When Will Christ Return?

[eclipsenow]

The ten-virgin's parable's extra oil (Mt. 25:4,9b) could represent the continued good works of believers, by which they'll be able to pass the judgment of the church (Mt. 25:19-30, Rom. 2:6-8) and enter the marriage of the church at Jesus' 2nd coming (Mt. 25:10, Rev. 19:7-21).

I seriously can't believe how poorly you read the bible. There's no passing the 'judgement of the church' in the verses you quoted! NEITHER verse implies that the church will judge Christian individuals. The Lord judges us and rewards us for our faithfulness, not the church. I'm finding you've got about a 50% fail rate with the verses you quote going anywhere NEAR the subject you're claiming they do!

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post 821:

There's no passing the 'judgement of the church' in the verses you quoted!

The first referenced passage (Mt. 25:19-30) shows that not all saved people will pass the judgment of the church by Jesus.

Some saved people, at the judgment of the church by Jesus (2 Cor. 5:10, Rom. 2:6-8, Lk. 12:45-48, Mt. 25:19-30) at his 2nd coming (Ps. 50:3-5, cf. Mk. 13:27), will lose their salvation because of such things as unrepentant sin (Lk. 12:45-46, Heb. 10:26-29, 1 Cor. 9:27), unrepentant laziness (Mt. 25:26,30, Jn. 15:2a, Rom. 2:6-8), or apostasy (Mk. 8:35-38, Heb. 6:4-8, 2 Tim 2:12b). That's why saved people know the "terror" of the coming judgment of the church by Jesus (2 Cor. 5:10-11), why they must remain in fear of being cut off the same as unbelievers if they don't continue in God's goodness (Rom. 11:20-22, Lk. 12:45-46), why they must be careful to work out their own ultimate salvation with fear & trembling (Philip. 2:12b, 1 Pet. 1:17, Rom. 2:6-8).

eclipsenow said in post 821:

NEITHER verse implies that the church will judge Christian individuals.

It hasn't been said that it will.

Regarding the second referenced passage (Rom. 2:6-8), it shows that initially saved people must have both faith & continued works of faith (1 Thes. 1:3, Gal. 5:6b, Titus 3:8) (not works of the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law) if they're to obtain ultimate salvation (Rom. 2:6-8, Jas. 2:24, Mt. 7:21, 25:26,30, Philip. 2:12b, 3:11-14, 2 Cor. 5:9, Heb. 5:9, 6:10-12, 2 Pet. 1:10-11, Jn. 15:2a). For believers must actually continue to do righteous deeds if they're to continue to be righteous (1 Jn. 3:7, Jas. 2:24,26). And there's no assurance believers will choose to do that, instead of wrongly employing their free will to become utterly lazy without repentance, to the ultimate loss of their salvation (Mt. 25:26,30, Jn. 15:2a).

eclipsenow said in post 821:

The Lord judges us and rewards us for our faithfulness, not the church.

That's right. Nothing has been said to the contrary.

 

[eclipsenow]

Regarding the second referenced passage (Rom. 2:6-8), it shows that initially saved people must have both faith & continued works of faith (1 Thes. 1:3, Gal. 5:6b, Titus 3:8) (not works of the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law) if they're to obtain ultimate salvation (Rom. 2:6-8, Jas. 2:24, Mt. 7:21, 25:26,30, Philip. 2:12b, 3:11-14, 2 Cor. 5:9, Heb. 5:9, 6:10-12, 2 Pet. 1:10-11, Jn. 15:2a). For believers must actually continue to do righteous deeds if they're to continue to be righteous (1 Jn. 3:7, Jas. 2:24,26). And there's no assurance believers will choose to do that, instead of wrongly employing their free will to become utterly lazy without repentance, to the ultimate loss of their salvation (Mt. 25:26,30, Jn. 15:2a).

You need to read Calvin's Institutes to really get a grasp on how to better word what you are saying. Faith that has actions is true faith: 'belief' in something but not accompanied by expression of that belief in their real life, that's not real faith in the first place. There's a vast difference in Calvin's TULIP than in your rather Arminian phrasing of the equation.

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post 823:

Faith that has actions is true faith: 'belief' in something but not accompanied by expression of that belief in their real life, that's not real faith in the first place.

It can be, but it is not a faith that will lead to ultimate salvation. For example, James 2:14 does not change the fact that James 2:20-26 applies to those who truly have faith. James shows believers that ultimate salvation requires works, and not faith alone (James 2:24), just as the rest of the New Testament shows that (Romans 2:6-8, Matthew 7:21, Philippians 2:12b; 2 Corinthians 5:9, Hebrews 5:9; 2 Peter 1:10-11, Hebrews 6:10-12, Philippians 3:11-14; 1 John 2:17b).

For faith is like a body and works of faith are like the breathing (spirit) of that body (James 2:26). Faith without works of faith will die just as a body without breathing (spirit) will die (James 2:26). If a believer refuses to continue to perform works of faith, without repentance, he will ultimately lose his salvation (Matthew 25:26,30, John 15:2a), just as if someone stops himself from breathing by hanging himself, he will die.

The breathing analogy (James 2:26) does not include the automatic aspect of breathing, for believers must be careful to maintain good works (Titus 3:8). The analogies in the Bible do not include every aspect of the analogous thing. For example, believers, born-again people, being like newborn babies (1 Peter 2:2) does not mean that believers have no ability to talk, walk, or control their bowels.

eclipsenow said in post 823:

There's a vast difference in Calvin's TULIP than in your rather Arminian phrasing of the equation.

Arminianism is mistaken insofar as it asserts that it's the individual who chooses to initially believe. For it's actually God who grants his miraculous gift of faith (Eph. 2:8, Jn. 6:65, 1 Cor. 3:5b, Rom. 12:3b, Heb. 12:2) only to certain individuals whom, from before the foundation of the world, he had already ordained/elected/chosen/predestined (Acts 13:48b, Rom. 9:11-24, Eph. 1:4-11, 2 Thes. 2:13) that they would become initially saved at some point during their lifetime.

Calvinism is mistaken insofar as it asserts that once the elect get saved, it's impossible for them ever to lose their salvation. For saved people can ultimately lose their salvation (e.g. Heb. 10:26-29, Heb. 6:4-8, Mt. 25:26,30). Also, Calvinism's doctrine of "limited atonement" is mistaken, for 1 Jn. 2:2 shows that Jesus' sacrifice was sufficient to forgive the sins of everyone, not just the sins of the elect.

eclipsenow said in post 823:

There's a vast difference in Calvin's TULIP than in your rather Arminian phrasing of the equation.

Regarding the "P" part of TULIP, Calvinism's mistaken doctrine of once-saved-always-saved through assured "Perseverance" unwittingly ends up logically requiring that saved people are robots. For if saved people can't choose to do evil to the point where they can ultimately lose their salvation, then they no longer have free will. Also, the mistaken doctrine of assured perseverance unwittingly ends up logically requiring that a Christian can have no present assurance that he is truly saved. For if a Christian who doesn't persevere to the end was never truly saved, then no Christian can presently have the assurance that he is truly saved, for no Christian can know if he will persevere to the end. Down the road he could fail to persevere, and so end up showing that he was only a fake Christian, a self-deceived hypocrite.

But under true, Biblical doctrine, every believer in the gospel (of 1 Cor. 15:1-4, Jn. 20:31) can know with perfect assurance that he is presently saved (1 Jn. 5:13, 1 Cor. 15:1-4) if when he became a believer in the gospel he repented from his sins (1 Jn. 3:6) and confessed them to God (1 Jn. 1:9). And he can be sure as a saved person that he can never be separated from the love of God, so long as he loves God (Rom. 8:28-39), which means obeying him (1 Jn. 5:3, Jn. 14:21-24). And no matter how many tests a saved person fails during his lifetime (sometime subsequent to his initial repentance), even if he fails and commits sin seventy times seven times in a single day (Mt. 18:21-22, Lk. 17:4), he can be sure that so long as he sincerely repents from every sin and confesses it to God, he will be completely forgiven (1 Jn. 1:9). He will lose his salvation in the end only if he wrongly employs his free will to do something like committing a sin without repentance (Heb. 10:26-29, 1 Cor. 9:27, Lk. 12:45-46), or becoming utterly lazy without repentance (Mt. 25:26,30, Jn. 15:2a, Rom. 2:6-8), or committing apostasy (Heb. 6:4-8, Jn. 15:6, 2 Tim. 2:12).

---

This discussion is an example of how any ongoing discussion of eschatology will ultimately touch on other areas such as soteriology (or ecclesiology, or Israelology, etc.). For all areas of theology are connected with each other. That's why a mistaken idea in one area can lead to mistaken ideas in other areas.

 

[eclipsenow]

It can be, but it is not a faith that will lead to ultimate salvation. For example, James 2:14 does not change the fact that James 2:20-26 applies to those who truly have faith. James shows believers that ultimate salvation requires works, and not faith alone (James 2:24), just as the rest of the New Testament shows that (Romans 2:6-8, Matthew 7:21, Philippians 2:12b; 2 Corinthians 5:9, Hebrews 5:9; 2 Peter 1:10-11, Hebrews 6:10-12, Philippians 3:11-14; 1 John 2:17b).

Throw in all the verses you like but it doesn't prove a thing. Works do not save. You want the bible to contradict itself? You're reading these verses wrong! TRUE faith results in an outward expression of faith which is the fruits of the spirit. False faith has no works. It's that simple, and that complex. But you would destroy the gospel itself, which is that we are SAVED by faith and continue in that faith by our works. I go to heaven not because of any microscopic thing I did, but because Jesus died on the cross for me.

4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

In other words, we don't do good works to get to heaven, we do good works because we're already on the way to heaven.

For faith is like a body and works of faith are like the breathing (spirit) of that body (James 2:26). Faith without works of faith will die just as a body without breathing (spirit) will die (James 2:26). If a believer refuses to continue to perform works of faith, without repentance, he will ultimately lose his salvation (Matthew 25:26,30, John 15:2a), just as if someone stops himself from breathing by hanging himself, he will die.

There's no such thing as a true believer that loses their salvation.

Arminianism is mistaken insofar as it asserts that it's the individual who chooses to initially believe. For it's actually God who grants his miraculous gift of faith (Eph. 2:8, Jn. 6:65, 1 Cor. 3:5b, Rom. 12:3b, Heb. 12:2)

And if you read your bible you would know that it is God who continues this work onto fruition.

