The latter Days: The type of the latter days

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
I find your conversation here interesting and would like to get your thoughts on something.

It’s estimated that Jonah lived around 785-744 BC, which puts him in the 1,000 years according to your view.

Amil I have spoken to will say Nineveh being saved was a picture of what would happen after the cross when Satan is bound. They will say Nineveh was an exception, in order for a Gentile to become saved prior to the cross they would have to become an Israelite.

Do you think Nineveh was not an exception but a reality that any Gentile could be saved without becoming an Israelite during the 1,000 years prior to 33 AD?
There were lots of examples of people who would have "technically" been "gentiles" who predated Abraham. (Abel, Enoch, Job, Noah to name a few.) Rahab, Bathsheba and Ruth were in the direct line of Christ. All of these women were gentiles. Naaman who was healed of his leprosy was a gentile. Lot was Abraham's nephew; but not one of his descendants.

If you look through the OT; (and even gentiles in the NT) you will find lots of examples of believers who never became Israelites.
 
Upvote 0

grafted branch

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 21, 2019
1,526
246
46
Washington
✟238,025.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
There were lots of examples of people who would have "technically" been "gentiles" who predated Abraham. (Abel, Enoch, Job, Noah to name a few.) Rahab, Bathsheba and Ruth were in the direct line of Christ. All of these women were gentiles. Naaman who was healed of his leprosy was a gentile. Lot was Abraham's nephew; but not one of his descendants.

If you look through the OT; (and even gentiles in the NT) you will find lots of examples of believers who never became Israelites.
During the time of the Mosaic law, if a Gentile wanted to do the will of God, wouldn’t they have to follow the law and participate in the temple ceremonies? Or would it be possible for a Gentile to be saved, doing the will of God, and do things like eat pork or work on a sabbath?
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
During the time of the Mosaic law, if a Gentile wanted to do the will of God, wouldn’t they have to follow the law and participate in the temple ceremonies? Or would it be possible for a Gentile to be saved, doing the will of God, and do things like eat pork or work on a sabbath?
Paul talks about those who "have not the law" but obey the law "written on their conscience" are a "law unto themselves". Romans 2:14-16

Revelation 11:18 has an interesting verse:
And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

Note everyone who's named in this verse is called "a servant of God". "..prophets..." (OT); "...saints.." (NT) "..them that fear Your name.." (everyone else who's outside of those covenants).

God has preordained this because Jesus is "the lamb slain from the foundation of the world" Revelation 13:8

There are people Christ atoned for who never heard of him and have had no exposure to written (or oral tradition of) Scripture at all.

And the law (OT system) was but a schoolmaster that pointed the people to Christ. It couldn't redeem anyone anyways. (Galatians 3:24, Hebrews 10:3-5)

So yes, one could be saved prior to the crucifixion even outside of the OT system.
 
Upvote 0

grafted branch

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 21, 2019
1,526
246
46
Washington
✟238,025.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Paul talks about those who "have not the law" but obey the law "written on their conscience" are a "law unto themselves". Romans 2:14-16

Revelation 11:18 has an interesting verse:
And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

Note everyone who's named in this verse is called "a servant of God". "..prophets..." (OT); "...saints.." (NT) "..them that fear Your name.." (everyone else who's outside of those covenants).

God has preordained this because Jesus is "the lamb slain from the foundation of the world" Revelation 13:8

There are people Christ atoned for who never heard of him and have had no exposure to written (or oral tradition of) Scripture at all.

And the law (OT system) was but a schoolmaster that pointed the people to Christ. It couldn't redeem anyone anyways. (Galatians 3:24, Hebrews 10:3-5)

So yes, one could be saved prior to the crucifixion even outside of the OT system.
Ok, I see what you’re saying and don’t have an issue with it.

What is your view of Satan being bound for 1,000 years? Do you believe in a still future millennium?
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Ok, I see what you’re saying and don’t have an issue with it.

What is your view of Satan being bound for 1,000 years? Do you believe in a still future millennium?
I've come to the conclusion that we are at the end of the millennium; and currently living in the time that Satan has been loosed.

