• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

The Fall of The Church

Discussion in 'Eschatology - Endtimes & Prophecy Forum' started by b_o_b, Mar 30, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GW

    GW Veteran

    +59
    Christian
    SON OF PERDITION -- FULFILLED!

    I trust you all acknowledge the contemporary 1st-century fulfillment spoken of by the text itself. The "man of lawlessness/the son of perdition" was being restrained from seizing control of Herod's Temple in Jerusalem at the time Paul was writing to the Thessalonians (2 Thess 2:6-7). This man's lawlessness was already at work in the nation of Israel in Paul's day (2 Thess 2:7); only he who then restrained this anarchy continued to do so until he was taken out of the way. And then the lawless one was revealed (2 Thess 2:7-8). This, of course, took place at the Jerusalem Temple within about 10 years of Paul's writing. The Thessalonian congregation actually knew personally who was at that time restraining the son of perdition from taking control of the Temple -- "And you know what restrains him now" (2 Thess 2:6).

    So the passage has a clear fulfillment contemporary with Paul and the 1st century Thessalonians as Paul stated. I trust you acknowledge this because it is Paul who gives us this information and its contextual fulfillment in their times. We all trust Paul on this one, right?


    Remember, the Thessalonians believed the Day of Christ was already present when they wrote to Paul with their questions (2 Thess 2:1-3)! That was in the late 50sAD. They believed the Day had come and was then present. So their understanding of the NATURE of that event matches up with what preterists claim instead of the Hollywood-styled second coming depicted in Left Behind movies -- Jesus indeed came as a Thief in the Night. Paul's reply to their belief that the Day of Christ was already present is even more telling -- instead of laughing out loud, he tells them they had only lacked two more SIGNS that were left which he had told them about but they had forgotten (2 Thess 2:5):

    (1) they had not yet experienced the falling away among their congregation
    (2) the son of perdition, while already working his rebellion in Israel and being restrained from his takeover of the temple, had not made his final move to seize the temple.


    Both of these signs took place in the 60s. Our bible THOROUGHLY documents the falling away (read Jude for one example, or about St. John's antichrists), and history records the son of perdition's sign in the Temple. But their reckoning of signs in the 50s told them that the Day of Christ was already present! Does that sound like the Left Behind concept of the second coming? Remember, Paul promised that the endtimes persecution that the 1st century Thessalonian Church was then experiencing was going to be ended VIA the second coming (2 Thess 1:5-7). Was Paul a false teacher? Did he give them a bum prediction? If Christ did not come then Paul's words to them were meaningless lies told to suffering people.

    In fact, we could go through each of the Churches in Revelation 2-3 and see how they were going to PERSONALLY be affected by the second coming (Rev 2:5-7, 9-10, 15-16, 20-25; 3:1-3, etc). If it could be preached by anyone that Christ did not honor his promises to them, then Christianity is a falsehood built upon the foundations of hucksters and swindlers. They were given specific promises unique to THEIR congregations. If the futurist postponement theory is correct then the first followers of Jesus were lied to, intentionally or otherwise.
     
  2. niwde

    niwde Member

    256
    +1
    presently
    all of us as believers of christ whould not speculate when or how and where Jesus would return
    all we need to do is to pray hard that on that day we may not fail and may find eternal happiness in heaven
    living our daily lives accordance to his commanments
    and strife for heaven
    all these debate or forums about when is he coming r all rubbish talking
    we as faithfuls should lead a life for the sake of eternal happiness and not for watching for signs that show that he is coming
    and we should never predict his coming for if u have faith u will not be afraid of anything whereas those who predict r those who try to correct their lives upon knowing when is he coming
    in other words
    "he is not coming yet,let us do what pleases us ; he is coming,let us prepare ourselves to face him"
    we should never be like this
    whether he is coming or not we must live a good spiritual life
     
  3. postrib

    postrib Well-Known Member

    508
    +0
    Christian
    Again, I don't believe 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and Revelation 13 and Revelation 11 and Revelation 16, etc., had a clear fulfillment contemporary with Paul.

