• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Biblical Numerology Of The Appearings

Discussion in 'Eschatology - Endtimes & Prophecy Forum' started by carlaimpinge, Jun 13, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. postrib

    postrib Well-Known Member

    508
    +0
    Christian
    In Acts 9, the appearance of Jesus himself to Paul was indeed secret, but is there a verse which says Jesus' appearance at the rapture will be secret?

    Note again that Paul only said he is a pattern to unbelievers for how longsuffering Jesus can be for the repentance of even the greatest of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15-16), not that all believers must have a secret vision of Jesus like he did.

    Can you quote the verses in these chapters that state the appearance of Jesus at the rapture will be secret and instantaneous, so we can see what they state?

    Those who believe heresies "shall not inherit the kingdom of God" (Galatians 5:20-21).

    How could we who will be in the tribulation who have washed our "robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb" (Revelation 7:14) and have "the faith of Jesus" (Revelation 14:12) and are "in the Lord" (Revelation 14:13) not be Christian? What religion will we be?

    In the pre-trib view, will those who "obtain salvation" in the tribulation be "appointed to wrath?" How could that be when being "appointed to wrath" and "obtaining salvation" are mutually exclusive?

    "God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thessalonians 5:9).

    Note that during the tribulation nobody in heaven says God's wrath "is come" until after the 7th trumpet (Revelation 11:15, 18), in the 7 vials of God's wrath (Revelation 15:1; Revelation 16), not one of which is poured out on those of us who have obtained salvation; we are even blessed at the 6th vial (Revelation 16:15), that we might endure to the 1,335th day (Daniel 12:12).

    Revelation 3:10 could simply be saying that Jesus would keep the 1st century church of Philadelphia from the persecution by the Roman Emperor Domitian.

    Note that the exact word "church" isn't used in Chapters 19-21 of Revelation, or anywhere in the books of 2 Timothy, Titus, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, and Jude. Do some then believe these chapters and books don't refer to the church?
     
  2. carlaimpinge

    carlaimpinge New Member

    100
    +0
    Christian
    Another post of REDUNDANT illiteracy, infidelity, and ignorance.  All of the STATEMENTS are clear.  All have been prooftexted.  All of the questions have been answered on numerous threads, but ignored. 
     
  3. npetreley

    npetreley pumpkin sailor

    +2
    That's not what my Bible says. It says we are not appoined to wrath.

    If anything, in 1 Thess 5:1-9, Paul tells his readers that they are not in darkness but will be able to recognize the Day of the Lord. As I've demonstrated elsewhere, the Day of the Lord occurs immediately after the great tribulation. So unless Paul is assuming that we will be around during the great tribulation, his statement would be nonsense.

    It is also inconsistent with the rest of the Bible to say that we'd be spared the great tribulation. Aside from the implication of 1 Thess 5:1-9, and possibly Matthew 24:9, I don't know of any places that explicitly say we will be present during the great tribulation. But we are only promised that we will be spared WRATH, and there are plenty of verses that say we WILL and DO experience TRIBULATION.

     
  4. carlaimpinge

    carlaimpinge New Member

    100
    +0
    Christian
    npetrely,

    It's good that yours reads as MINE. The "wrath" is associated with the day of the Lord, IN THE CONTEXT.

    "Recognizing" that day? He said, we ESCAPE it, while others don't. How? By being caught up on the day of Christ. (2 Thess.2) That's the day BEFORE the day of the Lord., which the others MISS. They're LEFT BEHIND.

    Who doesn't know that we suffer tribulation? We are NOT TOLD we will suffer the time of great tribulation, but are TOLD EXPLICITLY, we escape it. You see, you fell into the trap that others have.

    The time of the woman in travail IS the day of the Lord. Paul ASSOCIATES them as the same. (1 Thess.5)

    The OT scriptures teach that time is the day of the Lord. Jer.30. Notice the definitive terms. Day, great, woman in travail, in that day.

    Paul wrote one and knew the other. He's teaching doctrine for the body of Christ.

    That time is the time of trouble, (Dan.12), which Jesus spoke of as the time of great tribulation. (Matt.24)

    We ESCAPE the time of the woman in travail, which is the day of the Lord. That IS the text of 1 Thess.5.

    Those statements and verses are plain and simple. They teach doctrine.

    Paul has been given a subsequent revelation from the Lord Jesus,which differs from the doctrine taught by the 12. He DOES NOT teach what the Lord taught during his earthly ministry to Israel. This doctrine is taught by him alone. It is progressive revelation, which people reject.

    In Christ Jesus,
    Carl
     
  5. npetreley

    npetreley pumpkin sailor

    +2
    So let's have a look at 2 Thess 2.

    In plain language, Paul is saying, "You haven't seen the falling away and the man of sin revealed, yet, right? Well, if I've told you once, I've told you a thousand times, these events PRECEDE the Day of the Lord. So if you haven't seen them occur yet, then you should know the Day of the Lord couldn't possibly have come yet." The funny thing is that passage never made any sense to me when I took the word of others that pre-whatever rapture was true. (There is no such thing as a seven year "tribulation period" so I have trouble calling anything "pre-trib.") The first time it ever made sense to me was when I looked at it (and all the others) from a pre-wrath perspective.

    What trap? I've provided the verse that explicitly says we are not appointed to WRATH. You have yet to provide a single verse that explicitly says we escape the great tribulation. If you are saying they are one and the same, then would you please explain that to the martyrs who died in the Lord for the past 2000 years, including most of the apostles? Because I'm guessing that until now they've assumed that what they suffered by being jailed, tortured, stoned to death, mutilated, etc., was tribulation and not God's wrath.

