Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Just like your denial regarding the future literal human man as (The Beast) in Revelation chapter 13You try to turn everything into a spiritual fulfillment. You are the opposite of the hyper-literalist. I guess that would be a hyper-spiritualist. You lack objectivity and balance in your thinking just like them.
Stop It Right There? BIG SMILES!
I Disagree With Your Claims
"Deceive The Nations" is to battle in Revelation 20:1-8 as was clearly explained in post #76 above
Sorry, but you are wrong.
The context is very clearly about the destruction of the temple buildings standing at that time.
Your attempts to prove how spiritual you are prevent you from seeing when things are fulfilled literally. You try to turn everything into a spiritual fulfillment. You are the opposite of the hyper-literalist. I guess that would be a hyper-spiritualist. You lack objectivity and balance in your thinking just like them.
You are showing a suprising lack of discernment if you don't think that the Romans were also the enemies of the Jews. I'd love for you to try to tell them that. But, the Roman armies did as God wanted because they carried out His wrath against the unbelieving Jews without even realizing it. Which shows God's sovereignty in that situation.
It's both. The Jews had Him sentenced to death, so they bore the responsibility of destroying the city and the sanctuary and it was the Roman armies who physically destroyed the city and the sanctuary. You lack objectivity, so you only focus on the spiritual aspect of what happened.
I don't believe that you are sorry. I'm not sorry to say that you're wrong.
What we see today does not reflect what was there almost 2,000 years ago. The boundaries are different now than they were back then. New things have been built there since then. You're not even thinking about this rationally.
Does everything prophesied in scripture have to be recorded in scripture? What about the earthquakes, wars, pestilences, etc. that Jesus prophesied about in the Olivet Discourse? Those can't happen unless there is details in scripture about them (when they happened, what happened exactly, etc.)? You're making statements that can't be supported by scripture itself. There is no reason why something prophesied in scripture couldn't be fulfilled in history that we get information about in a history book. Don't be so silly.
Jesus talked about both. Your lack of objectivity continues to shine through.
When did I say it did, hummmmm???
I am. You are not the one to judge that. By acting as if every prophecy has a spiritual fulfillment does not make you spiritual, it makes you biased and not objective.
Seeing a physical fulfillment of a prophecy doesn't make me carnal. That is ridiculous. Zechariah 9:9 prophesies about Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a donkey, does it not? Does seeing that as having been literally, physically fulfilled as written mean I'm looking at it through a carnal lens? Of course not. Such nonsense.
Yes, He did. When He said "See these things" He was referring to the same things (the temple buildings) that the disciples were pointing at.
Yes, the Lord judges, not you. Remember that.
Of course you would. But, I stand by what I said regardless.I would disagree with your assessment on me, and premils, in regards to ignoring on 1 Peter 5:9.
What is your point here?The “camp of saints” in vs 9 of revelation 20 who resisted being deceived by Satan would be those very same saints that can resist according to 1 Peter 5:9.
So do I. His binding has allowed the gospel to be preached through the power of the Holy Spirit throughout the world, which continues on today.The gospels and epistles make it clear that 1.) the works of Satan were destroyed in the first century 2.) satan was actively working against the church
I simply believe 1.) refers to satans binding
No. He was not loosed in the first century already. He was making war on the church from the beginning, so if that marks the time when he was loosed that would mean he was bound for a very short time which makes no sense. That turns the thousand years into a very short time instead. Why would a thousand years symbolically represent a very short time? That's impossible.2.) refers to satans deceiving and making war on the church.
Like premils, you give Satan way too much credit and make him out to be more powerful than what he actually is. Does Hebrews 2:14-15 not say that the power of death that he held before Christ's death was taken away from him which led to people being set free from their fear of death? In your view it seems that the power of death was given right back to him shortly after it was taken away. I can't make any sense of your view at all.Satan deceiving, hindering and leading astray, but soon to be crushed, as stated by Paul is difficult to reconcile with the traditional amil position that satan is now bound and will be released.
We both believe we get our understanding from God, of course. These types of questions are pointless and useless.According to who? God or you?