Regarding the "P" part of TULIP, Calvinism's mistaken doctrine of once-saved-always-saved through assured "Perseverance" unwittingly ends up logically requiring that saved people are robots.

That's your way of putting it, not the bible's.

For if saved people can't choose to do evil to the point where they can ultimately lose their salvation, then they no longer have free will.

Do we have free will in heaven? Can we fall in heaven? Are we robots in heaven?

Also, the mistaken doctrine of assured perseverance unwittingly ends up logically requiring that a Christian can have no present assurance that he is truly saved. For if a Christian who doesn't persevere to the end was never truly saved, then no Christian can presently have the assurance that he is truly saved, for no Christian can know if he will persevere to the end. Down the road he could fail to persevere, and so end up showing that he was only a fake Christian, a self-deceived hypocrite.

This is about assurance, not the doctrine itself, and is a pastoral issue to do with self-knowledge of a person's sincerity of faith.

But under true, Biblical doctrine, every believer in the gospel (of 1 Cor. 15:1-4, Jn. 20:31) can know with perfect assurance that he is presently saved (1 Jn. 5:13, 1 Cor. 15:1-4) if when he became a believer in the gospel he repented from his sins (1 Jn. 3:6)

But your doctrine would have all Christians unsure whether or not they are going to make it long term, whether or not they are going to fall away! The bible's answer to can Christian's fall away seems to be DON'T fall away. I think certain parallel truths are kept in tension. We are both saved by God's grace totally and utterly, without any effort from ourselves, in that we wouldn't even care about sin if it were not for the Holy Spirit. And we are also kept in God's grace by his Spirit, and strive to the end by his Spirit, for those who have the Spirit walk in God's grace. While there may be periods of rebellion, the Spirit will not leave them comfortable in that state. He will call them back. But he does so by helping them FEAR the Lord again! So from the perspective of us humans, it feels like our fear and our will power motivate us. It's complex.

and confessed them to God (1 Jn. 1:9). And he can be sure as a saved person that he can never be separated from the love of God, so long as he loves God (Rom. 8:28-39),

But he can't be sure that he will always love God in your system so there goes assurance again. There's that pastoral implication. Calvinists might have issues with doubting the validity of their salvation now, the Arminians might have issues with doubting their long term commitment. Both systems have their pastoral implications, so please don't try to imply your system doesn't.

which means obeying him (1 Jn. 5:3, Jn. 14:21-24). And no matter how many tests a saved person fails during his lifetime (sometime subsequent to his initial repentance), even if he fails and commits sin seventy times seven times in a single day (Mt. 18:21-22, Lk. 17:4), he can be sure that so long as he sincerely repents from every sin and confesses it to God, he will be completely forgiven (1 Jn. 1:9).

And one wonders if such a person really is repenting?

He will lose his salvation in the end only if he wrongly employs his free will to do something like committing a sin without repentance (Heb. 10:26-29, 1 Cor. 9:27, Lk. 12:45-46), or becoming utterly lazy without repentance (Mt. 25:26,30, Jn. 15:2a, Rom. 2:6-8), or committing apostasy (Heb. 6:4-8, Jn. 15:6, 2 Tim. 2:12).

You're talking about losing your salvation over certain kinds of sin, but you're not even able to define it. Yet we are talking about someone going to hell forever!? I'm not really going to take your views on salvation seriously when you cannot explain why you read Revelation's Apocalyptic language literally when it is APOCALYPTIC which means symbolic theology!

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post 825:

Works do not save.

The following verses prove that works do save, ultimately (Romans 2:6-8, Matthew 7:21, Philippians 2:12b; 2 Corinthians 5:9, Hebrews 5:9; 2 Peter 1:10-11, Hebrews 6:10-12, Philippians 3:11-14; 1 John 2:17b).

eclipsenow said in post 825:

You want the bible to contradict itself?

No. It does not.

eclipsenow said in post 825:

TRUE faith results in an outward expression of faith which is the fruits of the spirit. False faith has no works.

That was addressed in the first part of post 824, which showed that even a true faith can have no works.

eclipsenow said in post 825:

But you would destroy the gospel itself, which is that we are SAVED by faith and continue in that faith by our works.

We are indeed saved by faith, and we indeed continue in a saving faith by our works, as was shown in the first part of post 824. And it is by continuing in a saving faith that we will obtain ultimate salvation, instead of wrongly employing our free will to become utterly lazy without repentance, to the ultimate loss of our salvation (Matthew 25:26,30, John 15:2a).

eclipsenow said in post 825:

I go to heaven not because of any microscopic thing I did, but because Jesus died on the cross for me.

It is not either/or, but both/and.

eclipsenow said in post 825:

4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

In other words, we don't do good works to get to heaven, we do good works because we're already on the way to heaven.

Regarding Ephesians 2:8-9's "not by works", initial salvation is indeed by grace through faith without any works at all on our part (Rom. 4:1-5, Titus 3:5). But other passages show that initially saved people must have both faith & continued works of faith (1 Thes. 1:3, Gal. 5:6b, Titus 3:8) (not works of the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law) if they're to obtain ultimate salvation (Rom. 2:6-8, Jas. 2:24, Mt. 7:21, 25:26,30, Philip. 2:12b, 3:11-14, 2 Cor. 5:9, Heb. 5:9, 6:10-12, 2 Pet. 1:10-11, Jn. 15:2a). For believers must actually continue to do righteous deeds if they're to continue to be righteous (1 Jn. 3:7, Jas. 2:24,26). And there's no assurance believers will choose to do that, instead of wrongly employing their free will to become utterly lazy without repentance, to the ultimate loss of their salvation (Mt. 25:26,30, Jn. 15:2a).

Regarding Ephesians 2:8-9's "lest any man should boast", no Christian should ever boast about anything. For it is impossible even to believe or continue to believe all the right things apart from God's miraculous gift of faith (Eph. 2:8, Jn. 6:65, Heb. 12:2) & some measure of his Spirit (1 Cor. 1:18-2:16), just as it's impossible to perform or continue to perform all the right actions as believers apart from God making it possible for believers to do that (Philip. 2:12-13, Jn. 15:4-5), & just as it's impossible to repent if a sin is committed apart from God making it possible to do that (2 Tim. 2:25, Acts 11:18, Rom. 8:13). So even if believers do continue to believe, act, & repent as they ought to, they must stay so humble they never give themselves any credit or glory (Lk. 17:10, Gal. 6:14, 1 Cor. 1:31). But at the judgment of the church, at Jesus' 2nd coming, he'll give them some credit (Mt. 25:21). Also, God does glorify saved people (e.g. Rom. 8:30).

Regarding Ephesians 2:10, it does not mean that true believers will automatically perform good works. For, while God makes it possible for saved people to do the right thing (Philip. 2:13, Jn. 15:4-5), he doesn't take away their free will, turning them into robots, or into macabre flesh puppets, mere marionettes which he forces to dance across the stage as he pulls on their strings. Instead, he leaves them as his real children with free will. And so they have to choose every day to deny themselves, take up their crosses, and follow Jesus to the end (Lk. 9:23, Mt. 24:13). And there's no assurance they will choose to do that (Mt. 25:26,30, Lk. 12:45-46, Lk. 8:13).

eclipsenow said in post 825:

There's no such thing as a true believer that loses their salvation.

There is. For example, Hebrews 10:26-29 shows that truly saved people, people who have actually been sanctified by Jesus' sacrificial blood (Hebrews 10:29), which sanctification requires a true faith (Acts 26:18b, compare Romans 3:25-26), can, after they get saved, wrongly employ their free will to commit sin without repentance (Hebrews 10:26). By doing this, these saved people are unwittingly trampling on Jesus and his sacrificial blood and doing despite to the Spirit of grace (Hebrews 10:29), turning the grace of God into lasciviousness (Jude 1:4), so that their ultimate fate will be worse than if they had never been saved at all (2 Peter 2:20-22). Even though Jesus' sacrificial blood is sufficient to forgive all sins (1 John 2:2), it actually forgives only the sins of believers that are past (Romans 3:25-26), as in sins which have been repented from and confessed to God (1 John 1:9,7). Jesus' sacrificial blood does not remit unrepentant sin (Hebrews 10:26-29). So a saved person can in the end lose his salvation if he wrongly employs his free will to commit unrepentant sin (Hebrews 10:26-29; 1 Corinthians 9:27, Luke 12:45-46).

Some Christians think that Hebrews 10:26-29 is not for Christians. But the immediate context of Hebrews 10:26-29 is Hebrews 10:25, which is addressing "we" saved people. Hebrews 10:25-29 is the same idea as Hebrews 3:13: Saved people need to gather together and exhort each other so that no saved person will fall into any unrepentant sin. For any unrepentant sin will ultimately result in the loss of salvation (Hebrews 10:26-29; 1 Corinthians 9:27, Luke 12:45-46, Matthew 7:22-23, Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 2:20-22, Romans 8:13; 1 John 5:16, James 5:19-20).

eclipsenow said in post 825:

And if you read your bible you would know that it is God who continues this work onto fruition.

Philippians 1:6 does mean that God will complete the work he has begun in saved people. But other passages show that he will do this only if they continue to cooperate with him and work along with him (1 Cor. 3:9; 2 Cor. 5:9, Col. 1:29, Philip. 2:12, Philip. 3:12-14), and don't wrongly employ their free will to, for example, become utterly lazy without repentance, to the ultimate loss of their salvation (Mt. 25:26,30, Jn. 15:2a, Rom. 2:6-8).

eclipsenow said in post 825:

Do we have free will in heaven?

Yes.

eclipsenow said in post 825:

Can we fall in heaven?

Yes.

eclipsenow said in post 825:

Are we robots in heaven?

No.

eclipsenow said in post 825:

This is about assurance, not the doctrine itself, and is a pastoral issue to do with self-knowledge of a person's sincerity of faith.