    Are you talking about the men in travail in Jeremiah 30? Did these men have sex change operations that weren't recorded in Jeremiah? ;) Because the "woman in travail" in Jeremiah doesn't exist. It's another simile, only this time describing what MEN are going through.

    Now let's have a look at 1 Thess 5:

    If you can find some symbolic reference to a thief in the night as encompassing the great tribulation, you might be able to build a case that the woman in travail here is a reference to a symbolic woman in travail. Otherwise, this looks like plain old simile to me. "Like a thief in the night." "Like labor pains that come on a pregnant woman." Why would I want to read anything else into those expressions than the simple simile that they are?

    Okay, so let's sum up our disagreement over Jeremiah 30. I've provided verses with indisputable language that lays out the chronology abomination -> great tribulation -> celestial signs -> Day of the Lord.

    You ignore the plain meaning of these texts in favor of the fact that you can find the expressions "that day," "woman in travail" and the word "great" all in one place. Then I'm guessing you ASSUME the word "great" must refer to the "great tribluation," and "that day" must refer to the Day of the Lord. Then you ASSUME that the men are actually a woman in order to draw a connection to another simile in 1 Thess 5. Then you ASSUME that the events you've INTERPRETED to refer to the great tribulation AND the Day of the Lord must take place simultaneously because...well, I haven't figure that one out yet, since there's no language here that says they're simultaneous. That's a LOT of ASSUMING and INTERPRETING you have to do to contradict very clear texts in places like Matthew 24 and Joel 2.

    Here's why I'm having trouble following your interpretation. It is as if I say these two things to you. First, "We went to McDonalds. Immediately after that, we went to the movies. And after that, we went shopping for food." At some other time, I sum it all up by saying, "we went to the movies, the grocery store, and got a snack at McDonalds." Somehow you've not only managed to ASSUME that we did all three at once, you've come to this conclusion in spite of the fact that I GAVE YOU the chronology IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS!

    ...

    Before I wrap up, let's take one last look at 1 Thess 5. IMO, the most fascinating thing about this passage is how well verse 4 harmonizes with the chronology I've laid out from the plain meaning of other scriptures. "But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief."

    If the bretheren are to be raptured out of the earth 3 1/2 to 7 years prior to "this Day," how can this statement possibly make sense? Paul clearly says "this Day" will come as a shock to the unsaved, but won't take THEM (his intended audience) by surprise. Why won't it take them by surprise? Because they'd be long gone by then? Why didn't Paul say that, then? It sounds to me more like Paul was saying that by the time these things were all happening, they would be anxiously awaiting the signs that immediately precede the Day of the Lord (the celestial signs)! I know that if I get caught in the great tribulation, I sure will be! I'll be searching the skies day and night! ;)

    But that verse only make sense in terms of a pre-wrath (or perhaps a post-trib) position. The only other way this makes sense in a pre-trib position is if there are signs to recognize so that they will not be surprised. Even if you can somehow rationalize that out of the text, you still have to invent this mythical thing called the "tribulation period" that is never mentioned in the Bible. And then you have to make both the "tribulation period" and the Day of the Lord's wrath the same thing, and make them occur simultaneously in SPITE of the fact that Jesus clearly said that the celestial signs which precede the Day of the Lord come immediately after the tribulation of those days.

    That seems like an AWFUL lot of unnecessary effort when a simple plain reading of what's right there will give you all the answers you need. IMO, it's all very simple. The abomination of desolation will be set up and the man of sin will be revealed. That starts the great tribulation. At precisely the right time, which is a time we cannot know in advance, the celestial signs of the Son of Man will appear, cutting short the great tribulation. Then Jesus will gather His elect (the rapture), seal the 144,000 among the tribes of Israel for protection, and then pour out His wrath upon the nations. And so on. And it all fits beautifully with every passage I've ever read in the Bible. The only verse that ever gave me any trouble with this chronology was in Daniel (11?) where Michael will "stand up." Then I discovered that this could just as easily have been translated as "stand down," as in "cease fighting for a period." That would make Michael a good candidate for the restrainer. But that's getting way off topic.

    ...

    Finally....

    I don't have any personal investment in seeing you change your mind about these things. The impression I get is that you're a man of God, interested in His word, and interested in truth, and that's more important than what you or I believe about the chronology of end times.

    But here's one concern I do have, which I think is worth expressing. You've been rather abrasive to others about how they read and interpret scripture. I personally don't mind when you are abrasive with me. I'm a writer, and I've endured so many years of flames that I've got very thick skin now. ;) And I can be VERY abrasive at times, too.

    Sometimes I think I've been justified in being abrasive, so I know what it's like to be in your shoes. But I've also learned from this that it's easy to fall into a nasty trap. This is most especially true when it comes to interpreting scripture. The more criticism one dishes out, the more difficult it becomes to see scripture any other way than the way one has been defending, because one has been portraying their criticism as defending the very Word of God.

    The danger is that one may get to the point where he no longer WANTS to know the truth if it contradicts prior assertions, because it would be too humiliating to have been so arrogant about scripture only to have to recant.
     
  6. carlaimpinge

    carlaimpinge New Member

    100
    +0
    Christian
    npetrely,

     

    Sorry.  You picked the wrong text (2 Thess.2) to talk about the day of the Lord.  THAT TEXT is the day of Christ.  There's a difference.

    Hey, even I, don't believe in a 7 year tribulation.  That's good you don't.  The time of tribulation, great tribulation, affliction, the days of vengeance, etc. does not start until the MIDST of the week.

    Luke, Paul's buddy, states it's when the troops INVADE Jerusalem, the desolation,(Luke 21), while Matthew and Mark talk about the temple and the abomination of desolation.

    I failed to provide a verse?  You're kidding.  You didn't read the prooftext.  This is NOW where we begin to see IF you believe what the Bible STATES.

