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

[Luke17:37]

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




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?



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

The coming of Christ as thief in the night is applicable because all Christians need to be alert (1 Thessalonians 5:1-10) lest they be deceived and be found as hypocrites, apostates, and sluggards (speaking of the parables of Matthew 24-25). We don't know if our generation will be the last generation.

Your tone appears rude (to me) and the intent in your questions isn't forthcoming and I think you are wasting my time. I'm not going to reply again.

 

[parousia70]

The coming of Christ as thief in the night is applicable because all Christians need to be alert (1 Thessalonians 5:1-10) lest they be deceived and be found as hypocrites, apostates, and sluggards (speaking of the parables of Matthew 24-25).

What does His thief's coming have to do with that?
Why doesn't the sure fact of your own mortality keep you from being found as a hypocrite, apostate, and sluggard?

What extra "umph" do you get that pushes you to "act righteously" from thinking Jesus could possibly, maybe perhaps return tomorrow that you don't get from the sure and certain knowledge that you aren't physically guaranteed your very next breath and you may die at any moment?

Also, tell me what benefit "watching and being alert" for His thiefs coming was gleaned by the Christian who lived between 1561 - 1620? that would not have been gleaned by the Christian of that same time who was not alert and did not watch?

I've asked those two questions here often and no one has yet been able to give a coherent response.
Could you be the first?

We don't know if our generation will be the last generation.

If History is any indicator, It wont be.

Your tone appears rude (to me) and the intent in your questions isn't forthcoming and I think you are wasting my time. I'm not going to reply again.

You can take your ball and get out of the sandbox if you want.
I'm sorry you don't like having your views challenged.

I'm sure there are many areas on CF where you can simply preach the choir instead of sharpening your iron here.

 

[eclipsenow]

I really don't think you are interested and I am not going to re-write my book in forum posts. Since you are convinced most of these things are to be interpreted symbolically, you may not consider my literal interpretations to be compelling.

You're right! Revelation is a book choc-full of biblical symbolism like Jesus being a 7-eyed, 7-horned lamb, and you want to read it literally? Wow. Just wow. Zero regard for biblical genres! Apocalyptic symbolism is a well known Jewish genre of literature from 200BC to 200AD, so reading it literally means you're just doing whatever you want with the text! You've completely disqualified yourself from having anything to say about it!

Jesus was asked two questions and He didn't distinguish His answers.

Wrong. Shifting pronouns distinguish the 2 subjects clearly.

Jesus refers to the end in verse 6 ("but the end is not yet"). The Jews experienced persecution for their faith and Jerusalem surrounded by armies, but you can't say that the gospel was preached to the whole world in their generation (vs. 14).

That's not the claim! I think the Lord could have returned by the end of Acts because Acts 1:8 says "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." That's what we see unfolding in Acts and the Epistles and Revelation: Jerusalem, Samaria, and finally all the way to Rome!

They may have experienced a type of abomination that causes desolation, but I don't know of one.

Then read some history! They set the temple ablaze and some gold melted down through the drains, and the soldiers literally pulled every stone apart looking for it after the fire. Even that sometimes untrustworthy Wikipedia admits
"Many modern biblical scholars[13]conclude that Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 are prophecies after the event about thesiege of Jerusalem in AD 70by the Roman generalTitus.[14]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abomination_of_desolation

The Roman armies eventually destroyed the temple, but the Christian Jews were long gone because they fled Jerusalem at first sight of the surrounding.

Exactly as Jesus told them to!

In the past (before Jesus), someone sacrificed a pig in the holy of holies.

Exactly what Jesus was referring to! He was citing that event to help them understand how horrible AD70 would be.

I think they all have future fulfillment as well, especially because of Jesus' promise that the generation who sees these things will also see their fulfillment (verses 33-34).

I covered that above. Are you reading my posts? These exact verses take place in the context of something predictable: the Roman destruction of the temple. Then the very next section contrasts this local, predictable event with the universal, unpredictable event of the Lord. Surely you can see how it's a 'compare and contrast', almost like Sesame Street's "3 of these kids are doing the same thing, one of these kids is doing his own."

And obviously Jesus hasn't returned, which according to verse 29 is after the tribulation of those days, the days of tribulation that are so bad that all flesh would die if they weren't shortened (verse 22). The siege on Jerusalem didn't affect all flesh, either--just those living in Jerusalem. It was an awful time for Israel, no doubt, but it didn't affect the whole world.

Exactly! The subject switches back to Jerusalem when he discusses the fig tree. As I said above, follow the pronouns. One event is local and escapable and they are to run: the other is universal and inescapable. Compare and contrast!

The supposed past "marks of the beast" you referenced were not required to buy or sell (Revelation 13:17) and refusing it didn't result in beheading (Revelation 20:4).

Prove it! As far as I remember from Paul Barnett's commentary, participation in the games was required to participate in the local economy.

Like I said before, Luke 18:1-8 and the three successive parables in Matthew 24-25 highlight His lateness in the perspective of men.

So the bible contradicts itself? Again, one event in Matt 24 is universal and inescapable, one is local and escapable and occurring IN THAT GENERATION! You cannot escape those clear words by referring to a parable that says keep on trusting the Lord during times of injustice.

The Bible predicts widespread apostasy and rejection of sound doctrine before Jesus returns. Jesus suggests few will endure in faith until His return (Luke 18:8). The parable of the virgins in Matthew 25 (five wise and five foolish) suggests half of professed Christians may commit apostasy.

Irrelevant to the issue of timing.

Matthew 13 says that the wheat and tares grow together until the harvest and the tares are gathered for destruction first before the righteous are gathered. Therefore, pre and mid-Tribulation perspectives are false.

Agreed: but what is the tribulation? Remember, John said he shares in it!

2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 link Jesus' return and the gathering together of the church to Him as one day in the future--after the man of sin and the falling away (apostasy - rejection of the faith by people who formerly claimed it). That again denies pre-Tribulation gathering.

I'm not a pre-or-mid-tribber.

Matthew 24 puts the gathering of the Church (v. 31) after Jesus' return (v. 30).

The resurrection and gathering (of live believers) happen when Jesus returns (1 Thessalonians 4:14-17), with the resurrection slightly preceding the gathering. Jesus can't return pre-Tribulation because the first resurrection includes people who are beheaded in the Tribulation for not taking the mark of the beast (Revelation 20:4-6).

I'm not a pre-or-mid-tribber.

Amils see Revelation as symbolic so they don't see a future tribulation with the plagues described in Revelation.

Now you're getting it! We see the tribulation as describing really horrific events NOW so that we have help NOW. That is, we understand events like the Boxing Day Tsunami or 9/11 or ISIS or North Korean persecution through the lens of the various "things in chaos" in Revelation. EG: Politics in chaos, nature in chaos, relationships in chaos, our hearts in chaos. Etc. It's a book that helps us now, not some last generation of Christians making it utterly and completely and totally laughably POINTLESS to all Christians prior to that generation!

Pre- and Mid-Tribulationists believe in a future tribulation according to the plagues, but they construct a theory that they won't be there for all or part of it. All three are woefully unprepared for the idea of living through a literal Tribulation.

I'm not a pre-or-mid-tribber.

Post-Tribulationists consider most of Revelation as future.

That's EXACTLY my problem with your view! Once again,

* Covenant Amils see it as an incredibly PRACTICAL book for all Christians in all ages. It encourages them to not give into suffering and refuse to follow the worldly short-term gains of materialism and worldly power and success and sensuality.
* Futurists make it irrelevant to all but the last generation.

* Covenant Amils see Revelation as clear symbolic sermons that interpret themselves according to other symbols in the bible, and are applicable to all Christians in all situations. It's immensely practical, encouraging stuff.
* Futurists see it as utterly dependent on today's headlines, and therefore inaccessible to everyone before this generation. It's confined to the last generation, and ... every generation argues over how it applies, as of course they think they're the special last generation.

* Covenant Amils use a consistent symbolic hermeneutic.
* Futurists use an inconsistent 'literal' hermeneutic which contradicts itself so frequently the system implodes. Does Jesus have 7 horns and 7 eyes or not? Is the book literal or not? Nothing futurists have said addresses the fundamental point that their literal hermeneutic is inconsistently applied.

There are some who expect to survive the Tribulation, but I don't and a according to the Bible, few will survive.

Few who stayed in Jerusalem survived. Few that remain faithful Christians in North Korea survived. It depends on where you are and what your temptation is during this time!

Because post-tribulationists anticipate these things,

I'm not a pre-or-mid-tribber.

they will be less likely to believe false returns of Christ (Matthew 24:23-26) or to deny the faith in face of severe persecution or death (Matthew 24:9-13). They will also be able to encourage themselves by the fact that the Tribulation is a limited time (based on Jesus reference to Daniel, and Daniel 9 as compared with history, it's a 7 year Tribulation), and afterwards, Jesus will return.

What? You're reading these verses through your paradigm of a literal end times table, but that would make Revelation a book that SNEERED at John's generation of suffering. "You think you've got it bad? Wait till you see what happens in 2000 years!" That's not in John's heart according to Rev 1.

 

[eclipsenow]

So you define “soon “ in Rev 1:1 to your reckoning of time and what soon means to you. How soon is soon? Based on what? There is no soon in Revelation 1:19. Actually , John wrote of three time periods in Revelation, Things that were in the past of his reality, things that were in his
day and things that were yet future to him.

Please don't write in red, it's hard to read.

Rev 1:1 “… SOON take place."

1:3 "Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, BECAUSE THE TIME IS NEAR!"

Note that John wanted his generation to *obey* the message! How do you obey a message all about people 2000 years in the future, and not even about you? You don’t. You can’t. But John expected them to *obey* this message. Futurists just wipe this under the carpet, but it’s all here in Chapter 1: the guide for how to read this entire book! Then when John also says that he shares their tribulation, it's clear. He's writing about things that have happened, are happening, and are just about to happen. There's simply no way to insert 2000 years. None. Zero. Futurists are adding to Revelation!