You can't just act as if the physical temple buildings didn't exist. And they are not there still today no matter how desperately you try to act as if they are. So, Jesus's prophecy of their destruction was dead on and He deserves our praise for it.See... the Jewish Temple is Christ. Christ is not a physical/literal building of bricks, but the building "represented" Christ. And actually, it was God's Holy Temple, God's Holy Place, the Jews just worshipped there illustrating they were in the presence of God. The Holy Temple was established long ago specifically to "represent" Christ. Physically no, Christ wasn't that Old Testament Holy Temple in Matthew 24 any more than He is our New Testament Holy Temple we read of in 2nd Thessalonians 2. As previously stated, both these Holy Temples are a figure of the assembly (body of believers) "representing" Christ's body. They can and will fall away or go into apostasy.
I never said that I believe the temple of God in 2 Thess 2 is a physical temple. You waste so much time telling me things that I already know. You can't get that time back. Just stick to what we're actually talking about and stop making assumptions that I am not aware of spiritual things. That isn't the issue. The issue is that you turn every prophecy into having spiritual fulfillments when that is not the case. You lack objectivity. You are a hyper-spiritualist. I believe what happened to you is that you used to be a hyper-literalist and you then overcompensated for that and became a hyper-spiritualist.Hebrews 6:6
"This" falling away of these people of the corporate church/congregation is like doing what Old Testament Israel did in crucifying Christ. By being a church that falls away, they (representing Him) literally put Him to an open shame. This is the intimate relationship Christ has established with His assembly that He so closely identifies Himself with them. What corporate Israel did outwardly in falling away, those today who fall away also do the exact same thing. They virtually crucify again the Son of God. If you don't think the corporate church of God is represented by the Holy Temple with unsaved sinners in it, read again 2nd Thessalonians 2.
- "If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."
I'm not ever going to agree with you on that, so give that idea up.Matthew 24 is an illustration signifying both are intimately related. One mirroring the other, since there is nothing new under the sun. When I look at the fall of the Holy Temple representing Christ in 33 AD, I see in the rest of Matthew 24 the fall of the Holy Temple representing Christ in the time of the end. God has designed it that way. You just don't understand it...yet.
Obviously, I believe yours does not and you believe that about mine. We already know all this. Stop wasting time saying things that we both already know. It serves no purpose.Ahhh...There's always an alternative view. Even the Scribes and Pharisees had an alternative view. The question is, does this view harmonize with the word of God or does it contradict it. That is the pertinent question.
But He did. And why wouldn't He? Look at how Jesus criticized the Pharisees and scribes in Matthew 23. Clearly, God was angry with them. It was only a matter of time before His wrath would come down on them. Their rejection of Christ and their insistence on foolishly continuing the animal sacrifices and such at the temple had to be stopped and God did that.Nowhere God used Roman armies to destroy a physical city and the temple. The Jews are their own enemies when they have rejected their Messiah the Prince and did destroy the temple (Christ) which they are part of his body. You need to see it from God's perspective according to His Word. Not world history.
Let's stop playing games and break down the text itself.Sorry, you are looking at the wrong city and the sanctuary. It was not the physical building or stones Christ talked about. I have shown you the Scripture exactly what Christ saw the stones as!
Of course. You continue to say things like this as if I don't already know things like this myself. I suggest not wasting your time doing that. I don't need you to tell me things like this.Like I said often in the past, the Lord judges and I am comfortable with that. He will decide which testimony is correct. I can't convince everyone. It's the Holy Spirit's job.
Give me a break. The Western Wall was not part of the temple buildings themselves. The disciples were not marveling at the Western Wall, they were marveling at the temple buildings themselves. The Western Wall is not a building. The text specifically references the buildings which were the places that had 4 walls and people could go inside. Those are "these things" that Jesus said would be destroyed. And they were. This is such a dishonest and desperate attempt to keep your interpretation afloat. Don't you want to approach God's word honestly and objectively?Ever hear of the Western wall? King Herod built this wall in 20 BCE during an expansion of the Second Temple. When the Romans destroyed the temple in 70 CE, the support wall survived. For hundreds of years, people prayed in the small area of the wall that could be seen.
Rationally much?
You even deny that He was talking about physical earthquakes, wars, famines, pestilences, etc.? You have lost all objectivity. The solution for getting out of one extreme false doctrine that you used to believe (pre-trib dispensationalism) is not to go completely the other way to another extreme doctrine. You have no balance or objectivity in your approach to scripture. Instead of looking at it with a hyper-literal approach like you used to, you know look at it with a hyper-spiritual approach. So, you have overcompensated. There's no reason to be so extreme in your approach.I am not being silly. I say that you are reading the chapter of Matthew 24 literally thinking Christ was talking about physical war, famine, pestilences, etc.