    You don't believe the time of the woman in travail IS the great tribulation? I gave ONE TEXT which MATCHES Paul's statement, with 4 different words showing THAT TIME is the day of the Lord.

    Look at it again.  I know what it says.

    Paul ASSOCIATED the day of the Lord WITH the time of the woman in travail, which is EXPLICITLY the time of Jacob's trouble, the time of the great tribulation foretold by the Lord Jesus and Daniel.

    Yes, sir.  I gave an explicit reference where Paul stated we ESCAPE the day of the Lord.  That IS the great tribulation, for it STARTS it.

    What's the mumble jumble with the apostles?  They were ALREADY told they were going to be killed and persecuted.  They didn't make it to the TIME of great tribulation.  See it's a TIME PERIOD.

    Are you kidding again? 

    So you're gonna' say that Paul was not talking about the same thing as Jeremiah was? 

    If you can't read "as a woman in travail" in the passage, you have a problem.   The TIME of Jacob's trouble is characterized the same way Paul stated the character of the day of the Lord.

    Well Lo and behold, we have a TIME, which is a DAY, which is GREAT, which is also said to be, IN THAT DAY.  Those references are to the day of the Lord.

    You're DEAD in the water bud.  The word of God blew you away.

    Your naive response is the mark of a man who is fixing to DENY the words of the Book.  The men, ARE AS A WOMAN IN TRAVAIL.  Notice that THOSE MEN, are also characterized as a HE. (That's from Jacob.  He (those men) characterized like a woman in travail, GOING THROUGH THAT TIME.  Paul speaks of that as the day of the Lord.

    The verses are plain and clear. 

    I gave the verses and then exposited them.  They LINE UP with what he said.  WE ESCAPE the day of the Lord, which is the time of the woman in travail.  ANY bible reader and believer KNOWS when that time is.  It is a day, which is great.  We know what that day is.  It's the day of the Lord.  That one is called, IN THAT DAY.

    The Book is clear, unlike your antics.

    You laid out no chronology.

    The only assumption I made is that you were a Bible student.  Forgive me.

    No assumptions on the time of Jacob's trouble being a day, which is great, which is said to occur in that day. The text STATES that. Any BIBLE STUDENT, KNOWS the day.  It is the day of the Lord found in the OT.  The verses are numerous and NONE are assumed.  They're written.

    Now you're gonna ASK me questions about why YOU don't understand the verse.  You are kidding.

    The day of the Lord IS NOT the day of OUR GATHERING.  It is the day of Christ. (2 Thess.2)  It comes BEFORE the day of the Lord.  Simple, for some.  WE ESCAPE that day.  That's written, not assumed.

    There is a TIME OF JACOB's TROUBLE.  Written, not assumed. It is a period of time by STATEMENT.  The day of the Lord and that time are the SAME in Jeremiah.  In that day, which is great, PROOFTEXTS it.  Written, not assumed.  The wrath of 1 Thess.5 is associated with the day of the Lord.  Written, not assumed. 

    No tribulation period?.

    The day of the Lord STARTS not with the celestial SIGNS of Rev.6, but with the SUN GOING DOWN at the invasion of Jerusalem.  (Amos 8, Jer.6,15) That is the midst of the week.  The day of the Lord is a TIME PERIOD made up of days.  (Luke 21, the days of vengeance)  The actual 24 hour day of his coming AFTER the time of great tribulation IS PRECEDED by the celestial signs of Rev.6.

    I appreciate your comments. I don't like to talk harsh, but it is necessary to STUN people sometimes from their silly ideas.  Now I take the Bible seriously.  I have heard everyone of your comments bofore.  They fit a system you've got.

    You have to DENY the time of Jacob's trouble is the day of the Lord.

    You have to DENY the day of the Lord and the day of Christ are different days.

    You have to DENY the day of the Lord is a period of time.

    Those are just for starters.  

    The text in Jeremiah destroys the first and third one.  The texts of 1 Thess.5 and 2 Thess.2 destroys the second one.

    Paul taught a pre-tribulation gathering of the body of Christ. I call it midweek.  The tribulation STARTS in the midst of the week.

     

    In Christ Jesus,

    Carl

     
     
  7. npetreley

    npetreley pumpkin sailor

    +2
    Yes, I can see the word is Christos in 2 Thess 2.

    So let's have a look at the text AGAIN and see how it fits with other texts.

    One thing we can do from this text is sum up the signs preceding the Day of Christ.

    1. Falling away
    2. Man of sin is revealed (The man who exalts himself above all that is called God)

    This is described in more detail in Daniel 11:

    1. Falling away

    Note what comes next - the abomination of desolation.

    What's next? This sure sounds like the great tribulation, to me. It even mentions the plundering you associated with the great tribulation. And it even describes what tribulation often does -- it refines, purifies. But let's let this pass as a guess for now.

    2. The man of sin is revealed

    This description of the man of sin leaves no question as to the connection to 2 Thessalonians 2

    How long will this guy be successful?

    Given Daniel's expanded desciption, we can specify a few more details in this list -- the abomination of desolation, possibly the great tribulation and definitely the time of wrath. There are some implications about the order of these things, but no clear distinction and no definitive chronology. So I'll lump 'em all into one bullet point for now. But, IMO, we can be certain from the description of the man of sin that 2 Thessalonians 2 refers to this passage.

    1. Falling away
    2. The abomination of desolation, maybe the great tribulation, the man of sin is revealed (The man who exalts himself above all that is called God), who will be successful until the time of wrath is complete

    Now let's go over these events again, only let's sort them out using Matthew 24 and its clear reference to Daniel as a connecting link.

    So far everything lines up perfectly with the way I've quoted Daniel, and now we even know for certain that it's the great tribulation that occurs after the abomination of desolation.

