[MOVED] End of the world predictions are a dime a dozen and always wrong. :)

[parousia70]

They all died and met their Maker, so if they were hypocrites than they would have been ashamed at their meeting.

Which is still not "the coming of Christ as a thief at an hour they did not expect"

I didn't say everything is Revelation 2-3 was fulfilled. Revelation is mostly unfulfilled, which is exactly what I've been arguing.

So Jesus failed to keep His promise to "come as a thief" to the 1st century Church of Sardis,"at an Hour they did not expect"?

 

[parousia70]

Jesus says, "Behold, I am coming soon" in Revelation 22:7 and Revelation 22:12 and "Surely, I am coming soon" in Revelation 22:20. This is in the last page of the Bible, and He hasn't come yet. So obviously, even though about 2000 years have passed, it is still soon to God.

So "I am coming soon" has no discernible meaning to Men, and is therefore useless?

 

[Luke17:37]

Which is still not "the coming of Christ as a thief at an hour they did not expect"



So Jesus failed to keep His promise to "come as a thief" to the 1st century Church of Sardis,"at an Hour they did not expect"?

He didn't promise to come to the 1st century church.

 

[Luke17:37]

So "I am coming soon" has no discernible meaning to Men, and is therefore useless?

2 Peter 3:8–9 (NKJV)
8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

It isn't useless--it just means that Jesus's clock isn't the same, and that He wanted to finish the canon of Scripture with the apostles, not somebody today writing a "new revelation." And Jesus is clear that although it will seem to our perspective like He bears long with us, He comes quickly.

Luke 18:7–8 (NKJV)
7 And shall God not avenge His own elect who cry out day and night to Him, though He bears long with them? 8 I tell you that He will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will He really find faith on the earth?”

Also, it means each generation should be prepared for the possibility of the fulfillment.

 

[Postvieww]

Actually there is:
Rev 1:19 YLT
Write the things that thou hast seen, and the things that are, and the things that are about to come after these things

It's the Greek Word "mello" that is used, that the KJV mistranslates as "Shall". In Fact the use of mello indicates that the things that were yet future to John were not things far off, thousands of year away but were "about to come" were indeed on the point, or on the verge, of happening imminently.

Strongs 3195 // mellw // mello // mel'-lo //

a strengthened form of 3199 (through the idea of expectation);

1) to be about
1a) to be on the point of doing or suffering something



A plain reading of the text indicates otherwise:
Rev 1:9
9 I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

John was a "companion in THE TRIBULATION OF JESUS CHRIST".

THE TRIBULATION OF JESUS CHRIST

Not Johns tribulation, not a mini tribulation, not general tribulation but
THE TRIBULATION OF JESUS CHRIST

Just let than sink in

Let the text form your view, rather than forcing your view onto the text.

Parousia70 said:

Actually there is:

Rev 1:19 YLT

Write the things that thou hast seen, and the things that are, and the things that are about to come after these things


YLT, CEB, Darby, LEB, MSG, agree with you the other 49 on Bible Gateway do not. What have you proved? Assuming “about” is correct , what does that mean? 5, 10, 70, 100 or 2000 years ? How soon is “about to come”?


It's the Greek Word "mello" that is used, that the KJV mistranslates as "Shall". In Fact the use of mello indicates that the things that were yet future to John were not things far off, thousands of year away but were "about to come" were indeed on the point, or on the verge, of happening imminently.


Strongs 3195 // mellw // mello // mel'-lo //


a strengthened form of 3199 (through the idea of expectation);


1) to be about

1a) to be on the point of doing or suffering something







A plain reading of the text indicates otherwise:


No, your interpretation says otherwise.


Rev 1:9

9 I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.


John was a "companion in THE TRIBULATION OF JESUS CHRIST".


Yes


THE TRIBULATION OF JESUS CHRIST


Yes


Not Johns tribulation, not a mini tribulation, not general tribulation but

THE TRIBULATION OF JESUS CHRIST


Yes


Just let than sink in


Johns tribulation on Patmos was not “such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be”. Therefore was not what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24:21. Let that sink in.


Let the text form your view, rather than forcing your view onto the text.


Good advice .