Came across a couple of interesting passages recently and based on Revelation 9 (compare to the sun being darkened at the crucifixion (Matthew 27:45, Mark 15:43) And I believe the binding of Satan started at the cross "immediately after the tribulation the sun is darkened" (Matthew 24)

And according to the end of Ephesians; Christ is given all dominion at the resurrection. Yet he doesn't "reign in glory" until he ascends to heaven. And believers on earth commence "reigning with Christ" at Pentecost via the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. (Translated out of the kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of His dear Son.)

The "2nd coming" is Christ's "return in glory". (Matthew 25) That commences the destruction of the cosmos because a corrupt universe can not stand in the presence of holy God in His glory.

The idea that glorified Christ is going to rule a political kingdom on this corrupt earth for 1000 years is silly.
 
Upvote 0

Trivalee

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 1, 2021
706
162
55
London
✟185,450.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
The 69th week ended when Jesus was crucified and the Roman Empire in charge.

Then 2000 years - time of the Gentiles - occupying the land of Israel.

Now we are in the end times, latter days, the Roman Empire is in the form of the EU. The Antichrist will come from that part of the world. i.e. of the people who destroyed the temple and sanctuary. Could be Zelensky. Too early to tell for certain.
Zelensky, huh? Talk about calling a dog a bad name to kill it! Upon all the bad people troubling the earth, your pick is Zelensky?
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,683
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,689.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Zelensky, huh? Talk about calling a dog a bad name to kill it! Upon all the bad people troubling the earth, your pick is Zelensky?
The person who becomes the Antichrist will not seem to be a bad person initially. Let's just wait, watch, and see what, if anything, happens.

There is a song about him on You Tube, "can one man save the world?"
 
Upvote 0

Trivalee

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 1, 2021
706
162
55
London
✟185,450.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
The person who becomes the Antichrist will not seem to be a bad person initially. Let's just wait, watch, and see what, if anything, happens.

There is a song about him on You Tube, "can one man save the world?"
Don't waste your time waiting on Zelensky to fulfil that prophecy because he's not the antichrist!
 
Upvote 0

Trivalee

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 1, 2021
706
162
55
London
✟185,450.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
During the time of the Mosaic law, if a Gentile wanted to do the will of God, wouldn’t they have to follow the law and participate in the temple ceremonies? Or would it be possible for a Gentile to be saved, doing the will of God, and do things like eat pork or work on a sabbath?
Apostle Paul answered your question in Rom 2:14 NLT Even Gentiles, who do not have God’s written law, show that they know his law when they instinctively obey it, even without having heard it. 15 They demonstrate that God’s law is written in their hearts, for their own conscience and thoughts either accuse them or tell them they are doing right.

God will judge those that lived and died all over the world without the Law (ie, during the OT) and those that died before hearing the gospel of grace after Christ has come and died. God will use how they responded to the natural sense of 'right and wrong' that every man was created with, to judge them on the GWTJ. Ask yourself, how did ancient tribes all over the world know that murder is wrong having not had the 10 Commandments - "thou shall not kill"? Answer - it is the 'natural, God-giving instinct' Paul was talking about.
 
Upvote 0

grafted branch

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 21, 2019
1,526
246
46
Washington
✟238,025.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Apostle Paul answered your question in Rom 2:14 NLT Even Gentiles, who do not have God’s written law, show that they know his law when they instinctively obey it, even without having heard it. 15 They demonstrate that God’s law is written in their hearts, for their own conscience and thoughts either accuse them or tell them they are doing right.

God will judge those that lived and died all over the world without the Law (ie, during the OT) and those that died before hearing the gospel of grace after Christ has come and died. God will use how they responded to the natural sense of 'right and wrong' that every man was created with, to judge them on the GWTJ. Ask yourself, how did ancient tribes all over the world know that murder is wrong having not had the 10 Commandments - "thou shall not kill"? Answer - it is the 'natural, God-giving instinct' Paul was talking about.
I do see that, Cain knew he had done wrong when he killed his brother.

What are your thoughts on Nineveh being preached to by Jonah and the twelve apostles being told not to go to the Gentiles in Matthew 10:5?

Why was Jonah told to go to the Gentiles and the apostles told not to?
 