What does that mean? How do you distinguish assurance from the doctrine itself? And how is self-knowledge a pastoral issue? Also, under Calvinism, how can any pastor know for sure someone's sincerity of faith, and how can any believer with any certainty have self-knowledge of his own sincerity of faith? For Calvinism's mistaken doctrine of assured perseverance unwittingly ends up logically requiring that no one can know for sure who is truly saved. For if a Christian who doesn't persevere to the end was never truly saved, then no one can presently know for sure who is truly saved, for no one can presently know for sure who will persevere to the end.

eclipsenow said in post 825:

But your doctrine would have all Christians unsure whether or not they are going to make it long term, whether or not they are going to fall away!

That's Biblical doctrine, and that's a good thing, for it can keep Christians from becoming complacent to the point where they will fall away. For falling away is a real possibility for saved people. For example, Hebrews 6:4-8 shows that saved people, who have repented and become partakers of the Holy Spirit, can in the end lose their salvation because of subsequently wrongly employing their free will to "fall away", to commit apostasy, to stop believing (like in Luke 8:13; 1 Timothy 4:1, and 2 Thessalonians 2:3), just as other scriptures show the same thing (John 15:6; 2 Timothy 2:12b, Mark 8:35-38, Hebrews 10:38-39, Matthew 24:9-13).

One way that a saved person could be brought to the point where he commits apostasy would be if he finds a particular sin to be very pleasurable, so pleasurable and so fulfilling (in the short term) that he continues in it over time until his heart becomes hardened by the deceitfulness of sin (Hebrews 3:13), to where his love for God grows cold because of the abundance of iniquity (Matthew 24:12), to where he quenches the Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:19), to where he sears his conscience as with a hot iron (1 Timothy 4:2), to where he begins to listen to the lies of demons and latch onto them to the point where he departs from the faith (1 Timothy 4:1). In a wrong desire to continue in their lusts without repentance, saved people can reach the point where they become no longer able to endure the sound doctrine of the Bible, and they instead seek out and latch onto any other teachings which will help to support them in their lusts (2 Timothy 4:3-4).

Another way that a saved person could be brought to the point where he commits apostasy would be if he has a terror of being tortured and killed during a persecution against Christians, so that during such a persecution, he completely renounces his faith in Jesus Christ and the gospel in order to keep from being tortured and killed (Mark 8:35-38; 2 Timothy 2:12). Some Christians will fall away in this sense during the future tribulation (2 Thessalonians 2:3, Matthew 24:9-13, compare Matthew 13:21, Luke 8:13), when the Antichrist will take control of the earth and make war against Biblical Christians and physically overcome them in every nation (Revelation 13:7-10, Revelation 14:12-13, Revelation 20:4-6, Matthew 24:9-13). There will be no way to repent from committing apostasy (Hebrews 6:4-8) and worshipping the Antichrist and his image, and willingly receiving his mark on the forehead or right hand, even if this is done just to keep from getting killed (Revelation 13:15-18). Whoever does these things, even if they had become initially saved before, will end up suffering punishment in fire and brimstone forever (Revelation 14:9-12). So Christians must be willing to be killed, even by getting beheaded (Revelation 20:4-6), before doing these things (Revelation 14:12-13).

This ties in with the fact that a saved person can in the end have his name blotted out of the book of life if he does not overcome (Revelation 3:5). An example of saved people "overcoming" (Greek: nikao, G3528) or "getting the victory" (nikao) (Revelation 15:2) is found later in the book of Revelation, in Revelation 15:2, which refers to those saved people who will be willing to be killed by the Antichrist instead of worshipping him to save their lives during the coming worldwide persecution against Biblical Christians (Revelation 13:7-10, Revelation 14:12-13, Revelation 20:4-6, Matthew 24:9-13). Christians will be able to spiritually "overcome" the Antichrist and Satan by not loving their lives to the death (Revelation 12:11).

eclipsenow said in post 825:

Both systems have their pastoral implications, so please don't try to imply your system doesn't.

What do you mean by "pastoral implications"?

eclipsenow said in post 825:

And one wonders if such a person really is repenting?

Jesus tells us not to wonder, but to forgive (Luke 17:4, Matthew 18:21-22). Also, regarding really repenting from a sin (for example, Acts 8:22; 2 Corinthians 12:21, Revelation 3:19), that means to change one's mind regarding that sin, in the sense of having no plans ever to commit it again, knowing that God has made it possible for believers not to sin (John 8:34-36, Romans 8:2-14, Romans 6:1-23, 2 Corinthians 7:1), even if they are tempted to do so (2 Peter 2:9, Matthew 6:13; 1 Corinthians 10:13, 1 Corinthians 9:27, Romans 8:13, Galatians 5:16).

But if, sometime after repenting from a sin, believers nonetheless wrongly employ their free will to commit that sin again, this does not mean that they had not previously repented from that sin, or that they as continued believers in Jesus and the gospel are not saved. What they need to do is repent from that sin again and confess it to God, and they will be completely forgiven (1 John 1:9, compare Lk. 17:4).

Satan wants believers to fail to continue to come to Jesus, to think that it is hopeless, that they are just too evil for Jesus, when in fact Jesus is waiting with open arms to forgive them for their sins which weigh down on them so heavily (Matthew 11:28-30).

eclipsenow said in post 825:

You're talking about losing your salvation over certain kinds of sin, but you're not even able to define it.

Define what?

eclipsenow said in post 825:

Yet we are talking about someone going to hell forever!?

Yes.

eclipsenow said in post 825:

I'm not really going to take your views on salvation seriously when you cannot explain why you read Revelation's Apocalyptic language literally when it is APOCALYPTIC which means symbolic theology!

Revelation can be read almost entirely literally because it is scripture; it is not bound by any man-made ideas regarding any made-made categories for writings in general.

 

[Achilles6129]

While you guys are debating your topic, I thought I would post some good commentaries on Revelation for those interested. These commentaries cover a broad range of perspectives (i.e. futurist, idealist, eclectic, etc.). Also if you know of any good commentaries you can post them as well.

So anyways, here are some good commentaries:

Beale (NIGTC)
Osborne (Baker Exegetical)
Aune (WBC)
Mounce (NICNT)
Thomas (Wycliffe)

 

[eclipsenow]

Revelation can be read almost entirely literally because it is scripture; it is not bound by any man-made ideas regarding any made-made categories for writings in general.

That's as ridiculous as me saying "Revelation can be read almost entirely as a genealogy because genealogy is scripture", as if the ONLY parts of the bible were the genealogies! It's that poor an argument!

God used human beings with human mouths and human tongues and human languages to breathe his message out by his Holy Spirit. God's message is pure and eternal and above our changing world systems, but nevertheless, it IS written in the genre's and words and classifications of the human languages with which God chose to deal at the time!

The bible contains dozens upon dozens of genres. Trying to imply that it is literal because it is God's word is a circular argument. It's like insisting that only literal things are God's word, therefore all of God's word is literal. Mate, you've got a LOT of work to do to establish that! The bible contains poems, creative narratives, parables, histories, eulogies, stories, biographies, laments, songs, love songs, battle cries, metaphors, similes, and our old friend apocalyptic symbolism.

" it is not bound by any man-made ideas regarding any made-made categories for writings in general"
Sorry pal but in one sense it IS bound. It is bound by the Hebrew culture and language and then the Greek culture and language of the authors day. You obviously think God just does dictation, and the human author copies verbatim. Wrong. God breathes into us fallible humans through his Holy Spirit to bring about his word. He uses the normal language conventions of the people and their time, and so in a sense God's words ARE bound by the normal grammars and syntaxes and cultural ideas of the time, and even the personalities and ideas of the authors! Though God remains eternal and his promises are sure forever, the means of delivering these promises were us frail, fallible human beings, empowered by his Spirit to get it right.

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post 828:

That's as ridiculous as me saying "Revelation can be read almost entirely as a genealogy because genealogy is scripture", as if the ONLY parts of the bible were the genealogies!

No, for Revelation chapters 6 to 22 are not a genealogy, but prophecies of future events, "things which must be hereafter" (Rev. 4:1). And just as Jesus' 2nd coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3 has never been fulfilled, for nowhere in history books do we find its fulfillment, so the highly-detailed events of the preceding tribulation in Rev. chs. 6-18 have never been fulfilled, for nowhere in history books do we find their fulfillment.

eclipsenow said in post 828:

The bible contains poems, creative narratives, parables, histories, eulogies, stories, biographies, laments, songs, love songs, battle cries, metaphors, similes, and our old friend apocalyptic symbolism.

Indeed, but still nothing requires that Revelation itself cannot be read as almost entirely literal. For it's unsealed (Rev. 22:10), meaning that it shouldn't be difficult for saved people of any time to understand it if they simply read it as it's written: chronologically & almost-entirely literally. The few parts of it that are symbolic are almost always explained afterward (e.g. Rev. 1:20, 17:9-12), and Revelation's few symbols not explained afterward (e.g. Rev. 13:2) are usually explained elsewhere in the Bible (e.g. Dan. 7:4-7,17). Just as Jesus' second coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3 will be fulfilled almost entirely literally, so the events of the preceding tribulation in Rev. chs. 6-18 will be fulfilled almost entirely literally. Also, the millennium in Rev. 20 will be literal, and will begin after Jesus' second coming (Rev. 19:7-20:6, Zech. 14:3-21), when he will reign on the earth with the bodily resurrected church for 1,000 years (Rev. 20:4-6, 5:10, 2:26-29, Ps. 66:3-4, 72:8-11). After that, the events of Rev. 20:7-22:5 will occur literally.

 

[eclipsenow]

No, for Revelation chapters 6 to 22 are not a genealogy, but prophecies of future events, "things which must be hereafter" (Rev. 4:1).
No, you got that wrong Bible2. It ACTUALLY says, in the Bible2 literal version, "Here are the things hereafter, which will inevitably occur 2000 years later". That's the Bible2 LITERAL version. If you're going to read it literally, it had better say that... doesn't your bible say that?

And just as Jesus' 2nd coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3 has never been fulfilled, for nowhere in history books do we find its fulfillment, so the highly-detailed events of the preceding tribulation in Rev. chs. 6-18 have never been fulfilled, for nowhere in history books do we find their fulfillment.

That's a child's logic, and it fails the first test.
Do you remember Acts 1, when Jesus ascended into heaven? Imagine if I explained that the events of Acts 1 were NOT written 2000 years ago but were actually Highly Detailed descriptions of the events leading up to Jesus return, simply because it referred to his return?