Good. I don't want you to waste your time with me on this. My made is made up on this just as yours is. And that's okay. We have not come to believe what we do after only a short time studying scripture. We have each studied it a long time and it makes sense to eventually make up your mind on some things, which is fine. We disagree on these things we're talking about here and agree on a number of other things. So be it. You're not going to find anyone who agrees with you on everything.And you don't even believe that the chapter was talking about the New Testament congregation prior to Second Coming. I have explained Matthew 24 before and you still don't accept it. Not going to waste my time with you on this.
Of course you don't. And I don't see that you have refuted me biblically so far, either. And that is not likely to change for either of us. So be it. We can agree to disagree respectfully on this, keeping in mind that we do agree on a good number of other things.Its up to Jesus Christ to decide if my testimony is false. What I see so far is that you have not refuted me biblically so far.
I never said that Revelation 12 had anything to do with what happened in 70 AD. So, there you go. Stop making assumptions about how I interpret any given passage. Just ask if you don't know.You tell me.
You can't be serious here. You have seen many of my posts, have you not? Not just in this thread, but others. Do you seriously think I don't back up my views with scripture? You know that I do. So, I don't need you questioning me like this. It's ridiculous.I testified with Scripture. Where's yours?
The point was that you come across as if all prophecy has a spiritual fulfillment, but I gave you one example where that wasn't the case. I don't see why Matthew 24:1-2 couldn't have a literal, physical fulfillment.Strawmen argument. I never said that Zechariah 9:9 needed to be understood spiritually.
Again, you tell me something I already know. Stop wasting your time doing that. You are not more spiritual than I am as if you understand spiritual things and I don't. That's not the case.Prophesy has never been subject to any man's historical observations, personal opinions, individual explanations or learned, scholarly suppositions. Interpretation is by God through God's word alone.
This is ridiculous. That's like saying I'm being like the natural man by seeing Zechariah 9:9 as having a literal, physical fulfillment. Stop this nonsense already.Matthew 24:1-2
Of course, the natural man would look at this and think that God was speaking about a physical temple buildings, but the spiritual man knows God speaks of the congregation as a temple and those within it as the stones of that Temple. That's not something I made up, that's a Biblical fact.
- "And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
- And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."
No kidding. Obviously. I didn't say otherwise. I'm just saying to not forget what you said because we all need to remember it and keep it in mind, including you.That's what I said. LOL.
Yes, it does. One difference between our views of Revelation 20 is that I believe that all of the things referenced there are also referenced in other scripture, but you don't.And your explanation above has absolutely no relationship to Satan's binding seen in Revelation 20:1-3 "None"
Why are you so childish? Seeing those two prophecies as having spiritual fulfillments means I see all prophecy as having spiritual fulfillments? Hardly. Grow up.Just like your denial regarding the future literal human man as (The Beast) in Revelation chapter 13
AND
The future literal prophets returned (Two Witnesses) in physical bodies that die as seen in Revelation chapter 11
What Power do you believe Satan has over the elect today?The Bible clearly teaches that humans are possessed by devils, this is seen throughout the scripture, just one example being the man in the caves inhabitants by a legion that were dealt into the swine
These devils are part of Satan's Kingdom on this earth, your suggestion Satan isn't active today is a big smile
So this scripture is false?There are scriptures that point to satan still being around. That he is not hidden away in a bottomless pit right now and nor is he bound.
That I don’t overlook 1 Peter 5:9.What is your point here?
No. He was not loosed in the first century already. He was making war on the church from the beginning, so if that marks the time when he was loosed that would mean he was bound for a very short time which makes no sense. That turns the thousand years into a very short time instead. Why would a thousand years symbolically represent a very short time? That's impossible.
Like premils, you give Satan way too much credit and make him out to be more powerful than what he actually is. Does Hebrews 2:14-15 not say that the power of death that he held before Christ's death was taken away from him which led to people being set free from their fear of death? In your view it seems that the power of death was given right back to him shortly after it was taken away. I can't make any sense of your view at all.
None.What do you believe?