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
I do see that, Cain knew he had done wrong when he killed his brother.

What are your thoughts on Nineveh being preached to by Jonah and the twelve apostles being told not to go to the Gentiles in Matthew 10:5?

Why was Jonah told to go to the Gentiles and the apostles told not to?
Later on they were told they would be his witnesses in Judea, Samaria and to the utter most parts of the earth (Acts 1:8)

If you take a really close look at Matthew 10:5. "Do not go into the way of".... "Do not enter a city of..." Then he says "go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel".

Note it doesn't say solely Jews. "Israel" is all those who are elect. (Apparently including people from Nianevah in the days of Jonah.) Paul says that "when the fullness of the gentiles is come in then all Israel is saved". Just because one is "Jewish" doesn't make them "of Israel"; because all those who disobedient still fell in the wilderness because of their unbelief. (Acts 7)

"of the way of" or "enter the city of". Think of Lot and Sodom. God literally had to go pull him out of there before He destroyed the city. Same thing with Paul. God used the Roman army to get him out of Jerusalem before the Roman Jewish wars started. When Paul was actually told by the Holy Spirit not to go to Jerusalem. (Acts 21:11)

When you read Scripture; pay very close attention to the details of what it's saying.

"Don't go in the way of the gentiles" is not the same thing as "don't preach the gospel to the gentiles".
 
Upvote 0

Trivalee

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 1, 2021
706
162
55
London
✟185,450.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
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.
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.

At this point in the Discourse, the focus is on what verse 1 is pertaining to.

Which then leads to this.

Matthew 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?


The first question asked, when shall these things be? At this point it appears to center around what Jesus said in verse 2. But that is not the only thing they asked. They also asked--- and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Jesus then proceeds to answer them. Note what He starts off with.

Matthew 24:4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.


Let's stop here for now. What would be the connection with this and what is recorded in verse 1 and 2? What does verse 4 and 5 have to do with what happened to the city and the temple in 70 AD? Even if verse 5 is already being fulfilled prior to 70 AD, is one then going to argue that it is no longer being fulfilled after 70 AD? And the same for verses 6 through 12, that even if some of that was already happening before 70 AD, is one going to argue that none of it also happening after 70 AD? How then can 70 AD be as far as the Discourse is seeing? Why would Jesus predict events that might involve both before 70 AD and after 70 AD, if all the Discourse is seeing are events up unto 70 AD?

If one argues, that prior to 70 AD verse 5 was already being fulfilled, thus this proves that the Discourse is only focusing on events leading up to 70 AD and 70 AD itself---but what kind of argument is that when verse 5 equally applies to after 70 AD? It would be a valid argument if verse 5 can only apply up unto 70 AD and that it can't also apply after 70 AD. Do Preterists even believe that, though? That verse 5 can only apply up unto 70 AD and not after 70 AD as well?
The Olivet Discourse is an encompassing exposition of the eschaton; starting with the judgment in history against Israel (70 AD) and ending with the events that mark the end of the age. Jesus focused more and rightly so, on the end-time events rather than the short to medium-term events that are already fulfilled. The key elements we are confronted with in this age, are the warning about the depth of deception that will be the order of the day in the end times, marked by the unprecedented influence of false Christs and prophets.

The church will be shaken so much that every believer must be forced to take a stand - for or against Christ (verses 12-13)! To help the faithful recognise the deception, the Lord provided more than sufficient clues for believers to look out for to differentiate the substance from the shadow.

It's unfortunate that many believers fail to recognise we are already in the end times and God's calendar points that we are in the days of the Black Horse Rider. Because of the pressure from the world, many believers are compromising their stand in other to be seen as progressive and tolerant. And this is the pitfall that will lead some to hell. Just yesterday the Church of England voted "to bless" gay marriages. They claimed they will not wed gay couples but will bless them. But isn't blessing them an endorsement of the very thing they claimed to oppose? This is an example of a religious institution's compromise and it also filters down to individuals.