 

[parousia70]

The Jews experienced persecution for their faith and Jerusalem surrounded by armies, but you can't say that the gospel was preached to the whole world in their generation (vs. 14).

We don't have to, The Holy Spirit, speaking infallibly through Paul, says it for us!:

Colossians 1:5-6 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel, 6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth;

Colossians 1:23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.

Romans 16:25-26 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith;

 

[eclipsenow]

We don't have to, The Holy Spirit, speaking infallibly through Paul, says it for us!:

Colossians 1:5-6 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel, 6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth;

Colossians 1:23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.

Romans 16:25-26 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith;

Fantastic post! I'm copying that into my email archives for future reference! Thank you for sharing the scriptures with us so clearly! Paul was obviously convinced that the gospel imperative to share it with the 'whole world' was more about it busting out of ethnically confined Judaism and spreading out beyond the borders of Israel. This 'whole world' business was satisfied nearly 2000 years ago, and the Lord has been free to return at any time since then!

 

[stephen583]

Dude, it all came from the Bible

I can selectively "lift" verses from the Bible and use them out of context to make just about any unbiblical argument you can imagine. Remember the Pharisees tried to use the same trick against Jesus. That didn't turn out so well for the Pharisees.. Their house was left DESOLATE unto them. In order for any interpretation of Scripture to be valid and relevant, it has to be contexually correct and consistant with the rest of the Scripture, especially the Gospel of Christ.

Otherwise, it's just nonsensical gibberish.

 

[parousia70]

I can selectively "lift" verses from the Bible and use them out of context to make just about any unbiblical argument you can imagine.

We know you can. We see you do it regularly.

In order for any interpretation of Scripture to be valid and relevant, it has to be contexually correct and consistant with the rest of the Scripture, especially the Gospel of Christ.

Otherwise, it's just nonsensical gibberish.

Which is why we know that Jesus' Cloud Coming must be interpreted to be contextually correct and consistent with the entire scriptural account of the previous "could Comings" of the Father.
Here's some education:

The meaning of the CLOUDS has to do with the Jewish teaching that Jehovah alone was known to come with clouds. Note the charge of "blasphemy" when Jesus tells the high preist that he will see Jesus come with clouds:

Matthew 26:64-65
Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you [Caiaphas], Hereafter shall ye [Caiaphas] see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.

This was blasphemy because only Yahweh was said to come with the clouds during various OT judgments:

Behold, Yahweh rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it. (Isaiah 19:1-2)

[Yahweh] maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind (Ps 104:3)

The earth shook and trembled; the foundations of heaven moved and shook, because [Yahweh] was wroth. There went up a smoke out of his nostrils, and fire out of his mouth devoured: coals were kindled by it. He bowed the heavens also, and came down; and darkness was under his feet. And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly: and he was seen upon the wings of the wind. And he made darkness pavilions round about him, dark waters, and thick clouds of the skies. Through the brightness before him were coals of fire kindled. Yahweh thundered from heaven, and the most High uttered his voice. And he sent out arrows, and scattered them; lightning, and discomfited them. And the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were discovered, at the rebuking of Yahweh, at the blast of the breath of his nostrils.(2 Samuel 22:8-16)

So, we see that the Jews attributed cloud-comings to Yahweh. These were times of judgment from Yahweh. So, they leveled the charge of blasphemy against Jesus. At no time was a physical incarnation of Yahweh required for these "Cloud Comings" to have taken place, yet take place they did.

What we see in the Old Testament is that God's various comings with the clouds do not speak of cumulous weather clouds of our skies overhead. All throughout the O.T., clouds are used to indicate the glory of God when he is carrying out a divine plan or judgment:

Again:

Isaiah 19:1
The burden of Egypt: "Behold, Yahweh rides on a swift cloud, and comes to Egypt. The idols of Egypt will tremble at his presence; and the heart of Egypt will melt in its midst.

2 Samuel 22:10-12
He bowed the heavens also, and came down With thick darkness under His feet. And He rode on a cherub and flew; And He appeared on the wings of the wind. And He made darkness canopies around Him, a mass of waters, thick clouds of the sky.

Jeremiah 4:13-14
Behold, he shall come up as clouds, and his chariots shall be as a whirlwind: his horses are swifter than eagles. Woe unto us! for we are spoiled. O Jerusalem, wash thine heart from wickedness , that thou mayest be saved. How long shall thy vain thoughts lodge within thee?

Psalm 104:1,3
Yahweh, my God, you are very great...He makes the clouds his chariot. He walks on the wings of the wind.

Psalm 97:2
Clouds and darkness are round about him: righteousness and judgment are the habitation of his throne.

Nahum 1:3
The LORD is slow to anger, and great in power, and will not at all acquit the wicked: the LORD hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and the clouds are the dust of his feet.

So, the use of this clouds imagery does not mean the weather clouds of our skies overhead. In fact, Revelation 14:14-20 depicts Jesus in exactly this sense: the God who rides upon heavenly clouds and issues forth his judgments from the heavenly realm.

Your view wrongly asserts that Christ coming with the clouds means the cumulus clouds of our skies overhead. In contrast, Rev 14 supports my view, as do the the many passages I cited from the OT about Yahweh's coming with clouds:

Again:

"[Yahweh] was seen upon the wings of the wind. And he made darkness pavilions round about him, dark waters, and thick clouds of the skies" (2 Sam 22, when Yahweh came and put down Saul's Kingdom).

"Behold, [Yahweh] shall come up as clouds, and his chariots shall be as a whirlwind: his horses are swifter than eagles. Woe unto us! ... O Jerusalem, wash thine heart from wickedness , that thou mayest be saved." (Jeremiah 4, when the prophet foretells the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem).

"Behold, Yahweh rides on a swift cloud, and comes to Egypt. The idols of Egypt will tremble at his presence; and the heart of Egypt will melt in its midst" (Isaiah 19, when the prophet warns of Egypt's doom).

As we see from this brief survey of the cloud comings of God in history, they all follow a similar pattern, nature, and experience: trumpets, clouds, darkening of the constellations, shaking of earth's foundations, great tribulation and distress, God's coming down with his armies. The apocalyptic language is graphic, filled with doom, and repeated at each of God's comings.

Christ's cloud Coming at AD70 was no different.

Until you cease to willfully ignore the set biblical precedent for the interpretation of Cloud Comings of God in favor of some "nonsensical" 21st century Hollywood fantasy "gibberish", unrecognizable to Christ and the apostles, you will remain hopelessly wrong.

Time to bring your views in line with Jesus, the prophets and apostles and reject the unbiblical views of "Cloud Comings" that you currently hold.

Clearly, the cloud-coming of Rev 1:7 that every eye was to see is depicted by St. John in Rev 14:14-20 -- obviously not a physical/literal event.

Those who think that seeing Christ's return must be a physical/literal incarnation of some kind are simply not reading the Old Testament. One can't hardly read five chapters of the Old Testamnent with out coming across a depiction of Yahweh showing up on earth and performing some event that is described as physical/literal (try Isa 34 or 2 Sam 22:8-16 for example). Or how about this TYPICAL statement:

Zechariah 9:13-14
When I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow with Ephraim, and raised up thy sons, O Zion, against thy sons, O Greece, and made thee as the sword of a mighty man. And JEHOVAH SHALL BE SEEN OVER THEM, and his arrow shall go forth as the lightning:...

Yet Yahweh never did any of those things is a physical literal way. We are even told MANY times that all people would marvel at Yahweh's comings. This is jewish apocalyptic language and was the norm for how they understood and knew of God's appearings.

Time to level your charge of being "Contextually Consistent" to your own view my friend.
It's a good rule for everyone, not just for people other than you.

 

[Luke17:37]

You're right! Revelation is a book choc-full of biblical symbolism like Jesus being a 7-eyed, 7-horned lamb, and you want to read it literally? Wow. Just wow. Zero regard for biblical genres! Apocalyptic symbolism is a well known Jewish genre of literature from 200BC to 200AD, so reading it literally means you're just doing whatever you want with the text! You've completely disqualified yourself from having anything to say about it!

When did I ever say that Jesus as a 7-eyed, 7-horned Lamb is literal? I didn't. The only thing you prove is that you know how to do whatever you want with my text, and that you don't know how to have a conversation with people who believe differently than you without being insulting.

Luke 17:37: Jesus was asked two questions and He didn't distinguish His answers.
eclipsenow: Wrong. Shifting pronouns distinguish the 2 subjects clearly.
This is your interpretation, but it's not mine.

Luke 17:37: Jesus refers to the end in verse 6 ("but the end is not yet"). The Jews experienced persecution for their faith and Jerusalem surrounded by armies, but you can't say that the gospel was preached to the whole world in their generation (vs. 14).
eclipsenow: That's not the claim! I think the Lord could have returned by the end of Acts because Acts 1:8 says "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." That's what we see unfolding in Acts and the Epistles and Revelation: Jerusalem, Samaria, and finally all the way to Rome!
The Holy Spirit is not Jesus. Jesus is going to return bodily to earth in the sky, just as He left. He has not done this, and He won't until after the man of sin is revealed and the great apostasy occurs (2 Thessalonians 2). Jesus' answer from Matthew 24:4-31 starts with the warning of false christs and culminates His return and the gathering of the Church. Then He told the parable of the fig tree, which in the context I believe is about all these things preceding His return, not the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. That was an element but obviously not the focus of His answer.

Luke 17:37: They may have experienced a type of abomination that causes desolation, but I don't know of one.
eclipsenow: Then read some history! They set the temple ablaze and some gold melted down through the drains, and the soldiers literally pulled every stone apart looking for it after the fire. Even that sometimes untrustworthy Wikipedia admits
"Many modern biblical scholars[13]conclude that Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 are prophecies after the event about thesiege of Jerusalem in AD 70by the Roman generalTitus.[14]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abomination_of_desolation
Destroying the temple is not the same as an abomination that causes desolation. The pig sacrificed in the holy of holies is an abomination - they entered a holy place with an unholy thing in order to make it unholy. The temple would have needed to be cleansed before they could make offerings again.