    The great tribulation will be cut short.

    Sounds like His return will be pretty obvious. But when will it be in the chronology of events?

    At this point we can now sort out some (but not all) of the events and the order in which they occur. I'll lump the "unsorted" ones again into one point.

    1. Falling away
    2. The abomination of desolation
    3. The great tribulation (which will be cut short) when the man of sin is revealed (The man who exalts himself above all that is called God)
    4. Immediately after the great tribulation, there are the easily recognizable celestial signs (sun, moon darkened, stars fall from heaven) and reaction from earth (all tribes of the earth will mourn), Son of Man will come on the clouds in great glory, and we still have the man of sin being successful until the time of wrath is complete.

    Now let's look at Revelation 6:

    I think we have a match here for the celestial signs. But what about the reaction from earth, just to double-check?

    Yep. We have a match. Now what do we call this?

    You've matched the Day of the Lord with just the words "great" and "day" so we should be able to stop here and conclude that this refers to the Day of the Lord. But just so nobody is left with any question about this, let's double-check it with Joel 2:31.

    Looks like everything fits. So now we have a fairly detailed chronology, and all of it is easily traceable all the way back to 2 Thessalonians 2:

    1. Falling away
    2. The abomination of desolation
    3. The great tribulation (which will be cut short) when the man of sin is revealed (The man who exalts himself above all that is called God)
    4. Immediately after the great tribulation, there are the easily recognizable celestial signs (sun, moon darkened, stars fall from heaven), the reaction from earth (all tribes of the earth will mourn)
    6. The Son of Man will come on the clouds in great glory
    7. The Day of the Lord's wrath
    8. The man of sin will be successful until the time of wrath is complete

    ...

    Now let's look at your objection. Paul calls it the "DAY OF CHRIST" in 2 Thessalonians 2 rather than the Day of the Lord, therefore it must be some OTHER day. Okay, let's apply this exegesis to other texts and see what we get.

    Joel 2:31 "Day of YHWH"

    Here we have the Day of the Lord.

    Isaiah 34:8 "Day of YHWH" (Day of the Lord's vengeance)

    So far, so good.

    Jeremiah 46:10 "Day of ADONAI YHWH" (Day of the Lord God, a day of vengeance)

    Whoops -- even though both refer to the Day of the Lord as the day of vengeance, this must be some OTHER day of the Lord, because it has Adonai in the label.

    Ezekiel 7:19 "Day of the WRATH of YHWH"

    Uh oh. This one is the Day of WRATH of YHWH. I guess that means we now have three different Days of the Lord.

    1 Corinthians 5:5 "Day of IESOUS KURIOS" (Jesus Lord, or the Lord Jesus)

    Yikes! The Day of the Lord Jesus?!? That's four!

    1 Thessalonians 5:2 "Day of KURIOS"

    The Day of the Lord, but it's just KURIOS! How curious! That makes five Days of the Lord!

    2 Thessalonians 2:2 "Day of CHRISTOS"

    There's your extra one! Six!

    Revelation 6: "Great Day of His Wrath [of the Lamb]"

    Criminy! Now it's the Day of the Wrath of the Lamb!! That's seven Days of the Lord. I'll stop there on that nice perfect number of completion, but we haven't even begun to count all the OTHER variations you can find! But I'm sure we can get at least a few weeks of days of the Lord if we just apply a little effort.

    So what shall I trust -- the plain and simple chronology you get when one cross-references the texts? Or a theory that 2 Thessalonians 2 is referring to something different than the Day of the Lord based only the fact that Paul refers to the event as the Day of "Christ" instead of the Day of the "Lord" in spite of the fact that your so-called different "Day of Christ" in 2 Thessalonians 2 aligns perfectly with the "Day of the Lord" described in Daniel, Matthew, Revelation, Joel, etc?

    Feel free to choose your interpretation, but I choose mine.
     
  8. carlaimpinge

    carlaimpinge New Member

    100
    +0
    Christian
    npetreley,

    You see the word Christ and then, like I KNEW you would, you try to change it to the day of the Lord to match your system.

    THE DAY OF CHRIST is not found in the OT. No OT prophet mentions it. The day of Christ RELATES to the body of Christ, NOT ISRAEL. The prophets in the OT didn't know anything about the body of Christ. (Eph.3)

    Daniel states nothing concerning the apostasy which occurs within the body of Christ. (2 Tim.4) Apostate Christians DEPART from the truth. (1 Tim.4) There are NONE in Dan.11.

    The abomination of desolation is the placing of the image, which results in the invasion of Jerusalem. This occurs at the midst of the week. Jesus calls it great tribulation. (Matt.24, Luke 21)

    You can't get the fact that the DAY OF THE LORD is a period of time, which is MADE UP of days. The actual day of his coming is ONE of them. It is AFTER the great tribulation. The day of the Lord though, STARTED long before that day of his coming.

    You have IGNORED the text of Zech.14, which includes the invasion of Jerusalem as the day of the Lord. That is in the midst of the week. You won't go far IGNORING texts.

    Now, like I said, you go on your tirade to prove the day of Christ is the day of the Lord, due to the name.

    Here's the facts.

    The day of the Lord is an OT term. It is mentioned in the NT.
    The day of Christ is a NT term, not mentioned in the OT.
    The day of the LORD refers to the Father, not the Son. (Psalm 110:1, Isaiah 2)
    The day of Christ refers to the Son, not the Father. The Father is never called Christ. That is a title of the Son.
    The day of Christ is stated to be the day of our gathering. (2 Thess.2)
    The day of the Lord is stated to be a day we escape. (1 Thess.5)

    Now those are biblical facts.

    You teach otherwise because you have a system.

    Like I said before.

    You have to DENY the time of Jacob's trouble is the day of the Lord.