God is absolute in his Sovereignty and immutable in his counsel. Therefore, every believer hoping to make heaven must take a stand behind God's position on every issue according to the Bible and that requires resisting the pressures of the world to conform. Unfortunately, many are waiting until the time of the mark of the beast to show their steadfastness to God by refusing the mark. But unbeknown to many, their personal test of faith may come long before the introduction of the mark of the beast and how they respond to their test will ultimately determine their eternal destiny.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Zao is life
Upvote 0

Trivalee

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 1, 2021
706
162
55
London
✟185,450.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
I do see that, Cain knew he had done wrong when he killed his brother.

What are your thoughts on Nineveh being preached to by Jonah and the twelve apostles being told not to go to the Gentiles in Matthew 10:5?

Why was Jonah told to go to the Gentiles and the apostles told not to?
The Bible didn't tell us why, so whatever I say here is my opinion.

My view is that the Sovereign God reserves the right to show mercy on whom (be it an individual or nation) he pleases (Exodus 33:19). Remember the example of the woman of Canaan (a Gentile) that besought Jesus for her daughter. The Lord told her that it was not right to give the children's food to dogs but she responded that even dogs eat the crumbs that fell from the table (Matt 15:22-28). Subsequently, Jesus bid her as she desired.

Scattered throughout the OT and NT are examples of Gentiles receiving grace and favour from God long before the due season - the advent of the church. Who can discern God's counsel?
 
Upvote 0

grafted branch

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 21, 2019
1,526
246
46
Washington
✟238,025.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Later on they were told they would be his witnesses in Judea, Samaria and to the utter most parts of the earth (Acts 1:8)

If you take a really close look at Matthew 10:5. "Do not go into the way of".... "Do not enter a city of..." Then he says "go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel".

Note it doesn't say solely Jews. "Israel" is all those who are elect. (Apparently including people from Nianevah in the days of Jonah.) Paul says that "when the fullness of the gentiles is come in then all Israel is saved". Just because one is "Jewish" doesn't make them "of Israel"; because all those who disobedient still fell in the wilderness because of their unbelief. (Acts 7)

"of the way of" or "enter the city of". Think of Lot and Sodom. God literally had to go pull him out of there before He destroyed the city. Same thing with Paul. God used the Roman army to get him out of Jerusalem before the Roman Jewish wars started. When Paul was actually told by the Holy Spirit not to go to Jerusalem. (Acts 21:11)

When you read Scripture; pay very close attention to the details of what it's saying.

"Don't go in the way of the gentiles" is not the same thing as "don't preach the gospel to the gentiles".
Ok, so one other verse that some people use to show Gentiles weren’t saved in the OT is Ephesians 2:11-12. This seems to indicate that if someone was not taking part in the covenant (common wealth of Israel) they were with out hope.

What is your view on this verse?
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Ok, so one other verse that some people use to show Gentiles weren’t saved in the OT is Ephesians 2:11-12. This seems to indicate that if someone was not taking part in the covenant (common wealth of Israel) they were with out hope.

What is your view on this verse?
Take a really close look at Ephesians 2:11. "... you were called uncircumcised by the circumcision in the flesh made by hands." Just because the Jews called you uncircumcised, doesn't mean you were disregarded by God.

Compare this to Romans 2:29 "But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

Now take a look at Ephesians 2:12 Those of the circumcision (who now allegedly believe in Christ) are still saying this to the gentiles. "That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:"

So the gentiles were what? Strangers to a system that wasn't going to save them anyways!

Now look at verse 13: "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.

"Sometimes" in this verse is a compound of a word "and, both, even" combined with "about" / "be in the place of" It's translated "sometimes" because that makes the most sense in English; but the Greek denotes that they were "both near and far" of "long way down the road".

Are "made (come to pass) near". "Near" is another derivative of two other words "arm" and "throttle".

So in that sense both those "under the law" and those "not under the law" were on the same road. And that road only leads to condemnation. (The purpose of the giving of the law is to point out sin. The law can't save.) The gentile was "both near and far" on the road (of the law that leads to condemnation) because they weren't under that law. Some of them had "keener attuned conscience" about the law because they paid attention to their conscience. So in that sense maybe they were "closer" (to getting off the road) than they would have been to the promise of the covenant. The promise of the covenant was that the Messiah would deliver you from condemnation because of your sin.

