3rd Temple coming soon..

[Interplanner]

Rat did you ever define preterism?
does it mean you believe the virgin birth already happened?
does it mean the AofD was Antiochus?
does it mean Mt 24A is about the DofJ?
does it mean Dan 9's final paragraph is one coherent vision without X000 years inserted in v26?

 

[ShedSinforChrist]

The understanding of the 144,000 who are virgins is explained spiritually! I will make the point this way:

They are virgins because they have remained faithful to God and Christ. Where can we find this? In 2 Corinthians 11:2 where Paul says:

2 For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband, so that to Christ I might present you as a pure virgin.
Notice that Paul considers coming to Christ to be a betrothal! He see the church as a "pure virgin". This is what gives insight into the 144,000 also...because they are called virgins. They are virgins in that they have been cleansed by Christ's blood.

He does it again in Ephesians 5:25-27 where he says of the church:
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her,
26 so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,
27 that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless.

This is exactly why the 144,000 are the church...and they are typified as virgins in that they have remained faithful to Christ. They are without spot of wrinkle through the blood of Christ.

This can never be seen correctly though until the concept that the church is spiritual Israel is seen.

The apostle Paul LABORS in the scriptures to make this point...yet so many will not receive it.

*He says this in Romans 2:28-29:
28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh.
29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

This is a beginning point for the apostle that those in Christ are Jews spiritually. This is what the apostle is saying here!

This has to be seen to understand who the 144,000 are! Paul labors all through his epistles making this point...yet it is not received...and the really amazing thing, is that he uses the OT prophets to do it!!!

So are you calling John a liar mate?

Rev-14:4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

John says they are virgin men, redeemed from earth (not spirit form as you say) who are not defiled by women.


The only verses to coincide with this are found here.

Rev-7:3 Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

Here, weve already seen the Angel from the east say not to hurt the Earth before Gods servants are sealed.

 

[ebedmelech]

Just another example of a preterist making plainly stated scripture to be spiritual in order to justify his doctrine.

What this response is is an example of a literalist who can't rightly divide the word.

Just as Jesus said to the Pharisees 6:51:
51 I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”

Like you...the Pharisees andswered in John 6:52:
52 Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?”

Just like you...the Pharisees thought it was "plainly stated"...

______________________________________

So are you calling John a liar mate?

Rev-14:4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

John says they are virgin men, redeemed from earth (not spirit form as you say) who are not defiled by women.


The only verses to coincide with this are found here.

Rev-7:3 Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

Here, weve already seen the Angel from the east say not to hurt the Earth before Gods servants are sealed.

I didn't call John a liar. Revelation tells you in 1:1, that John "communicated" in symbols! That's what the passage literally says:
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John,

The word for "communicated" is "semaino" which means to use signs to communicate. Vine's Expository Dictionary of NT Words says this:
Signify:
"to give a sign, indicate" (sema, "a sign:" cp. SIGN, No. 1), "to signify," is so translated in Jhn 12:33; 18:32; 21:19; Act 11:28; 25:27; Rev 1:1, where perhaps the suggestion is that of expressing by signs.

This is why the literal interpretation of Revelation is not the proper approach to understanding what is communicated.

Of course it follows you want to look at it literally, so you would *think* I call John a liar.

 

[ShedSinforChrist]

Just another example of a preterist making plainly stated scripture to be spiritual in order to justify his doctrine.

To call someone a preterist is to say they are not a Christian, I dont think faulty interpretation makes one a "preterist".

We must be careful when addressing others as they are simply trying to make sense of the scripture.

Cheers

 

[riverrat]

A preterist rightly dividing the word.

 

[ebedmelech]

A preterist rightly dividing the word.

Nothing but a "fear factor" by one who feels threatened...when the proper view is rendered.

 

[ShedSinforChrist]

I didn't call John a liar. Revelation tells you in 1:1, that John "communicated" in symbols! That's what the passage literally says:

Interesting perspective, thank you for addressing your point. So Jesus is not actually addressing the literal churches in Revelation correct?

These Churches are in fact spiritual correct?

 

[ebedmelech]

Interesting perspective, thank you for addressing your point. So Jesus is not actually addressing the literal churches in Revelation correct?

These Churches are in fact spiritual correct?

The Churches are literal Churches. However as John begins to communicate the vision he helps us understand some things.

The vision John receives begin at verses 10, 11:
10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like the sound of a trumpet,
11 saying, “Write in a book what you see, and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Pergamum and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea.”

We read Jesus walking among the 7 lampstands in verse 12.

Now John begins the vision and describes Jesus in verses 13-16..and at verse 16:
16 In His right hand He held seven stars, and out of His mouth came a sharp two-edged sword; and His face was like the sun shining in its strength.

Now we get to the meat in 17-20
17 When I saw Him, I fell at His feet like a dead man. And He placed His right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, 18 and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.
19 Therefore write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things.
20 As for the mystery of the seven stars which you saw in My right hand, and the seven golden lampstands: the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.

So now we know the seven stars are the angles (or pastors) of the seven churches. The churches are symbolized as 7 lampstands in the vision...so they are literal.

 

[ShedSinforChrist]

The Churches are literal Churches. However as John begins to communicate the vision he helps us understand some things.