 

[Postvieww]

Lessee... Rome, gone. Byzantine Empire, gone. Holy Roman Empire, gone. Ottoman Empire, gone. British Empire, gone. Czarist Russia, gone. Imperial Japan, gone. Imperial China, gone. Soviet Union, gone. US Empire might end some day? Oh, the horror!

Never ridden a mule? Smarter than horses, but their backs are sharp. Products of genetic manipulation, albeit on a very basic level.

Ya know, I've seen that "scoffer" charge leveled against folks who, by and large, confess in every service they attend that our Lord " ascended into Heaven, sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead." In the Anglican service, we also declare that 'Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again." I've begun to think that chucking that verse at people to whom it in no way applies is little better than a knowing lie. I'll assume that in your case it was done thoughtlessly.

Jipsah said:


Lessee... Rome, gone. Byzantine Empire, gone. Holy Roman Empire, gone. Ottoman Empire, gone. British Empire, gone. Czarist Russia, gone. Imperial Japan, gone. Imperial China, gone. Soviet Union, gone. US Empire might end some day? Oh, the horror!


When it happens you just might be right, about the horror.


Never ridden a mule? Smarter than horses, but their backs are sharp. Products of genetic manipulation, albeit on a very basic level.


Yea but nobody was trying to make a god out of them or have eternal life without God.


Ya know, I've seen that "scoffer" charge leveled against folks who, by and large, confess in every service they attend that our Lord " ascended into Heaven, sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead." In the Anglican service, we also declare that 'Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again." I've begun to think that chucking that verse at people to whom it in no way applies is little better than a knowing lie. I'll assume that in your case it was done thoughtlessly.


Ya know when someone tells me all is well in the world, and everything is just as it has always been, there has always been wars, famines and earthquakes, we’re richer than ever, eat drink and be merry, and Jesus may have come 1000 years ago, I believe 2 Peter 3:3 just might apply. Sorry if you disagree.

 

[Jipsah]

Just because people hold to the coming of Christ today doesn't mean they will tomorrow.

Which occurs to me could as easily apply to you as to me. Probably moreso, since I don't depend on the newspapers for "evidence" that our Lord is coming back.

No, the "scoffer" charge is simply, and shamefully, untrue.

 

[Postvieww]

If this is true, I'm curious in what way you believe Revelation 3:3 applied to the 1st century Church at Sardis:

3 Remember therefore how you have received and heard; hold fast and repent. Therefore if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you.

Did Christ Come as a thief upon those 1st century Christians at Sardis who did not watch, as he PROMISED to them in this passage he would?

Maybe they watched and repented, we are not told.

 

[Luke17:37]

Which occurs to me could as easily apply to you as to me. Probably moreso, since I don't depend on the newspapers for "evidence" that our Lord is coming back.

No, the "scoffer" charge is simply, and shamefully, untrue.

Well, at least I believe the Bible's accounts of creation and the global flood, which a significant percentage of Christians today reject in one way or another.

I am not looking at newspapers for evidence that the Lord is coming back, either.

 

[Jipsah]

Jesus says, "Behold, I am coming soon" in Revelation 22:7 and Revelation 22:12 and "Surely, I am coming soon" in Revelation 22:20. This is in the last page of the Bible, and He hasn't come yet. So obviously, even though about 2000 years have passed, it is still soon to God.

And so would 2,000,000 years be equally as soon to God. And if God had written the Revelation to Himself. that might have made sense. But since He saw fit to have it written down in human-readable form, He probably meant it to be understood by people. Reckon?

 

[Jipsah]

Ya know when someone tells me all is well in the world, and everything is just as it has always been, there has always been wars, famines and earthquakes, we’re richer than ever, eat drink and be merry, and Jesus may have come 1000 years ago, I believe 2 Peter 3:3 just might apply. Sorry if you disagree.

Sorry, hoss, it's still a lie, rationalize it as you will.

 

[Luke17:37]

And so would 2,000,000 years be equally as soon to God. And if God had written the Revelation to Himself. But since He saw fit too have it written down in human-readable form, He probably meant it to be understood by people. Reckon?

I think He'll probably come back much sooner--maybe even to this wicked generation.

