I find it interesting how SDAs and Dispys are at each others throats in a hate-hate relationship, every time I read anything from either camp, I'm left banging my head against the wall, it is a wonder (considering the amount I have read from both of them) that I can actually still function as a human being.
That depends on which futurism...and most ascribe to a pretrib rapture. For those who do, my response stands.Regarding "Partial preterism doesn't believe a pretrib rapture", note that neither does futurism per se, for the reasons given in the 2nd section of post 14.
As my response says, all you have to do is allow those passages to speak...there is NO pretrib rapture.Regarding "EVERY passage that futurism points to as a rapture is really Christ coming to resurrect the righteous and the unrighteous", note that the rapture will occur right after the resurrection of the righteous...
When you consider Paul is answering that question to BELIEVERS who are inquiring about resurrection...why would he even speak of the resurrection of the unrighteous?Regarding "Christ coming to resurrect the righteous and the unrighteous", note that when Jesus returns, only the church will be bodily resurrected and finally-judged (1 Corinthians 15:21-23, Revelation 20:5; Psalms 50:3-5, cf. Mark 13:27; Matthew 25:19-30; 2 Corinthians 5:10, Luke 12:45-48). The obedient part of the bodily resurrected church, including those in the church who had been beheaded by the Antichrist, will then reign on the earth with the returned Jesus for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29, Psalms 66:3-4, Psalms 72:8-11, Zechariah 14:3-21). Only sometime after the 1,000 years and the subsequent Gog/Magog rebellion are over (Revelation 20:7-10, Ezekiel chapters 38-39) will the rest of the dead (of all times) be bodily resurrected (Revelation 20:5) and finally-judged at the great white throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-15).
Iranaeus' quote is ambiguous...it can be read both ways. But for the reason I stated, you cannot address. Why does John not speak to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, if he's writing in 95AD?Since John saw his Revelation vision around 95 AD, near the end of Domitian's reign (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5:30:3c), and Revelation is about future events (Revelation 1:1), not past events, there was no need to mention the past events of 70 AD.
Obviously you're totally ignoring many OT prophets who tell us Israel is the harlot as well as is figuratively Babylon. Which is why does John calls it "Mystery Babylon MOTHER OF HARLOTS"...so when you IGNORE prophecy you get distorted prophecy. Jeremiah even tells Judah she has a HARLOT'S FOREHEAD!!!Note that while the corrupt aspects of first-century AD Jerusalem (and of other cities) are included in what Revelation's symbolic "Babylon" (Revelation chapters 17-18) represents, it represents much more than just the corrupt aspects of first-century AD Jerusalem. For first-century AD Jerusalem just by itself didn't reign over the kings of the earth (Revelation 17:18). Nor was first-century AD Jerusalem the only place where people bought merchandise (Revelation 18:11). Nor had first-century AD Jerusalem just by itself corrupted the entire world (Revelation 18:3). Nor had first-century AD Jerusalem been continuously supported by the empires of fallen man throughout history (Revelation 17:9-10). Instead, Revelation's symbolic "Babylon" represents all of mankind's corrupt political (Revelation 17:18), economic (Revelation 18:11), and religious (Revelation 18:24) systems throughout the earth (Revelation 18:3), and throughout history (Revelation 17:9-10).
When you read Jesus lament Jerusalem as DESOLATE in Matthew 23:37-39, you should be able to understand this. At that point it became about the "Jerusalem above" as Paul tells us in Galatians 4:26. So here again you're erroneous. The passage is referring to Jerusalem where the Lord was crucified to tell you it's about to be destroyed. Do yourself a favor and understand what John means when he was told to "measure the city"...it was for destruction!In Revelation 11:8, the great city is Jerusalem, where Jesus was crucified. But in Revelation 21:10, the great city is New Jerusalem, which is now in heaven. And in Revelation 14:8, Revelation 17:18, and Revelation 18:10-21, the great city is the symbolic harlot/city of Babylon. When it's destroyed, it will be found no more at all (Revelation 18:21), forever (Revelation 19:3), unlike Jerusalem, which was found again after its only-temporary destruction in 70 AD.