The vision John receives begin at verses 10, 11:
10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like the sound of a trumpet,
11 saying, “Write in a book what you see, and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Pergamum and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea.”

We read Jesus walking among the 7 lampstands in verse verse 12.

Now John begins the vision and describes Jesus in verses 13-16..and at verse 16:
16 In His right hand He held seven stars, and out of His mouth came a sharp two-edged sword; and His face was like the sun shining in its strength.

Now we get to the meat in 17-20
17 When I saw Him, I fell at His feet like a dead man. And He placed His right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, 18 and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.
19 Therefore write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things.
20 As for the mystery of the seven stars which you saw in My right hand, and the seven golden lampstands: the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.

So now we know the seven stars are the angles (or pastors) of the seven churches. The churches are symbolized as 7 lampstands in the vision...so they are literal.

Thank you for your personal opinion on the matter.

Blessings from our Lord

Cheers

 

[riverrat]

Nothing but a "fear factor" by one who feels threatened...when the proper view is rendered.

I keep waiting for a proper view from you but I never see one.

 

[ShedSinforChrist]

I keep waiting for a proper view from you but I never see one.

Only God opens eyes.

He is just as entitled to his understanding as you are, if he is wrong, God will bring him to understanding by letting him live a lie to its own ends.

Likewise, for you as well.. No need to "convince" him of your views, truth is not something one can hide from forever.

Gen 21:19 And God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad drink.

Rev 22:11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

Blessings from our Lord to all

Cheers

 

[ebedmelech]

I keep waiting for a proper view from you but I never see one.

Stop waiting and read the word for yourself. When it comes to the "proper view" riverat, I don't think anyone has the "proper view"!

We are imperfect. Even with the Holy Spirit teaching us we can't get it completely right because we are but flesh. That's why each person will have his praise of God for how faithful they were to reading and rightly dividing His word. Most Christians are accepting what their pastors teach them...and instead of reading and studying for themselves, they will accept what the pastor says.

So I don't think I have it all correct...but nor do I rest thinking I do; I keep working at it and if I come to the belief that there's an error in my view, I can accept that. Just like I did when I came to the realization that "dispensational eschatology" is way off years ago.

That I have no doubt about.

 

[riverrat]

Rat, we are supposed to take the Scripture plainly to justify a doctrine! Gotcha. Rom 2 is the definitions that Paul works over in Rom 9-11 to make it harmonious. EbedM took them plainly; you do not. Otherwise Rom 9-11 will fall to pieces. There's no jumping outside Romans; no inserting X000 years. It's right there in the book, a foundation, leading to a wall, leading to a finished building.

Regardless of the definition of a true Jew, in the Rev, you can't really imaging that there are "neat" little disasters that affect exactly 1/3 of the earth, do you? 144K--isn't that more a matter of 12 12s than anything else--a huge perfect number? And even with all the "tidy" disasters that happen that expend what is out there, the 2 witnesses can inflict any plague or disease they want anyway, making the others not so neat and tidy after all.

Sorry, too confusing to bother with.

 

[riverrat]

Rat did you ever define preterism?
does it mean you believe the virgin birth already happened?
does it mean the AofD was Antiochus?
does it mean Mt 24A is about the DofJ?
does it mean Dan 9's final paragraph is one coherent vision without X000 years inserted in v26?

You are in la la land.

 

[riverrat]

Stop waiting and read the word for yourself. When it comes to the "proper view" riverat, I don't think anyone has the "proper view"!

We are imperfect. Even with the Holy Spirit teaching us we can't get it completely right because we are but flesh. That's why each person will have his praise of God for how faithful they were to reading and rightly dividing His word. Most Christians are accepting what their pastors teach them...and instead of reading and studying for themselves, they will accept what the pastor says.

So I don't think I have it all correct...but nor do I rest thinking I do; I keep working at it and if I come to the belief that there's an error in my view, I can accept that. Just like I did when I came to the realization that "dispensational eschatology" is way off years ago.

That I have no doubt about.

In #246 you stated that your view is proper. Now you say you do not have the proper view. Seems you are confused. Stick with preterism and you will continue to be confused.

 

[riverrat]

To call someone a preterist is to say they are not a Christian, I dont think faulty interpretation makes one a "preterist".

We must be careful when addressing others as they are simply trying to make sense of the scripture.

Cheers

Don't try to put words in my mouth!
I have never said that a preterist is not a Christian.
You should take your own advice and be careful how you address others.

 

[Interplanner]

"La la land" would mean I thought Bugs Bunny had showed up in 1st century Israel. All of those questions are honest and call for honest answers.

There are people here (and in the church in general) who think preterism means some or all of those things. What about you?

 

[riverrat]

"La la land" would mean I thought Bugs Bunny had showed up in 1st century Israel. All of those questions are honest and call for honest answers.

There are people here (and in the church in general) who think preterism means some or all of those things. What about you?

I do not know what "things" you are talking about.

 

[Interplanner]

oh good grief. Get some rest, have some coffee, read the previous posts, and stop wasting people's time. You're just worthless as a participant.

 

[riverrat]

oh good grief. Get some rest, have some coffee, read the previous posts, and stop wasting people's time. You're just worthless as a participant.

I have had my nap and my second cup of coffee for the day and have read the previous posts that might interest me. I don't really care if your time is wasted or not. I have been called a lot worse things than "worthless".