    In Paul's time no man sat in the Jewish temple and proclaimed himself God (2 Thessalonians 2:4) and was worshipped by all the inhabitants of the earth (Revelation 13:8), or had a False Prophet who called fire down from heaven in the sight of men (Revelation 13:13) and made a speaking image of him that must be worshipped on the pain of death (Revelation 13:14-15), and caused a mark to be put on their hand "or" forehead that they might not buy or sell without it (Revelation 13:16-17), which mark may be the name of the man or the number of his name, which is 666 (Revelation 13:17-18). None of this has been fulfilled to this day.

    Again, to say that it has plays right into the hands of the False Prophet to come, who could claim "all that is past" and that he really is the end-time Elijah (Malachi 4:5, Matthew 17:11), calling fire down from heaven in order to turn men to the worship of the true God, just as Elijah did (1 Kings 18:37-39), and could claim the mark of the Antichrist's name is no more than a fulfillment of the principle of Revelation 22:4 and 3:12. Christ warned us specifically against being deceived by such subtleties (Mark 13:22-23).

    Again, Christ's 2nd coming will be "immediately" after the tribulation (Matthew 24:29-31), will be seen by every eye (Revelation 1:7), will bring the resurrection and rapture of the entire church (1 Corinthians 15:23, 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17), and will destroy the Antichrist (2 Thessalonians 2:8).

    The Thessalonians would have been agitated (2 Thessalonians 2:2) if Jesus had supposedly already returned and the resurrection had already happened, because where was Jesus? And where were all their departed loved ones that Paul had promised they would see again? (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18) Those who spiritualized away the resurrection in Paul's day were destroying the faith of some (2 Timothy 2:18).

    The Bible verses only require that the prophesied events were near to God and were intended by God to come to pass, however long that might seem to men (2 Peter 3:4-9). Some may hold onto preterism precisely in order not to have to accept that all the horrors that are written must still come upon mankind.

    Full Preterism says that even the 2nd coming and rapture and resurrection have already happened, and so it destroys the faith of some (2 Timothy 2:18) as it destroys their hope in the coming return of Christ (Titus 2:13, 1 Peter 1:13) and their resurrection into immortal bodies (1 Corinthians 15:52-55). Partial Preterism says that the tribulation has already happened, and so hinders some Christians from knowing, understanding, and preparing themselves for the sufferings and deceptions that are coming soon (Mark 13:23).

    Future events will undo both Full and Partial Preterism, and reveal the damage they have done.

    Regarding the pretrib vs. postrib discussion among futurists, many Christians believe we shouldn't waste our time with it. But I believe knowing the rapture's timing is important because if some Christians believe with all their heart that Jesus has promised them a pre-trib rapture, couldn't "many be offended" if it doesn't happen?

    "Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold" (Matthew 24:9-12).

    "The same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it; Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended" (Matthew 13:20-21).

    I believe Jesus told us everything we'd have to face beforehand for a good reason, so that we wouldn't be offended: "Take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things (Mark 13:23). "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge" (Hosea 4:6). To be forewarned is to be forearmed: mentally, emotionally, and spiritually (and possibly even physically, if the Lord so leads).

    I believe the pre-trib doctrine could be setting the church up for great disappointment and confusion and the falling away from the faith: "The Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith" (1 Timothy 4:1), and this departure from the faith will happen before Jesus comes to rapture us: "We beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him... Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away [apostasy] first" (2 Thessalonians 2:1, 3).


    Is there a verse that some believe requires the rapture be before the tribulation? My only concern is if there isn't a pre-trib rapture that nobody think that something has gone wrong.

    "Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy" (1 Peter 4:12-13).


    I believe we all must begin in these days to face and get free of any fear of the coming tribulation and any fear of death:

    "Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life" (Revelation 2:10).

    "He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. But the fearful... shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone" (Revelation 21:7-8).

    "Deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage" (Hebrews 2:15).

    "Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do" (Luke 12:4).

    "For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not. For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better" (Philippians 1:21-23).


    I believe pre-trib prophets are giving the people what they want to hear (2 Timothy 4:3-4), instead of what they need to hear (Mark 13:23), and that false prophets that teach God's people false hopes will be held accountable, as in the days of old (Jeremiah 14:13-15, Ezekiel 13:2-16).