Luke 17:37: In the past (before Jesus), someone sacrificed a pig in the holy of holies.
eclipsenow: Exactly what Jesus was referring to! He was citing that event to help them understand how horrible AD70 would be.
That's your interpretation. Mine is that Jesus' warning helped the Christians of Jerusalem to survive the AD70 destruction, but that there will be a future abomination of desolation (either of a temple not yet built, unless it is the spiritual abomination of people taking the mark of the beast in their personal temple and effectively committing blasphemy of the Holy Spirit).

Luke 17:37: I think they all have future fulfillment as well, especially because of Jesus' promise that the generation who sees these things will also see their fulfillment (verses 33-34).
eclipsenow: I covered that above. Are you reading my posts? These exact verses take place in the context of something predictable: the Roman destruction of the temple. Then the very next section contrasts this local, predictable event with the universal, unpredictable event of the Lord. Surely you can see how it's a 'compare and contrast', almost like Sesame Street's "3 of these kids are doing the same thing, one of these kids is doing his own."
Cute, Sesame Street. That is not how I interpret Matthew 24:4-31.

Luke17:37: And obviously Jesus hasn't returned, which according to verse 29 is after the tribulation of those days, the days of tribulation that are so bad that all flesh would die if they weren't shortened (verse 22). The siege on Jerusalem didn't affect all flesh, either--just those living in Jerusalem. It was an awful time for Israel, no doubt, but it didn't affect the whole world.
eclipsenow: Exactly! The subject switches back to Jerusalem when he discusses the fig tree. As I said above, follow the pronouns. One event is local and escapable and they are to run: the other is universal and inescapable. Compare and contrast!
Your interpretation is that He is talking about Jerusalem. I think He stayed talking about His return.

Luke17:37: The supposed past "marks of the beast" you referenced were not required to buy or sell (Revelation 13:17) and refusing it didn't result in beheading (Revelation 20:4).
eclipsenow: Prove it! As far as I remember from Paul Barnett's commentary, participation in the games was required to participate in the local economy.
You find evidence that they beheaded people for refusing this "mark", or that they needed it to buy and sell. You are the one who brought it up. Regardless, it didn't affect everyone, as it says in Revelation 13:16: "He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads."

Luke17:37: Like I said before, Luke 18:1-8 and the three successive parables in Matthew 24-25 highlight His lateness in the perspective of men.
eclipsenow: So the bible contradicts itself? Again, one event in Matt 24 is universal and inescapable, one is local and escapable and occurring IN THAT GENERATION! You cannot escape those clear words by referring to a parable that says keep on trusting the Lord during times of injustice.
Where did I say the Bible contradicts itself? Jesus is consistently telling us that it will seem like a long time to us before He returns, and that in the waiting, many will fall away.

Luke17:37: The Bible predicts widespread apostasy and rejection of sound doctrine before Jesus returns. Jesus suggests few will endure in faith until His return (Luke 18:8). The parable of the virgins in Matthew 25 (five wise and five foolish) suggests half of professed Christians may commit apostasy.
eclipsenow: Irrelevant to the issue of timing.
No, it isn't. It's integral to the issue of timing. It's going to be perceived as a long time.

Luke17:37: Matthew 13 says that the wheat and tares grow together until the harvest and the tares are gathered for destruction first before the righteous are gathered. Therefore, pre and mid-Tribulation perspectives are false.
eclipsenow: Agreed: but what is the tribulation? Remember, John said he shares in it!
Everyone who is a Christian shares in tribulation (John 16:33). Not everyone is alive for the Tribulation, that most awful limited period of time where if God did not shorten the days NO FLESH would survive.

Luke17:37: Amils see Revelation as symbolic so they don't see a future tribulation with the plagues described in Revelation.
eclipsenow: Now you're getting it! We see the tribulation as describing really horrific events NOW so that we have help NOW. That is, we understand events like the Boxing Day Tsunami or 9/11 or ISIS or North Korean persecution through the lens of the various "things in chaos" in Revelation. EG: Politics in chaos, nature in chaos, relationships in chaos, our hearts in chaos. Etc. It's a book that helps us now, not some last generation of Christians making it utterly and completely and totally laughably POINTLESS to all Christians prior to that generation!
You say it is pointless for Revelation to describe future events. What about all the generations of Israelites to whom God made promises about the coming Messiah? (Even Adam and Eve had this promise about 4,000 years before Jesus was born into our world.) They had the promises, but not the fulfillment. They had assurance of God's presence if they actually paid attention to the Scriptures and noticed how God provided for them. You can apply Revelation from a practical standpoint but I think it's foolish to deny a future fulfillment of the plagues (seals, trumpets, bowls), the return of Christ to earth, His reign on earth, the judgment, and the new heaven and the new earth. When you read about the life of Joseph, do you apply his lessons to your life? I try to, and that's great. But just because there are practical applications doesn't negate the truth that it is a historical account of Joseph's life. The same is true of Revelation. Just because you can practical apply it to your life today doesn't negate it's literal future fulfillment.

Luke17:37: Post-Tribulationists consider most of Revelation as future.
eclipsenow:
That's EXACTLY my problem with your view! Once again,

* Covenant Amils see it as an incredibly PRACTICAL book for all Christians in all ages. It encourages them to not give into suffering and refuse to follow the worldly short-term gains of materialism and worldly power and success and sensuality.
* Futurists make it irrelevant to all but the last generation.

* Covenant Amils see Revelation as clear symbolic sermons that interpret themselves according to other symbols in the bible, and are applicable to all Christians in all situations. It's immensely practical, encouraging stuff.
* Futurists see it as utterly dependent on today's headlines, and therefore inaccessible to everyone before this generation. It's confined to the last generation, and ... every generation argues over how it applies, as of course they think they're the special last generation.

* Covenant Amils use a consistent symbolic hermeneutic.
* Futurists use an inconsistent 'literal' hermeneutic which contradicts itself so frequently the system implodes. Does Jesus have 7 horns and 7 eyes or not? Is the book literal or not? Nothing futurists have said addresses the fundamental point that their literal hermeneutic is inconsistently applied.
I can tell the difference between a symbolic and straightforward prophecy. The symbols in Revelation are sometimes defined anyway.

Luke17:37: they will be less likely to believe false returns of Christ (Matthew 24:23-26) or to deny the faith in face of severe persecution or death (Matthew 24:9-13). They will also be able to encourage themselves by the fact that the Tribulation is a limited time (based on Jesus reference to Daniel, and Daniel 9 as compared with history, it's a 7 year Tribulation), and afterwards, Jesus will return.
eclipsenow:What? You're reading these verses through your paradigm of a literal end times table, but that would make Revelation a book that SNEERED at John's generation of suffering. "You think you've got it bad? Wait till you see what happens in 2000 years!" That's not in John's heart according to Rev 1.
Revelation--and the Bible in general--doesn't sneer at anyone's suffering. And like I said, the past generations didn't know if Jesus would return to them. I bet a few people thought Hitler was the Antichrist. He was certainly an antichrist, just not the one from Revelation.

Are you willing to consider the viewpoint that most of Revelation is unfulfilled? It doesn't sound like it. If an Antichrist shows up, and world war, and severe famine, and death from various things, and widespread killing of Christians, will you adjust your view? Revelation is pretty straightforward to me, although there are some things we might not know until they start to happen. My main problem with Pre-Tribulation and Mid-Tribulation views, besides the fact that they aren't taught in the Bible, are that it convinces Christians they won't be there for such and such real suffering so they are completely unprepared for it, should they be wrong. In a different way, your view does that, too.

Matthew 24:9–10 (NKJV)
9 “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name’s sake. 10 And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another.

People are able to endure much more suffering when they are prepared for it in advance.

Matthew 24:11–13 (NKJV)
11 Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many. 12 And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved.

Notice that it's he who endures to the end who is saved, not the many who fall away.

These are my last words. We disagree, and that's all there is to it.

 

[eclipsenow]

The meaning of the CLOUDS has to do with the Jewish teaching that Jehovah alone....

I hear you, although, I prefer the term 'Cloud Rider' which seems to be the Hebrew claim against Baal. Baal was not the Cloud Rider, Yahweh was! So it's a politically and culturally and theologically loaded term in the ancient Middle East, and so important that when Jesus leaves us to ascend to heaven, he seems to do a special performance just for the Hebrews as he leaves in Acts!

 

[eclipsenow]

This is your interpretation, but it's not mine.

But that's your problem, right there! You don't come back with compelling evidence, but like a subjectivist New Ager just say "That's your vibe man, my vibe is different" without demonstrating why your interpretation is different.

The Holy Spirit is not Jesus. Jesus is going to return bodily to earth in the sky, just as He left. He has not done this, and He won't until after the man of sin is revealed and the great apostasy occurs (2 Thessalonians 2).

The 'man of sin' is picture language for us today about the heartbeat of hell, the type of individual we want to avoid becoming. Some experts say there may have been an actual 'man of sin' in AD70, fulfilling this verse and leaving the door open for Jesus return, and others say it is a biblical symbol of sinfulness personified, and is describing how judged and false and exposed as the deception it was that all human evil will be at the end.

Jesus' answer from Matthew 24:4-31 starts with the warning of false christs and culminates His return and the gathering of the Church. Then He told the parable of the fig tree, which in the context I believe is about all these things preceding His return, not the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. That was an element but obviously not the focus of His answer.
Again, you have not shown why your interpretation is different. Just asserting your view does not argue for your view. This would fail a High School English essay.

I pointed to the consistent use of pronouns and how "these things" = the temple being destroyed, a local judgement against Israel that the disciples can actually do something about and escape from. Then I point to the use of "That day" and how it describes the universal and inescapable and inevitable judgement of the world. You haven't contradicted these points, but have basically avoided my points and said "Well, my vibe is different". Sorry, but that's not convincing.

Now I've noticed this....
These are my last words. We disagree, and that's all there is to it.
If you want to actually try and disprove my points with substantive counter-arguments, then I'm all ears. I could be wrong. Debating on the internet is how I learn stuff. I've changed my mind before. This is not the most compelling argument I've ever heard... This is your interpretation, but it's not mine.