Please refer to post #27
Jesus Is The Lord
We both believe we get our understanding from God, of course. These types of questions are pointless and useless.
You can't just act as if the physical temple buildings didn't exist.
And they are not there still today no matter how desperately you try to act as if they are.
So, Jesus's prophecy of their destruction was dead on and He deserves our praise for it.
I never said that I believe the temple of God in 2 Thess 2 is a physical temple. You waste so much time telling me things that I already know. You can't get that time back. Just stick to what we're actually talking about and stop making assumptions that I am not aware of spiritual things. That isn't the issue. The issue is that you turn every prophecy into having spiritual fulfillments when that is not the case. You lack objectivity. You are a hyper-spiritualist. I believe what happened to you is that you used to be a hyper-literalist and you then overcompensated for that and became a hyper-spiritualist.
I'm not ever going to agree with you on that, so give that idea up.
Obviously, I believe yours does not and you believe that about mine. We already know all this. Stop wasting time saying things that we both already know. It serves no purpose.
But He did. And why wouldn't He? Look at how Jesus criticized the Pharisees and scribes in Matthew 23. Clearly, God was angry with them.
It was only a matter of time before His wrath would come down on them. Their rejection of Christ and their insistence on foolishly continuing the animal sacrifices and such at the temple had to be stopped and God did that.
Let's stop playing games and break down the text itself.
Matthew 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
Do you believe the disciples were showing Jesus the physical temple buildings?
Matthew 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
Immediately after they showed Him the temple buildings He asked "See ye not all these things"? He was clearly talking about something they could see. How could He not have been talking about the same things (the temple buildings) that they had just showed Him? That makes no sense. The context of this passage is not the same as a passage like John 2:19-21.
Of course. You continue to say things like this as if I don't already know things like this myself. I suggest not wasting your time doing that. I don't need you to tell me things like this.
Give me a break. The Western Wall was not part of the temple buildings themselves. The disciples were not marveling at the Western Wall, they were marveling at the temple buildings themselves. The Western Wall is not a building. The text specifically references the buildings which were the places that had 4 walls and people could go inside. Those are "these things" that Jesus said would be destroyed. And they were. This is such a dishonest and desperate attempt to keep your interpretation afloat. Don't you want to approach God's word honestly and objectively?
You even deny that He was talking about physical earthquakes, wars, famines, pestilences, etc.? You have lost all objectivity.
Good. I don't want you to waste your time with me on this.
My made is made up on this just as yours is. And that's okay.
You're not going to find anyone who agrees with you on everything.
Of course you don't. And I don't see that you have refuted me biblically so far, either. And that is not likely to change for either of us. So be it. We can agree to disagree respectfully on this, keeping in mind that we do agree on a good number of other things.
I never said that Revelation 12 had anything to do with what happened in 70 AD.
So, there you go. Stop making assumptions about how I interpret any given passage. Just ask if you don't know.
You can't be serious here. You have seen many of my posts, have you not?
Not just in this thread, but others. Do you seriously think I don't back up my views with scripture? You know that I do. So, I don't need you questioning me like this. It's ridiculous.
The point was that you come across as if all prophecy has a spiritual fulfillment, but I gave you one example where that wasn't the case. I don't see why Matthew 24:1-2 couldn't have a literal, physical fulfillment.
This is ridiculous. That's like saying I'm being like the natural man by seeing Zechariah 9:9 as having a literal, physical fulfillment. Stop this nonsense already.
As my response clearly stated, Satan is "Presently" bound from (deceiving the nations) to battleI have no disagreement that within the context of the Vision, Satan is bound from deceiving the nations to battle against the saints. Such is plain from a literal reading of the text.
The NT describe satan as actively deceiving as an angel of light, working through the sons of sons of disobedience, prowling like a lion and looking to devour, hindering the gospel to the nations, killing the saints, throwing the saints In prison, and leading many astray AFTER the resurrection of Christ, BUT Satan would soon be crushed (Romans 16:20).
So where should these events associated with satans activity be placed, during the first resurrection/millennium, or after the first resurrection/satans little season?
your suggestion Satan isn't active today is a big smile
??Satan is "Presently" bound
I'd prefer a little give and take instead of me just ansewering your questions.... besides, your post #27 isn't addressed to me.Please read and respond to post #27 with your question on Satan being presently bound?