Pretty much fantasy because of a failure to understand apocalyptic language of scripture.The 10 kings of the Antichrist's empire will destroy with fire what Revelation's "Babylon" represents (Revelation 17:16-17) when they destroy the cities of the earth (Revelation 16:19), probably with nukes (and probably with Fission-Fusion-Fission, "FFF", or "666", nukes, "F" representing the number six in English gematria), at the time of the 7th vial (Revelation 16:17,19), which will be the final event (Revelation 16:17) of the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24, right before Jesus' 2nd coming (Revelation 19:2 to 20:6, Matthew 24:29-31). They could do this under the direction of Lucifer/Satan (Isaiah 14:17,12), who could want to leave only a literal "scorched earth" for Jesus to return to.
Of course this will be a lie. For at his 2nd coming, Jesus (who is YHWH: John 10:30, Zechariah 14:3-4) will completely defeat the world's armies, arrayed against YHWH (Revelation 16:14, Revelation 19:19-21). And Jesus will have Lucifer bound in the bottomless pit during the subsequent 1,000 years (Revelation 20:1-6, Isaiah 14:15). And Jesus will restore ruined parts of the earth and make them like the Garden of Eden (Ezekiel 36:35, Isaiah 51:3). And after the 1,000 years and subsequent events are over (Revelation 20:7-15), God will create a new heaven (a new first heaven, a new sky/atmosphere for the earth) and a new earth (a new surface for the earth) (Revelation 21:1). And then God will descend from the 3rd heaven in the literal city of New Jerusalem, to live with saved humanity on the new earth (Revelation 21:2-4)...
Daniel gives us the four beasts and who they are...consistent with that John picks up where Daniel and Jesus leaves off. This is specific to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. We as believers already know there is but one God so when it comes to the 21st century we don't need the typification of Babylon...as I said earlier that goes back to the OT prophets symbolically calling Israel/Judah harlots...and don't forget the city is called "MYSTERY BABYLON".Note that just as Revelation's symbolic "Babylon" (Revelation chapters 17-18) represents much more than just first-century AD Jerusalem, so the beast of Revelation 17:3 represents much more than just the ancient Roman empire...
Beware of the false teacher who discounts a dispensational view of the Bible and at the same time dismisses the scriptural teaching of a pre-tribulation intervention by Jesus Christ to call His ecclesia [called out ones] just before He brings His unprecedented wrath upon a world of unbelief at the end of this present age The central theme of those who do this is to employ a bogus ruse built around the idea that Darbys discoveries of progressive revelation related to a dispensational structure, and his alleged attempt to create the idea of what they call a pre-tribulation rapture . all of this can be proven to be based upon a hoax These false teachers at the same time hold replacement theology which claims the Lord is finished with His national people Israel . this idea cannot be supported by the prophetic scriptures of the Bible . these related scriptures project a dispensational framework which is ignored by the false teacher When ever you see this combination of thinking, you can know without a doubt that that the false teacher is creating a deception for nefarious and proprietary ambitions This false teaching exists in the many different sects of professing Christianity and has given rise to off course theologies that include preterism, post-tribulation thinking, anti-Semitism, the idea of a revived European based Roman Empire, the implication of a Pope lead RCC end time antichrist maker, the hatching of numerous ineffective middle of the road Christian look a likes, and similar religious cults . and certainly the virulent anti-christ religion of Islam All of these must necessarily first dismantle the Lords structure and framework of His written Word which reflects His ways of dealing with fallen humanity from the beginning to the ending of the same . this behavior then open up the Bible for all sorts of meddling and subversion . human temptation to create self gain is the root cause of this kind of intransigence And so are the unregenerate followers guilty who embrace false teaching by choice The world is currently in the dispensation of the Lords grace . different from the previous, and about to end for the beginning of the next [Ephesians 1:10; 3:2; Colossians 1:25]
Indeed it is. The sad part about it is that many believe in it...because they want to believe they will escape a fabricated 7 year tribulation that already occurred.The only false teaching is dispensationalism itself, it is not historic despite a few cherry picked teachings of some early fathers. The consensus view rejected that, evidenced in the Creed.