10 They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. 11 “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”

That means that the Highly Detailed stories leading up to Acts 1:11 are right before the Lord's return, and therefore in our future!

That's actually how bad your logic is! Because there's a description of the basic gospel promise of the Lord's return, the rest of it MUST be an end-times table. A child's answer. Just because something describes the gospel promise of the Lord's return doesn't move it from a gospel sermon. We've got to have evidence of it actually being a prophetic timetable of events. Here, we have no evidence that it is THAT KIND of prophecy. Instead we see the HIGHLY SYMBOLIC writing of Apocalyptic.

Now you keep harping on and on and on about

No, for Revelation chapters 6 to 22 are not a genealogy, but prophecies of future events, "things which must be hereafter" (Rev. 4:1).
But John has just said in Chapter 1 that these events are "SOON" and "THE TIME IS NEAR" and he wants his generation to take this letter to heart and obey him! No one is to REMOVE anything? Well, you know what you've effectively done in hindsight? You've unintentionally REMOVED most of the book from the access of the first century Christians. It's no good to them. It's 'about the future'. What RUBBISH!

If John has just said in Chapter 1 that these events are "SOON" and "THE TIME IS NEAR" and he wants his generation to take this letter to heart and obey him, don't you think that he would ANNOUNCE a 2000 year gap?

"things which must be hereafter" does not mean that! It simply means NEXT! And, with the way Revelation waltzes around and around certain themes, I'm not even sure if that's a chronological NEXT. It's just a 'then'. 'Then this happened.' It's just a word that describes the thing that happens following the first thing. It's the next. Get it? There's NO 2000 year jump here. Nothing.

As for "highly detailed", yeah, right, pull my other leg it plays jingle bells! It's SO "highly detailed" that ANYONE and their dog can make it say ANYTHING. There's detail for you! Great isn't it? Oh, by the way, don't hold your breath for the 3rd temple to be built for your precious (and highly RIDICULOUS) android image of the antichrist because THE AOD IS HAPPENING ON THE 22ND OF THIS MONTH! Didn't you get the memo? There's been movie release and everything!

Honestly, you futurists couldn't agree on how to run a chook raffle! It's revolting, and makes Christianity out to be a completely mad joke, as in people who obviously missed their medication, and should be stuffed into their straight-jackets and locked in padded rooms.

Now, where were we? Oh yes, AFTER! You would have AFTER say 2000 years!? Sorry Pal, Strong's will not allow it. It just means AFTER! Imagine that?

meta: with, among, after​

Original Word: μετά
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: meta
Phonetic Spelling: (met-ah')
Short Definition: with, after
Definition: (a) gen: with, in company with, (b) acc: (1) behind, beyond, after, of place, (2) after, of time, with nouns, neut. of adjectives.

3326 metá (a preposition) – properly, with ("after with"), implying "change afterward" (i.e. what results after the activity). As an active "with," 3326 (metá) looks towards the after-effect (change, result) which is only defined by the context.

lIndeed, but still nothing requires that Revelation itself cannot be read as almost entirely literal.

WRONG! What this paragraph means is that you have to provide EVIDENCE AS TO IT'S GENRE!

You obviously FAILED TO UNDERSTAND THE DEBATING PROCESS, SO HERE YOU ARE AGAIN:

WHICH ONE OF THESE GENRE'S IS REVELATION? PLEASE SUPPORT YOUR ASSERTION WITH A COHERENT ARGUMENT WHICH INCLUDES FACTS, DATA, AND A DEGREE OF COHERENT LOGIC!

The bible contains dozens upon dozens of genres. Trying to imply that it is literal because it is God's word is a circular argument. It's like insisting that only literal things are God's word, therefore all of God's word is literal. Mate, you've got a LOT of work to do to establish that! The bible contains poems, creative narratives, parables, histories, eulogies, stories, biographies, laments, songs, love songs, battle cries, metaphors, similes, and our old friend apocalyptic symbolism.

For it's unsealed (Rev. 22:10), meaning that it shouldn't be difficult for saved people of any time to understand it

Yeah, it's SO easy to understand even you FUTURISTS with the same PRESUPPOSITIONS cannot agree! That's why YOU say the temple has to be rebuilt so the AoD can occur, and why other people are producing 'mockumentaries' on why the AoD is going to occur on March 22nd WITHOUT a temple! Meanwhile, the AoD ACTUALLY happened 2000 years ago when Titus destroyed the temple, destroyed the daily sacrificial system, murdered 1.1 million Jews, destroyed the nation of Israel and dispersed them for 2000 years! But you're just like "Oh, really, what AoD? Really? That can't be the AoD because a little retaining wall survives!?"

if they simply read it as it's written: chronologically & almost-entirely literally.

There you go with that childish habit of just repeating your assertions until my ears bleed from hearing the same, tired, boring old RUBBISH! Are you ever going to cite the different kinds of bible genre and how you distinguish one from another? Are you ever going to explore what bible experts and scholars with years of knowledge OUTSIDE OF YOUR OWN BRAIN have actually said about these passages? People who have learned to think and dream in Hebrew, led historical tours of the Holy Lands for generations, and have taught both theology and secular history of the Roman empire of that period for decades? Does reading scholars ever occur to you? Or did you forget your medication one night and just dream up an android image of the antichrist?

The few parts of it that are symbolic are almost always explained afterward (e.g. Rev. 1:20, 17:9-12),

You really don't know what symbols are or how they work.

Rev. 19:7-20:3 will be fulfilled almost entirely literally,

FAIL! Jesus return is not literally described because there are not really any words that can describe it. Jesus was 'caught up in a cloud' on his way to 'heaven'. That's up, right? Somewhere in space, right? That's what you would think if you read Acts 1 literally!

Dude, here's the deal. If Revelation were LITERAL it would be a whole lot easier to understand. It's not. It's written in apocalyptic SYMBOLS and people are just making it out to mean whatever they want. Those symbols are anchored in biblical history, and have THEOLOGICAL meanings. However, modern America is fascinated by instant gratification and this is skewing how people approach revelation. They want it to be all about all about US, all about OUR generation, all about how special the time in which WE live is! The reality is we CANNOT know.

Anyway, I think I'm done listening to your boring repetitions without ANY decent arguments in reply. Congratulations. You're back on my ignore list.

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post 830:

"Here are the things hereafter, which will inevitably occur 2000 years later".

Just as there's a requirement to insert some 2,000 years into Revelation for the fulfillment of Jesus' never-fulfilled second coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3, so there's a requirement to insert some 2,000 years for the never-fulfilled, preceding tribulation of Rev. chs. 6-18.

eclipsenow said in post 830:

We've got to have evidence of it actually being a prophetic timetable of events.

The evidence that Rev. chs. 6-22 are prophetic of events which are (to us) still future, is that they're about "things which must be hereafter" (Rev. 4:1), and just as Jesus' 2nd coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3 has never been fulfilled, for nowhere in history books do we find its fulfillment, so the highly-detailed events of the preceding tribulation in Rev. chs. 6-18 have never been fulfilled, for nowhere in history books do we find their fulfillment.

eclipsenow said in post 830:

We've got to have evidence of it actually being a prophetic timetable of events.

The evidence that Rev. chs. 6-22 are a timetable of events is that the tribulation of Rev. chs. 6-18 will begin with the events of seals 2-6, occurring in the order shown in Rev. 6:3-14. After the events of seal 6, Rev. 7 will occur. Then seal 7 will be unsealed and out of it will come the tribulation's 7 trumpets (Rev. 8:1-6). Then the events of trumpets 1-6 in Rev. 8:7-9:21 will occur in the order shown there. Then Rev. 10 will occur. Then the literal 3.5 years of the Antichrist's worldwide reign will occur, which time period is shown from 4 different angles in Rev. chs. 11-14 (Rev. 11:2b-3, 12:6,14, 13:5,7, 14:9-13). Then trumpet 7 will sound, announcing the legal end of the Antichrist's reign (Rev. 11:15). Out of trumpet 7's heavenly temple opening will come the 7 plagues of the 7 vials (Rev. 11:19, 15:5-16:1), the tribulation's final stage. Then the events of the 7 vials will occur in the order shown in Rev. 16. Then Jesus will return (Rev. 19:2-7) and marry the church (Rev. 19:7). Then Jesus will defeat the unsaved world (Rev. 19:11-20:3) and will reign on the earth with the bodily resurrected church for 1,000 years (Rev. 20:4-6, 5:10, 2:26-29). Then the events of Rev. 20:7-22:5 will occur in the order shown there.

eclipsenow said in post 830:

Instead we see the HIGHLY SYMBOLIC writing of Apocalyptic.

Revelation can be read almost entirely literally for the reasons given in the second part of post 829, and because, as scripture, Revelation is not bound by any man-made ideas regarding any made-made categories for writings in general.

eclipsenow said in post 830:

But John has just said in Chapter 1 that these events are "SOON" and "THE TIME IS NEAR" . . .

From the viewpoint of men, part of what Revelation chapters 2-3 foretold could have begun unfolding "shortly" (Revelation 1:1,3) after John saw his Revelation vision. For the letters to the seven literal, first century AD local church congregations (Revelation chapters 2-3) in seven cities in the Roman province of "Asia" (Revelation 1:11b) could have foretold a first century AD persecution (Revelation 2:10, Revelation 3:10) under the Roman Emperor Domitian which happened shortly after John saw his vision around 95 AD, near the end of Domitian's reign (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5:30:3c). But even all the (to us) still-future events of the tribulation and subsequent second coming of Revelation chapters 6 to 19 will unfold "shortly" (Revelation 1:1,3) or "quickly" (Revelation 22:20) after John saw his vision. For from the viewpoint of God, even the passing of some two thousand years is like the passing of only two days (2 Peter 3:8). Christians should look at the future fulfillment of Revelation chapters 6 to 19 from the viewpoint of God, not men, for whom the passing of some two thousand years seems like a long delay for its fulfillment (2 Peter 3:9).

eclipsenow said in post 830:

But John has just said in Chapter 1 that these events are "SOON" and "THE TIME IS NEAR" and he wants his generation to take this letter to heart and obey him!