So look at the context around these verses. The chapter is talking about God's grace. The only advantage one had of being exposed to the law and covenant of promise was knowledge of the coming Messiah.

Now look at verse 15. "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;" Christ fulfilled the law because sinners can't.

Keep in mind now, both Jew and Gentile are on the "highway to hell" so to speak.

Now look at verse 16: "And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: Note, He's not reconciling the gentile because the Jew is "closer"; He's reconciling BOTH! Because neither are "close enough".

Now look at verse 17: "And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.

Well, them that were "nearer" unto what? If the law's only purpose is to condemn one for their sin; what is the Jew "nearer" to than the gates of hell? Both are on the road that leads to condemnation. Remember the law doesn't save anyone! The only advantage one had who was familiar with the law; was if they understood that this covenant was about the coming of the promised Messiah.

Matthew 8:5-13
Now here's a good example of this principle coming to us out of one story in the NT. A centurion coming to Jesus asking that his servant be healed. Jesus says he'll go to the centurion's house. The centurion says; you don't have to come to my house. I have men that I command. I tell them to do something and I know they'll do it. And so thus I know that if you just say it will happen that it will.

And what was Jesus's reaction. He's dumbfounded. He says to the Jews following him about this heathen soldier (who is not under the law). I don't even see such great faith in all of Israel. So the centurion went back home and his servant was healed. Jesus never said to this man that he had to convert to Judaism.

Thus this soldier of much more faith, was "closer" to God than the law abiding Jew; despite the law abiding Jew was more aware of the promise of the Messiah.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

grafted branch

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 21, 2019
1,526
246
46
Washington
✟238,025.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Take a really close look at Ephesians 2:11. "... you were called uncircumcised by the circumcision in the flesh made by hands." Just because the Jews called you uncircumcised, doesn't mean you were disregarded by God.

Compare this to Romans 2:29 "But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

Now take a look at Ephesians 2:12 Those of the circumcision (who now allegedly believe in Christ) are still saying this to the gentiles. "That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:"

So the gentiles were what? Strangers to a system that wasn't going to save them anyways!

Now look at verse 13: "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.

"Sometimes" in this verse is a compound of a word "and, both, even" combined with "about" / "be in the place of" It's translated "sometimes" because that makes the most sense in English; but the Greek denotes that they were "both near and far" of "long way down the road".

Are "made (come to pass) near". "Near" is another derivative of two other words "arm" and "throttle".

So in that sense both those "under the law" and those "not under the law" were on the same road. And that road only leads to condemnation. (The purpose of the giving of the law is to point out sin. The law can't save.) The gentile was "both near and far" on the road (of the law that leads to condemnation) because they weren't under that law. Some of them had "keener attuned conscience" about the law because they paid attention to their conscience. So in that sense maybe they were "closer" (to getting off the road) than they would have been to the promise of the covenant. The promise of the covenant was that the Messiah would deliver you from condemnation because of your sin.

So look at the context around these verses. The chapter is talking about God's grace. The only advantage one had of being exposed to the law and covenant of promise was knowledge of the coming Messiah.

Now look at verse 15. "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;" Christ fulfilled the law because sinners can't.

Keep in mind now, both Jew and Gentile are on the "highway to hell" so to speak.

Now look at verse 16: "And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: Note, He's not reconciling the gentile because the Jew is "closer"; He's reconciling BOTH! Because neither are "close enough".

Now look at verse 17: "And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.

Well, them that were "nearer" unto what? If the law's only purpose is to condemn one for their sin; what is the Jew "nearer" to than the gates of hell? Both are on the road that leads to condemnation. Remember the law doesn't save anyone! The only advantage one had who was familiar with the law; was if they understood that this covenant was about the coming of the promised Messiah.

Matthew 8:5-13
Now here's a good example of this principle coming to us out of one story in the NT. A centurion coming to Jesus asking that his servant be healed. Jesus says he'll go to the centurion's house. The centurion says; you don't have to come to my house. I have men that I command. I tell them to do something and I know they'll do it. And so thus I know that if you just say it will happen that it will.

And what was Jesus's reaction. He's dumbfounded. He says to the Jews following him about this heathen soldier (who is not under the law). I don't even see such great faith in all of Israel. So the centurion went back home and his servant was healed. Jesus never said to this man that he had to convert to Judaism.

