Eschatological Views

[Judephraim]

Hey all and God bless!

Excuse me, but what is a "Millionarochratist," Judephraim? I'd be very interested in knowing. Thank you and God bless!

In Christ,
Sheridan

I don't know but it sounds like some of them big words ya'll was usin.Besides you guys need a short post in there somewhere.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I don't know but it sounds like some of them big words ya'll was usin.Besides you guys need a short post in there somewhere.

LOL!

 

[FreeinChrist]

I just spent a long time typing a response...and had a server problem and seem to have lost it!


will try again in a bit.

 

[FreeinChrist]

Hi Free,

I want you to look thru one of your supposed arguments.

In response to a verse in Hebrews 9 that indicated the time of the end of the ages , you wrote:
You should be more complete:

Then you listed some verses and wrote:
He came once to “put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself, and will come again a second (deuteros) time.

**************

I guess the above is all you got out of Hebrews in those verses. Pity.

There is no wonder you have a really poor handle on what the bible actually says. You are blind to the word, you are blinded by the mindset that prohibits you from even seeing the written word. It has to be that.

The verse I put down says this:
26Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

That verse says what it says regardless if you read it alone or with the entire chapter. This 'context' thing is just the last resort to escape and deny what the verse actually says..Context , my eye, if I can get the meaning of the verse so can anybody else. Adding in the verses around it change absolutely nothing.

Verse 26 tells you when the end of the ages are. I asked you what the end could be...could it be the end of the covenant and you go on to explain that the end of the covenant was when Jesus was here. SO then you agree that the 'end' could have been when Jesus died or thereabouts??????Or what?

You are stooping to ad hominen attack with the "you are blinded" stuff.

Yes, context is important.
Hbr 9:26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

Hbr 9:27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this {comes} judgment,

Hbr 9:28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without {reference to} sin, to those who eagerly await Him.

Verse 26 refers to the His first coming - on earth as the Incarnation. Born of the Virgin Mary, died on the cross to provide the propitaiton for sin.
The "consumation fo the ages" - the ages this is referring to is all the previous ages in which God progressively revealed his plan of salvation. It all pointed to the cross - from why God as Abraham to sacrifice Issac, the Law, and more.
Christ was the fulfillment of the Law, of the promise of the "seed of the woman" (Genesis 3:15), of the promise to Abrham to bless all nations through his seed, of the prophecies of Isaiah, in Psalms and more.
It all pointed to the fact that God himself, through the Incarnation, provided the propiation of man's sin.

Vs. 28 tells He came that one time already...and will come again a second (deuteros) time.

Do you honestly believe that the Old Covenant was valid in the 40 years after the death and resurrection of Christ??

The author of Hebrews wrote a book showing how Christ fulfilled the Law, and had brought in the "new and living way".
He is the mediator of a better covenant, made with a better sacrifice made with better blood (His), offerred in the better sanctuary (in heaven) by the better High Priest (Jesus) and based on better promises.
The Law pointed to all of this - and Christ fulfilled it.

No, at the time of the writing of say Paul or Matthew , the resurrections hadn't happened yet. Jesus flatly state that no one had gone to Heaven.

Jesus may have told you where Abraham's Bosum was, but He hasn't shown me yet.

Abraham's bosom was never in heaven, Justme. It was in Sheol. Jesus tells about it. And the spirits of those who were there could not go to heaven unless Christ went first.

52The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus' resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

Some dead people were brought back to life, they even went into Jerusalem and 'appeared' to many people. The meaning of the greek word for 'appeared ' is shown as this by Strong.

1) to manifest, exhibit to view

2) to show one's self, come to view, appear, be manifest

3) to indicate, disclose, declare, make known

If this was a resurrection Paul would have no right to critisize Hymeneaus and Philates (or whoever they were) for saying the resurrection was over.

Matthew 27:50-53 does not speak of a resurrection.

Yes, actually it does.

!

Yes, Free, yes indeed.!!!! However, it it is a SPIRITUAL body. A body yes, but because it is a body, that doesn't make it a PHYSICAL body because scripture specifically states it is a SPIRITUAL body.
I don't know how it is done either and don't care. Just like Matt Slick, you know that it is a SPIRITUAL body, but for whatever reason you chose to change the biblical meaning to PHYSICAL. Go ahead, but that is biblically incorrect. It is sown a natural body it is RAISED a SPIRITUAL body.

Jesus was raised form the grave and was on earth as a physical person/body/whatever when He talked to Thomas. After you and I die, we do not get up and walk around earth after three days. Jesus then went up to Heaven hidden by a cloud....Heaven is a spiritual realm, flesh and blood, natural man can not enter there.

SPIRITUAL BODY - AS IN A GLORIFIED PHYSICAL BODY. IF THERE WAS NO BODY, WE WOULD JUST BE SPIRITS AND THE WORD FOR BODY WOULD NOT BE USED.

THE WORD SPIRITUAL IS USED BECAUSE WE WILL BE IN THE SPIRITUAL WORLD - LIKE ANGELS. BUT WE WILL NOT BE GHOSTS, JUSTME. LIKE CHRIST, WE WILL BE RAISED IN A GLORIFIED BODY:

Phl 3:20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:Phl 3:21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.
And yes, Christ rose physically - in a glorified body - and ascended in the same body. There is nothing in the text of His ascension that His body changed from a glorified physical body to pure spirit only.


