victorinus

[parousia70]

The Thousand Years is Typological and represents the entire length of the Davidic Monarchy, from David, the First King in the line through Christ, the Final King in the line, spanning a period of... wait for it.... 1000 years.

 

[Postvieww]

-based on the four horsemen thread my views are not all that unique
-everyone has islam and communism
-not necessarily in the right order
-red is the color for communism but islam came from the red sea and communism from the black sea
-that puts them is the right order
-also they fail to identify the rider of the horse
-it is a person
-like mohammed for islam and marx for communism
-the rider of the white horse also has a name
-constantine

Victrorinus said:

-also they fail to identify the rider of the horse

-it is a person

-like mohammed for islam and marx for communism

-the rider of the white horse also has a name

-constantine


Below is a repost from the other thread. The only thing that seems to support your above statement is Zechariah 1:8 “a man riding upon the horse”. Verse 11 clearly identifies “the man” as an angel of the Lord.

Zech 1:11 And they answered the angel of the Lord that stood among the myrtle trees, and said, We have walked to and fro through the earth, and, behold, all the earth sitteth still, and is at rest.

None of the riders are human men.


“Whatever your theory of the 4 horsemen Here are some facts.

The riders are heavenly entites that carry out God’s plan. They are behind whatever action is described. They are there to make it happen.

1. Zech 1:8 “a man”

Zech 1:10 “they whom the Lord hath sent to walk to and fro through the earth”

Zech 1:11 “the angel of the Lord that stood among the myrtle trees, and said, We have walked to and fro through the earth, and, behold, all the earth sitteth still, and is at rest

2. In Zech. 6:5 “These are the four spirits of the heavens, which go forth from standing before the Lord of all the earth.

3. Rev 6:2 “he that sat on him”

Rev 6:4 “to him that sat theron”

Rev 6:5 “he that sat on him”

Rev 6:8 “his name that sat on him” “

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

None of the riders are human men.

Amen

 

[victorinus]

None of the riders are human men.

so God sent an angel to take peace from the world?
-give me a break

 

[victorinus]

The Thousand Years is Typological and represents the entire length of the Davidic Monarchy, from David, the First King in the line through Christ, the Final King in the line, spanning a period of... wait for it.... 1000 years.

does anyone understand what you are saying here?

 

[NightHawkeye]

does anyone understand what you are saying here?

There seems to be a loose correlation with Revelation 20:

And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, 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.

And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.​

 

[Postvieww]

so God sent an angel to take peace from the world?
-give me a break

I can’t give you a break. You said “-also they fail to identify the rider of the horse -it is a person”.

Zechariah clearly disagrees with you. I didn’t write it. Nothing in scripture supports what you said. Just because it doesn’t make sense to you or you can’t explain it does not mean it is not so.

You do believe there are good angels and fallen angels, don’t you?

Nothing in Rev 6 says the “him” on the horses were human men. Jesus opened the seals releasing the “him” on the horses to carry out the stated task.

Zechariah said the rider was an angel 1:11 believe it.

In Daniel 10 who do you think the “prince of the kingdom of Persia" was? It took two of God’s holy angels , one of which was Michael to overcome him.

Do you realize satan and some of his fallen angels have not yet been kicked out of heaven, Revelation 12:7-10. If you hold to the belief all of this is past, that might be part of the confusion.

Maybe with human reasoning try to explain Psalms 78:49

Again , None of the riders are human men.

Zech. 6:5 “These are the four spirits of the heavens, which go forth from standing before the Lord of all the earth.

 

[Postvieww]

so God sent an angel to take peace from the world?
-give me a break

Double Post

 

[victorinus]

Zechariah said the rider was an angel 1:11 believe it.

there is nothing in zech 1:11 to suggest angels are riding the horses
-john is not afraid of calling an angel an angel
-he has angels doing stuff all over the place so why would he try to hide the fact that they are also riding horses in rev 6?
-it is okay to expect it to make sense

 

[parousia70]

does anyone understand what you are saying here?

Plenty of folks do.
But since you seem not to, I'm happy to elaborate for you.

The "Thousand years" a symbol that showed that Christ fulfilled the hopes of the Davidic Monarchy that Christ would fill David's office as King (Luke 1:68-69; Acts 2:30-36; 1 Timothy 1:17; Mark 11:10; ) and restore the tabernacle of David (Acts 15:16-17) so that all the gentile nations could join in to the true worship of Jehovah. The 1000 years shows a completed Monarchy instead of the fact that the Monarchy had fallen into ruin in the 500s BC via the Babylonian captivity.

 

[victorinus]

Plenty of folks do.
But since you seem not to, I'm happy to elaborate for you.

The "Thousand years" a symbol that showed that Christ fulfilled the hopes of the Davidic Monarchy that Christ would fill David's office as King (Luke 1:68-69; Acts 2:30-36; 1 Timothy 1:17; Mark 11:10; ) and restore the tabernacle of David (Acts 15:16-17) so that all the gentile nations could join in to the true worship of Jehovah. The 1000 years shows a completed Monarchy instead of the fact that the Monarchy had fallen into ruin in the 500s BC via the Babylonian captivity.

I still don't get it but I see you are a catholic and a preterist and being a historicist will never understand that
-my questions for you are:
-do you agree the church has no official view of the apocalypse?
-if anything, the church promotes preterism or spiritualism
-do you find few if any catholics who are interested in the apocalypse?