ebedmelech said in post 43:
Jesus even weighs in on it with the parable of the "wheat and the tares" in Matthew 13:36-43.
ebedmelech said in post 43:
Pretty clear...but find Jesus ANYWHERE speaking of a rapture prior to his second coming.
ebedmelech said in post 43:
However you're pretty much cornered when he says the first four words of 1 Corinthians 15:24 "THEN COMES THE END..."
ebedmelech said in post 43:
Why does John not speak to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, if he's writing in 95AD?
ebedmelech said in post 43:
Obviously you're totally ignoring many OT prophets who tell us Israel is the harlot as well as is figuratively Babylon.
ebedmelech said in post 43:
When you read Jesus lament Jerusalem as DESOLATE in Matthew 23:37-39, you should be able to understand this.
ebedmelech said in post 43:
At that point it became about the "Jerusalem above" as Paul tells us in Galatians 4:26.
ebedmelech said in post 43:
At that point it became about the "Jerusalem above" as Paul tells us in Galatians 4:26.
ebedmelech said in post 43:
Do yourself a favor and understand what John means when he was told to "measure the city"...it was for destruction!
ebedmelech said in post 43:
Pretty much fantasy because of a failure to understand apocalyptic language of scripture.
No. Deal with the parable based on what it says. It say's nothing about a millennium nor New Jerusalem. The parable is making the point that Jesus will separate wheat from tares...that's the ONLY point Jesus makes..."all your "other stuff" just isn't mentioned...so that is how you impose on a passage. Speak to that which is in the parable.In Matthew 13:38, the good seed are the elect, and the weeds/tares are the nonelect, who can't ever believe in Jesus (John 8:42-47). Matthew 13:40-42 refers to the great white throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-14), after the future millennium and subsequent events (Revelation 20:7-10), when the unsaved will be cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:15). In Matthew 13:43, the kingdom of the Father is after the great white throne judgment, when a new earth (i.e. a new surface of the earth) will be created and God the Father will descend from heaven in the literal city of New Jerusalem to live with the church on the new earth (Revelation 21:1-3).
You reasons are loaded with impsosition...but yes the only rapture is at Christ return.The rapture won't occur until the 2nd coming, for the reasons given in the 2nd section of post 14.
The end...is the end. As I have stated to you before 1 Corinthians 15 doesn't require Jesus to do anything immediately..it says He will do it...so He will do itThe "end" in 1 Corinthians 15:24 will be at the end of all of the future, never-fulfilled events of Revelation 19:7 to 20:15.
1 Corinthians 15:23-28 doesn't require that Jesus will deliver the kingdom to God the Father immediately at his 2nd coming, only that he will do that sometime subsequent to his 2nd coming. For right after his 2nd coming,...
You're free to believe that...but those events are not future. All you do is read Revelation knowing it expands on Matthew 24...and we know Jerusalem fell as well as the temple.Because Revelation is about future events (Revelation 1:1), not past events.