 

[Postvieww]

You're right! Revelation is a book choc-full of biblical symbolism like Jesus being a 7-eyed, 7-horned lamb, and you want to read it literally? Wow. Just wow. Zero regard for biblical genres! Apocalyptic symbolism is a well known Jewish genre of literature from 200BC to 200AD, so reading it literally means you're just doing whatever you want with the text! You've completely disqualified yourself from having anything to say about it!


Wrong. Shifting pronouns distinguish the 2 subjects clearly.


That's not the claim! I think the Lord could have returned by the end of Acts because Acts 1:8 says "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." That's what we see unfolding in Acts and the Epistles and Revelation: Jerusalem, Samaria, and finally all the way to Rome!


Then read some history! They set the temple ablaze and some gold melted down through the drains, and the soldiers literally pulled every stone apart looking for it after the fire. Even that sometimes untrustworthy Wikipedia admits
"Many modern biblical scholars[13]conclude that Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 are prophecies after the event about thesiege of Jerusalem in AD 70by the Roman generalTitus.[14]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abomination_of_desolation



Exactly as Jesus told them to!


Exactly what Jesus was referring to! He was citing that event to help them understand how horrible AD70 would be.


I covered that above. Are you reading my posts? These exact verses take place in the context of something predictable: the Roman destruction of the temple. Then the very next section contrasts this local, predictable event with the universal, unpredictable event of the Lord. Surely you can see how it's a 'compare and contrast', almost like Sesame Street's "3 of these kids are doing the same thing, one of these kids is doing his own."


Exactly! The subject switches back to Jerusalem when he discusses the fig tree. As I said above, follow the pronouns. One event is local and escapable and they are to run: the other is universal and inescapable. Compare and contrast!


Prove it! As far as I remember from Paul Barnett's commentary, participation in the games was required to participate in the local economy.


So the bible contradicts itself? Again, one event in Matt 24 is universal and inescapable, one is local and escapable and occurring IN THAT GENERATION! You cannot escape those clear words by referring to a parable that says keep on trusting the Lord during times of injustice.


Irrelevant to the issue of timing.


Agreed: but what is the tribulation? Remember, John said he shares in it!


I'm not a pre-or-mid-tribber.


I'm not a pre-or-mid-tribber.


Now you're getting it! We see the tribulation as describing really horrific events NOW so that we have help NOW. That is, we understand events like the Boxing Day Tsunami or 9/11 or ISIS or North Korean persecution through the lens of the various "things in chaos" in Revelation. EG: Politics in chaos, nature in chaos, relationships in chaos, our hearts in chaos. Etc. It's a book that helps us now, not some last generation of Christians making it utterly and completely and totally laughably POINTLESS to all Christians prior to that generation!


I'm not a pre-or-mid-tribber.


That's EXACTLY my problem with your view! Once again,

* Covenant Amils see it as an incredibly PRACTICAL book for all Christians in all ages. It encourages them to not give into suffering and refuse to follow the worldly short-term gains of materialism and worldly power and success and sensuality.
* Futurists make it irrelevant to all but the last generation.

* Covenant Amils see Revelation as clear symbolic sermons that interpret themselves according to other symbols in the bible, and are applicable to all Christians in all situations. It's immensely practical, encouraging stuff.
* Futurists see it as utterly dependent on today's headlines, and therefore inaccessible to everyone before this generation. It's confined to the last generation, and ... every generation argues over how it applies, as of course they think they're the special last generation.

* Covenant Amils use a consistent symbolic hermeneutic.
* Futurists use an inconsistent 'literal' hermeneutic which contradicts itself so frequently the system implodes. Does Jesus have 7 horns and 7 eyes or not? Is the book literal or not? Nothing futurists have said addresses the fundamental point that their literal hermeneutic is inconsistently applied.


Few who stayed in Jerusalem survived. Few that remain faithful Christians in North Korea survived. It depends on where you are and what your temptation is during this time!


I'm not a pre-or-mid-tribber.


What? You're reading these verses through your paradigm of a literal end times table, but that would make Revelation a book that SNEERED at John's generation of suffering. "You think you've got it bad? Wait till you see what happens in 2000 years!" That's not in John's heart according to Rev 1.

Revelation 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.


2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.


3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.


What is your historical explanation with evidence for this?


4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?


What is your historical explanation with evidence for this?


5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.


Explain this in a historical context with evidence.


6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.


Explain this in a historical context that fits the context of all of the surrounding verses.


7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.


Now just exactly who fulfilled this in history? Power over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations?


8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.


What the historical explanation of this event? Where is the historical record of this taking place?


9 If any man have an ear, let him hear.


10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.



11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.


What the historical explanation of this event? Where is the historical record of this taking place?


12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.


What the historical explanation of this event? Where is the historical record of this taking place?


13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,


What the historical explanation of this event? Where is the historical record of this taking place?


14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.


What the historical explanation of this event? Where is the historical record of this taking place?


15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.


What the historical explanation of this event? Where is the historical record of this taking place?


16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:


Eclipsenow Post #101

Correction: was a real thing: probably arena tickets that they used to enter the circus to worship the local Proconsul at games where Christians were slaughtered (Dr Paul Barnett). You said it was about what would soon take place. That's exactly right!


Did they stamp the arena tickets on their right hand or forheads? Prove it.


17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.


Eclipsenow Post #143

Prove it! As far as I remember from Paul Barnett's commentary, participation in the games was required to participate in the local economy.


Did “all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond” attend the arena games? Prove it.


18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.


Please answer in detail point by point. If all of this has happened in the past, it shouldn’t be too hard to prove. As you have said in other posts “prove it”.

 

[eclipsenow]

Hi Postview,

Revelation 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. 2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. 3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
What is your historical explanation with evidence for this?​

John is saying that Rome was coming. They rise up out of the sea, because Rome had to cross the Mediterranean to get to Asia minor. The 7 heads and 10 crowns are pretensions to ultimate power in Jewish number symbolism. The beast is an amalgamation of the 4 beasts of Daniel 7: lion, bear, leopard, and he had terrible authority. In other words, John is saying Daniel's 3 kingdoms are nothing compared to Rome, Rome is worse than all of them combined. Rome is the terrifying beast with iron teeth: the Roman legions are coming! Emperor Nero was once nearly mortally wounded but survived, so John is warning that this beast will even have a false gospel to trust in instead of the true gospel of our saviour's death and resurrection.

4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? What is your historical explanation with evidence for this?​

Rome was unstoppable.

5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. Explain this in a historical context with evidence.​

This is where number symbolism comes in. The 42 months = 3.5 years = half of the perfect amount of time. (7 years). It means a limited amount of time. This is apocalyptic number symbolism. Rome would persecute, it would hurt, but it would not last forever.

6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. Explain this in a historical context that fits the context of all of the surrounding verses.​

I can't find my commentary at the moment but there was a Roman official (I think he was called the Proconsul) who led Emperor worship.

7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.​

Again, the way the New Testament speaks of 'all nations' here does not literally mean every single group on earth like the Australian aboriginals. It's symbolism of 'all kinds of nations beyond but including Israel'. It's the amazing grace busting open to the kingdom of God outside of Israel, and now judgement follows those same people of God. It's about the widespread rule of Rome.

Now just exactly who fulfilled this in history? Power over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations?
8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.​

If you're going to be too hyperliteralistic about 'all nations', then are you going to be consistent and tell Paul he was wrong when he wrote these verses? Go on! Just how has the gospel been preached in all the world, to every creature under heaven, throughout the whole world, and made known to all nations in the New Testament era? You're not going to argue that Paul discovered Australia and the Americas and India and China are you?

Colossians 1:5-6 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of thegospel, 6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth;

Colossians 1:23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.

Romans 16:25-26 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith;​

9 If any man have an ear, let him hear. 10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints. 11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.​

Asian Proconsul came up out of the earth of Asia Minor. I'll have to find my commentary to explain what the term 'out of the earth' means.

What the historical explanation of this event? Where is the historical record of this taking place?
12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.​

Emperor cult worship under Domitian:

Domitian[edit]​

According to some historians, Jews and Christians were heavily persecuted toward the end of Domitian's reign (89-96).[39] The Book of Revelation, which mentions at least one instance of martyrdom (Rev 2:13; cf. 6:9), is thought by many scholars to have been written during Domitian's reign.[40][41] Early church historian Eusebius wrote that the social conflict described by Revelation reflects Domitian's organization of excessive and cruel banishments and executions of Christians, but these claims may be exaggerated or false.[42] Some historians, however, have maintained that there was little or no anti-Christian activitity during Domitian's time.[43][44][45] The lack of consensus by historians about the extent of persecution during the reign of Domitian derives from the fact that while accounts of persecution exist, these accounts are very cursory or their reliability is debated.[37]

Often, reference is made to the execution of Flavius Clemens, a Roman consul and cousin of the Emperor, and the banishment of his wife, Flavia Domitilla, to the island of Pandateria. Eusebius wrote that Flavia Domitilla was banished because she was a Christian. However, in Cassius Dio's account (67.14.1-2), he only reports that she, along with many others, was guilty of sympathy for Judaism.[46] Suetonius does not mention the exile at all.[47] According to Keresztes, it is more probable that they were converts to Judaism who attempted to evade payment of the Fiscus Judaicus - the tax imposed on all persons who practiced Judaism. (262-265).[40] In any case, no stories of anti-Christian activities during Domitian's reign reference any sort of legal ordinances[37]​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Christian_policies_in_the_Roman_Empire#Domitian

What the historical explanation of this event? Where is the historical record of this taking place?
13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,​

As Dr Paul Barnett explains in "Apocalypse Now and then", Emperor worship put on quite a show and even had their own special effects teams backing images and altars to the Emperor, animating a robot-like statue that could do stuff.

16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:​

Eclipsenow Post #101

Correction: was a real thing: probably arena tickets that they used to enter the circus to worship the local Proconsul at games where Christians were slaughtered (Dr Paul Barnett). You said it was about what would soon take place. That's exactly right!