Regarding "he wants his generation to take this letter to heart and obey him", the original Greek word ("tereo", G5083) translated as "keep" in Revelation 1:3 can be used in the sense of obeying commandments (John 14:15). But almost all of Revelation does not consist of commandments, but of prophecies of future events (Revelation 1:1,3, Revelation 22:7) which are not things to be "obeyed". For example, how would believers "obey" the prophecy regarding the weird locust-like beings (Revelation 9:3-11)? Instead, "tereo"/"keep" in Revelation 1:3 and Revelation 22:7 is used in the sense of holding onto something precious (John 12:7, John 2:10b, John 17:11,12,15, Ephesians 4:3) instead of casting it away as worthless. We are to "keep"/hold onto all of Revelation as being the precious truth, from Jesus to the church (Revelation 1:1, Revelation 22:16), just as we are to "keep"/hold onto Christian faith itself (2 Timothy 4:7b), even during the worst time for the church during the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18/Matthew 24 (Revelation 13:7-10, Revelation 14:12-13, Revelation 20:4-6, Matthew 24:9-13).

eclipsenow said in post 830:

You've unintentionally REMOVED most of the book from the access of the first century Christians. It's no good to them. It's 'about the future'.

Just as Jesus' 2nd coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3 has always been relevant to Christians (for all scripture is profitable: 2 Tim. 3:16) despite the fact that it has never been fulfilled, but will be fulfilled almost entirely literally in our future, so the highly-detailed and chronological events of the preceding tribulation in Rev. chs. 6-18, and the subsequent millennium and other events in Rev. chs. 20-22, have always been relevant to Christians, despite the fact that they have never been fulfilled, but will be fulfilled almost entirely literally in our future. Also, Christians don't have to experience every literal event in scripture, whether past literal events (e.g. Gen. chs. 1-11) or future literal events (e.g. Rev. chs. 6-18) for every scripture to be profitable to Christians (2 Tim. 3:16).

eclipsenow said in post 830:

Honestly, you futurists couldn't agree on how to run a chook raffle!

Just as people shouldn't reject Christianity per se simply because it's divided into different denominations, which can't agree on what all the scriptures mean, so people shouldn't reject futurism per se simply because it's divided into different schools (e.g. pre-trib or post-trib, dispensational or covenantal), which can't agree on what all the prophetic scriptures mean. People should nonetheless accept Christianity per se, for it is scriptural & nothing disproves it, just as they should accept futurism per se, for it is scriptural & nothing disproves it.

eclipsenow said in post 830:

Meanwhile, the AoD ACTUALLY happened 2000 years ago when Titus destroyed the temple, destroyed the daily sacrificial system, murdered 1.1 million Jews, destroyed the nation of Israel and dispersed them for 2000 years!

No, the abomination of desolation has to do with something (possibly an android image of the Antichrist) being placed standing in the specific "holy place" (that is, the inner sanctum) part of the temple (Matthew 24:15, Daniel 11:31), shortly before the Antichrist himself sits there and proclaims himself God (2 Thessalonians 2:4, Daniel 11:36).

eclipsenow said in post 830:

Are you ever going to cite the different kinds of bible genre and how you distinguish one from another?

Revelation, as scripture, is not limited to any man-made rules regarding any man-made ideas regarding genres. For example, some parts of even just a single verse in Revelation, Rev. 5:6, are literal (God's throne in heaven, the 4 beasts, the 24 elders, Jesus having been slain, the 7 Spirits of God, the earth) while other parts of Rev. 5:6 are symbolic (Jesus being a lamb, his having 7 horns, his having 7 eyes).

The way we know what's a metaphor & what's literal is by comparing each part of a verse with other verses (Isa. 28:9-10, 1 Cor. 2:13). For example, we know that Jesus isn't literally a lamb with 7 horns and 7 eyes (Rev. 5:6) because other verses show that he's literally a human (Lk. 24:39, 1 Tim. 2:5, Heb. 7:24-26, 2:17).

 

[eclipsenow]

Just as there's a requirement to insert some 2,000 years into Revelation for the fulfillment of Jesus' never-fulfilled second coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3, so there's a requirement to insert some 2,000 years for the never-fulfilled, preceding tribulation of Rev. chs. 6-18.

Great! You finally admit to writing your own bible. So just take it out, get a pen, and write whatever you want in it. Actually, just burn your bible and write your own. That's what you're doing anyway.

The version I read DOESN'T have a requirement for inserting 2000 years but instead has a requirement that it be about John's generation of Christian believers so they could hear and understand and obey it. It's absolutely SCANDALOUS to insist you have the right to insert 2000 years!

The evidence that Rev. chs. 6-22 are prophetic of events which are (to us) still future

No they are not.

, is that they're about "things which must be hereafter" (Rev. 4:1), and just as Jesus' 2nd coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3 has never been fulfilled,

They are fulfilled every day my friend. Every time there's government persecution of Christians or worldly philosophies or wealth and pleasure or all the other challenges to Christians living in this world, Revelation's symbolic description of these general challenges is fulfilled. And you have absolutely no definitive answer that can disprove this, because John CLEARLY wrote to his generation, and through that all generations. There is NO way to insert 2000 years and hold your head up high as if you haven't just got a kids crayon and scribbled heresies into your own bible.

for nowhere in history books do we find its fulfillment,

Every day pal, every day. Look out your window or watch the news.

so the highly-detailed events of the preceding tribulation in Rev. chs. 6-18 have never been fulfilled, for nowhere in history books do we find their fulfillment.

Only if one reads Revelation in a completely unjustified literalistic manner like trying to read a toaster manual to build a 747. Good luck with that! Every single scholar I've read on Revelation acknowledges the symbolic tools used ALL the way through the book. What do you say to that? You're somehow smarter than them? What's YOUR degree in hey pal?

The evidence that Rev. chs. 6-22 are a timetable of events is that the tribulation of Rev. chs. 6-18 will begin with the events of seals 2-6, occurring in the order shown in Rev. 6:3-14.

Happens all the time pal, there's nothing unique.

Revelation can be read almost entirely literally for the reasons given in the second part of post 829, and because, as scripture, Revelation is not bound by any man-made ideas regarding any made-made categories for writings in general.

That's right! To communicate to us God can just say Twaddle diddum spoofy woofy! So the way to be saved is smurfle whompom buddle twud! Don't forget that PONGdong WACKO WOMPY DOMPY! If you don't get FUDDLED, then your WOMPY might go WINKLE DINKEL!

God doesn't have to use human beings to communicate with us, but he did. God didn't have to BECOME a human being, but he did. God didn't have to use words written on a page, but he did.

After giving us the gift of rational thought and language, it would have been a disgrace if he expected us to understand his message of PONGDONG if it was all WINKLE DINKLE! (Are you understanding me yet? Language has rules and conventions and Twaddle diddum WOMP, and don't you gofffor it!)

Paul INSISTS on rational, sensible language used in services, and says that being understood is the key to growth. (1 Corinthians 14). God communicates with us through the conventions of rational human language, not nonsense. But rational language has styles and rules and norms for poetry, creative writing, literal historical writing, colourfully phrased biographies, and completely symbolic apocalyptic. Just asserting otherwise only makes you look a bit silly!

From the viewpoint of men, part of what Revelation chapters 2-3 foretold could have begun unfolding "shortly" (Revelation 1:1,3) after John saw his Revelation vision.

Too right! AMEN! First sensible thing you've said in a while.

For the letters to the seven literal, first century AD local church congregations (Revelation chapters 2-3) in seven cities in the Roman province of "Asia" (Revelation 1:11b)

Sorry mate, but there were at least over 10 large churches in that area in the time John wrote his letter, so the number 7 is SYMBOLIC and shows that he is writing to ALL churches across the world because he is using the number SYMBOLICALLY! If John was writing LITERALLY, he would have made a HUGE factual error! Being inspired by the Holy Spirit, that would see the very foundations of Scripture start to unravel. So John was ABSOLUTELY using 7 figuratively in the Jewish number sense of the word. 7 horns and 7 eyes on Jesus. Hmm, what other sevens are there in Revelation?

(Are we getting this symbolic stuff yet? )

(Revelation 1:1,3) or "quickly" (Revelation 22:20) after John saw his vision. For from the viewpoint of God, even the passing of some two thousand years is like the passing of only two days (2 Peter 3:8). Christians should look at the future fulfillment of Revelation chapters 6 to 19 from the viewpoint of God, not men, for whom the passing of some two thousand years seems like a long delay for its fulfillment (2 Peter 3:9).

This is a cheap and nasty trick and is beneath you. Why not go and argue that Noah's flood actually rained for 40,000 years, because a day is like a thousand years? It says 40 days in the text! Therefore, any good futurist automatically knows days = 1000 years!

Regarding "he wants his generation to take this letter to heart and obey him", the original Greek word ("tereo", G5083) translated as "keep" in Revelation 1:3 can be used in the sense of obeying commandments (John 14:15).

AGREED!

But almost all of Revelation does not consist of commandments, but of prophecies of future events (Revelation 1:1,3, Revelation 22:7)

FAIL! They are 'prophetic' in that they describe the general kind of life we will be living, just as Jesus said the Last Days (2000 years and counting since Acts 2 and Hebrews 1) would be full of wars and rumours of wars. That's a pretty good general description, hey? So we obey Jesus when he gives us certain instructions about how to keep trusting in God and avoiding temptation.

which are not things to be "obeyed". For example, how would believers "obey" the prophecy regarding the weird locust-like beings (Revelation 9:3-11)?

By understanding the symbolic sermon behind it and obeying it. Easy.

Instead, "tereo"/"keep" in Revelation 1:3 and Revelation 22:7 is used in the sense of holding onto something precious (John 12:7, John 2:10b, John 17:11,12,15, Ephesians 4:3) instead of casting it away as worthless.

That's a cheap sidetracking trick. BECAUSE this is a symbolic sermon we CAN obey it. Understand?

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post 832:

The version I read DOESN'T have a requirement for inserting 2000 years . . .

Revelation 4:1 does have an unwritten requirement for inserting some 2,000 years, because, again, just as there's an unwritten requirement for inserting some 2,000 years for the fulfillment of Jesus' never-fulfilled second coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3, so there's an unwritten requirement for inserting some 2,000 years for the never-fulfilled, preceding tribulation of Rev. chs. 6-18.

eclipsenow said in post 832:

The version I read DOESN'T have a requirement for inserting 2000 years but instead has a requirement that it be about John's generation of Christian believers so they could hear and understand and obey it.