    I expect Satan will use the failure of the pre-trib rapture to happen as a great weapon against Christians who believed with all their heart that Jesus had promised them a pre-trib rapture. He could say something like: "Jesus promised you that he would whisk you away before the tribulation started, but did he keep his word? No. Just like he kicked poor Adam and Eve out of the garden of Eden to keep them from eating the tree of life and living forever, as it says in Genesis 3:22-23, so even now he doesn't want the best for you; he just wants you and your poor baby to suffer and starve to death for his amusement! You don't believe me? Read it for yourself in Job 9:22-23 and Proverbs 1:26. But look here, I'm not laughing at you, I'm offering you and your baby food to eat. Why? Because unlike him I care about what happens to you. All you need to do is take this little mark on your hand or forehead and worship me and my man here for a little bit and we'll take perfect care of you; and once we're all united we'll storm heaven together and I'll let you eat of the tree of life and live forever and do as you please."

    I believe it's possible that some Christians, desperate in their suffering, could fall for this deception, for haven't many already fallen for a false gospel which says Jesus saved them from the tribulation?

    "They shall pass through it, hardly bestead and hungry: and it shall come to pass, that when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse their king and their God, and look upward. And they shall look unto the earth; and behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish; and they shall be driven to darkness" (Isaiah 8:21-22).


    http://www.geocities.com/postrib
     
  4. GW

    GW Veteran

    +59
    Christian
    Brother Postrib:

    2 Thess 2:4 definitely has a clear fulfillment contemporary with Paul. Paul says the event spoken of was already underway and happening:

    2 Thessalonians 2:6-7
    And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way


    Paul says that the son of perdition was being restrained from being revealed at the Temple at the time Paul wrote -- AND, they actually knew who it was that was restraining him. This MUST be past and cannot be future.


    Yet St. John says they must have. Do you not believe him?

    Revelation 1:1,3
    This is the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things which must happen soon...Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written in it, for the time is at hand.


    2 Thessalonians 2:4 took place within about 10 years of Paul's writing it. Indeed the players were already doing their thing in the nation of Israel -- one stirring up lawlessness in Israel and the other restraining the revolt.

    Interestingly enough, Paul does not give your response at all. In fact, he tells them simply that they have not accounted for two final signs which they were to look for. How could they look for signs in the year 2000 or beyond? They obviously could not, and therefore your interpretation makes the passage meaningless communication and a false testimony transacted between Paul and the Thessalonians, his original audience to whom the letter pertained.


    That is impossible, for Jesus takes sides with the straightforward meaning of time statements. Obviously, time statements (near, soon, at hand) are given throughout the entire N.T. for countless events and they mean what they say. Futurists, however, being exegetically inconsistent, say they don't mean what they say every time they speak of eschatology. Jesus disagrees:

    Luke 21:8
    He said, "Watch out that you don't get led astray, for many will come in my name, saying, 'I AM,' and, 'The time is at hand.' Therefore don't follow them.

    Luke 21:8
    And He said, "See to it that you are not misled; for many will come in My name, saying, 'I am He,' and, 'The time is near.' Do not go after them.

    Therefore we see that the assertion that "the Bible verses only require that the prophesied events were near to God" is absurd. God speaks using concepts with which WE are familiar. When the N.T. speaks of TIME, it means exactly what we think it means.



    Who is the "YOU" in this paragraph? It is without question the apostles. Compare to Matt 10:16-23.


    Again, who is the "YOU" in this paragraph. It is undoubtedly Peter's own flocks. How do you all keep reading US into this stuff? Peter said in verse 7 that the end of all things was at hand! He says in verse 17 that the judgment was beginning --
    "because it is the time of the beginning of the judgment" (1 Peter 4:17)

    How is it that you think this is to us and not for the church in Smyrna who were fighting off the jewish persecution as they waited for Christ to come and destroy their oppressors? Was Jesus not faithful to keep his promise to them? Did he not do exactly as he led them to believe as they endured severe persecution?
     
  5. RKF

    RKF Member

    408
    +0
    Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

    This = preterest
     
  6. ex_christian

    ex_christian Member

    133
    +0
    WHOA! Looks like were goin a bit crazy with all the super man sized posts! For the love of all that is sanctified people, this is a discussion not a trial! And to whoever it was who called me a "devil" earlier on, I would just like to say that I am not a "devil", I do not believe in the devil, and I am actually a very good person. To whoever told me not to listen to the scientists, archeologists, etc about Jesus b/c they weren't there, well YOU weren't there either. And to whoever said that they are sorry I was hurt on my path to god, or whatever, let me just say that I was actually not hurt but in fact the truth was just revealed to me. Don't get me wrong, i may not elieve that Jesus was the "messiah" but I do believe he was a GREAT man and should be respected for his deeds.

