

Q. Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 say the Roman Empire whill continue till the Lord returns and overthrows its last head. Where is that empire now?

David Kent said:

Not allegorising at all. It is history. You are allegorising when you bring antichrist into a prophecy which is about Messiah the Prince and turn it into a prophecy about antichrist. Just as the Jews did when they accused Jezsus of being the devil. A great sin.
As I said the papacy overthrew three of the ten gothic kingdoms that deposed the last western emperor. They gave power to the pope due to him showing forged documents mainly that Constantine left the empire to the popes. These ten then gave their allegiance to the pope, but he later overthrew three of them as I have shown over again.

Click to expand...

This might work if, and this is a big if, but if the details of Biblical prophecy did not matter. They do however matter to me so call me what ever names makes you happy but Daniel ch 7, the 10 horns, then another horn (the man of sin), plucking three of the horns, this is all future.

If it were all past history, then the preterist, who think Jesus returned in 70AD, would be able to identify the antichrist. But it is all future so they can't give that ID and also because to those of us that take the words of the Bible seriously, the actual details actually matter. It's not enough for me to say that too many details have not come to pass, rather it is factual to say that almost none of the details have come to pass in history.

David Kent said:

That is the pope.

Click to expand...

When has a pope sat in the temple at Jerusalem?

David Kent said:

The "What" was the Roman Empire. Which was taken out of the way by Constantine.

Click to expand...

So explain how Rome held back the pope in light of this passage:

2 Thessalonians 2:7
For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

So popery and Catholicism was already active in Paul's day in the church?

David Kent said:

Not allegorising at all. It is history. You are allegorising when you bring antichrist into a prophecy which is about Messiah the Prince and turn it into a prophecy about antichrist. Just as the Jews did when they accused Jezsus of being the devil. A great sin.

Click to expand...

Well I don't accuse Jesus of being the one who will allow idols in the temple to make it desolate! I don't call Jesus a Roman prince as the passage demands if you follow rules of Grammar. Jesus did not establish a 7 year covenant and in the middle of that covenanat cause the sacrifices to end!

David Kent said:

The armies of Titus destroyed the city and temple. The bible does not say that the prince would confirm a covenant. He is not the subject of that verse, The people of the prince are. the subject. The He will confirm a covenant refers back to Messiah the Prince. Jesus caused the sacrifice to cease in the midst of the week by his death on the cross. The covenant is the new covenant that Jesus mad FOR MANY.
Actually I have of copy of the page of Daniel 9 from the1611 KJV wher it says "The abomination of desolation" The margin reads "or the desolating armies."

Click to expand...

1st. Marginal notes are not the infallible word of God!
2nd you should look up abomination and desolate in the Hebrew- you can't get armies from them.
3rd. Yes the Roman Prince will confirm the covenant

Daniel 9:26-27 King James Version (KJV)
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

If you believe god is grammatically correct- then the he of verse 27 has to refer to its nearest antecedant and that is the Prince of the people who will destroy the sanctuary.

If one takes the bible as written- we know that the people of Rome came and destroyed the sanctuary, but a Roman Prince has not come yet who has made a covenant with Israel for 7 years- so he is still future. And as the antichrist reigns for 7 years- it is a natural step to put the two together seeing aqns he comes at the end of this prophecy which is also the 70th week of the prophesy right before Jesus physically returns!

4th Yes the cross ending the sacrifice argument has been floated many times, and sunk every time. Once again you have to allegorize the passage sayhing the sacrifice and oblation to physically end to mean spiritually end. Jesus ended the efficacy of the sacrificial system- but He didn't physically end it! As Titus did not make a covenant with Israel nor stand in the Holy Place- it cannot be him, so it is a furture ruler that Paul called the man of lawlessness who stands in the temple declaring himself as God!-

David Kent said:

As I said the papacy overthrew three of the ten gothic kingdoms that deposed the last western emperor. They gave power to the pope due to him showing forged documents mainly that Constantine left the empire to the popes. These ten then gave their allegiance to the pope, but he later overthrew three of them as I have shown over again.

Click to expand...

You named the three kings (though it took over 30 years if I am remembering right) so who are the other 7 kings who gave their allegiance to the Pope so that the Pope rules the whole world! Also what is the mark of the Pope which people have to have on their forehead or in the ir right hand or they can't buy or sell?

David Kent said:

Q. Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 say the Roman Empire whill continue till the Lord returns and overthrows its last head. Where is that empire now?

Click to expand...

Well this shall be a little lengthy. A full and heavily referenced answer is fouind inteh book entitled "Footsteps of the Messiah" by Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum.

Most people confuse the fourth beast and the bottom of the statue to be Rome and then a revived Roman Empire. It is not. Daniel made not that the fourth beast was different from all the rest? How so? Rome conquered like all others, but they instituted a form of government of captive lands that still survives to this day! It is called IMperialism. Rome allowed locals to reign, but had their procurators to oversee. That is why at the time of Jesus Herod was king- but still answered to Rome in matters of the empire.

Jesus also told us that Jerusalem would be trodden down by the gentiles until the times of the gentiles be fulfilled- so seeing these two as connected passages of the end we can come up with some solutions!

1. Rome was the first part of the statue Daniel saw (Legs and feet)(fourth beast)
2. The legs are two - which describes that Rome split in two (Rome and Constantinople as capitals)
3. those two moved over time.After the ottoman empire the constantinople leg moved to Russia where it still resides. Czar= ceaser.
4. The Rome leg moved to Germany (the holy Roman Empire of Germany(kings called Kaiser =ceaser)
5. Afterwards to the HRE of the Frankish nation, then the HRE of the Spanish nation.
6. Then to Britain and where it resides now- America.


We now move back to the beast vision

We must have a one world imperialistic government.

Dan. 7: 23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

Rome nor any other kingdom has conquered or ruled the world. And No- Rome did not even rule the known world! Greece conquered further than Rome.

This one world government shall fail somehow and we shall have the world ruled by ten heads:

Dan. 7: 24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

During these ten kings the antichrist arises and conquers three. As Revelation declares the other 7 give him their allegiance. I believe these conquests are the first seal in Revelation opened. when the rider on the white horse goes out conquering and to conquer!

As you can see- I have simply taken Scripture as written and compared it to history! Some things have been fulfilled as written, and some thins are still unfulfilled as written.

I'm curious to know if it would be considered bad form or otherwise inappropriate for dispensationalists here to go to the covenant theology sub-forum and point out all of the flaws, of which there are many, in that system?

thomas15 said:

I'm curious to know if it would be considered bad form or otherwise inappropriate for dispensationalists here to go to the covenant theology sub-forum and point out all of the flaws, of which there are many, in that system?

Click to expand...

Christians who believe that animal sacrifices are no longer needed now, but were needed during the OT, would you consider them dispensationalists too?

Guojing said:

Christians who believe that animal sacrifices are no longer needed now, but were needed during the OT, would you consider them dispensationalists too?

Click to expand...

Well that depends. do they hold to teh literal/historical/grammatical acceptance of Scripture or the allegorical hermeneutic?

Do they still accept God will fulfill His covenant promises He made to Israel?

do they realize that God governed man in different ways during different eras?

Do they accept that Revelation and many OT and Olivet discourse prophecies are still future?

Do they beliee that Jesus will reign over a physical kingdom that is to last 1,000 years with Israel ruling the earth, the apostles ruling Israel and the church co-reigning over all with Jesus?