 

[Postvieww]

Hi Postview,

Revelation 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. 2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. 3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
What is your historical explanation with evidence for this?​

John is saying that Rome was coming. They rise up out of the sea, because Rome had to cross the Mediterranean to get to Asia minor. The 7 heads and 10 crowns are pretensions to ultimate power in Jewish number symbolism. The beast is an amalgamation of the 4 beasts of Daniel 7: lion, bear, leopard, and he had terrible authority. In other words, John is saying Daniel's 3 kingdoms are nothing compared to Rome, Rome is worse than all of them combined. Rome is the terrifying beast with iron teeth: the Roman legions are coming! Emperor Nero was once nearly mortally wounded but survived, so John is warning that this beast will even have a false gospel to trust in instead of the true gospel of our saviour's death and resurrection.

4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? What is your historical explanation with evidence for this?​

Rome was unstoppable.

5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. Explain this in a historical context with evidence.​

This is where number symbolism comes in. The 42 months = 3.5 years = half of the perfect amount of time. (7 years). It means a limited amount of time. This is apocalyptic number symbolism. Rome would persecute, it would hurt, but it would not last forever.

6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. Explain this in a historical context that fits the context of all of the surrounding verses.​

I can't find my commentary at the moment but there was a Roman official (I think he was called the Proconsul) who led Emperor worship.

7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.​

Again, the way the New Testament speaks of 'all nations' here does not literally mean every single group on earth like the Australian aboriginals. It's symbolism of 'all kinds of nations beyond but including Israel'. It's the amazing grace busting open to the kingdom of God outside of Israel, and now judgement follows those same people of God. It's about the widespread rule of Rome.

Now just exactly who fulfilled this in history? Power over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations?
8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.​

If you're going to be too hyperliteralistic about 'all nations', then are you going to be consistent and tell Paul he was wrong when he wrote these verses? Go on! Just how has the gospel been preached in all the world, to every creature under heaven, throughout the whole world, and made known to all nations in the New Testament era? You're not going to argue that Paul discovered Australia and the Americas and India and China are you?

Colossians 1:5-6 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of thegospel, 6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth;

Colossians 1:23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.

Romans 16:25-26 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith;​

9 If any man have an ear, let him hear. 10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints. 11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.​

Asian Proconsul came up out of the earth of Asia Minor. I'll have to find my commentary to explain what the term 'out of the earth' means.

What the historical explanation of this event? Where is the historical record of this taking place?
12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.​

Emperor cult worship under Domitian:

Domitian[edit]​

According to some historians, Jews and Christians were heavily persecuted toward the end of Domitian's reign (89-96).[39] The Book of Revelation, which mentions at least one instance of martyrdom (Rev 2:13; cf. 6:9), is thought by many scholars to have been written during Domitian's reign.[40][41] Early church historian Eusebius wrote that the social conflict described by Revelation reflects Domitian's organization of excessive and cruel banishments and executions of Christians, but these claims may be exaggerated or false.[42] Some historians, however, have maintained that there was little or no anti-Christian activitity during Domitian's time.[43][44][45] The lack of consensus by historians about the extent of persecution during the reign of Domitian derives from the fact that while accounts of persecution exist, these accounts are very cursory or their reliability is debated.[37]

Often, reference is made to the execution of Flavius Clemens, a Roman consul and cousin of the Emperor, and the banishment of his wife, Flavia Domitilla, to the island of Pandateria. Eusebius wrote that Flavia Domitilla was banished because she was a Christian. However, in Cassius Dio's account (67.14.1-2), he only reports that she, along with many others, was guilty of sympathy for Judaism.[46] Suetonius does not mention the exile at all.[47] According to Keresztes, it is more probable that they were converts to Judaism who attempted to evade payment of the Fiscus Judaicus - the tax imposed on all persons who practiced Judaism. (262-265).[40] In any case, no stories of anti-Christian activities during Domitian's reign reference any sort of legal ordinances[37]​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Christian_policies_in_the_Roman_Empire#Domitian

What the historical explanation of this event? Where is the historical record of this taking place?
13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,​

As Dr Paul Barnett explains in "Apocalypse Now and then", Emperor worship put on quite a show and even had their own special effects teams backing images and altars to the Emperor, animating a robot-like statue that could do stuff.

16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:​

Eclipsenow Post #101

Correction: was a real thing: probably arena tickets that they used to enter the circus to worship the local Proconsul at games where Christians were slaughtered (Dr Paul Barnett). You said it was about what would soon take place. That's exactly right!

eclipsenow Post #153


John is saying that Rome was coming. They rise up out of the sea, because Rome had to cross the Mediterranean to get to Asia minor. The 7 heads and 10 crowns are pretensions to ultimate power in Jewish number symbolism. The beast is an amalgamation of the 4 beasts of Daniel 7: lion, bear, leopard, and he had terrible authority. In other words, John is saying Daniel's 3 kingdoms are nothing compared to Rome, Rome is worse than all of them combined. Rome is the terrifying beast with iron teeth: the Roman legions are coming! Emperor Nero was once nearly mortally wounded but survived, so John is warning that this beast will even have a false gospel to trust in instead of the true gospel of our saviour's death and resurrection.


Eclipse thanks for your response, let’s discuss it. Let me be honest. With all due respect when reading these explanations I feel like you start with a supposition that being many of these events have already transpired and look throughout history for anything that might vaguely apply and mesh the two together. For the first 3 verses of Revelation IMHO your explanation is vague at best and proves nothing.


This is where number symbolism comes in. The 42 months = 3.5 years = half of the perfect amount of time. (7 years). It means a limited amount of time. This is apocalyptic number symbolism. Rome would persecute, it would hurt, but it would not last forever.


Now this is a prime example of hyper spiritualization. If you want to quibble about how long “soon”, or a “short time” is fine, but when scripture says 42 months I see no justification for making it say anything other than 42 months. Because it does not fit your narrative does not qualify as justification.



I can't find my commentary at the moment but there was a Roman official (I think he was called the Proconsul) who led Emperor worship.


IMO this is another example of trying to force history into the preterist puzzle. You really shouldn’t rely so heavily on your commentaries. Know what you believe and why you believe it.


7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.


Again, the way the New Testament speaks of 'all nations' here does not literally mean every single group on earth like the Australian aboriginals. It's symbolism of 'all kinds of nations beyond but including Israel'. It's the amazing grace busting open to the kingdom of God outside of Israel, and now judgement follows those same people of God. It's about the widespread rule of Rome.


I disagree with you on this point . I believe the Holy Spirit when out of His way to emphasize the scope of this, by using 3 separate words to make the point “all 1. Kindreds 2. Tounges, and 3. Nations. If you were talking of a phrase such as “on earth” “around the earth” your point might have a little more credibility. I will not disagree some language in scripture is figurative, if the context will not allow it to be taken literal then it is fair game for discussion. Where there is no real reason other than making a doctrine work to spiritualize scripture, we will have to agree to disagree on that point.


If you're going to be too hyperliteralistic about 'all nations', then are you going to be consistent and tell Paul he was wrong when he wrote these verses? Go on! Just how has the gospel been preached in all the world, to every creature under heaven, throughout the whole world, and made known to all nations in the New Testament era? You're not going to argue that Paul discovered Australia and the Americas and India and China are you?


Colossians 1:5-6 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of thegospel, 6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth;


Colossians 1:23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.


Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.


Romans 16:25-26 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith;


It should be obvious from the context of Colossians 1:23 that the gospel was not preached to every fish , bird, dog and cat under heaven. This is clearly figurative in some sense. Just what is it about Rev 13:8 is not literally possible in our world today.


Again the Holy Spirit does not just say “all that dwell upon the earth” but adds more detail that only those whose names are not written in the Lamb’s book of life, will worship him.


Asian Proconsul came up out of the earth of Asia Minor. I'll have to find my commentary to explain what the term 'out of the earth' means.


Again very vague and dependent upon your commentary.


Emperor cult worship under Domitian:

Domitian[edit]

According to some historians, Jews and Christians were heavily persecuted toward the end of Domitian's reign (89-96).[39] The Book of Revelation, which mentions at least one instance of martyrdom (Rev 2:13; cf. 6:9), is thought by many scholars to have been written during Domitian's reign.[40][41] Early church historian Eusebius wrote that the social conflict described by Revelation reflects Domitian's organization of excessive and cruel banishments and executions of Christians, but these claims may be exaggerated or false.[42] Some historians, however, have maintained that there was little or no anti-Christian activitity during Domitian's time.[43][44][45] The lack of consensus by historians about the extent of persecution during the reign of Domitian derives from the fact that while accounts of persecution exist, these accounts are very cursory or their reliability is debated.[37]


Often, reference is made to the execution of Flavius Clemens, a Roman consul and cousin of the Emperor, and the banishment of his wife, Flavia Domitilla, to the island of Pandateria. Eusebius wrote that Flavia Domitilla was banished because she was a Christian. However, in Cassius Dio's account (67.14.1-2), he only reports that she, along with many others, was guilty of sympathy for Judaism.[46] Suetonius does not mention the exile at all.[47] According to Keresztes, it is more probable that they were converts to Judaism who attempted to evade payment of the Fiscus Judaicus - the tax imposed on all persons who practiced Judaism. (262-265).[40] In any case, no stories of anti-Christian activities during Domitian's reign reference any sort of legal ordinances[37]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Christian_policies_in_the_Roman_Empire#Domitian


I would not dispute any of these historical events, what I dispute is that you have convincingly tied any of these event to Revelation 13.


As Dr Paul Barnett explains in "Apocalypse Now and then", Emperor worship put on quite a show and even had their own special effects teams backing images and altars to the Emperor, animating a robot-like statue that could do stuff.

I don’t know who Dr. Paul Barnett is but I will check him out. You seem to base a lot of what you believe on the opinions of this man. Again your explanation is vague at best. You really did not deal seriously with the mark of the beast issue.