    You have to DENY the day of the Lord and the day of Christ are different days.

    You have to DENY the day of the Lord is a period of time.

    Those are just for starters.

    The text in Jeremiah destroys the first and third one. The texts of 1 Thess.5 and 2 Thess.2 destroys the second one.

    Paul taught a pre-tribulation gathering of the body of Christ. I call it midweek. The tribulation STARTS in the midst of the week.

    You didn't even comment on the sun going down. How it is related to the day of the Lord. How are you going to learn the Bible? Or the timing of the sun going down? 12:00 noon. How bout that? That's WHEN Paul saw him. (Acts 9,22,26) Ah, the appearance of the Lord Jesus Christ. That's what were talking about, isn't it? You didn't comment on the invasion of Jerusalem at 12:00 noon by the spoiler. That's Jeremiah. That's who Paul used for his desription of the day of the Lord as the woman in travail.

    Bible study is serious. Trying to prove a system is not. You'll have to do better.

    In Christ Jesus,
    Carl
     
  9. postrib

    postrib Well-Known Member

    508
    +0
    Christian
    I don't believe Zechariah 14:1-3 requires that the day of the Lord begin before the 2nd coming. Verse 1 states "the day of the LORD cometh," a statement which we can make today without the day of the Lord having to actually come today; verse 2 shows what will happen to Jerusalem before the 2nd coming; and verse 3 shows it actually coming.

    What timeframe and events does the Bible itself say "the time of Jacob's trouble" will include? (Jeremiah 30:7-8)

    I believe "the day of Christ" and "the day of the Lord" are the same day, "the day of the Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Corinthians 1:7-8), the day he comes to gather us together (2 Thessalonians 2:1-3, compare Matthew 24:29-31).

    Note that no verse says or requires that the day of the Lord begin before the 2nd coming.

    I don't believe he did, but that in 2 Thessalonians 2:1, 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, and 1 Corinthians 15:52 he is referring to the same "coming" of Jesus and the same "gathering together" of the saints and the same "trumpet" and the same "clouds" as Matthew 24:29-31, which says all these will occur "immediately after the tribulation." I don't believe Paul taught a 3rd coming or a 2nd rapture.

    Who are the women in travail in Jeremiah 49:24; Jeremiah 50:43; Psalm 48:6; Isaiah 13:8; Isaiah 42:14; Galatians 4:19; and 1 Thessalonians 5:3?
     
  10. carlaimpinge

    carlaimpinge New Member

    100
    +0
    Christian
    There goes the man spinning his wheels again.
     
  11. npetreley

    npetreley pumpkin sailor

    +2
    I'm seriously tired of this volley, so I'll tackle your comments and then let you have the last word.

    It's only mentioned ONCE in the NT, too, and the surrounding events do not deviate from the descriptions surrounding any of the MANY OTHER TYPES OF references to the Day of the Lord, some of which I listed. If the use of the word Christos is significant to you, fine, but you have completely failed to demonstrate why it is significantly different other than just saying it is.

    That didn't stop them from writing about the church in prophecy, as I demonstrated with chapter and verse and not just making my own personal assertions, which is currently your approach to arguing this, so you are the one who is failing to rely on scripture.

    Departure from the truth is departure from the truth. Daniel 11 refers to the falling away. Whether or not Daniel personally knew anything about the Body of Christ is irrelevant. As you pointed out regarding John in revelation, he wrote what he observed and heard. That's all. Likewise, the text in Daniel didn't come from Daniel's personal knowledge of anything (recall "no prophecy is of human interpretation") but the information came from God. Are you suggesting God didn't know about the Body of Christ back then?

    I agree (I think), but I'm not sure about the image thing. There's still some question in my mind about the two references in Daniel. But IMO that's totally irrelevant to this particular discussion.

    This I just don't get. When did I ever insist that the Day of the Lord is a single day?

    Now you're ignoring scripture. The Day of the Lord begins after the great tribulation. But it isn't just one day. I've illustrated at least the former with scripture already, and multiple times, including the Day of Christ in 2 Thess.

    Now here I'm just baffled. I ignored nothing of the kind. Did you not read my reply to you on this very issue? It was in another thread, but it was still a reply to YOU.

    http://www.christianforums.com/foru...=definite and article and hebrew&pagenumber=4

    As I said, a completely arbitrary distinction, and one that violates the plain reading of the text.

    Really? Not only was I under the impression that Jesus said that He and the Father are one, I thought the Pharisees wanted to stone Jesus for using the expression, "I am" in an unmistakable context.

    So is the Day of the Lord. For the umpteenth time, Jesus clearly refers to the Day of the Lord in Matthew 24:29-31. When you add that to the many other links (the fact that the man of sin who exalts himself above every other God must be revealed BEFORE your "Day of Christ") that tells you without any wiggle room that the Day of Christ and the Day of the Lord (and the Day of the Lord Jesus and the Day of the Lord's wrath, etc., etc.) all refer to the same thing.

    Absolutely. The Day of the Lord's wrath is exactly what we escape. Not the great tribulation. And you can CONFIRM that with 1 Thessalonians 5:9

    It does NOT say that God did not appoint us to tribulation.

    Quite the contrary. Everything I have said comes straight from scripture with no added spiritualization or symbolism. And in every case I have let scripture speak for itself. When scripture says wrath, I read wrath, not tribulation. When scripture says great tribulation I read great tribulation, not wrath. When scripture uses words like BEFORE, IMMEDIATELY AFTER, etc., I allow those words to define the sequence of events and do not impose some other chronology on the events. If that's a system, it's a system of allowing scripture to speak for itself, and no more.