You're quite confused here because you're very inconsistent in allowing passages to say...what they say. So here again you come with "doesn't requires" and "could means". So when you know what it means...we'll talk about it.Note that passages like Ezekiel 16 don't require that Jerusalem alone must be the entirety of what the symbolic "Babylon" in Revelation chapters 17-18 represents, just as, for example, Nahum 3:4 doesn't require that Nineveh alone (Nahum 1:1) is the entirety of Revelation's "Babylon". Similarly, Isaiah 23:15-16 doesn't require that Tyre alone is the entirety of Revelation's "Babylon". And Ezekiel 23:4-8,44 doesn't require that Samaria alone is the entirety of Revelation's "Babylon". And Jeremiah 3:6-7 and Hosea 4:15 don't require that the northern kingdom of Israel alone is the entirety of Revelation's "Babylon". And Ezekiel 20:30 and Ezekiel 43:7 don't require that the house of Israel alone is the entirety of Revelation's "Babylon". And Hosea 5:3 and Hosea 6:10 don't require that Ephraim alone is the entirety of Revelation's "Babylon". Instead, the corrupt aspects of all of these, and of all other cities and nations throughout the earth and throughout history, can be included as only parts of what Revelation's "Babylon" represents.
No Jesus said "YOUR HOUSE (which is the temple), is left to you desolate". The temple was God's house until that point. Ask yourself why Jesus speaks of all the prophets that were sent to Jerusalem if this is only spiritual. Jesus then moves to the temple destruction at Matthew 24:15. The veil of the temple was ripped in half when Jesus died...IT WAS THE END OF TEMPLE WORSHIP FOREVER.Matthew 23:38 refers to the spiritual desolation of Jerusalem because of its rejection of Jesus (1 John 5:12b), whereas Matthew 23:39 refers to the future salvation of all the unbelieving elect Jews in Jerusalem at Jesus' 2nd coming, when they will see him in person and believe in him (Zechariah 12:10-14, Romans 11:26-29).
So what do you do when Paul tells you this allegory?:Well, I do not own a have a Scofield bible . I refer to my KJV study bible and I also like the ESV . I got some of my references from theopedia which is an evangelical encyclopedia of biblical Christianity . This is used for basic different Christian theological beliefs.
I put everything that I read, whether on this forum , books, ect, under the light of the word to see if it matches up with scripture . One must be able to discern something that is true to the scripture verses false . The only way to not be deceived is to know what the word of God says. Everyone should be a good berean and search out matters to see if they are true to the word .
What I said above does not fall apart in its eschatology . It actually makes perfect sense . If one allegories the scripture instead of taking it literally, a lot of confusion can happen . I believe that the literal interpretation is the only way to interpret scripture .
ebedmelech said in post 47:
Deal with the parable based on what it says. It say's nothing about a millennium nor New Jerusalem.
ebedmelech said in post 47:
Deal with the parable based on what it says. It say's nothing about a millennium nor New Jerusalem.
ebedmelech said in post 47:
The parable is making the point that Jesus will separate wheat from tares...
ebedmelech said in post 47:
As I have stated to you before 1 Corinthians 15 doesn't require Jesus to do anything immediately..it says He will do it...so He will do it
ebedmelech said in post 47:
You're free to believe that...but those events are not future. All you do is read Revelation knowing it expands on Matthew 24...and we know Jerusalem fell as well as the temple.
ebedmelech said in post 47:
Jesus then moves to the temple destruction at Matthew 24:15.
It is a parable Bible2...so when you introduce the millennium into a parable that doesn't mention it, you've imposed on the parable. Jesus speaks to the "wheat and the tares" nothing else...so basically you deal with that and that alone. It mentions nothing of New Jerusalem.Neither does it deny a future millennium or a literal New Jerusalem.
For New Jerusalem is a literal city 1,500 miles cubed (Revelation 21:16),...
No. That's what you're looking for. The kingdom exist right now...which is why Jesus started His ministry saying “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”. What happens on Jesus return is "Jerusalem above" comes to earth.The church looks for Jesus' return from heaven (Philippians 3:20) and his setting up of his physical kingdom on the earth with the bodily resurrected church for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29). New Jerusalem won't descend from the 3rd heaven to the earth until after a new earth (a new surface of the earth) has been created (Revelation 21:1-4), sometime after the 1,000 years and subsequent events are over (Revelation 20:7-15). The church will physically live and reign in New Jerusalem with God the Father and Jesus on the new earth (Revelation 21:1 to 22:5).