 

[keras]

there is nothing in zech 1:11 to suggest angels are riding the horses

But Zechariah 6:1-8 makes it clear the four horses, chariots and riders are spiritual entities. They range over the whole earth and have done so since Jesus opened the first five Seals at His ascension to heaven in the first century.
This is plainly evident from the effects we have experienced. How much worse could wars, famines, plagues, etc, be?

Victorinus, I see you are here to promote the Catholic agenda. I personally don't object to Catholic's per se, many are true believers, but I do object to your posting opinions and doctrines without scriptural support.
From the above paragraph, it seems you don't know the Bible quite as well as you should.

 

[victorinus]

Victorinus, I see you are here to promote the Catholic agenda. I personally don't object to Catholic's per se, many are true believers, but I do object to your posting opinions and doctrines without scriptural support.
From the above paragraph, it seems you don't know the Bible quite as well as you should.

I am here to share my views on the apocalypse
-the church has no official position on this
-I am not here to cut and paste what is in the bible
-I expect you know the bible better than I
-I admit to posting my opinions and you should do the same
-it is called interpretation

 

[Postvieww]

there is nothing in zech 1:11 to suggest angels are riding the horses
-john is not afraid of calling an angel an angel
-he has angels doing stuff all over the place so why would he try to hide the fact that they are also riding horses in rev 6?
-it is okay to expect it to make sense

Victornius said

there is nothing in zech 1:11 to suggest angels are riding the horses

Zechariah 1: 8 I saw by night, and behold a man riding upon a red horse, and he stood among the myrtle trees that were in the bottom; and behind him were there red horses, speckled, and white.

The man who rode the horse was also the man who stood among the myrtle trees.

9 Then said I, O my lord, what are these? And the angel that talked with me said unto me, I will shew thee what these be.

10 And the man that stood among the myrtle trees answered and said, These are they whom the Lord hath sent to walk to and fro through the earth.

The man that stood among the myrtle trees in this verse is the same one called an angel in verse 11.

11 And they answered the angel of the Lord that stood among the myrtle trees, and said, We have walked to and fro through the earth, and, behold, all the earth sitteth still, and is at rest.

The man that stood among the myrtle trees was “the angel of the Lord”.

-john is not afraid of calling an angel an angel

Nor is he afraid to write down what he saw as he saw it in the vision.

Did Constantine ride a lteral white horse, Did mohammed ride a literal red horse, Did marx ride a literal black horse

-he has angels doing stuff all over the place so why would he try to hide the fact that they are also riding horses in rev 6?

Compare scripture with scripture, line upon line precept upon precept, here a little there a little. If you choose to see no connection to what Zechariah and John saw , fine, I believe there is a connection.

-it is okay to expect it to make sense

I agree how is it you say the riders are a person except for the pale horse “natural disasters “ is not a person. Does that make sense?

Victornius said: Post #7 on the other thread

my discussion of the four horsemen starts here

-they are:

-constantine

-mohammed

-karl marx

-natural disasters

victroniusPost #119

-also they fail to identify the rider of the horse

-it is a person

-like mohammed for islam and marx for communism

-the rider of the white horse also has a name

-constantine

None of the riders are human men!

 

[parousia70]

-my questions for you are:
-do you agree the church has no official view of the apocalypse?

Yes.

-if anything, the church promotes preterism or spiritualism

Not sure what you mean by spiritualism, could you elaborate?
But yes, By and large, The Catholic Church is and has been orthodox preterist in their eschatology

-do you find few if any catholics who are interested in the apocalypse?

Yes. Most Catholics I've known are more interested in the here and now and what they can do today to build the kingdom.

They typically aren't into engaging in the wild and fanciful end time scenario speculations that have enveloped the protestant denoms since the 1880's

 

[victorinus]

Yes.



Not sure what you mean by spiritualism, could you elaborate?

spiritualism is a non literal interpretation
-and
-like futurism
-it can be anything you want it to be

 

[parousia70]

spiritualism is a non literal interpretation
-and
-like futurism
-it can be anything you want it to be

Well, I don't hold that spiritual is any less Literal than temporal is, and I'd argue, like St Paul did, that the Spiritual is MORE literal than the temporal.

 

[victorinus]

Well, I don't hold that spiritual is any less Literal than temporal is, and I'd argue, like St Paul did, that the Spiritual is MORE literal than the temporal.

I really do not understand that
-prophecy is about what will take place in the future and historical events are the only way to confirm it
-I also believe history can help us interpret
-history will never exactly fit our interpretation of what is to come
-so we look for events that might fit if we change our view

 

[Biblewriter]

By and large, The Catholic Church is and has been orthodox preterist in their eschatology

What, pray tell, is meant by the term "orthodox preterist"? This is an oxymoron.

 

[parousia70]

What, pray tell, is meant by the term "orthodox preterist"? This is an oxymoron.

Hardly.
The ECF's universally taught that the Olivet discourse was fulfilled in Jerusalem's A.D. 70 destruction, while still holding to a future creedal consummation, separate and distinct from the Olivet. The Orthodox Church Hasn't deviated from that position for 1900 years.
That is Orthodox Preterism.

Placing the Olivet into our future is a relatively new Protestant novelty that arose less than 200 years ago.