    Just wondering, did jesus ever say the exact words "I am the one and only son of God"? Please post to at least this
     
  7. niwde

    niwde Member

    256
    +1
    to simplyfy it
    which is to be ready when he comes
    dun go out and look for signs
    there might have signs but as a faithful we do not need to look for signs but believe and be prepared for that day

    to ex christian
    maybe u were hurt along the journey
    but like it or not jesus is the messiah and there is nothing u can do about it
    it the whole truth u can't change it
    remember u shall never exalt urself
    for those who exalt themsleves will be humbled and those who humbled themselves will be exalted
    the devil comes in a lot of ways
    not with horns and fire but by temptation and maybe the most beautiful things
    so watch out
     
  8. GW

    GW Veteran

    +59
    Christian
    Scripture doesn't support your views RKF. That turns Col 2:8 against you.

    Why not just deal with the SUBSTANCE of the issues instead of resorting to personal attacks? It must be because you can't defend your position with scripture -- your endtimes views are were invented in the 1800s with the Irvingites, John Nelson Darby and a girl named Margaret Macdonald.
     
  9. Brother Paul

    Brother Paul New Member

    3
    +0
    Who????
     
  10. RKF

    RKF Member

    408
    +0
    Mat 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

    Mat 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

    Mar 1:11 And there came a voice from heaven, [saying], Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

    This what God said of Jesus
     
  11. ex_christian

    ex_christian Member

    133
    +0

    I asked if JESUS said that... So what if some guy says he heard a voice from the sky... I am asking if jesus ever said it himself, it is important that he said "I am the ONLY son of God" b/c otherwise this could have an ENTIRELY different meaning.
     
  12. postrib

    postrib Well-Known Member

    508
    +0
    Christian
    Even though the "spirit of antichrist" was already in the world (1 John 4:3), this doesn't mean the antichrist himself had come, just as the Spirit of Christ was already in the world but that didn't mean Christ himself had come again, for John does not deny that "antichrist shall come" (1 John 2:18), and I believe he refers to this same man in Revelation: "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. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. 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. And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life... 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" (Revelation 13:5-8, 18). I believe Daniel refers to this same individual: "And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High... and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time" (Daniel 7:25). "It shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished" (Daniel 12:7). I believe that each of the last three passages above state this individual will rule and make war against the church for 3 1/2 years.

    Revelation 1:1 says "shortly come to pass." Irenaeus of Lyons (b.130) says Revelation was written by John "towards the end of Domitian's reign" (Against Heresies, Book 5, Chapter 30, Paragraph 3), which ended in 96 AD. How did each verse of Revelation 13 and Revelation 11 and Revelation 16 shortly come to pass after 96 AD? How did the 2nd coming in Revelation 19 shortly come to pass, and how did the millenial reign and great white throne judgment of Revelation 20 and the eternal state of the new heaven and new earth and New Jerusalem of Revelation 21-22 shortly come to pass? To God, all these will indeed shortly come to pass, for to him a thousand years are as one day (2 Peter 3:8), but we men need "long patience" in waiting for the 2nd coming, even though it draws nearer with each passing day (James 5:7-8).

    Again, note that never has any man sat in the Jewish temple and proclaimed himself God (2 Thessalonians 2:4) and been worshipped by all the inhabitants of the earth (Revelation 13:8), or had a False Prophet who called fire down from heaven in the sight of men (Revelation 13:13) and made a speaking image of him that must be worshipped on the pain of death (Revelation 13:14-15), and caused a mark to be put on their hand "or" forehead that they might not buy or sell without it (Revelation 13:16-17), which mark may be the name of the man or the number of his name, which is 666 (Revelation 13:17-18). None of this has been fulfilled.

    Not at all. 2 Thessalonians 2 is just as valid for us today as it was for its original recipients.

    Are we familiar with a thousands years seeming like a single day?

    I believe the 7 letters are "the things which are" in the passage which says: "Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter" (Revelation 1:19). It's not until after the letters that Jesus says: "Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter" (Revelation 4:1).