    I do not deny that, scripture does. When scripture lumps the great tribulation (the day of Jacob's trouble) in with the rest of the events, it speaks in general terms (as I pointed out referring to the original hebrew used in Zechariah 14). This is not unusual at all in scripture, but it doesn't mean it's all one event at one time with one label. For example, look at the portion of Isaiah Jesus quoted:

    Note that this verse isn't even finished yet, but this is where Jesus stopped and said "today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing." But what follows in Isaiah?

    Whoops -- the OT seems to be describing in a continuous way events that are separated by qutie a long period of time, which is why Jesus stopped where He did! So if you had interpreted this passage in some year BC, you would probably have made the mistake of assuming these things all had to be fulfilled at once under a single label called "A day of Carl?" ;)

    So when the OT says "a day of the Lord is coming, this will happen, that will happen, and the other thing will happen, we know it's referring to many things in general terms. But when the OT says THE Day of the Lord or THE Day of the Lord's wrath, then you might want to pay attention to see if you'll find something specific about THAT day.

    Now what do we see if we allow scripture to speak for itself according to its own language this way? What is associated with THE Day of the Lord and not "A" day of the Lord? We find VINDICATION for Jacob, not the time of Jacob's trouble.

    No, you deny they are the same. Scripture aligns them perfectly, as I illustrated in detail with scripture references and not just my personal assertion that they are different.

    You also deny that tribulation is NOT the same thing as wrath. You ignore that the Day of the Lord is when Jacob is vindicated, not the time of Jacob's trouble. Yet these are all based on very plain reading of the scripture, whereas your ideas are based entirely on opinions that contradict other scriptures.

    I don't know where you got this idea. I don't deny anything of the sort. I simply pointed out that scripture places that period of time in a different location than you do.

    He did nothing of the sort. This is purely your interpretation, and totally unsupported by scripture itself. Scriptuer doesn't even plainly put the rapture where I believe it is -- it doesn't CLEARLY place it anywhere, or there would be no argument about it. But IMO all scripture lines it up when Jesus says it happens, which is on or about the Day of the Lord or when the celestial signs that immediately precede the Day of the Lord occur.

    You mean Amos 8? Criminy! I might give a hoot if it really said "I will make the sun set at noon" and stopped there. But it doesn't. It says, "I will make the sun go down (also translated "go in") at noon and darken the earth in clear day." So unless you're saying it's going to set over the whole earth at noon (a very neat trick, but I guess God can do anything), either you're tripping on a translation issue (go down, go in, whatever), or missing a nice poetic way of saying the sun will go dark. This is even more clear in Jeremiah 6, where it says more plainly "the day will go away" (get dark, duh), NOT that the sun will set.

    All I can say is, wow. You're lining up your events around literary techniques like similes and poetic desriptions, which wouldn't even make sense if you happened to come to the right conclusion. But your conclusions CONTRADICT the way the Bible outlines the chronology of events with language that does NOT rely on similes and poetic descriptions! Priorities, man! Next you're going to be checking astrological charts and counting the letters in the verses to see if you can connect these things that way.

    Yes. It is far too serious to be making assertions that contradict the Bible based on things as flimsy as similes, or a premonition that there's some connection between Jesus visiting Paul at noon and the noon hour is also used in a description of the sun going dark. THAT is the sort of thing that is a sure sign that someone is approaching the text with a system. And you compound your error by ignoring things that are NOT based on similes or mystical interpretations.

    That's it. Enjoy your last word.
     
  12. carlaimpinge

    carlaimpinge New Member

    100
    +0
    Christian
    npetrely,

    I just didn't say that it is. I gave you the FACTS of the day of Christ and the day of the Lord. You IGNORED every single one of them. Typical. All do.

    The prophets wrote about the "body of Christ"? Fraid not. Paul did though. HIS TEACHING states "explicityly" that it was UNKNOWN by them.

    Not using scripture? Now your showing your foolishness. I ALWAYS do.

    Daniel is WRITING about apostate JEWS who are NOT FOLLOWING the holy covenant. The text is NOT about the body of Christ. Any person can read that. You INTERJECT the body into the text through sheer supposistion and aribitrary opinion. No verse in Daniel or Paul STATES that. Geez, read the text.

    No, I'm not ignoring scripture. I gave you the verses for stating the day of the Lord STARTS at the INVASION of Jerusalem, 42 months BEFORE his coming AFTER the great tribulation. Here they are again. Go study. (Zech.14:1-2,Rev.11:1-2,Luke 21:22-24, Dan.7,8,9,11,Micah 2:4,Jer.6,15) Enough scripture?
    There's more.

    Sorry. I hadn't seen the reply.

    So to "get rid" of THE DAY of the Lord, you become a Hebrew scholar and take "the" out of the text, and make it "a" day of the Lord. I see. That's no proof to me. It's proof that you think you are smart enough to correct any Bible and make it say WHAT YOU WANT. I don't have to change a word in my Bible to teach what I believe. That tells me something about you.

    Besides that, what in the world would "a" day of the Lord be? The passage is not disputed. He's talking about "THE DAY OF THE LORD". The one which is referred to over and over in the OT.

    Check the references, if you want the truth, (in that day, etc), and you will FIND that if refers to EVENTS BEFORE the celestial signs which are found AFTER the great tribulation. The INVASION of Jerusalem being the PRIMARY ONE for WHEN the sun goes down, it STARTS.

    I sure know exactly what you people will do to DENY what the Book states. I put in right in front of you.

    So NOW, you're saying there is NO DISTINCTION between the Father and the Son by your use of John 10. Get real, man. There are three personalites. The day of the LORD in the OT and day of the Lord in the NEW refers to the Father, NOT THE SON. The day of Christ refers to the personality of the SON, not the Father.

    That's a fact. You didn't do anything with your "verse". Geez.