Hosea 5:14 - Hosea 6:3
14 For I will be like a lion to Ephraim,
And like a young lion to the house of Judah.
I, even I, will tear them and go away;
I will take them away, and no one shall rescue.
15 I will return again to My place
Till they acknowledge their offense.
Then they will seek My face;
In their affliction they will earnestly seek Me.”
6 Come, and let us return to the Lord;
For He has torn, but He will heal us;
He has stricken, but He will bind us up.
2 After two days He will revive us;
On the third day He will raise us up,
That we may live in His sight.
3 Let us know,
Let us pursue the knowledge of the Lord.
His going forth is established as the morning;
He will come to us like the rain,
Like the latter and former rain to the earth.

If the two days in Hosea 6 are like a thousand years, maybe Israel's significant revival will begin around 2033. And if so, His return would closely follow it.

He wrote it for His servants, not Himself.

 

[parousia70]

He didn't promise to come to the 1st century church.

Sure He did.

Revelation 3:3 (Addressing the 1st Century Church @ Sardis)
Remember therefore how you have received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore you will not watch, I will come on you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you.

Not, "I might come, or I could come, or perhaps I'll come, or maybe I'll come"

Rather, I WILL COME UPON YOU

 

[Luke17:37]

And so would 2,000,000 years be equally as soon to God. And if God had written the Revelation to Himself. that might have made sense. But since He saw fit to have it written down in human-readable form, He probably meant it to be understood by people. Reckon?

I read the Bible and it makes sense to me.

 

[Luke17:37]

Sure He did.

Revelation 3:3 (Addressing the 1st Century Church @ Sardis)
Remember therefore how you have received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore you will not watch, I will come on you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you.

Not, "I might come, or I could come, or perhaps I'll come, or maybe I'll come"

Rather, I WILL COME UPON YOU

It says Sardis, but you added the part about the 1st century church. Sardis could mean people in the Church today who had the same spiritual problems that 1st century Sardis had. Are you accusing God of lying because you have a different interpretation of His promises?

 

[Postvieww]

Sure He did.

Revelation 3:3 (Addressing the 1st Century Church @ Sardis)
Remember therefore how you have received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore you will not watch, I will come on you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you.

Not, "I might come, or I could come, or perhaps I'll come, or maybe I'll come"

Rather, I WILL COME UPON YOU

Rev 3:3 Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.


“Let the text form your view, rather than forcing your view onto the text”

 

[parousia70]

How soon is “about to come”?

I would say let scripture be your guide.

Look up where else it's used and let me know if in any of the instances it refers to a time longer than 40 years.

Johns tribulation on Patmos was not “such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be”. Therefore was not what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24:21. Let that sink in.

Of course it was. No Tribulation carried the covenental significance of Israels Great Tribulation of AD 66-70. Not even one matches it. No future tribulation can match or surpass it either.

But again, you need to search the scriptures to Discover what precedent Jesus was using by "every was nor ever shall be"

Scripture tells us in 1 Kings 3:12 that there was "no king like Solomon before or after him." Such statements are then repeated in 2 Kings 18:5-6 of Hezekiah and in 2 Kings 23:25 of Josiah. Obviously, they can't all be the greatest King there ever was nor ever shall be. (And, of course, Jesus Christ surpasses even Solomon -- Matt. 12:42). Furthermore, this same Old Testament idea of "never will be again" is employed of various judgments that have already been fulfilled such as locusts in Egypt (Ex. 10:12-15; cf. Joel 1:1-4), a cry in Egypt (Ex. 11:6), and judgment upon O.T. Israel (Ez. 5:9; Joel 2:2). The Ezekiel 5:9 passage is especially instructive to us, for it states that the Babylonian conquest of Israel (sixth-century BC) would be the greatest judgment God had ever brought upon a nation, past or future.

You are making a choice to ignore this set precedent in favor of a hyper literal hollywood style interpretation that was completely foreign to Jesus the Apostles.

Conversely, I recognize that the expression "ever was/nor ever shall be" is a common Hebraic idiom understood and used by Christ and the apostles meaning "very great" or "very much." Our Lord was simply saying in Matthew 24:21 that there would be very great tribulation.

St. Luke's account of this great tribulation reads as follows:
These are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. (Luke 21:22-23)

Without question, Jesus promised his apostles that they would live to see Israel's great tribulation ("great distress in the land and wrath upon this people") and all those things come to pass in their generation (Matt 24:33-34; Luke 21:31-32).