Thus this soldier of much more faith, was "closer" to God than the law abiding Jew; despite the law abiding Jew was more aware of the promise of the Messiah.
Thanks for taking the time to explain that. I’ve just went with what I’ve been taught in the past on this. You’ve given me a lot to think about.
 
Upvote 0

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,420.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Amil I have spoken to will say Nineveh being saved was a picture of what would happen after the cross when Satan is bound. They will say Nineveh was an exception, in order for a Gentile to become saved prior to the cross they would have to become an Israelite.

Do you think Nineveh was not an exception but a reality that any Gentile could be saved without becoming an Israelite during the 1,000 years prior to 33 AD?
I would have to disagree with the Amil position that thinks Satan was bound at the cross. On the contrary, the ascension of Christ on the morning after His resurrection is what RELEASED Satan from being bound and cast him out of heaven down to earth to deceive the nations once more (as had happened in Revelation 12:9-13). There are many texts in the NT that testify to a LOOSED Satan in those days after Christ had ascended (the "roaring lion walking about" example, the need for putting on the armor of God to combat Satan's attacks, some being "taken captive by Satan at his will", etc.). This is why the Holy Spirit was poured out in such abundance at Pentecost - to combat the deception of the loosed Satan and his evil spiritual forces with the even greater power of the Holy Spirit indwelling the believers.

As for Nineveh repenting, yes, I do believe Jonah's message to them was an example in the OT days of Satan's deception of the nations being bound during that literal thousand years from 968 / 967 BC until AD 33. Although there was a sudden surge in the progress of God's kingdom by Satan's deception of the nations being bound during those years, I do not believe that Nineveh was only an "exception" example of Gentiles being saved prior to the cross. I believe God has ALWAYS had children of faith among all the nations, all the way from creation and forward. Paul called this a "mystery" which had been hidden during the ages past, but was revealed in the NT; that God had His own children of faith coming out of both Jew and Gentile nations, and considered them to be "fellow-heirs", with "one fold" and "one shepherd" over them.
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
I would have to disagree with the Amil position that thinks Satan was bound at the cross.
Compare Revelation 9:1-2
And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.

2 And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit.

to Revelation 20:1-3
And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.

2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

Now compare Revelation 9:1-2 to Matthew 27:45, Mark 15:33, & Luke 23:44.

If the darkness that happened at the crucifixion is not related to the "sun and air darkened" in Revelation 9:2; than what would it be related to? We know it's not a solar eclipse because you can't have a solar eclipse on a full moon because of where the moon, earth and sun are in relation to each other. And since Passover is 15 days after the new moon; you know it's a full moon.

When one compares Revelation 9 to Revelation 20 to what happened at the crucifixion; it's clear the binding of Satan happened at the cross. Scripture records all these things because they are not events that are isolated from each other.
On the contrary, the ascension of Christ on the morning after His resurrection is what RELEASED Satan from being bound and cast him out of heaven down to earth to deceive the nations once more (as had happened in Revelation 12:9-13).
Now compare Revelation 12:9-13
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.

9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceives the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

with John 12:27-31
27 Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour.

28 Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.

29 The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him.

30 Jesus answered and said, This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes.

31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

This event recorded in John 12 happened the Tuesday afternoon of the week of the crucifixion when Jesus left the temple for the last time.

He goes from the temple to Bethany that night to a dinner at the house of Simon the Leper. At that dinner an anonymous woman pours oil over Jesus's head and he says: "She's done this for my burial". Exactly three periods of 24 hours later (3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth) Jesus is dead.

This is the commencement of the atonement. This is why Revelation 12:10 says:
"....Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ:..."
There are many texts in the NT that testify to a LOOSED Satan in those days after Christ had ascended (the "roaring lion walking about" example, the need for putting on the armor of God to combat Satan's attacks, some being "taken captive by Satan at his will", etc.). This is why the Holy Spirit was poured out in such abundance at Pentecost - to combat the deception of the loosed Satan and his evil spiritual forces with the even greater power of the Holy Spirit indwelling the believers.
I know you REALLY want to believe this; but it just doesn't jive with the rest of Scripture.
As for Nineveh repenting, yes, I do believe Jonah's message to them was an example in the OT days of Satan's deception of the nations being bound during that literal thousand years from 968 / 967 BC until AD 33.
This idea you have here doesn't jive with what Revelation states about Satan being bound related to the "millennial reign" of Christ.