    Now you LIED. Paul SAID the day of Christ WAS THE DAY of our gathering, NOT the day of the Lord. We ESCAPE that day.
    Jesus SAID nothing about the body of Christ, nor the day which it was gathered. You lied, pure and simple. What you ACTUALLY said was "your opinion" about that. I QUOTED the text. (2 Thess.2)

    You have a problem reading. The great tribulation is a time of wrath, which is identified by Jeremiah as the day of the Lord. (Luke 3,21, Matt.3,24, 1 Thess.1)

    Poor man. The wrath to come IS the great tribulation which JEWS FLEE from. That's what WE ESCAPE. Why? It's the START of the day of the Lord at the invasion of Jerusalem, AS I PROOFTEXTED. Oh, that's right. You "changed" it from the to a. That's YOUR SYSTEM of interpretation.

    I pegged it right from the start. I identified WHAT you would DENY. You did.

    The time of Jacobs' trouble is said to be a DAY, which is GREAT, which is IN THAT DAY. All references IDENTIFY it as the day of the Lord. You DENY it. Hey. That's what the Book STATES.

    You DENY the day of Christ and the day of the Lord are different.

    Paul stated our gathering was on the day of Christ, and we escape the day of the Lord. HE DISTINGUISHED THEM. They're not the same. He spoke of the day of the Lord IN CONNECTION, with the time of the woman in travail, as Jeremiah.

    That's what the Book STATES. Not my personal opinion. Read it in 1 Thess.5. They're never spoken of AS THE SAME.

    Who doesn't know that the Lord SPLIT his coming? What you don't KNOW is that he SPLIT the gathering also. There's ANOTHER given by revelation to Paul. (1 Cor.15) It DOESN'T concern Israel as the PROPHESIED one does. (Gen.49:10, Isaiah 27, 11)

    Fella, when you change, deny, and ignore the verses, like you do, you can't understand much in the Bible.

    The Lord Jesus STATED nothing about the body of Christ or it's gathering. Paul did.

    Why you poor man. You can't understand the Bible because you can't READ what it says. The term, "the sun going down" ALWAYS has specific reference to SUNSET. At this day, the day of the Lord, it SETS at NOON, not at 6:00pm, as it normally does.
    Check the references. I won't list them.

    You can't make an intelligent comment on the verses given about Paul and the appearance. It is recorded THREE times in the Bible. Astrological charts? What bruitish railing.

    Why you poor man. ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for DOCTRINE. You forgot what Paul SAID.

    That's your problem. You don't pay attention to his WORDS.

    So long. You're another in a long list of those who WHEN confronted with the verses, DENY them. It shows your ignorance, illiteracy, and infidelity to the Book. We're not talking about a different view, but one which will corrupt the words.
     
  13. postrib

    postrib Well-Known Member

    508
    +0
    Christian
    What timeframe and events does the Bible itself say "the time of Jacob's trouble" will include? (Jeremiah 30:7-8)
    Note that none of these verses say or require that "the day of the Lord" begin before the 2nd coming.

    Note that it refers to the Son: "The day of the Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Corinthians 1:7-8).

    In the mid-week view, will those who "obtain salvation" in the tribulation be "appointed to wrath?" (1 Thessalonians 5:9) Note that in the tribulation nobody in heaven says God's wrath "is come" until after the 7th trumpet (Revelation 11:15, 18), in the 7 vials of God's wrath (Revelation 15:1; Revelation 16), not one of which is poured out on those of us who have obtained salvation.

    Who is the woman in travail in Jeremiah 49:24; Jeremiah 50:43; Psalm 48:6; Isaiah 13:8; Isaiah 42:14; Galatians 4:19; and 1 Thessalonians 5:3?
    What did he state in John 14:3 and Matthew 24:30-31?
     
  14. carlaimpinge

    carlaimpinge New Member

    100
    +0
    Christian
    Another dazzling display and demonstration of ignorance, illiteracy, and infidelity.

    Watch what he does with the verses people.

    The TIME OF JACOB'S TROUBLE IS stated to be a DAY, which is GREAT, which is included as the term, IN THAT DAY. (Jer.30:7-8) THE DAY OF THE LORD is stated to be ALL THREE. (Isaiah 2, Zeph.1) That day INCLUDES the great tribulation, for it is THE TIME OF JACOB'S TROUBLE, according to the Lord Jesus, Daniel, and the apostle Paul. (Dan.12, 1 Thess.5, Matt.24)

    Paul identifies the day of the Lord, as wrath with the characterization of it being as a woman in travail, JUST AS Jeremiah does. That is the wrath we escape. It's associated with the day of the Lord, which INCLUDES the time of the woman in travail, which is the great tribulation.

    The day of the Lord, which includes the great tribulation, STARTS long BEFORE the vials are ever poured out.

    What a joke. He can't read the verses. The invasion of Jerusalem is BEFORE the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. The son of perdition INVADES it, in that day, the day of the Lord. (Zech.14, Zeph.2, Micah 2, Isaiah 5,7,10) That's the MIDST of the week, NOT AFTER the tribulation.

    The poor man can't read. I state the day of the Lord, and he states the day of the Lord Jesus Christ. Two words ADDED. The FIRST still refers to the Father, and the second to the Son. Why? Very simple. There is no Christ or Jesus "hooked" on the end of the Lord in the first one.

    The Lord in the term, day of the Lord NEVER refers to the SON, the Lord Jesus Christ. It refers to the FATHER. It is an OT term, mentioned in the new. 

    The day of Christ is NEVER mentioned in the OT. It never refers to the Father.

    The nation of Israel is characterized as the woman in travail in Jer.30.

    Jesus stated nothing about the body of Christ or it's gathering. Both mysteries were revealed to Paul years later. (Eph.3, Col.1)
     
  15. Brian45

    Brian45 Senior Member

    +147
    Christian
    Single
    Another dazzling display and demonstration of ignorance, illiteracy, and infidelity.