    I believe the general truths given in the 7 letters in Revelation are also for the church down through history, just as the general truths given in the letters to the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians are for the church down through history, for all scripture is profitable (2 Timothy 3:16).

    The individual experiences of believers down through history may match the experience of one of the 7 churches in Revelation more than another. For example, many in the church down through history have been tried in tribulation and been faithful unto death as Jesus said the Smyrnans would be (Revelation 2:10), and I believe many whom Jesus knew had "little strength" have been kept from temptation and trial as Jesus said the Philadelphians would be (Revelation 3:8-10).

    Some may hold onto preterism in order not to have to accept that the tribulation events "which must be hereafter" have yet to come to pass.


    http://www.geocities.com/postrib
     
  13. ZiSunka

    ZiSunka It means 'yellow dog'

    +276
    Christian
    Geez, there were witnesses ! It wasn't something Jesus heard in his mind, it was a voice from heaven that everyone heard.

    Why is it important to you that Jesus said it about himself? I think that being affirmed by God would be way superior than saying it about yourself. Heck, I could claim to be the son of God, but unless that were confirmed by God Himself, what meaning would it have? :scratch:
     
  14. GW

    GW Veteran

    +59
    Christian
    There is no single antichrist. Antichrist is "MANY" (2 Jn 1:7; 1 Jn 4:1; 1 Jn 1:18). Antichrist was a 1st century Church heresy (1 Jn 2:18-19) of many false deceivers who taught that Christ's incarnation never occurred in real human flesh (2 Jn 1:7; 1Jn 4:2-3). They also taught that one could have covenant relations with Jehovah without Christ (1 Jn 2:22-23). That's everything the bible teaches about antichrist. Notice not a single statement in the bible links antichrists to World Rulers or pagans or anything else then what I just stated. Antichrist is past.

    This is Nero, who also persecuted the Church for 42 months and whose name was 666. He was the world ruler at the time St. John was writing.

    Only if you mean typologically. I'm sure you realize that Antiochus Epiphanes fulfilled most of Daniel.

    The late-date tradition has only one statement upon which it rests. The early date view is best supported by history and the text itself. The garbled statement of Irenaeus is all the late date rests upon. Papias had earlier claimed that St. John died around AD 70. Furthermore, Irenaeus' statement claims that either St. John was seen around Domitian's time or that the vision was seen around Domitian's time. We don't know which he meant. Some scholars even think that Irenaeus spoke of Nero. Scholar Robert Young stated that the name Domitianou, referring actually to Nero, was mistaken by later writers for Domitian. The evidence for the early date of the book is overwhelming. I will post these links to get right at the internal and external witness:

    The Dating of the Book of Revelation: AD 66-68
    http://mb.notdeceived.net/topic.cgi?forum=21&topic=234

    Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation
    by Dr. Kenneth Gentry
    http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/2206_47e.htm


    You're obviously committing the common assumption that all these passages converge on one person. You have mixed up St. John's Church heresy (Antichrist) with Antiochus with Revelation 13 with the son of perdition as if they are all one thing. In fact a jewish Messiah literally fulfilled 2 Thess 2:4 in the year AD66 and helped launch the Revolt against Rome that resulted in the 3.5 years of Israel's tribulation.

    Impossible. It is EITHER valed to them OR it is valid to you. Paul's statement that the son of man was already being restrained and that the Thessalonians knew of the one restraining him from seizing the Temple places fulfillment in Paul's time and makes it impossible that it could be fulfilled any later then the later part of the 1st century. The Temple in Jerusalem was still standing when Paul wrote.

    That would require you to adopt preterism. Why? Because to each of those Churches Christ promises to come to them and perform some unique duty to aid their then-pressing crises. He promises his coming soon to every one of those first century CHurches to perform some task they needed done. Jesus even tells the Sardis Church that he was about to come upon them as a Thief in the Night (Rev 3:1-3). Sounds like he is a false prophet if your view of endtimes is adopted which claims Jesus did not come back to those 1st century Churches to whom the promises were made.

    Not so of the endtimes teaching. For the endtimes teaching concerns only ONE generation of history. And, the reason the general truths of the New Testament letters apply to us is because of the eternal New Covenant. Not a single New Testament letter was written to you or me. They were not thinking of us in the least as they sent their letters to each other any more than your correspondence with me or a friend is addressed to people 2000 years into the future.