Let’s just try to nail down at least one point from this post, my question to you is if this beast of Revelation 13 is the historical character you propose, Explain Revelation 19:19-21 and how this fits into this historical view you promote. Has Jesus already returned to this earth and cast the beast into the lake of fire. Is this all just figurative language? Do you believe Jesus will one day physically return to this earth? My dear brother one of us is in serious error. Looking forward to your response to any of this, especially this last paragraph.

 

[eclipsenow]

eclipsenow Post #153Eclipse thanks for your response, let’s discuss it. Let me be honest. With all due respect when reading these explanations I feel like you start with a supposition that being many of these events have already transpired and look throughout history for anything that might vaguely apply and mesh the two together. For the first 3 verses of Revelation IMHO your explanation is vague at best and proves nothing.

With respect, everyone reads Revelation with presuppositions. What's yours? That it's in the future? Why? Rev 1 just does not allow that kind of reading, but so many people assume that it *must* be about the future because.... Hollywood. Because.... we're special, and we've got some amazing new theory about who the anti-Christ might turn out to be. Because... it's more thrilling that way. But honestly, what does John say in Rev1? That he's going to comfort his generation of suffering Christians in the tribulation he shares with them by.... pointing to a whole bunch of worse suffering 2000 years away? Doesn't that sound like he's rubbing their noses in it? "You think you've got it bad, wait till you see what happens in the REAL tribulation!?" No. That's unacceptable. Read Rev 1 and question your own presuppositions please.

This is where number symbolism comes in. The 42 months = 3.5 years = half of the perfect amount of time. (7 years). It means a limited amount of time. This is apocalyptic number symbolism. Rome would persecute, it would hurt, but it would not last forever.


Now this is a prime example of hyper spiritualization. If you want to quibble about how long “soon”, or a “short time” is fine, but when scripture says 42 months I see no justification for making it say anything other than 42 months. Because it does not fit your narrative does not qualify as justification.​

No, it's a fine example of what the experts in Apocalyptic Symbolism say these numbers mean. Where's your Phd in both history and theology? 42 months IS Daniel's 3.5 years IS a 'short period of time'.

I can't find my commentary at the moment but there was a Roman official (I think he was called the Proconsul) who led Emperor worship.
IMO this is another example of trying to force history into the preterist puzzle. You really shouldn’t rely so heavily on your commentaries. Know what you believe and why you believe it. ​

And how do I know what I believe? By reading the most image laden text in the bible and asking my gut feelings what I believe, or by actually researching it by reading peer-reviewed theology?

7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.


Again, the way the New Testament speaks of 'all nations' here does not literally mean every single group on earth like the Australian aboriginals. It's symbolism of 'all kinds of nations beyond but including Israel'. It's the amazing grace busting open to the kingdom of God outside of Israel, and now judgement follows those same people of God. It's about the widespread rule of Rome.


I disagree with you on this point . I believe the Holy Spirit when out of His way to emphasize the scope of this, by using 3 separate words to make the point “all 1. Kindreds 2. Tounges, and 3. Nations. If you were talking of a phrase such as “on earth” “around the earth” your point might have a little more credibility. I will not disagree some language in scripture is figurative, if the context will not allow it to be taken literal then it is fair game for discussion. Where there is no real reason other than making a doctrine work to spiritualize scripture, we will have to agree to disagree on that point. ​

I believe the Holy Spirit inspired Word of God as well, so please let's not write in a way that implies you believe it more than me. Just calmly explain why you disagree. You're disagreeing with many references that explain the gospel has already gone out into the whole earth, and here Rome is pictured as all kinds of languages and nations that Rome ruled over. It's that simple.

If you're going to be too hyperliteralistic about 'all nations', then are you going to be consistent and tell Paul he was wrong when he wrote these verses? Go on! Just how has the gospel been preached in all the world, to every creature under heaven, throughout the whole world, and made known to all nations in the New Testament era? You're not going to argue that Paul discovered Australia and the Americas and India and China are you?


Colossians 1:5-6 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of thegospel, 6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth;


Colossians 1:23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.


Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.


Romans 16:25-26 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith;


It should be obvious from the context of Colossians 1:23 that the gospel was not preached to every fish , bird, dog and cat under heaven. This is clearly figurative in some sense. Just what is it about Rev 13:8 is not literally possible in our world today.
​

Thanks. Colossians 1:23 is another example proving my point for me! Sorry, but you really need to wrestle with how the New Testament spoke about the "whole world" because that's the sort of language being used here and IS entirely consistent with my Amil partial-preterist reading of Revelation. (Full Preterism is a heresy).

13:3 The whole world was filled with wonder.... And it was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast.

Doesn't trouble me at all! It's apocalyptic symbolism for the all encompassing nature of the Roman Empire.


Again very vague and dependent upon your commentary.

At least it's not as vague as just trusting in my own theories about Apocalyptic Symbolism. If it's a new genre to you, I suggest getting your head around the symbols. What does a horn mean? the Number 144 thousand? What is it all about? Are there common uses of these symbols through the bible or Jewish world?

 

[Postvieww]

With respect, everyone reads Revelation with presuppositions. What's yours? That it's in the future? Why? Rev 1 just does not allow that kind of reading, but so many people assume that it *must* be about the future because.... Hollywood. Because.... we're special, and we've got some amazing new theory about who the anti-Christ might turn out to be. Because... it's more thrilling that way. But honestly, what does John say in Rev1? That he's going to comfort his generation of suffering Christians in the tribulation he shares with them by.... pointing to a whole bunch of worse suffering 2000 years away? Doesn't that sound like he's rubbing their noses in it? "You think you've got it bad, wait till you see what happens in the REAL tribulation!?" No. That's unacceptable. Read Rev 1 and question your own presuppositions please.

This is where number symbolism comes in. The 42 months = 3.5 years = half of the perfect amount of time. (7 years). It means a limited amount of time. This is apocalyptic number symbolism. Rome would persecute, it would hurt, but it would not last forever.


Now this is a prime example of hyper spiritualization. If you want to quibble about how long “soon”, or a “short time” is fine, but when scripture says 42 months I see no justification for making it say anything other than 42 months. Because it does not fit your narrative does not qualify as justification.​

No, it's a fine example of what the experts in Apocalyptic Symbolism say these numbers mean. Where's your Phd in both history and theology? 42 months IS Daniel's 3.5 years IS a 'short period of time'.

I can't find my commentary at the moment but there was a Roman official (I think he was called the Proconsul) who led Emperor worship.
IMO this is another example of trying to force history into the preterist puzzle. You really shouldn’t rely so heavily on your commentaries. Know what you believe and why you believe it. ​

And how do I know what I believe? By reading the most image laden text in the bible and asking my gut feelings what I believe, or by actually researching it by reading peer-reviewed theology?

7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.


Again, the way the New Testament speaks of 'all nations' here does not literally mean every single group on earth like the Australian aboriginals. It's symbolism of 'all kinds of nations beyond but including Israel'. It's the amazing grace busting open to the kingdom of God outside of Israel, and now judgement follows those same people of God. It's about the widespread rule of Rome.


I disagree with you on this point . I believe the Holy Spirit when out of His way to emphasize the scope of this, by using 3 separate words to make the point “all 1. Kindreds 2. Tounges, and 3. Nations. If you were talking of a phrase such as “on earth” “around the earth” your point might have a little more credibility. I will not disagree some language in scripture is figurative, if the context will not allow it to be taken literal then it is fair game for discussion. Where there is no real reason other than making a doctrine work to spiritualize scripture, we will have to agree to disagree on that point. ​

I believe the Holy Spirit inspired Word of God as well, so please let's not write in a way that implies you believe it more than me. Just calmly explain why you disagree. You're disagreeing with many references that explain the gospel has already gone out into the whole earth, and here Rome is pictured as all kinds of languages and nations that Rome ruled over. It's that simple.

If you're going to be too hyperliteralistic about 'all nations', then are you going to be consistent and tell Paul he was wrong when he wrote these verses? Go on! Just how has the gospel been preached in all the world, to every creature under heaven, throughout the whole world, and made known to all nations in the New Testament era? You're not going to argue that Paul discovered Australia and the Americas and India and China are you?


Colossians 1:5-6 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of thegospel, 6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth;


Colossians 1:23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.


Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.


Romans 16:25-26 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith;


It should be obvious from the context of Colossians 1:23 that the gospel was not preached to every fish , bird, dog and cat under heaven. This is clearly figurative in some sense. Just what is it about Rev 13:8 is not literally possible in our world today.
​

Thanks. Colossians 1:23 is another example proving my point for me! Sorry, but you really need to wrestle with how the New Testament spoke about the "whole world" because that's the sort of language being used here and IS entirely consistent with my Amil partial-preterist reading of Revelation. (Full Preterism is a heresy).

13:3 The whole world was filled with wonder.... And it was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast.

Doesn't trouble me at all! It's apocalyptic symbolism for the all encompassing nature of the Roman Empire.


Again very vague and dependent upon your commentary.

At least it's not as vague as just trusting in my own theories about Apocalyptic Symbolism. If it's a new genre to you, I suggest getting your head around the symbols. What does a horn mean? the Number 144 thousand? What is it all about? Are there common uses of these symbols through the bible or Jewish world?

Part 1



Eclipsenow post #155


With respect, everyone reads Revelation with presuppositions. What's yours? That it's in the future? Why? Rev 1 just does not allow that kind of reading, but so many people assume that it *must* be about the future because.... Hollywood. Because.... we're special, and we've got some amazing new theory about who the anti-Christ might turn out to be. Because... it's more thrilling that way. But honestly, what does John say in Rev1? That he's going to comfort his generation of suffering Christians in the tribulation he shares with them by.... pointing to a whole bunch of worse suffering 2000 years away? Doesn't that sound like he's rubbing their noses in it? "You think you've got it bad, wait till you see what happens in the REAL tribulation!?" No. That's unacceptable. Read Rev 1 and question your own presuppositions please.

I at least try to form my presuppositions from the reading of the text and not from commentaries written by men with PHD’s.


Rev1: 1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass;


We’ve already had our disagreements on what shortly can or does mean, my point here is this book was written to His servants.


