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

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

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

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

Featured Where is the Beast right Now

Discussion in 'Eschatology - Endtimes & Prophecy Forum' started by Just The Facts, Feb 1, 2019.

  1. _Dave_

    _Dave_ Active Member Supporter

    399
    +199
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    I have to admit I lost interest in your post after reading your bad misinterpretation of Rev 3:3.

    I don't see any point in debating with someone whose hermeneutics leads them to build a false doctrine from such faulty interpretations. Those types never learn from being corrected, and never, ever change their minds. Others might enjoy debating folks who are like that, but I don't. I'm always mindful of Matthew 7:6 and don't see anything to gain from debating with intransigent people.

    That being said, I am always curious about what others believe, but once I hear what they have to say I am content to leave them with their beliefs and move on.

    You hold to a preterist belief, your hermeneutics are on the opposite end of the scale from mind. I get it. No problem. And I don't wish to drag Scripture into a fruitless debate about it.
     
  2. parousia70

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

    +2,940
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    How is it Bad Dave?
    I am simply stating Revelation 3:3 means what it says!
    I take the position that Jesus was not mistaken, Lying nor Misleading those people into believing something that was not true, and did not directly apply to them, back then, the very living breathing people He was directly addressing and gravely warning.

    Seems to me if you are saying, "Jesus was NOT telling them what He actually said in the text of the passage", or worse "Jesus said it but He didn't really mean it", or still worse, "Jesus deliberately misled them", then yours would be the bad misinterpretation.

    I am still curious since you apparently do not believe Revelation 3:3 means what it says... what then do you assert it DOES mean?

    It's one thing to claim I'm wrong in my interpretation, but when you fail to provide an alternative, our readers will logically to defer to my unrefuted claims as just that, unrefuted.

    Funny, that's exactly the reason I see a powerful point in debating you.
    I get to let you expose your faulty hermeneutics and false doctrine to our readers by simply letting you state your case, and then providing a scriptural rebuttal.

    That you appear reluctant to engage & defend your position with scripture after just a couple posts of mine calling you to account for it might indicate to our readers that you have your own personal doubts as to the reliability of your position.

    Fair enough.. I suppose our readers can piece together enough from what you've already said to determine the veracity (or lack thereof) of your claims.

    Again, your desire to take your ball and leave the sandbox because staying to provide sober reason for your faith when called to account for it (1 Peter 3:15) is uncomfortable for you, that is your prerogative I suppose.

    It does Seem that "I don't wish to debate Scripture" is an odd position to take for someone who has made the rather recent, conscious decision to Join a Christain Debate Forum, however.

    Christian Forums does provide a few "Preach it to the Choir" Safe Houses where you don't have to worry about your position being challenged if that's the kind of thing you are looking for here...

    In accordance with CF TOS, if you elect not to respond, I'll respect your wish to not have your position challenged by me on this thread any longer.
    :)
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2019
  3. _Dave_

    _Dave_ Active Member Supporter

    399
    +199
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    I'll answer your question directly, and correct one of your taunting, goading invectives below. The rest of your arrogant, ugly, insinuating comments I'll leave unanswered in this thread.
    You were using Rev 3:3 to make a point about denying the Doctrine of Imminence.

    It turns out that your example was not only a bad misinterpretation of Scripture, and thus absolutely does not support your case, but it actually revealed a lot more about the false doctrines in present-day church than you would be willing to admit.

    In Rev 3:3 Jesus is addressing the church of Sardis in his seven letters to the seven churches. Sardis is one of only two churches of the seven that Jesus had no commendation for. The reason, it turns out, is because Sardis represents the denominational church; which has defiled its garments by holding to false doctrine.

    The denominational church began on a good note, as it was the church that began with the reformation. However, what the reformers accomplished so well in the area of soteriology -- salvation by faith, and faith alone -- they failed to follow through with a reformation of the false doctrines that had been creeping into the church for almost a 1,000 years concerning eschatology.