Perhaps others who are reading this would like to read this sermon by Spurgeon:

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0066.htm

Unless you have anything new, Justme, I think I am done with this discussion. My responses are up to 54 pages on a Word document since page 27. I haven't seen anything to dissuade me from believing the Second coming is not yet a future event - a one time event - in which Christ returns physically in glory, and from believing in the resurrection of the body.

 

[Justme]

Hi Free,
I am going to set up a thread to discuss the 70 AD parousia and the future coming of of Christ.

You have been pretty vocal in condemning the 70 AD view when we can not comment back. Let's see how your stuff holds up when we have no restrictions.

What do you mean 'end the discussion now' ? You have only dealt with miniscule parts of it anyway...that is not a discussion, so you haven't been in it for ages.

unorthodox theology, you can see your points dealt with there from now on...whether you come or not, your points will be dealt with there.

Justme

 

[FreeinChrist]

Hi Free,
I am going to set up a thread to discuss the 70 AD parousia and the future coming of of Christ.

You have been pretty vocal in condemning the 70 AD view when we can not comment back. Let's see how your stuff holds up when we have no restrictions.

What do you mean 'end the discussion now' ? You have only dealt with miniscule parts of it anyway...that is not a discussion, so you haven't been in it for ages.
unorthodox theology, you can see your points dealt with there from now on...whether you come or not, your points will be dealt with there.

Justme

I have already been there and done that in the Unorthodox Doctrines forum. One thread alone went on for over 25 pages and got closed by a moderator. It had gotten ugly. I distinctly remember being referred to as a "racist" for beleiving that one purpose of the tribulation period ois the reconciliation of Israel. It wouldn't have come up here if parousia70, GW and yourself didn't try to bring it here earlier in the month!


You ask, "What do you mean 'end the discussion now' ? What I had written was:
"Unless you have anything new, Justme, I think I am done with this discussion."
Seems you like to just keep making the same arguements over and over...but I don't.


"You have only dealt with miniscule parts of it anyway...that is not a discussion, so you haven't been in it for ages."
Speak for yourself. I dealt with more than you, IMHO.

 

[DIVAMOM]

I want you all to understand that you've taken something that has the potential to be very helpful to others and perverted it to forward your own agendas. That is unBiblical. There are ways to discuss your beliefs without clogging up the threads here. I've already lost the entire thought process behind this thread and would like to start over from here for those of us interrested in discussion and learning. If you'd like to debate, please do so in a PM and don't waist my time.

 

[DIVAMOM]

Oh yeah,
I believe Christ will return after much prophesy has been fulfilled. Then the seven year tribulation will occur, followed by Christ's glorious return. Directly followed by the battle of all ages, Armageddon, then onto our 1000 years on reign on earth and the Devil's last fall after that.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I want you all to understand that you've taken something that has the potential to be very helpful to others and perverted it to forward your own agendas. That is unBiblical. There are ways to discuss your beliefs without clogging up the threads here. I've already lost the entire thought process behind this thread and would like to start over from here for those of us interrested in discussion and learning. If you'd like to debate, please do so in a PM and don't waist my time.

?

Why don't you just start a new thread here?

 

[Justme]

Hi Divamom,

I believe Christ will return after much prophesy has been fulfilled. Then the seven year tribulation will occur, followed by Christ's glorious return. Directly followed by the battle of all ages, Armageddon, then onto our 1000 years on reign on earth and the Devil's last fall after that.

I'd like to see a thread on this Armaggeddon thing. It occurs in two sentences in the spoken conversation of a vision and forms a fair bit of the foundation of some so-called christian groups.

I'm sure there are threads on why some consider the tribulation of the Olivet Discourse to be seven years long. The long and short of that is that the days were shortened....shortened to what? Who knows, it doesn't say as far as I know. If it does spell out in the bible what the shortened days were shortened to I would like to read that.

I would really like to discuss the 1000 year reign with Christ with someone who reads the bible and accepts the written word. Your opinion is that the 1000 years is after the 'parousia' or the coming of the son of man which is right after the great tribulation. Could you quote the bible verses that could place the 1000 years after the parousia?

There are a number of things that could be revisited just from your short post alone.

Justme

 

[Judephraim]

Hi Divamom,


I'd like to see a thread on this Armaggeddon thing. It occurs in two sentences in the spoken conversation of a vision and forms a fair bit of the foundation of some so-called christian groups.

I'm sure there are threads on why some consider the tribulation of the Olivet Discourse to be seven years long. The long and short of that is that the days were shortened....shortened to what? Who knows, it doesn't say as far as I know. If it does spell out in the bible what the shortened days were shortened to I would like to read that.

I would really like to discuss the 1000 year reign with Christ with someone who reads the bible and accepts the written word. Your opinion is that the 1000 years is after the 'parousia' or the coming of the son of man which is right after the great tribulation. Could you quote the bible verses that could place the 1000 years after the parousia?

There are a number of things that could be revisited just from your short post alone.

Justme

Armeggeddon is where Elija made the people decide.He was standing at the head of the Jezzereel valley,valley of descision.If an army came to attack Jerusalem they would rally their troops and decide Jerusalem's fate in that valley.Interesting subject

 

[Justme]

Hi Jude,

There you go. Well, it's either that or a symbolic battle between a lamb and a big snake. The lamb wins.

Justme

 

[DIVAMOM]

oops duplicate post

 

[DIVAMOM]

I just wanted to quick post to let you know that I am in the middle of studying for finals, so I will not be able to give you an in-depth response until after Thursday. Until then, pray the Lord will reveal His Word to me, not the word of man.
Thanks all.
Jen