Regarding, "so they could hear and understand and obey it", that was addressed in the "obey" part of post 831.

eclipsenow said in post 832:

Revelation's symbolic description of these general challenges is fulfilled.

Revelation is almost entirely literal, for it's unsealed (Rev. 22:10), meaning that it shouldn't be difficult for saved people of any time to understand it if they simply read it as it's written: chronologically & almost-entirely literally. The few parts of it that are symbolic are almost always explained afterward (e.g. Rev. 1:20, 17:9-12), and Revelation's few symbols not explained afterward (e.g. Rev. 13:2) are usually explained elsewhere in the Bible (e.g. Dan. 7:4-7,17). Just as Jesus' second coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3 will be fulfilled almost entirely literally, so the events of the preceding tribulation in Rev. chs. 6-18 will be fulfilled almost entirely literally. Also, the millennium in Rev. 20 will be literal, and will begin after Jesus' second coming (Rev. 19:7-20:6, Zech. 14:3-21), when he will reign on the earth with the bodily resurrected church for 1,000 years (Rev. 20:4-6, 5:10, 2:26-29, Ps. 66:3-4, 72:8-11). After that, the events of Rev. 20:7-22:5 will occur literally.

eclipsenow said in post 832:

Revelation's symbolic description of these general challenges is fulfilled.

Regarding "these general challenges", Rev. chs. 6-22 are a highly-detailed, almost entirely literal future timetable, for they contain such a huge number of details, which are so varied, so specific, so chronological, & so long, that to reduce all of them to merely a general description of life at anytime renders them utterly useless. For what person who has ever lived needs a general description of life? It's like throwing Rev. chs. 6-22 into the trash, just to be done with them.

eclipsenow said in post 832:

Every single scholar I've read on Revelation acknowledges the symbolic tools used ALL the way through the book. What do you say to that?

You would have to provide their specific arguments from the scripture itself (compare Isaiah 8:20b), and not from any man-made ideas that would go against the true meaning of the scripture (compare 1 Corinthians 1:20).

eclipsenow said in post 832:

Language has rules and conventions . . .

But language can be distinguished from man-made ideas regarding genres, that would go against the true meaning of the scripture.

eclipsenow said in post 832:

But rational language has styles and rules and norms for poetry, creative writing, literal historical writing, colourfully phrased biographies, and completely symbolic apocalyptic.

But nothing in the language of Revelation requires that it is "completely symbolic apocalyptic", instead of it being almost entirely literal.

eclipsenow said in post 832:

Sorry mate, but there were at least over 10 large churches in that area in the time John wrote his letter, so the number 7 is SYMBOLIC and shows that he is writing to ALL churches across the world because he is using the number SYMBOLICALLY!

No, Revelation 1:11 can be literal. What are the other three churches you are referring to?

Revelation 1:11 could have been limited to the seven churches mentioned there because the "angels" of the seven literal, first century AD local church congregations in seven cities in the Roman province of "Asia" (Revelation 1:20, Revelation 1:11) could have been seven human messengers sent by only those seven churches to John on Patmos (Revelation 1:9). For in Revelation 1:20, the original Greek word (aggelos, G0032) translated as "angels" can refer to human "messengers" (Luke 7:24).

eclipsenow said in post 832:

It says 40 days in the text!

But no number of days is given for the fulfillment of Revelation.

Also, it has not been said that "days" in a prophecy can never be literal. For the still-unfulfilled 1,260-day time period in the prophecies of Rev. 12:6,14, 11:3,2, 13:5, Dan. 7:25, 12:7 will be 1,260 literal days, just as, for example, the 3 days in the fulfilled prophecies of Lk. 9:22, 18:33 were 3 literal days.

 

[eclipsenow]

Revelation 4:1 does have an unwritten requirement for inserting some 2,000 years, because, again, just as there's an unwritten requirement for inserting some 2,000 years for the fulfillment of Jesus' never-fulfilled second coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3, so there's an unwritten requirement for inserting some 2,000 years for the never-fulfilled, preceding tribulation of Rev. chs. 6-18.

The 'prophecy' of Revelation is only prophecy in the sense that it is the gospel declaration that those who obey God and trust in Him alone, and don't give into pressure, temptation, and worldly philosophies and desires are those who will reign with him forever.

The 'prophecy' of Revelation could be 'turn or burn'. Or it could be 'Jesus saves, so stay with him'. The chapters at the end are a vision of Jesus saving power and final victory. They are a gospel statement, not a detailed prophetic timetable.

Regarding, "so they could hear and understand and obey it", that was addressed in the "obey" part of post 831.

But as you've never actually addressed this in a meaningful manner it's a lie to say you dealt with it in any post.

Revelation is almost entirely literal, for it's unsealed (Rev. 22:10), meaning that it shouldn't be difficult for saved people of any time to understand it

PROVE IT! How would a Roman understand an Android antichrist? Of all the psychadelic dreams and nightmares people have spewed up in this forum, an Android Antichrist is up there with those that most urgently require medication! The assertion that a Roman Christian would have understood that is just absurd. You go tell yourself you're making sense, but to other people you sound like what happens when medicine goes wrong!

if they simply read it as it's written: chronologically & almost-entirely literally.

God used human beings with human mouths and human tongues and human languages to breathe his message out by his Holy Spirit. God's message is pure and eternal and above our changing world systems, but nevertheless, it IS written in the genre's and words and classifications of the human languages with which God chose to deal at the time!

The bible contains dozens upon dozens of genres. Trying to imply that it is literal because it is God's word is a circular argument. It's like insisting that only literal things are God's word, therefore all of God's word is literal. Mate, you've got a LOT of work to do to establish that! The bible contains poems, creative narratives, parables, histories, eulogies, stories, biographies, laments, songs, love songs, battle cries, metaphors, similes, and our old friend apocalyptic symbolism.

" it is not bound by any man-made ideas regarding any made-made categories for writings in general"
Sorry pal but in one sense it IS bound. It is bound by the Hebrew culture and language and then the Greek culture and language of the authors day. You obviously think God just does dictation, and the human author copies verbatim. Wrong. God breathes into us fallible humans through his Holy Spirit to bring about his word. He uses the normal language conventions of the people and their time, and so in a sense God's words ARE bound by the normal grammars and syntaxes and cultural ideas of the time, and even the personalities and ideas of the authors! Though God remains eternal and his promises are sure forever, the means of delivering these promises were us frail, fallible human beings, empowered by his Spirit to get it right.

The few parts of it that are symbolic are almost always explained afterward (e.g. Rev. 1:20, 17:9-12), and Revelation's few symbols not explained afterward (e.g. Rev. 13:2)

But you ignore the symbols and just decide they are what YOU decide they are. That's not only arrogant, it impoverishes Revelation into YOUR PERSONAL TIMETABLE (and Science Fiction story) for the future. NO ONE ELSE has come up with your whacked out "Android AntiChrist" story.

Yet you have the absurd arrogance to claim Christians through the ages would have understood Revelations. Well, to prove that claim why don't you just turn up St Augustine's page on ANDROIDS? Hmmm? Come on Bible2, instead of just writing your own version of the bible and repeating it over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again, as if SHEER REPETITION is going to prove something, WHY DON'T YOU FIND US AN EARLY CHURCH FATHER THAT DISCUSSES YOUR ANDROID ANTICHRIST?

Just as Jesus' second coming in Rev. 19:7-20:3 will be fulfilled almost entirely literally,

I don't think it will be exactly as described because it is described 3 different times in 3 different ways.
Revelation has no timeline. There's no linear sequence of particular events all lined up in order. Rather it waltzes around and around some general theological themes, like the repeated theme of Satan's challenge to God and final defeat. We see this in Chapters 17, 19, and 20. It's like watching a sporting event with cameras from every angle. Once the final try is scored, we can see it up close and personal, then from the sidelines, and finally from a 'God's eye' view from heaven. Check it out!

In each repetitive sequence the beast does something, and then gathers for battle, and then is *completely* defeated by Christ. It's the same event from different angles, all of which describe Satan's attempts to wipe out God's kingdom on earth, and then God's victory on Judgement Day. Repeated again and again.

In 17:7-14 the beast was, and is not, and then is again: with 10 horns (symbolic of great power) to persecute God's people, but is wiped out by the Lamb. (Emphasising that our Lord's death saved us).

In 19:11-21 we see the emphasis from the point of view of the Kings of the Earth who are sometimes tricked by Satan into persecuting the church, especially through a 'false prophet'. This is symbolic of all the times false teaching corrupts government. The beast is defeated once again, but this time it is the Lord on a conquering horse! (Even though the blood is probably yet another reference to his sacrifice for us).

Finally, in Chapter 20 we see that Satan is bound in a very specific way, and then rises to fight God's people and is defeated almost as an anti-climax. When God acts... it just happens. Game over. God has won!

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post 834:

The 'prophecy' of Revelation is only prophecy in the sense that it is the gospel declaration that those who obey God and trust in Him alone, and don't give into pressure, temptation, and worldly philosophies and desires are those who will reign with him forever.

The prophecy of Revelation chapters 6 to 22 is prophecy in the sense that it is about "things which must be hereafter" (Revelation 4:1b). And just as Jesus' second coming in Revelation 19:7 to 20:3 has never been fulfilled, for nowhere in history books do we find its fulfillment, so the highly-detailed events of the preceding tribulation in Revelation chapters 6 to 18 have never been fulfilled, for nowhere in history books do we find their fulfillment.

eclipsenow said in post 834:

The 'prophecy' of Revelation could be 'turn or burn'. Or it could be 'Jesus saves, so stay with him'.

Regarding "Jesus saves, so stay with him", that's right. The Bible gives believers clear warning ahead of time about everything they're going to have to face during the future tribulation (Mk. 13:23, Rev. chs. 6-18, 1:3, 22:16), so they can be better prepared mentally not to be blindsided (1 Pet. 4:12-13) or deceived by anything that's coming (Mt. 24:4-5,23-25, Rev. 13:13-18, 19:20), and so they can be better prepared mentally to endure the future tribulation with patience and faith to the end (Mt. 24:9-13, Rev. 13:7-10, 14:12-13, 20:4-6), and not commit apostasy during the tribulation (Isa. 8:21-22, Mt. 24:9-13, 13:21), to the ultimate loss of their salvation (Heb. 6:4-8, Jn. 15:6, 2 Tim. 2:12).

eclipsenow said in post 834:

They are a gospel statement, not a detailed prophetic timetable.