    And, finally, it is obviously a tremendous allegory to say the 7 historic Churches of Asia Minor are churhes or Church ages down through Church history. Where does the text give any liberty for such an interpretation?

    Luke places the Tribulation at AD 66-70 (Luke 21:20-22). Just compare that passage to Matthew 24:15-20 and we see that the AoD and the great tribulation are past events. Scripture teaches it.
     
  15. Phoenix

    Phoenix Senior Member

    520
    +11
    Christian
    Even though your views are conflicting, great posts GW and Postrib ! For someone like me who reads and learns, you all are outstanding..thank you.
     
  16. GW

    GW Veteran

    +59
    Christian
    Christ's riches to you Phoenix.

    Eschatology is an exciting part of the faith and perhaps has been the most elusive doctrine in the Church for 20 centuries with 4 MAIN perspectives and literally thousands of spin off notions. We're just trying to go where angels fear to tread. :)

    Stay tuned.

    GW
     
  17. postrib

    postrib Well-Known Member

    508
    +0
    Christian
    Technically, anyone who currently denies that Jesus is the Christ or denies that Jesus came in the flesh is an antichrist: "Even now are there many antichrists... Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son... And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world... For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist" (1 John 2:18, 1 John 2:22, 1 John 4:3, 2 John 1:7).

    Again, even though the "spirit of antichrist" is already in the world, this doesn't mean the antichrist himself has come, just as the Spirit of Christ is already in the world but this doesn't mean Christ himself has come again, for John does not deny that "antichrist shall come" (1 John 2:18), and I believe he refers to this same man in Revelation: "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. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. 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. And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life... 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" (Revelation 13:5-8, 18). I believe Daniel refers to this same individual: "And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High... and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time" (Daniel 7:25). "It shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished" (Daniel 12:7). I believe that each of the last three passages above state this individual will rule and make war against the church for 3 1/2 years.

    I believe this individual will sit in a rebuilt Jewish temple and proclaim himself God: "And that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God" (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4). "And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate... And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished" (Daniel 11:31, 36). "Ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)" (Matthew 24:15).

    And I believe this individual will be destroyed by Jesus at the 2nd coming: "And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming" (2 Thessalonians 2:8). "And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone" (Revelation 19:19-20).

    Is the heresy past? No one today denies Jesus is the Christ, or denies that he came in the flesh?

    How did Nero fulfill each verse of Revelation 13?

    I don't believe he was.

    Even the part of Daniel referred to in Matthew 24:15?

    I don't believe it is garbled.

    Can we look at that quote?

    I believe he meant the vision: "We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign" (Against Heresies, Book 5, Chapter 30, Paragraph 3).

    Can we look at the basis for that?

    Not to those much closer to that time than we:

    Justin Martyr (100-165) spoke of the coming of the Antichrist as an event yet in the future: "He whom Daniel foretells would have dominion for a time, and times, and an half, is even already at the door, about to speak blasphemous and daring things against the Most High" (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 32).

    As did Irenaeus of Lyons (130-202): "But, knowing the sure number declared by Scripture, that is, six hundred sixty and six, let them await, in the first place, the division of the kingdom into ten; then, in the next place, when these kings are reigning, and beginning to set their affairs in order, and advance their kingdom, [let them learn] to acknowledge that he who shall come claiming the kingdom for himself, and shall terrify those men of whom we have been speaking, having a name containing the aforesaid number, is truly the abomination of desolation" (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, Book 5, Chapter 30).

    As did Hippolytus: "It is proper that we take the Holy Scriptures themselves in hand, and find out from them what, and of what manner, the coming of Antichrist is; on what occasion and at what time that implores one shall be revealed; and whence and from what tribe (he shall come); and what his name is, which is indicated by the number in the Scripture; and how he shall work error among the people, gathering them from the ends of the earth; and (how) he shall stir up tribulation and persecution against the saints; and how he shall glorify himself as God; and what his end shall be" (Hippolytus, Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, 5).