We both think that the other is not getting an understanding from God in the cases where we think the other person is wrong. But, we don't need to point that out every time we think the other person is wrong. Do you understand what I'm saying? Would you like it if I told you you're NOT getting an understanding from God every time I disagree with you about something? I'm sure you wouldn't. So, let's leave comments like that out of the discussion.But I can see that you did NOT get an understanding from God concerning Matthew 24:1-2. Or at least not yet.
What do you suppose God thought of it when they foolishly continued to perform animal sacrifices there at the temple while not acknowledging Jesus's "once for all" sacrifice? Do you think God would want to punish them for that? I do. And He did.It was. Only as a type.
Of course I have. That's why I know you don't know what you're talking about.I did my researching. Have you?
Yes, He deserves praise for that, too.Jesus' prophecy of the fall of Old Testament congregation at the Cross was dead on and He deserves our praise for it.
LOL. I tell others all the time that they should interpret scripture with scripture, so this was a ridiculous thing to say to me.Learn to compare Scripture with Scripture and you probably will be closer to the Truth. Not interested in the labeling game you are playing with.
LOL. I am the one who needs to pray for you. But, God isn't going to force you to see the truth about this. You have to be open to it.Too bad. I used to believe exactly what you believe in three books covering Olivet Discourse. I can see why you are not yet enlightened on the books yet. Praying for you.
Of course I believe that He does. Any other silly questions you'd like to ask me?Does God agree with you? Only one of both is the Truth.
Of course. But, that is not the context of the Olivet Discourse.Of course. Don't you realize that Christ clearly told the JEWS to destroy the temple and in three days he will rise it up? The Jews thought he was talking about physical temple but he was talking about THEM, His people!
Who told you I don't see that truth? I see it and agree with it. But, I disagree that the Olivet Discourse has anything to do with that. Stop making assumptions about what I believe. It's making you look very bad. Take the time to find out what I believe if you don't know.But you still cannot see this truth
I'm not suck with that idea. I'm fully aware of what was accomplished on the cross as well. It's possible to understand both, you know?because you are so stuck with the idea that Christ used the Romans instead to destroy the physical temple and the city in 70AD. You are wrong.
The natural man doesn't know what the Olivet Discourse is about at all. The spiritual man understands that scripture contains both literal and spiritual fulfillments of Bible prophecy. You have become a hyper-spiritual extremist who thinks that everything has a spiritual fulfillment.Of course, the natural man would look at this and think that God was speaking about a physical temple building, but the spiritual man knows God speaks of the congregation as a temple and those within it as the stones of that Temple. That's not something I made up, that's a Biblical fact.
If me not wanting to waste time means I'm offended easily, then so be it. If you can't understand not wanting to waste time with nonsense then I don't know what to tell you.I am just saying something that is true. You seem to get offended and defensive easily.
LOL. You are just not getting it. Are you even trying? Do you understand that the city now is very different than it was in 70 AD? The borders aren't even the same as they were then. We'd have to take a time machine to 70 AD if we wanted to prove these things with 100% certainty.Buy yourself a flight ticket to Jerusalem and talk with historic experts on the city and see the stones for yourself.
I don't need a lesson from you. Spiritualizing everything in the prophecy shows your lack of objectivity and I have nothing to learn from someone with no objectivity.Here is a little lesson
If I feel that way? Of course I do or I wouldn't have said it. This doesn't come across as a sincere apology.My apology if you feel that way.
What part of the Olivet Discourse do you not read spiritually? From what you've said so far, I'm not aware of any part of it that you take literally.Keep in mind that I do not read everything in Scripture spiritually.
Why does the context warrant it at least 90% of the time in your view?Only when the context warrants it.
Spiritual discernment has nothing to do with intepreting something as being spiritual rather than literal and physical. Spiritual discernment has to do with discerning if something is meant to be interpreted literally and/or physically or if it is meant to be interpreted spiritually or figuratively.And I can SEE why Matthew 24:1-2 was NOT fulfilled literally as you believe. Like I said.... spiritual discernment.
That's not the truth.The truth is that you still have natural eyes as far as Matthew 24 is concerned
Satan Is Presently Bound As Is Clearly Seen In (Revelation) 20:7-8 Below That Interprets (Deceive The Nations) Is To Battle, Not General Evil In The World Presently.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?