1. John 12 states that Satan is kicked out of heaven at the commencement of the atonement.
2. Revelation 12 talks about Satan cast to the earth.
3. Revelation 9 states that opening the bottomless pit causes the sun to be darkened.
4. Matthew, Mark and Luke record the darkening of the sun at the crucifixion.
5. Revelation 20 talks about the commencement of the "millennial reign" is the biding of Satan
6. Just before Jesus dies he says: "It is finished." Prior to that he tells the thief "Today you will be with me in Paradise.
7 Upon death; Jesus's human soul ascends to heaven (Daniel 7:9-13) and we have the record in Revelation of "the lamb that was slain" opening the scrolls. (Revelation 5:5-7)

You have to correlate Scripture with Scripture.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,420.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
1 Peter 1:21 doesn't mean that these things happened all at once.
Yes, it does mean that. Christ was in His glorified flesh-and-bones body the moment He awakened to life again in the tomb. Christ said the same thing to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus when He asked them, "Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, AND TO ENTER INTO HIS GLORY?" This was spoken by Christ that same day of His resurrection, when He had already by then "entered into His glory" in Luke 24:26.
Read John 7:39 really carefully. That passage is referring to Pentecost. Jesus said the Spirit would not be sent until he ascended back to heaven. Pentecost was 10 days after the ascension.
No, that passage is not necessarily referring to Pentecost. That is an assumption. We are clearly told that Christ breathed the Holy Spirit into the disciples that evening after His resurrection in John 20:22 when He said "Receive ye the Holy Spirit". By comparing this text with John 7:39, we can then conclude that Christ was already glorified at that point, because Christ was supposed to be glorified BEFORE the Holy Spirit was given.
"Receive you the Holy Spirit" was a present tense command. He was actually commanding the Holy Ghost to indwell them; but that didn't happen until 10 days after the ascension. If they had "received" as had been commanded to the Spirit to descend; Pentecost would have happened right then and there. But that's not what happened. Why not? (Because he wasn't yet glorified.)
No, there was no delayed giving of the Holy Spirit until 50 days later at Pentecost. The Holy Spirit was given to the disciples then and there that evening. Pentecost taking place 50 days later was the moment when the miraculous sign gifts of the Holy Spirit were being poured out on all flesh. The Holy Spirit can be present and indwelling an individual without them manifesting miraculous sign gifts, which is the situation we have today also. Those sign gifts being manifested back then were only a visible proof to others that the Holy Spirit was ALREADY indwelling the disciples.

As for the resurrected Matthew 27:52-53 saints...
Thus then according to your logic; the "holy city" they appeared in would have HAD TO BE the new Jerusalem.

All the people resurrected prior to Jesus's resurrection died again. Lazarus wasn't automatically transfigured at the point Christ rose from the dead. And yes, it would be correct to assume that Lazarus was still physically alive when Christ rose from the dead.
No, none of those died again. That has also been a common assumption without a single scripture to back up that theory, but this is an impossibility. The same power of the Holy Spirit that it takes to make a believer rise to life again is the same power that gives them immortality at that point. Just as it is impossible for the Holy Spirit to die, so it is impossible for one raised to life again by the Spirit's power to die again either.

Lazarus was never "transfigured". Christ raised Lazarus to live again in a glorified, incorruptible, immortal life, and he never died again. Humanity is appointed to die ONLY ONCE - never twice. The Hebrews 9:27-28 rule stands firm. "Neither CAN they die anymore..." Luke 20:36 says of the saints' resurrected state.
You're wrong here too. Take a look at all the places (4) that (3062) is translated "remnant"; it means "remainder of"; not "fraction".
Matthew 22:6, Revelation 11:13, Revelation 12:17, Revelation 19:21

In none of those passages does it mean a portion of. It means all the rest that are left.
When I read in Revelation 20:5 about the "rest of the dead" (loipoi) who "lived again" as the "First resurrection" event, this word "loipoi" also appears in the definition for the word "remnant" in my Vine's dictionary, which is why I use that word . Also, as you have noted, it also means "remaining ones". Exactly so. Those many Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints and those others like them did not ascend with Christ in Acts 1. Instead, that "multitude of captives" whom Christ brought out of the grave continued to REMAIN on earth to serve in the early church as pastors and teachers, evangelists, prophets, etc. (as in Ephesians 4:8-12).