    As did Cyprian (c. 250 AD): "Nor let it disturb you, dearest brethren, if with some, in these last times, either an uncertain faith is wavering, or a fear of God without religion is vacillating, or a peaceable concord does not continue. These things have been foretold as about to happen in the end of the world; and it was predicted by the voice of the Lord, and by the testimony of the apostles, that now that the world is failing, and the Antichrist is drawing near, everything good shall fail, but evil and adverse things shall prosper" (Cyprian, Epistles 67.7). "Even Antichrist, when he shall begin to come, shall not enter into the Church because he threatensÂ… They endeavour to imitate the coming of Antichrist, who is now approaching" (Cyprian, Epistles 54.19).

    What suggests they are different persons?

    Can you show from historical sources how 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and each verse of Revelation 13 and Revelation 11 and Revelation 16 and Revelation 19 and Revelation 20 and Revelation 21-22 were all fulfilled? And how Christ's 2nd coming was "immediately" after the tribulation (Matthew 24:29-31), was seen by every eye (Revelation 1:7), brought the resurrection and rapture of the entire church (1 Corinthians 15:23, 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17), and destroyed the Antichrist? (2 Thessalonians 2:8)

    I believe it will be rebuilt.

    Even to Smyrna?

    Because Jesus didn't come again in the 1st century, I believe Revelation 3:3 must be a warning against complacency.

    I don't believe Jesus anywhere promises them he would come back to them.

    I don't believe it does. I simply believe the general truths given in the 7 letters in Revelation are also for the church down through history, just as the general truths given in the letters to the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians are for the church down through history, for all scripture is profitable (2 Timothy 3:16).

    Luke 21:20-24 has not already happened, for when the city will be trodden down for 42 months the temple will remain (Revelation 11:1-2). Passages such as Revelation 11 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and Revelation 13 have not been fulfilled yet.
     
  18. parousia70

    parousia70 I'm livin' in yesterday's tomorrow Supporter

    +2,599
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    Could you please explain to all us Christians here how any stone building built by modern day, Christ rejecting, Gospel denying, anti-christian people could in any way, shape, or form be "The Temple Of God"?

    Thanks,
    P70
     
  19. GW

    GW Veteran

    +59
    Christian
    Postrib,

    (#1) You have ignored the OTHER qualification of the antichrists essential teaching. They not only denied that one needed Jesus to have the Father 1 Jn 2:22-23), but they ALSO taught that Christ's incarnation did not happen in a true flesh form (2 Jn 1:7; 2 Jn 4:2-3). Antichrist is not one, but is MANY (2 Jn 1:7; 1 Jn 4:1; 1 Jn 2:18). Antichrist is NOT future, but was something that they heard was to come and St. John says "EVEN NOW THERE ARE MANY ANTICHRISTS BY WHICH WE KNOW IT IS THE LAST HOUR." We are not still in the last hour of the last days as was St. John. We are living 19 centuries beyond the "last hour" of the last days. And finallly, the antichrist spirit has been absent from the Church for nearly 1800 years now. The Church has been orthodox on the nature of Christ's incarnation for a very long time -- the early Church defeated the Antichrist Heresy which threatened to destroy the establishment of the Church in truth during its most vulnerable stage. Clearly there is no spirit of antichrist in the Church in our day that St. John would recognize.

    (#2) There are typological links between Revelation and Daniel. But to ignore that Daniel was already fulfilled once and assert that it speaks directly to our times is guesswork that ignores its prior fulfillment. St. John quotes the Old Testament hundreds of times in Revelation, and the pattern of his quotes suggests he is innovating upon O.T. themes in nearly all chapters and re-adapting the Hebrew prophetic vernacular to events obligated to occur in his own times (Rev 1:1; 1:3; 22:6-7; 22:10-11). There is no one-to-one relationship in the way he is quoting O.T. passages. His vision is NEW, but is using familiar Hebrew history to communicate the fate of Israel in its last days period of 66-70AD.

    (#3) I don't understand how you can imagine that the AoD is yet future? Many in the early Church believed it was past (Augustine, Eusebius, Chrysostom), pertaining to events surrounding the Fall of Jerusalem at AD 66-70. I find most amazing your claim that Luke 21:20-22 doesn't pertain to AD 66-70. I don't know of a commentary that agrees with you. Most agree that this spoke of AD 66-70.