No. I'm not going to do that again with you. The 1000 years represent Christ's reign in entirety from His resurrection until He judges the world.Regarding a future millennium, note that there are at least 8 different scriptural reasons for reading the 1,000 years of Revelation 20:2-6 as not beginning until after Jesus' future 2nd coming in Revelation 19:7-21.
First,...
Other scriptures are not mentioned in the parable. Jesus is making one point... He will separate the wheat from the tares.Right. But other scriptures show that he won't do that until after the future millennium.
What 1 Corinthians 15:24 says "then comes the end"...so "then comes the end". Revelation 19:7 - 20:15 is after the end. It is "the end" because God's salvation plan ends...no one else can be saved...so it's THE END.Right, but he won't do 1 Corinthians 15:24 until after the never-fulfilled events of Revelation 19:7 to 20:15.
No need to. They have happened.See post 37 for the reasons why Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24 are still future to us.
*Matthew 24:2-8 describe conditions that will exist throughout time, which is why Jesus calls them "birth pangs".Just as Matthew 24:2 wasn't fulfilled in 70 AD, so Matthew 24:15 wasn't fulfilled in 70 AD.
We've done that before Bible2. It's Jerusalem's destruction and the temple as well. The abomination of desolation is committed by the Romans when they enter the temple to destroy it. It's not a repeat of Antiochus Epiphanies...what it is is something they can relate to BECAUSE of the history of what Antiochus did in desecrating the temple. Jesus KNEW they could make that connection...and it WAS a SIGN to flee Jerusalem...which the saints of that time DID do.In Matthew 24:15, Jesus is referring to Daniel 11:31...
ebedmelech said:So what do you do when Paul tells you this allegory?: Galatians 4:21-31 21 Tell me, you who want to be under law, do you not listen to the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman. 23 But the son by the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise. 24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar. 25 Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother. 27 For it is written, "Rejoice, barren woman who does not bear; Break forth and shout, you who are not in labor; For more numerous are the children of the desolate Than of the one who has a husband." 28 And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29 But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. 30 But what does the Scripture say? "Cast out the bondwoman and her son, For the son of the bondwoman shall not be an heir with the son of the free woman." 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman, but of the free woman. So there we have Paul clearly telling us Sarah and Hager (way back in Genesis 16), are allegories...so what do you do with that? Since it goes back to Abram, Sarah and Hagar...it seems to me you have to look at it the allegory from that point forward...so now what?
ebedmelech said in post 50:
It is a parable Bible2...so when you introduce the millennium into a parable that doesn't mention it, you've imposed on the parable. Jesus speaks to the "wheat and the tares" nothing else...so basically you deal with that and that alone. It mentions nothing of New Jerusalem.
ebedmelech said in post 50:
The kingdom exist right now...
ebedmelech said in post 50:
What happens on Jesus return is "Jerusalem above" comes to earth.
ebedmelech said in post 50:
*Why does New Jerusalem come down as a bride prepared for her husband?
ebedmelech said in post 50:
Other scriptures are not mentioned in the parable. Jesus is making one point... He will separate the wheat from the tares.
ebedmelech said in post 50:
What 1 Corinthians 15:24 says "then comes the end"...so "then comes the end".
ebedmelech said in post 50:
Revelation 19:7 - 20:15 is after the end.
ebedmelech said in post 50:
It is "the end" because God's salvation plan ends...no one else can be saved...so it's THE END.
ebedmelech said in post 50:
*Matthew 24:9-14 Jesus tells the disciples to expect to be killed as the tribulation happens but that the gospel will be preached to ALL nations.
ebedmelech said in post 50:
Jesus KNEW they could make that connection...and it WAS a SIGN to flee Jerusalem...which the saints of that time DID do.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?