Rev 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.


Again my point is who this blessing is for, not what we disagree the meaning of “time at hand” is. Looks like we are told to read this text and not commentaries.


Rev. 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.


Since I believe this as not yet happened and you didn’t bother to answer the question on what you believe on this point, I believe the text of this verse spreads this book out a little further in time than you promote.


Rev 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.


Again I do not believe this has as yet happened and places the scope of this book at least into our day.


Rev 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be


Hereafter is an undetermined timed after this revelation was given, and since Jesus has not yet returned for every eye to see Him we are still in that hereafter time frame.


I have read chapter 1 and I just explained how I arrived at my view of the timing of this book. If you are good with hanging your hat on what a PHD tells you the definition of “shortly” and “time is at hand” is, that is your privilege.


I would be interested to know what the man with the PHD believes is the year Revelation was written?


Then we have that issue of “tribulation”. I suppose we should take every time the word tribulation is used in the new testament and make that to mean “ For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be” Matt 24:21. I don’t think so.

 

[eclipsenow]

I at least try to form my presuppositions from the reading of the text and not from commentaries written by men with PHD’s.....We’ve already had our disagreements on what shortly can or does mean, my point here is this book was written to His servants.​

OK, so you're presupposition about the majority of Revelation being in the future is based on verses that say it is SOON, and THE TIME IS NEAR, and that John SHARES IN THEIR TRIBULATION. Got it! Yeah, you really justified that by just reading the text!

Rev 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

OK, so what if I gave you a prophecy that in 4000AD, the Greens would fight the Blues on Mars. Now hurry up and obey it! Ummm, how? What we have here is chapter after chapter after chapter after chapter of pointless detail that only applies to the LAST GENERATION. Or else, John was actually writing to his generation, about his generation, and they were to obey it. It's one of the other. Who's got the presupposition that's hard to prove now?

• soon
• time is near
• shares in their tribulation
• they are to obey it

Giant locust monsters will literally jump up out of the Earth in the Mars war of 4000AD, and then the mark will be applied, and then the reds will come... now OBEY IT!

Again my point is who this blessing is for, not what we disagree the meaning of “time at hand” is. Looks like we are told to read this text and not commentaries.​

Looks like you don't know how to read this text because you don't have a clue about the biblical signs and symbols common to Apocalyptic Symbolism 200BC to 200AD. Recognising that one might need help with reading Ancient Greek or Ancient Metaphors is not a weakness: it's wisdom.

Rev. 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Since I believe this as not yet happened and you didn’t bother to answer the question on what you believe on this point, I believe the text of this verse spreads this book out a little further in time than you promote.​

On that logic, the gospels couldn't have happened because they also mention Jesus returning on the cloud. Tell me, are the gospels all in the future as well? I'm not being flippant. I'm pointing out that Jesus returning is the gospel hope that John is reminding HIS suffering generation that HE suffers with and shares in THEIR tribulation, and they are to OBEY this gospel message that is TO them and ABOUT their suffering!

Remember this is about the unfolding of Biblical Theology: how the Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the new. A BIG problem for Jewish Christians was why hadn't the Messiah kicked out the Romans and ended suffering? John was most definitely addressing this problem for their generation of suffering Christians, and it is a ridiculous, unfounded presupposition to add 2000 years to the text! It's just not there!

Rev 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.​

So? That's God's title. Right after this John says it's all about THEIR suffering in THEIR generation and THEY are to obey his gospel message. Not 2000 years! You're coming dangerously close to adding to scripture. Want to revisit your presuppositions again?

Again I do not believe this has as yet happened and places the scope of this book at least into our day. ​

God's title has nothing to say about the timing of this letter. John tells us why he wrote the letter in Chapter 1: it's just inconvenient to your presuppositions.

Rev 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be ​

Absolutely right! Oh, and when will those 'things which shall be' arrive? Soon. For the time is NEAR!

Hereafter is an undetermined timed after this revelation was given,​

No it isn't! It's clear! SOON! NEAR! SHARES THEIR TRIBULATION! Read the passage!

and since Jesus has not yet returned for every eye to see Him we are still in that hereafter time frame. ​

So because John tells them that Revelation is a gospel message they must obey, with the gospel promise of Jesus return re-enacted multiple times throughout the book to remind them of God's coming judgements from 4 different viewpoints, making 4 different sermon applications of the same theme, it means the whole book is a TIMETABLE? Wow. One may as well read Luke or Matthew as a timetable for the future!

I have read chapter 1 and I just explained how I arrived at my view of the timing of this book. If you are good with hanging your hat on what a PHD tells you the definition of “shortly” and “time is at hand” is, that is your privilege.​

I'm good with it because it makes sense of the words, sense of the gospel message, sense of John's comfort to HIS generation, and sense of John's exhortation to HIS generation to OBEY the message.

Now how about you apply the mark of the beast to John's generation as if it was hypothetically 2000 years after John's generation? How about you show them how they are to be encouraged by all this mumbo-jumbo if it's not actually about THEM?

“ For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be” Matt 24:21. I don’t think so.​

The judgement of God's people Israel was a horrible event, and worthy of some of Jesus hyperbole. This is the same Jesus that said one must 'hate' one's mother and father and follow him, cut off one's hand, poke out your eye, and stick a camel through the eye of a needle. Hyperbole. It's a thing.

Also, you Matt 24 and other Olivet discourses are tricky because there is 'that day' (Lord's return) and 'these things' (THAT temple being destroyed!) That's why it says "Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place." The disciples asked when THAT temple, not some hypothetical third temple, would be destroyed. That temple was destroyed in AD70. It happened in that generation. It was a terrible tribulation of God's people, and their symbol of God's presence with him was irrevocably destroyed and replaced by Jesus. Even though mathematically more Jews died in the Nazi holocaust, and even though climate change could possibly bring even more suffering than WW2, AD70 was an especially significant and horrible abomination because it was only made possible by the WORST abomination of them all: God's son being murdered! But that's a whole other argument.

 

[Postvieww]

With respect, everyone reads Revelation with presuppositions. What's yours? That it's in the future? Why? Rev 1 just does not allow that kind of reading, but so many people assume that it *must* be about the future because.... Hollywood. Because.... we're special, and we've got some amazing new theory about who the anti-Christ might turn out to be. Because... it's more thrilling that way. But honestly, what does John say in Rev1? That he's going to comfort his generation of suffering Christians in the tribulation he shares with them by.... pointing to a whole bunch of worse suffering 2000 years away? Doesn't that sound like he's rubbing their noses in it? "You think you've got it bad, wait till you see what happens in the REAL tribulation!?" No. That's unacceptable. Read Rev 1 and question your own presuppositions please.

This is where number symbolism comes in. The 42 months = 3.5 years = half of the perfect amount of time. (7 years). It means a limited amount of time. This is apocalyptic number symbolism. Rome would persecute, it would hurt, but it would not last forever.


Now this is a prime example of hyper spiritualization. If you want to quibble about how long “soon”, or a “short time” is fine, but when scripture says 42 months I see no justification for making it say anything other than 42 months. Because it does not fit your narrative does not qualify as justification.​

No, it's a fine example of what the experts in Apocalyptic Symbolism say these numbers mean. Where's your Phd in both history and theology? 42 months IS Daniel's 3.5 years IS a 'short period of time'.

I can't find my commentary at the moment but there was a Roman official (I think he was called the Proconsul) who led Emperor worship.
IMO this is another example of trying to force history into the preterist puzzle. You really shouldn’t rely so heavily on your commentaries. Know what you believe and why you believe it. ​

And how do I know what I believe? By reading the most image laden text in the bible and asking my gut feelings what I believe, or by actually researching it by reading peer-reviewed theology?

7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.


Again, the way the New Testament speaks of 'all nations' here does not literally mean every single group on earth like the Australian aboriginals. It's symbolism of 'all kinds of nations beyond but including Israel'. It's the amazing grace busting open to the kingdom of God outside of Israel, and now judgement follows those same people of God. It's about the widespread rule of Rome.


I disagree with you on this point . I believe the Holy Spirit when out of His way to emphasize the scope of this, by using 3 separate words to make the point “all 1. Kindreds 2. Tounges, and 3. Nations. If you were talking of a phrase such as “on earth” “around the earth” your point might have a little more credibility. I will not disagree some language in scripture is figurative, if the context will not allow it to be taken literal then it is fair game for discussion. Where there is no real reason other than making a doctrine work to spiritualize scripture, we will have to agree to disagree on that point. ​

I believe the Holy Spirit inspired Word of God as well, so please let's not write in a way that implies you believe it more than me. Just calmly explain why you disagree. You're disagreeing with many references that explain the gospel has already gone out into the whole earth, and here Rome is pictured as all kinds of languages and nations that Rome ruled over. It's that simple.

If you're going to be too hyperliteralistic about 'all nations', then are you going to be consistent and tell Paul he was wrong when he wrote these verses? Go on! Just how has the gospel been preached in all the world, to every creature under heaven, throughout the whole world, and made known to all nations in the New Testament era? You're not going to argue that Paul discovered Australia and the Americas and India and China are you?


Colossians 1:5-6 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of thegospel, 6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth;


Colossians 1:23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.


Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.


Romans 16:25-26 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith;


It should be obvious from the context of Colossians 1:23 that the gospel was not preached to every fish , bird, dog and cat under heaven. This is clearly figurative in some sense. Just what is it about Rev 13:8 is not literally possible in our world today.
​

Thanks. Colossians 1:23 is another example proving my point for me! Sorry, but you really need to wrestle with how the New Testament spoke about the "whole world" because that's the sort of language being used here and IS entirely consistent with my Amil partial-preterist reading of Revelation. (Full Preterism is a heresy).

13:3 The whole world was filled with wonder.... And it was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast.

Doesn't trouble me at all! It's apocalyptic symbolism for the all encompassing nature of the Roman Empire.


Again very vague and dependent upon your commentary.