The resurrected Matthew 27:52-53 saints were also the very same ones who had been made "alive" (by resurrection) and who were then "remaining" on earth in 1 Thessalonians 4:15&17. Paul assured the Thessalonians that these "remaining" ones would not precede their own dead loved ones (that were then in the grave) by ascending to heaven with Christ before they did. Those saints already resurrected would wait and "remain" on earth in their immortal condition until they could join the others in the next resurrection event when together they would meet the Lord in the air .


(And by the way, I am thoroughly pleased that you recognize the Mount of Olives as the crucifixion site of Golgotha. I don't run into many that know about this fact. The "place of the skull" I believe also has probable reference to the "head" of the Mount of Olives being its crest. That is what the word "ros" means in the OT. King David escaping over the crest of the Mount of Olives after Absalom took the city was said to be passing over "Ros" or the "head" of the Mount of Olives, where he worshipped God - 2 Kings15:32 LXX)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,420.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
7 Upon death; Jesus's human soul ascends to heaven (Daniel 7:9-13) and we have the record in Revelation of "the lamb that was slain" opening the scrolls. (Revelation 5:5-7
It's not possible that the soul of Christ ascended to HEAVEN at His death, because He told Mary "Touch me not, for I HAVE NOT YET ASCENDED TO MY FATHER" that morning after His resurrection (John 20:17). For Christ's soul to go to Paradise was not for Him to go to the Father in heaven yet, but to go to the same realm that the righteous dead were reserved BEFORE the risen, ascended Christ had made it possible from then on for the souls of the righteous to be "present with the Lord in heaven upon their death.
31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

This event recorded in John 12 happened the Tuesday afternoon of the week of the crucifixion when Jesus left the temple for the last time.

He goes from the temple to Bethany that night to a dinner at the house of Simon the Leper. At that dinner an anonymous woman pours oil over Jesus's head and he says: "She's done this for my burial". Exactly three periods of 24 hours later (3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth) Jesus is dead.

This is the commencement of the atonement. This is why Revelation 12:10 says:
"....Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ:..."
Yes, yes, yes...this John 12:31 verse is one of the key verses that tell us exactly when a LOOSED Satan was going to be cast out of heaven down to the earth, to again deceive the nations in great wrath. It says "NOW shall the prince of this world be cast out", because a LOOSED Satan was going to be cast out of heaven down to earth to deceive humanity immediately after Christ's ascension on His resurrection day had ended the war in heaven. At that point, Satan could no longer accuse the brethren, because of the blood of the Lamb providing full atonement for them.

This John 12:31 verse of a LOOSED Satan cast down to earth pairs up with John 14:30 at the Last Supper, when Christ told the disciples that "...the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me." It was then time for the enemy's "hour", and Satan's coming "power of darkness" as Christ told the chief priests, the captains of the temple, and the elders who came to arrest Him (Luke 22:53).
I know you REALLY want to believe this; but it just doesn't jive with the rest of Scripture.
When we compare the time of Satan being bound to his being loosed afterward, Christ gives us proof of when that binding took place. The "strong man" had to "FIRST" be bound before his goods could be spoiled (Matthew 12:29). Satan was compared to the "strong man", and the "spoiling of his goods" was compared to Christ and His disciples casting out devils. This ability to cast out devils was proof positive that Satan had ALREADY "FIRST" been bound earlier in history. Satan the "strong man" losing his "goods" by devils being cast out of people followed afterward. The fact that Christ and His disciples were casting devils out of individuals only proved that the start of Satan's thousand-year binding had "FIRST" happened already, and this was even before Christ's earthly ministry had begun.
 
Upvote 0