 

[parousia70]

It says Sardis, but you added the part about the 1st century church.

Is it your contention that this letter was not Directly addressed and delivered to the first century Church at Sardis?

Sardis could mean people in the Church today who had the same spiritual problems that 1st century Sardis had.

Then maybe you can explain to me How the Coming of Christ as a thief, an event that happens only one time, ever, can be applicable to all peoples of all times?

Are you accusing God of lying because you have a different interpretation of His promises?

I'm not the one claiming He didn't do what He said He would.
I believe He kept that promise.

 

[parousia70]

Rev 3:3 Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.


“Let the text form your view, rather than forcing your view onto the text”

The coming of Jesus Christ as a Thief was a conditional first-century event based on the decisions of men???

The coming of Jesus Christ as a Thief was delayed 2000+ years because some first-century men did or did not not repent when Jesus attempted to come back for them? Not hardly.

St. John did not say Christ's coming to them was conditional. RATHER, what was conditional was whether or not Jesus was going to reward them or punish them at his coming to them. That Jesus was returning to those seven churches of Asia Minor is not in question, if we are to trust the words of St. John and Jesus Christ.

The only conditional part to Rev 2-3 is whether each Church would be punished or rewarded (according to their works, of course). If they were obedient, they were rewarded. If disobedient, punished. The idea that Christ was making his thief's coming to them conditional is nowhere in the text.

--COMPARE THIS--

Matt 24:42-44
be on the alert, for you do not know which day your Lord is coming...if the head of the house had known at what time of the night the thief was coming, he would have been on the alert and would not have allowed his house to be broken into. For this reason you also must be ready; for the Son of Man is coming at an hour when you think not

--TO THIS--

Revelation 3:1-3
"To the angel of the [first-century] church of Sardis write:...remember what you have received and heard; and keep it, and repent. Therefore if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come to you.

The giving of either a punishment or a reward was all that was conditional, and the condition was placed upon "their works" (Matt 16:27; Rev 20:13; Rom 2:6), which Jesus was then judging in Rev 2-3 (Rev 2:2, 2:9, 2:13, 2:19, Rev 3:2, 3:8, 3:15 ). The judging of their works took place in Revelation 2-3, back in the first century, and St. John documents it for us to read about.

The thiefs coming itself was not conditional, and it was fulfilled exactly when Jesus and the apostles believed it would be--in their generation.

The coming of Jesus Christ as a Thief is NOT A CONDITIONAL EVENT. According to scripture, the coming of Jesus Christ as a Thief was to take place irrespective of whether some repented and others did not -- in fact, scripture fully and uniformly teaches that some would be faithful and others unfaithful (Romans 2:5-9; Mt 25:1-13; Lk 13:24-30; 1 Cor 3:12-15). As the angel also plainly states:

Revelation 22:10-11
And he said to me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near. Let the one who does wrong, still do wrong; and the one who is filthy, still be filthy; and let the one who is righteous, still practice righteousness; and the one who is holy, still keep himself holy."

Did you catch that? Man's repentance or lack thereof has nothing to do with the timing of the coming of Christ as a Thief. Nothing whatsoever. Note also that Jesus explicitly says that the Thyatria Prophetess movement chose not to repent, and that He was coming and would kill her and her "children." But to the rest at Thyatria (the faithful), they were to hold fast and had no additional burden placed upon them, for Jesus had rewards to give them as stated in Rev 2:26-28. We know that Christ came to them, for he came and killed the Prophetess and rewarded the faithful as he said. This is all first-century stuff here. No "Church Age," no "1948," no "21st century computer chips" -- the glorified Jesus knew of none of those modern speculative doctrines, and that makes them impossible doctrines, ones not found anywhere in scripture. Had any of those things been biblical doctrines, then Jesus would not be speaking to first-century churches about His coming TO THEM as we see him doing in Revelation 2-3, where He plainly applies the doctrine to first-century people.

 

[parousia70]

Also, it means each generation should be prepared for the possibility of the fulfillment.

The challenge to that view is the FACT that the fulfillment was NOT POSSIBLE in each generation, for it's timing was FIXED. (Acts 17:31)