    (#4) There is no direct link between 2 Thess 2 and Daniel. Daniel serves as a typological fulfilled prophecy that serves to foreshadow the events of AD 66-70. Daniel has 4 kingdoms that track until the end -- Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, ANCIENT ROME. So Daniel's book doesn't stretch 1500 years beyond Ancient Rome. In fact, Jesus said the TIME WAS FULFILLED for the Kingdom of God to arrive in Mark 1:14-15. It is no accident that the 490 years also expire in the time of Christ's ministry. So I maintain that you have ignored all of Daniel's time indicators, re-creating a new book of Daniel for our times.

    (#5) Matthew 24:15-20 is parallel to Luke 21:20-22. Agreed? Therefore, if Luke 21:20-22 is accomplished then so is Matthew 24:15-20. Scholars usually place Luke 21:20-22 at 66-70AD, and therefore Matthew 24:15-20 is also fulfilled.

    (#6) Irenaeus' statment is garbled according to at least two scholars I could find:

    Scholars agree there are at least two possible meanings to Irenaeus' quote:
    This single passage is the ONLY evidence for a late dating of Revelation. The evidence for the EARLY date is overwhelming, both from Church history and from internal evidence from the book itself. Anyone interested in this side-debate must provide rebuttal to Kenneth Gentry's book, Before Jerusalem Fell

    (#7) You listed the historic premillennial beliefs about "antichrist" from those whose view was ultimately condemned as heresy at the Council of Ephesus at 431AD. Their view of antichrist does not match St. John's -- I think you'll agree that we have to choose scripture over tradition. Those men you quoted taught that the world would end no later than the 400s. In truth, they taught it would end earlier, even in their own time.

    (#8) I believe I showed you the literal fulfillment of 2 Thess 2:4 already. Menahem was the jewish Messiah and King that took control of the Temple in AD 66, directing the commands that led to the downfall of Israel in the following 3.5 years (AD 67-70). Going verse by verse through Revelation at a messageboard seems like an impossible task. I'd be happy to post a link to David Chilton's commentary on Revelation if you thought you might actually look up some passages. Either way, your systematic refusal to consider the inspired time statments of Revelation that demand a 1st century fulfillment for the vision makes your own interpretations anachronistic on all counts. It does sound to me, however, that you would browse a commentary on Revelation from the preterist view if one was free online. Perhaps?

    (#9) Your belief that a Temple will be rebuilt in Jerusalem for the endtimes to occur in conflicts with the New Covenant teaching about the Mosaic types and shadows which were only to last until the REALITY OF CHRIST had come. [Not to mention that it conflicts with the Holy Spirit inspired statments that the last days were back in the 1st century -- Heb 1:1-2; 1 Cor 10:11; Acts 2:15-17; James 5:3; Heb 9:26 ]. A standing Temple in Israel back then was the Holy Spirit's sign that the way into the true holy place of Heaven was not yet available to receive the saints (Hebrews 9:7-9). A new Temple built in Jerusalem according to "bible prophecy" would be the Holy Spirit signaling once again that the saints are prohibited from fellowship with God in Heaven (Heb 9:7-8).

    (#10) Jesus even promised to come to Smyrna (Rev 22:20; Rev 1:1, 1:3; -- compare 2:9-11 with 3:9-11). Next you said:

    "Because Jesus didn't come again in the 1st century, I believe Revelation 3:3 must be a warning against complacency."

    But that is not at all what Jesus said. Jesus promised he was to come upon them and they were about to have that happen as a thief in the night (Rev 3:1-3), according to Jesus himself. This CANNOT speak of some event beyond the first century. Your denial that it happened makes both John and Jesus false prophets, or lunatics or liars. You are claiming that Christ didn't fulfill his promise to them. Can we now trust that Christ honors any of His promises?

    (#11) Finally, not a single New Testament letter was written to you or me today. John did not write his vision so that every ensuing generation of the Church would mistakenly think they were in the last days. This is why he gives so many time restrictions for the vision -- all of which you ignore. They were not giving dire warnings to each other back in the first century so that WE could think they were talking about us. It was for THEIR time (Rev 1;1, 1:3). John wrote it during THE Tribulation at the Day of the Lord (Rev 1:8-10). They knew and taught that THEY themselves were the last days generation (Matt 24:33-34; James 5:3; 1 Peter 1:20; Acts 2:15-17).
     
  20. RKF

    RKF Member

    408
    +0
    Gw , more lemonade, twist, twist, twist,
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...