Revelation chapters 6 to 22 are highly detailed prophecies of future events. And they are a timetable, as was shown in the "Rev. chs. 6-22 are a timetable" part of post 831.

eclipsenow said in post 834:

How would a Roman understand an Android antichrist?

No reference has been made to an android Antichrist, only to a possibly android image of the Antichrist.

Also, an ancient Roman Christian did not have to know about androids to understand Revelation. All that Christians at any time in the past needed to understand, and could understand, was that Revelation 13:14-15 refers to a literal image (Greek: "eikon", something made in the likeness) of the Antichrist, which will appear to be alive, which will speak, and which people will have to worship or be killed. Christians in the past could understand this without having to know, for example, whether the image will be two-dimensional or three-dimensional (or both), or what it will be made of, or how it will be made to speak and appear to be alive. All futurism does is consider these things.

And the fact remains that one possibility is that the "image of the beast" (Rev. 13:15) could be an android image of the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast) which the Antichrist's False Prophet (Rev. 13:11-16, 19:20) could cause to be made after the Antichrist receives a terrible head wound (Rev. 13:3,14b). For this injury could leave the Antichrist's facial & bodily appearance permanently marred, & could render him unable to speak clearly (like someone after a bad stroke), so that the Antichrist himself won't want to appear or speak in public again.

Did you ever see that movie "Dave"? It had a President who was in a coma, so his handlers found a regular guy who looked exactly like the President, & had him be a public stand-in for the President. He was able to speak just like the President did. It could be like that with the Antichrist's image. It could be the Antichrist's "Dave", his double, that appears & speaks (Rev. 13:15) before the world instead of his wounded self. But instead of letting people think the Antichrist's android image is the Antichrist himself, the False Prophet could tell people from the beginning the image isn't the Antichrist himself, but still fully represents him.

In Rev. 13:15, the original Greek word translated as "life" or "breath" (pneuma, G4151) can mean "spirit" in the sense of consciousness (1 Cor. 2:11a, Lk. 1:47), so that the android could appear to have a spirit, to have consciousness. The way this could be achieved would be through the android having wireless connections to huge banks of supercomputers running advanced artificial intelligence software. The False Prophet could claim that the Antichrist's consciousness dwells within the android by means of neural networks imprinted with the Antichrist's brain patterns. But this could be a lie, in that the android won't actually have the Antichrist's consciousness, or any true consciousness, but will only appear to have consciousness, by its being able to pass even the most stringent Turing Test. This is a test whereby one speaks with a computer & can't tell whether it has consciousness or not, because all its answers are the same as if it had consciousness.

But the android's "consciousness" could appear far more advanced than any human's, for it could have access to huge databases containing every fact known to man, so that the android will appear to be omniscient. In this way, it could convince the world that it's not just a machine, but a material incarnation, a machine avatar, of the true God, a literal "deus ex machina", a literal "God from a machine". And this machine "God" could boast not only of his mental powers, but also of his physical powers: he could be extremely strong. And he could boast of the "immortality" of his machine body, which could be made of titanium, covered with some practically-everlasting flesh-like silicone. People could just be completely awestruck by his (what they could call) "omniscient wisdom, his strength, his indestructibility". They could consider him more than worthy of worship by (in their words) "mere humanity, which is so mentally and physically limited, made out of mere flesh and blood, which is so weak and so mortal". The world will actually worship the Antichrist's image (Rev. 13:15), just as it will actually worship Lucifer (the dragon, Satan) and the Antichrist (Rev. 13:4,8, 12:9).

(More in post 485)

eclipsenow said in post 834:

God's message is pure and eternal and above our changing world systems, but nevertheless, it IS written in the genre's and words and classifications of the human languages with which God chose to deal at the time!

Revelation can be almost entirely literal because, as scripture, it is not bound by any man-made ideas regarding any made-made categories for writings in general. And nothing about Revelation's language in itself requires that it cannot be almost entirely literal.

eclipsenow said in post 834:

It is bound by the Hebrew culture and language and then the Greek culture and language of the authors day.

Nothing about the Hebrew or Greek culture or language requires that Revelation's words in themselves are not used by God almost entirely literally.

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post 834:

I don't think it will be exactly as described because it is described 3 different times in 3 different ways.

No verse in Revelation requires that Jesus' second coming will not occur as described in Revelation 19:7 to 20:3.

eclipsenow said in post 834:

We see this in Chapters 17, 19, and 20.

Revelation chapters 17, 19, and 20 refer to three different, sequential times, insofar as the destruction of the symbolic Babylon in Revelation 17:16 by the ten kings of the Antichrist's empire will occur at the seventh vial/bowl, immediately before Jesus' second coming (Revelation 16:17,19, Revelation 19:2-21). Then Revelation 19:7 to 20:3 will happen at his second coming. Then Revelation 20:7-10 will happen some thousand years after his second coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:10).

Regarding Revelation 17:14, it is just a part of the description of the career of the ten kings of the Antichrist's empire (Revelation 17:12-17). In Revelation 17:14a, the extremely-short summary of what will happen to them at Jesus' second coming is not meant to be taken, like the highly detailed Revelation 19:7 to 20:3 is meant to be taken, as when the second coming will occur in relation to the chronological sequence of Revelation chapters 6 to 22.

Revelation chapters 6 to 22 are chronological insofar as the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 will begin with the events of the second through sixth seals, occurring in the order shown in Revelation 6:3-14. After the events of the sixth seal, Revelation 7 will occur. Then the seventh seal will be unsealed and out of it will come the tribulation's seven trumpets (Revelation 8:1-6). Then the events of the first six trumpets in Revelation 8:7 to Revelation 9:21 will occur in the order shown there. Then Revelation 10 will occur. Then the literal 3.5 years of the Antichrist's worldwide reign will occur, which time period is shown from four different angles in Revelation chapters 11 to 14 (Revelation 11:2b-3, Revelation 12:6,14, Revelation 13:5,7, Revelation 14:9-13).

Then the seventh trumpet will sound, announcing the legal end of the Antichrist's reign (Revelation 11:15). Out of the seventh trumpet's heavenly temple opening will come the seven plagues of the seven vials/bowls (Revelation 11:19, Revelation 15:5 to 16:1), the tribulation's final stage. Then the events of the seven vials/bowls will occur in the order shown in Revelation 16. Jesus will return right after the seventh vial/bowl (Revelation 16:17,19, Revelation 19:2-21), and he will marry the church at that time (Revelation 19:7). Then he will defeat the unsaved world (Revelation 19:11 to 20:3), and he will reign on the earth with the bodily resurrected church for a thousand years (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29). Then the events of Revelation 20:7 to Revelation 22:5 will occur in the order shown there.

eclipsenow said in post 834:

In 17:7-14 the beast was, and is not, and then is again: with 10 horns (symbolic of great power) to persecute God's people, but is wiped out by the Lamb.

Regarding "the beast was, and is not, and then is again", one part of what that means is based on the seven heads of the beast in its empire aspect (Rev. 13:1, 17:3) representing seven empires (Rev. 17:9-10): Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome, and (possibly) Islam. The first five had fallen by the time of John the apostle in the first century A.D.: "five are fallen" (Rev. 17:10, 1:1b-2). The sixth (Rome) existed at the time of John: "one is" (Rev. 17:10). The seventh (possibly Islam) had not come by the time of John: "the other is not yet come" (Rev. 17:10). The empire of the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast) will be a different, still-future, eighth head (Rev. 17:11), which will be a revival of one of the five empires that had fallen by the time of John (Rev. 17:8,10-11). It will be a revival of the empire of Babylon. The Antichrist will transform the present-day, rebuilt city of Babylon (in Iraq) into the capital of his empire, only to see it ultimately destroyed at Jesus' second coming (Isa. 13).

Before the second coming, when the world is brought into the worship of Lucifer (the dragon, Satan) and the Antichrist, during the Antichrist's future, literal 3.5-year worldwide reign (Rev. 13:4-18, 12:9), the Antichrist will build their main temple in the city of Babylon. For a temple to "wickedness" will be built in Shinar (Babylonia) (Zech. 5:8,11), and the Antichrist is called "that Wicked" (2 Thes. 2:8). Also, the dragon has been the god worshipped in the city of Babylon since ancient times.

The Antichrist may claim to be Nebuchadnezzar returned, and so reinstitute the system Nebuchadnezzar set up whereby everyone had to worship an image or be killed (Dan. 3, Rev. 13:15). The Antichrist may also claim to be Nimrod (the founder of Babylon: Gen. 10:8-10), and Hammurabi, and Asoka, et al. For he may claim that he has had many different "past lives" as different, "enlightened" human rulers.

Besides building a main temple in Babylon, the Antichrist will also sit (at least one time) in a future, third Jewish temple in Jerusalem and declare himself God there (2 Thes. 2:4, Dan. 11:36,31, Mt. 24:15, Rev. 11:1-2). The Antichrist could also sit (at least one time) in other religions' holiest shrines and declare himself to be God there as well. For example, he could also sit in Islam's Kaaba in Mecca, in the Sikhs' Golden Temple in Amritsar, in Catholicism's St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican, etc.

---

eclipsenow said in post 834:

In 17:7-14 the beast was, and is not, and then is again: with 10 horns (symbolic of great power) to persecute God's people, but is wiped out by the Lamb.

Regarding the "10 horns", the 10 horns/kings of the beast in its Antichrist's-empire aspect (Rev.17:3,12, Rev. 13:1) could be 10 men whom the Antichrist will appoint as kings over 10 major nations, which could be the 10 horns in Dan. 7:24. For Dan. 7's first three beasts (Dan. 7:3-6) represent the ancient empires of Babylon (lion), Medo-Persia (bear), and Greece (leopard). And Dan. 7's fourth beast, or fourth "king"/"kingdom" (Dan. 7:17,23), represents the ancient Roman Empire. The ten horns/kings which come out of it (Dan. 7:7,24) could represent ten major kingdoms/nations today which came out the former territory of the Roman Empire, which consisted not only of Western Europe, but also the Middle East and North Africa. These ten nations could be Germany, the U.K., France, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Algeria, and Syria.