    I gotta hand it to ya Carl , your a true individual , but I still like ya mate .
     
  16. npetreley

    npetreley pumpkin sailor

    +2
    It's not a matter of what I want, but what is. If you don't change the word to "A" in your Bible, then your Bible is wrong. Don't take my word for it, check the original Hebrew for yourself. And if you don't know Biblical Hebrew, ask someone else who does.

    You're basing your conclusion on a mistranslation.
     
  17. postrib

    postrib Well-Known Member

    508
    +0
    Christian
    Note that Jeremiah 30:7-8 doesn't state that "the time of Jacob's trouble" is the great tribulation.
    When is the time of the woman in travail in Jeremiah 49:24; Jeremiah 50:43; Psalm 48:6; Isaiah 13:8; Isaiah 42:14; Galatians 4:19; and 1 Thessalonians 5:3?

    Note once more that no verse states that the day of the Lord begins before the 2nd coming.

    Note that none of the verses you've referred to state that the son of perdition invades Jerusalem in the day of the Lord.

    Does Paul call the Father "the Lord?" Doesn't he say "Jesus is the Lord?" (1 Corinthians 12:3)

    What did Jesus state in John 14:3 and Matthew 24:31?
     
  18. carlaimpinge

    carlaimpinge New Member

    100
    +0
    Christian
    npetrely,

    Had to do some more commenting, didn't you?

    The "original" Hebrew? Don't make me laugh. You nor anybody you KNOW has ever seen the original Hebrew. What a joke.

    You're a bible corrector. You think you can change the bible to what you "think" it should be. NOODLE POWER.

    Fraid not, bud. The Holy Spirit is the one who teaches the scriptures, not "any person" with formal education in Hebrew or Greek. (1 Cor.2)
     
  19. carlaimpinge

    carlaimpinge New Member

    100
    +0
    Christian
    What ignorant foolishness. Did you notice, he didn't post ONE verse for anything he stated.

    He doesn't "believe" the time of Jacob's trouble is the great tribulation. What a blind guide. He DENIED, and didn't comment, refute, and give any verses CONTRARY to what the time is IDENTIFIED as by Jeremiah.

    Remember folks. Jeremiah said the TIME was a DAY, which is GREAT, occuring IN THAT DAY. EVERY reference is a match to the day of the Lord. I gave the verses. He gave NONE.

    Come on blind guide, you can do better than that can't you.

    Bud, it wouldn't make any difference what I said it was in the other verses. You don't believe or understand the one in Jer.30, to which Paul states. THAT is the one we are discussing as being the great tribulation.

    Your nuttier than a Claxton fruitcake. Every context deals with the invasion of Jerusalem at the midst of the week by the son of perdition. HE is the ONLY ONE, who INVADES it in the future, on the day of the Lord.

    The very idea that it is the LORD's TROOPS, who rape and scatter those in Jerusalem! (Zech.14) Are you among one of those soldiers?

    The very idea to say that the BOOTY of Jerusalem, and their DESOLATION, is at the END of the week, when the Lord comes. (Zeph.2) You got it backwards, bud. JERUSALEM is saved AT THE END of the week.

    The very idea that the spoiling and division of the land is NOT done by the son of perdition, WHEN it is clearly shown. (Micah.2:4, Dan.11:39) You wouldn't know a bible verse from a number in a phone book.

    And to top it off, to state that Isaiah 5,7, and 10 have nothing to do with the invasion of Jerusalem by the son of perdition is ignorant stupidity of the word of God. Every one of the references deal with the invasion of Jerusalem IN THAT DAY. The Assyrian is the son of perdition in Isaiah 10.

    You'll never make a living, trying to read something. That's WHY you can't teach the Bible. You don't pay attention to the words. I said, the Lord, in the term, day of the Lord, was the FATHER, not the Son.

    The man knows exactly what I stated, but uses deception to confuse and confound. The day of the LORD is an OT term which refers to the Father. The day of the Lord, is an OT term mentioned in the NT scriptures, which refers to the Father. The day of Christ is a NT term NEVER mentioned in the OT.

    Now, go blow the rest of it out your nose, bud. You have proved over and over again, that you have no knowledge of biblical texts and deny every verse of scripture crossreferenced by context, word, phrase, and association of terms. A Jehovah Witness can't do it any better than you.

    You don't know what you're talking about and can't PROVE the junk you state.
     
  20. postrib

    postrib Well-Known Member

    508
    +0
    Christian
    Note that Jeremiah 30:7-8 doesn't identify "the time of Jacob's trouble" as the great tribulation.

    Must 1 Thessalonians 5:3 be referring to Jer. 30? Must it also be referring to Jeremiah 49:24; Jeremiah 50:43; Psalm 48:6; Isaiah 13:8; Isaiah 42:14; and Galatians 4:19?

    Note that no verse states that the son of perdition invades Jerusalem on the day of the Lord.

    Note that verse 1 states "the day of the LORD cometh," a statement which we can make today without the day of the Lord having to actually come today; verse 2 shows what will happen to Jerusalem before the 2nd coming; and verse 3 shows it actually coming.

    Amen (Jeremiah 30:7-8; Nahum 1:13, 15; Romans 11:26; Zechariah 14:4-5; Zechariah 12:7-10).

    I believe "the day of the Lord" and "the day of the Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Corinthians 1:7-8) are the same day, the day he comes to gather us together (2 Thessalonians 2:1-3, compare Matthew 24:29-31).

      Is the LORD in the OT always the Father? Will the Father's feet stand on the Mount of Olives? (Zechariah 14:3-4)

    Can you point out which verses I've denied?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...