At least it's not as vague as just trusting in my own theories about Apocalyptic Symbolism. If it's a new genre to you, I suggest getting your head around the symbols. What does a horn mean? the Number 144 thousand? What is it all about? Are there common uses of these symbols through the bible or Jewish world?

Part 2


Eclipsenow Post #155


No, it's a fine example of what the experts in Apocalyptic Symbolism say these numbers mean. Where's your Phd in both history and theology? 42 months IS Daniel's 3.5 years IS a 'short period of time'.


Since in scripture it is broken down in 3 different ways “time, times and half time” “42 months” and “1260 days”, the short period of time to which you refer is exactly 1260 days, or 42 months, or a time, times and half a time if you wish. To try to justify it to be something else is really not wise, PHD, expert or not. You do understand that many men in Christendom with PHD’s disagree on these same points we are discussing. Now we are left to debate whose PHD is better or which commentary is correct, no thanks.


And how do I know what I believe? By reading the most image laden text in the bible and asking my gut feelings what I believe, or by actually researching it by reading peer-reviewed theology?


What commentaries do you think Jesus read? I’m not against commentaries per say but I do believe many people put way too much confidence in them because of the perception, titles, such as expert, and PHD give the impression that they really know better than common lay people. Just my opinion.


I believe the Holy Spirit inspired Word of God as well, so please let's not write in a way that implies you believe it more than me. Just calmly explain why you disagree. You're disagreeing with many references that explain the gospel has already gone out into the whole earth, and here Rome is pictured as all kinds of languages and nations that Rome ruled over. It's that simple.


If what I wrote sounded something other than calm, I apologize. Not my intent. I do not believe I implied you didn’t believe scripture was inspired when I said, “ I believe the Holy Spirit when out of His way to emphasize the scope of this, by using 3 separate words to make the point “all 1. Kindreds 2. Tounges, and 3. Nations’ “. My point was I believe it was emphasized by the Holy Spirit by saying it 3 different ways.


Thanks. Colossians 1:23 is another example proving my point for me! Sorry, but you really need to wrestle with how the New Testament spoke about the "whole world" because that's the sort of language being used here and IS entirely consistent with my Amil partial-preterist reading of Revelation. (Full Preterism is a heresy).


You are welcome. You answered a question on Rev 13:3 I did not ask and ignored the question on Rev 13:8 I did ask. My question was: “Just what is it about Rev 13:8 is not literally possible in our world today”. The qualification “whose name are not written in the book of life” is added. Should we read this passage: And all that dwell in Rome shall worship him whose names are not written in the book of life ?


At least it's not as vague as just trusting in my own theories about Apocalyptic Symbolism. If it's a new genre to you, I suggest getting your head around the symbols. What does a horn mean? the Number 144 thousand? What is it all about? Are there common uses of these symbols through the bible or Jewish world?


A horn in Genesis or Daniel? We have explanation for the horns in Daniel and Revelation. Just as we have explanation of the number 144,000. Rev. 7:5-8 12,000 from each of 12 tribes those add up to 144,000, simple math. Or should I not take that literally?

 

[eclipsenow]

Since in scripture it is broken down in 3 different ways “time, times and half time” “42 months” and “1260 days”, the short period of time to which you refer is exactly 1260 days, or 42 months, or a time, times and half a time if you wish. To try to justify it to be something else is really not wise, PHD, expert or not. You do understand that many men in Christendom with PHD’s disagree on these same points we are discussing. Now we are left to debate whose PHD is better or which commentary is correct, no thanks. ​

OK then. What does it mean? How did Jews use it? How do you know what it means? Do you have proof of how they used it?

I believe the Holy Spirit when out of His way to emphasize the scope of this, by using 3 separate words to make the point “all 1. Kindreds 2. Tounges, and 3. Nations’ “. My point was I believe it was emphasized by the Holy Spirit by saying it 3 different ways.​

And the point is the Holy Spirit inspired Paul and others to use similar phrases to describe how the gospel going out into the whole Roman empire was the equivalent of the gospel being declared to the whole world. You raved something about it not being declared to fishes, but that was incoherent and off topic. My point still stands. Also, the dimensions of the image of the "New Jerusalem" coming down from heaven are again not literal, but roughly the size of maps of the whole known world to the ancient Roman empire. It's a picture of heaven coming down to cover the whole earth, not just a great big chunk of it! The Roman empire = whole world and a goodly sample of all the nations in the world. It's just how they wrote. Deal with it.

Thanks. Colossians 1:23 is another example proving my point for me! Sorry, but you really need to wrestle with how the New Testament spoke about the "whole world" because that's the sort of language being used here and IS entirely consistent with my Amil partial-preterist reading of Revelation. (Full Preterism is a heresy).

You are welcome. You answered a question on Rev 13:3 I did not ask and ignored the question on Rev 13:8 I did ask. My question was: “Just what is it about Rev 13:8 is not literally possible in our world today”. The qualification “whose name are not written in the book of life” is added. Should we read this passage: And all that dwell in Rome shall worship him whose names are not written in the book of life ? ​

I don't really see the point and how it proves whether Revelation is futurist or not.

A horn in Genesis or Daniel? We have explanation for the horns in Daniel and Revelation. Just as we have explanation of the number 144,000. Rev. 7:5-8 12,000 from each of 12 tribes those add up to 144,000, simple math. Or should I not take that literally? ​

None of the numbers in Revelation are literal!

 

[Postvieww]

With respect, everyone reads Revelation with presuppositions. What's yours? That it's in the future? Why? Rev 1 just does not allow that kind of reading, but so many people assume that it *must* be about the future because.... Hollywood. Because.... we're special, and we've got some amazing new theory about who the anti-Christ might turn out to be. Because... it's more thrilling that way. But honestly, what does John say in Rev1? That he's going to comfort his generation of suffering Christians in the tribulation he shares with them by.... pointing to a whole bunch of worse suffering 2000 years away? Doesn't that sound like he's rubbing their noses in it? "You think you've got it bad, wait till you see what happens in the REAL tribulation!?" No. That's unacceptable. Read Rev 1 and question your own presuppositions please.

This is where number symbolism comes in. The 42 months = 3.5 years = half of the perfect amount of time. (7 years). It means a limited amount of time. This is apocalyptic number symbolism. Rome would persecute, it would hurt, but it would not last forever.


Now this is a prime example of hyper spiritualization. If you want to quibble about how long “soon”, or a “short time” is fine, but when scripture says 42 months I see no justification for making it say anything other than 42 months. Because it does not fit your narrative does not qualify as justification.​

No, it's a fine example of what the experts in Apocalyptic Symbolism say these numbers mean. Where's your Phd in both history and theology? 42 months IS Daniel's 3.5 years IS a 'short period of time'.

I can't find my commentary at the moment but there was a Roman official (I think he was called the Proconsul) who led Emperor worship.
IMO this is another example of trying to force history into the preterist puzzle. You really shouldn’t rely so heavily on your commentaries. Know what you believe and why you believe it. ​

And how do I know what I believe? By reading the most image laden text in the bible and asking my gut feelings what I believe, or by actually researching it by reading peer-reviewed theology?

7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.


Again, the way the New Testament speaks of 'all nations' here does not literally mean every single group on earth like the Australian aboriginals. It's symbolism of 'all kinds of nations beyond but including Israel'. It's the amazing grace busting open to the kingdom of God outside of Israel, and now judgement follows those same people of God. It's about the widespread rule of Rome.


I disagree with you on this point . I believe the Holy Spirit when out of His way to emphasize the scope of this, by using 3 separate words to make the point “all 1. Kindreds 2. Tounges, and 3. Nations. If you were talking of a phrase such as “on earth” “around the earth” your point might have a little more credibility. I will not disagree some language in scripture is figurative, if the context will not allow it to be taken literal then it is fair game for discussion. Where there is no real reason other than making a doctrine work to spiritualize scripture, we will have to agree to disagree on that point. ​

I believe the Holy Spirit inspired Word of God as well, so please let's not write in a way that implies you believe it more than me. Just calmly explain why you disagree. You're disagreeing with many references that explain the gospel has already gone out into the whole earth, and here Rome is pictured as all kinds of languages and nations that Rome ruled over. It's that simple.

If you're going to be too hyperliteralistic about 'all nations', then are you going to be consistent and tell Paul he was wrong when he wrote these verses? Go on! Just how has the gospel been preached in all the world, to every creature under heaven, throughout the whole world, and made known to all nations in the New Testament era? You're not going to argue that Paul discovered Australia and the Americas and India and China are you?


Colossians 1:5-6 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of thegospel, 6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth;


Colossians 1:23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.


Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.


Romans 16:25-26 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith;


It should be obvious from the context of Colossians 1:23 that the gospel was not preached to every fish , bird, dog and cat under heaven. This is clearly figurative in some sense. Just what is it about Rev 13:8 is not literally possible in our world today.
​

Thanks. Colossians 1:23 is another example proving my point for me! Sorry, but you really need to wrestle with how the New Testament spoke about the "whole world" because that's the sort of language being used here and IS entirely consistent with my Amil partial-preterist reading of Revelation. (Full Preterism is a heresy).

13:3 The whole world was filled with wonder.... And it was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast.

Doesn't trouble me at all! It's apocalyptic symbolism for the all encompassing nature of the Roman Empire.


Again very vague and dependent upon your commentary.

At least it's not as vague as just trusting in my own theories about Apocalyptic Symbolism. If it's a new genre to you, I suggest getting your head around the symbols. What does a horn mean? the Number 144 thousand? What is it all about? Are there common uses of these symbols through the bible or Jewish world?

Part 3


From Postview #154


Let’s just try to nail down at least one point from this post, my question to you is if this beast of Revelation 13 is the historical character you propose, Explain Revelation 19:19-21 and how this fits into this historical view you promote. Has Jesus already returned to this earth and cast the beast into the lake of fire. Is this all just figurative language? Do you believe Jesus will one day physically return to this earth? My dear brother one of us is in serious error. Looking forward to your response to any of this, especially this last paragraph.


You didn’t address this. Looking forward to your response. Nor were you very convincing in previous posts on a ticket to the games being the mark of the beast.