The ten part-iron/part-clay toes of Dan. 2:42 could represent the same thing as the ten horns of Dan. 7:7. The Europeans could be the iron, and the Arabs and Turks could be the clay. In Dan. 2:43, the inability of the iron to mix with the clay could represent how, for example, there are many Turks living in Germany, but they remain separated in ghettoes within German cities. Similarly, there are many Algerians living in France, but they remain separated in ghettoes within French cities.

But despite this social separation, which could endure indefinitely, the people of Western Europe on the one hand, and the people of the Middle East and North Africa on the other, could still one day put aside their political separation and become united into one confederation (Dan. 2:42 refers to the ten as a singular "kingdom"). The person who brings this about could be the Antichrist. The arising of the "little" horn (Dan. 7:8, 8:9), which is "diverse" from the ten major nations (Dan. 7:24), could mean that the Antichrist will arise from a little country. And the little horn arising from "among" the ten major nations (Dan. 7:8) could mean the Antichrist's country's territory used to be part of the Roman Empire. And before that, it was part of one of the four Diadochian Greek kingdoms which succeeded the Greek Empire of Alexander the Great (Dan. 8:8-9,21-25). The territory of these four kingdoms stretched from Greece over to Iran, and down into Egypt. So the Antichrist could come from the Middle East. He could be an Arab who will come from the little country of Lebanon, from the modern city of Tyre (Ezek. 28:2, 2 Thes. 2:4).

The Antichrist could start out by claiming to be a Baathist. After becoming the leader of Lebanon, he could peacefully gain control of a Baathist confederation of three of the ten major nations (Dan. 7:24): Egypt ("toward the south" of Lebanon: Dan. 8:9), Iraq and Syria ("toward the east" of Lebanon: Dan. 8:9). This confederation could also include the minor nation of a United Palestine (i.e. a defeated Israel, "the pleasant land": Dan. 8:9). This Baathist confederation could be put together in the future by an Iraqi Baathist General who could completely defeat and occupy Israel and Egypt (Dan. 11:15-17; in verse 17 the original Hebrew word translated as "daughter" is "bath"), but who could then mysteriously disappear (Dan. 11:19) shortly before the Antichrist arises on the world stage (Dan. 11:21-45). Years later, when the Antichrist gains control over all ten of the major nations, he could appoint kings over them (Rev. 17:12) who will defer to him (Rev. 17:13), like, for example, when Napoleon gained control over different nations, he appointed kings over them who would defer to him.

 

[eclipsenow]

The prophecy of Revelation chapters 6 to 22 is prophecy in the sense that it is about "things which must be hereafter" (Revelation 4:1b). And just as Jesus' second coming in Revelation 19:7 to 20:3 has never been fulfilled, for nowhere in history books do we find its fulfillment, so the highly-detailed events of the preceding tribulation in Revelation chapters 6 to 18 have never been fulfilled, for nowhere in history books do we find their fulfillment.

OK, settle down, you'll hurt yourself pulling the same tired old rubbish out again and again like this.

So, based on the fact that Revelation mentioned (drum roll please) the GOSPEL promise that Jesus will RETURN one day, do we add 2000 years to the phrase 'after this'?

4 After this I looked,

Cool, so that makes it 2000 years right? According to your math anyway.

And then, I guess, to be consistent, we must add another 2000 years in Chapter 7.


7 After this I saw four angels

Don't forget chapter 19: After this

Come on pal, once we add up all the 'after this' verses surely we're into the year 20,000 or something? (I haven't bothered to go through and count them all). I guess we're going to get quite a bit of time out of 'after this' aren't we, if we go and count all the way through the book?

Now run along, you've got some more bible to invent as you come up with an excuse for why 'after this' just doesn't mean the next symbolic sequence in John's sermon, which is the way all the scholars I bother with read it. Or, why does it mean 'after this' in ONLY chapter 4! Off you go, to torture greek words into submission to your will. You've got some more verses to rewrite!

 

[eclipsenow]

Regarding "Jesus saves, so stay with him", that's right. The Bible gives believers clear warning ahead of time about everything they're going to have to face during the future tribulation (Mk. 13:23, Rev. chs. 6-18, 1:3, 22:16), so they can be better prepared mentally not to be blindsided (1 Pet. 4:12-13) or deceived by anything that's coming (Mt. 24:4-5,23-25, Rev. 13:13-18, 19:20), and so they can be better prepared mentally to endure the future tribulation with patience and faith to the end (Mt. 24:9-13, Rev. 13:7-10, 14:12-13, 20:4-6), and not commit apostasy during the tribulation (Isa. 8:21-22, Mt. 24:9-13, 13:21), to the ultimate loss of their salvation (Heb. 6:4-8, Jn. 15:6, 2 Tim. 2:12).

Throw all the verses in here to disguise the shape of the woods for the trees. The reality is most of these verses are actually irrelevant to this conversation, which is all about your assumptions when you open this book and just decide, totally randomly that Revelation is about the future. It's not.

What you have just done, by saying there's this EXTRA bad bit of tribulation coming, is patronise generations and generations of suffering Christians. John's generation were about to suffer the terrible persecution of the Romans. You're turning Revelation into an INSULT to them! "Oh yeah, you think you've got it bad, wait till you see what C3PO does to the temple!" (Your silly 'android antichrist' idea really requires medication, you know that don't you?)

Revelation is written to and ABOUT all Christians across all time who are suffering. You simply don't get to change that FACT by writing a few silly Science Fiction stories about it, do you mate? C3PO as a scary 'image' of the antichrist. Give me a break! Go take your pills.

*************
​

* Covenant Amils see John as writing to comfort Christians ALREADY going through terrible tribulations in HIS generation. John explicitly wrote to Christians in HIS generation to obey his instructions. The very first paragraph states: "What must soon take place"... "because the time is near".
It's not only soon, but it is a message to be obeyed.
Revelation 1:3 says:
"Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near."
How can John's generation of Christians obey this book if it is actually all about Christians 2000 years later? Futurists pile up absurdity upon absurdity.
* Futurists almost bring down the curses of Revelation on themselves by effectively removing these verses from the book! (We are not to remove anything from Revelation!) Futurists also ADD to the book by inserting 2000 years into this text when John specifically states that he wanted HIS generation to hear and obey his message as the Roman persecution crashed down on the heads of those early Christians.

* Covenant Amils see Revelation as a book that then also applies to *any* generation of Christians that are suffering the persecution of corrupt governments and the temptation of worldly wealth, worldly philosophies, and worldly security. Revelation is a practical book of comfort to suffering Christians.
* Futurists just patronise today's suffering Christians by insisting that whatever is going on now or has gone on before, it is NOTHING compared to the 'tribulation' that is coming. (Again, this makes the book entirely irrelevant to John's generation and just does not square with an honest reading of John's stated intentions in Chapter 1!)

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

* Covenant Amils see Revelation as clear symbolic sermons that interpret themselves according to other symbols in the bible, and are applicable to all Christians in all situations.
* Futurists see it as utterly dependent on today's headlines, and therefore inaccessible to everyone before this generation.

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

* Covenant Amils are more likely to witness to the saving power of Jesus Christ
* Futurists are often more keen to 'witness' to the lunacy of their end-times schemes and try to win the unconverted not just to Jesus, but to their particular end-times-tables before the person is even saved! As this guy even proudly admitted! How ironic and sad that this Christian talked more about the AntiChrist than his Lord and Saviour, the true Christ!
http://www.christianforums.com/t7638964-7/#post60524172

 

[eclipsenow]

No verse in Revelation requires that Jesus' second coming will not occur as described in Revelation 19:7 to 20:3.



Revelation chapters 17, 19, and 20 refer to three different, sequential times, insofar as the destruction of the symbolic Babylon in Revelation 17:16 by the ten kings of the Antichrist's empire will occur at the seventh vial/bowl, immediately before Jesus' second coming (Revelation 16:17,19, Revelation 19:2-21). Then Revelation 19:7 to 20:3 will happen at his second coming. Then Revelation 20:7-10 will happen some thousand years after his second coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:10).

I don't have time to convince you of Chapter 17, but look at 19. It goes out of its way to show how how complete and thorough this judgement is.

11 I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war. 12 His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. 14 The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. 15 Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.” He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. 16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:
king of kings and lord of lords.

17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, 18 so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and the mighty, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, great and small.”
19 Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to wage war against the rider on the horse and his army. 20 But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. 21 The rest were killed with the sword coming out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.

That's everyone! This is judgement day. Verse 18 shows this to be the universal human race, from our Leaders to our Military heroes to the great and small: everyone. Judged. The beast (all governments against God's people across time) and false prophecy and all those who worshipped money instead of God? Judged. And anyone else NOT included in this exhaustive list of victims, simply, "The rest".... Judged!

This is universal Judgement on a grand scale.


But then we find in Rev 20 that there are nations again? Where on earth did they come from? There's simply no people left by the end of Rev 19. Everyone's been judged and slaughtered. It says so. "The rest..."
Come on pal, you're the one who pretends to read this book literally! Are you going to do a verbal dance around the complete and utter judgement of Rev 19? Are you going to say that's NOT one angle on Judgement Day?

Because then John runs an instant replay and looks at Judgement day from the heavenly perspective in Rev 20. It's the same story, different angle.

See how it's not literal?

 

[eclipsenow]

Revelation can be almost entirely literal because, as scripture, it is not bound by any man-made ideas regarding any made-made categories for writings in general. And nothing about Revelation's language in itself requires that it cannot be almost entirely literal.

I think you need to try stating this in other words, because this paragraph you wrote is meaningless.
Scripture is NOT only literal.
Scripture WAS written by human beings to other human beings in human languages, and a variety of forms of linguistic styles.
With the vast consensus of biblical scholars AGREEING that this is all apocalyptic symbolism, with the repeating, almost self-contradicting nature of the book with all it's 'flash forwards' and 'flash backs', suggesting it is LITERAL is not just ignorant, it is DEFIANT and absurd.
EVERYTHING in the language itself screams out that it is symbolic, because the language constitutes the words and symbols used and we read them and understand them to be ENTIRELY symbolic from the REPEATED USE and RECOMBINATION of past biblical symbols. We KNOW it is symbolic because of all the symbols. Don't you get that yet?