    Among the false doctrines that pervade today's denominational churches are "soft" hermeneutics (putting it mildly), denial of Christ's snatching up believers to be saved from the wrath to come, denial of Christ's bodily millennial reign on the physical Throne of David, denial of Israel's prophetic destiny, and a misinterpreting and denial of much of what Christ has said in his own words.

    So, to put it bluntly, rather than calling the church of Sardis to watch for his return to snatch believers up to Him in the clouds, Christ's warning was he would come as a thief in the night as judgment to those who don't repent of the error of their false doctrines.

    Throughout Scripture, Christ's coming as a thief is only used in judgment, usually in regard to cleansing the earth of unrepentant sinners at the end of the Tribulation period. That is what is in view here.

    This was language that was particularly poignant to the Sardisians, who thought their location on top of a three-sided cliff was impregnable. But twice in their history they were caught by surprise in the darkness of the night and captured by besieging forces. They were overconfident, and arrogant, and thus lost the ability to defend themselves against the wiles of the enemy.

    Christ commented that there are some in Sardis who have not defiled their garments, a remnant, and if they watch and are diligent they will not be taken into judgment when he "comes as a thief in the night."

    Today's "Sardis" church is largely characterized by ecumenicism -- which directly flies in the face of what the reformers intended -- and an eschatology that denies Christ's rapture of the church, denies the cleansing of the Tribulation, denies the millennial reign of Christ, and denies eternal punishment in the Lake of Fire. Jesus' warning to "watch" is for all of those in today's denominational churches; not for their being snatched up, but for their being carried off to judgment as unbelievers.

    Your whole post here was characterized by many ugly, insinuating, arrogant, bullying, personal remarks that are in direct contravention of the rules of conduct for this forum. But there was one that was more egregious than the others, and that is the one I am going to respond to.

    You put quote marks around, "I don't wish to debate Scripture" but that is absolutely NOT what I said.

    What I did say was, "I don't wish to drag Scripture into a fruitless debate ..." citing Matthew 7:6 as the reason not to get into a debate with an intransigent, unreasonable person, dragging God's Word through the mire and muck and getting battered by ugliness and invective. And that is EXACTLY what happened, isn't it.
     
  4. ewq1938

    ewq1938 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +4,205
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    US-Republican

    Well done. Eloquent and informative as well. I didn't agree with every single thing but the post was too well designed and executed for me to be petty enough to do anything else but applaud.
     
  5. Douggg

    Douggg anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

    +1,717
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Satan being cast down to earth, in Revelation 12:7-9, restricted to earth, is end times - has not happened yet.

    It will be the third of three woes John would be presented - woe "to the inhabiters of the earth"

    Revelation 8:13 And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!

    John then is presented two woes, and then is he quickly shown the third woe when the 7th trumpet sounds.

    14 The second woe is past; and, behold, the third woe cometh quickly.

    15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

    The seventh trump sounding is the go signal for Michael/his angels to cast Satan/his angels from the 2nd heaven, down to earth. Satan/his angels were cast of out the third heaven when they first sinned, long, long, long ago.

    In Revelation 12:12, Satan being cast down to earth, knowing he has but a little time left.

    Revelation 12: 12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

    Satan/his angels will be cast down restricted to earth from the second heaven, the cosmos. The cosmos itself will be peeled back in the sixth seal events near the end of the 7 years, when the world sees Jesus before the throne of God prepared to carry out his wrath on behalf of them martyred during the great tribulation.
     
  6. ewq1938

    ewq1938 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +4,205
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    US-Republican
    No one can say if it has happened or not.

    No, Satan is cast out before the trib begins. The last verse of Rev 12 is Satan going to start the trib.


    No that's wrong. Satan and some of his angels are capable of entering heaven and starting a war which is LONG after Satan's initial fall due to his sin.


    Which proves you wrong because a short time is not the long time that you claim it is. That verse happens before the trib begins. It is because he has a short time that he must start the GT. Clearly he isn't being cast out thousands of years before the trib starts.
     
  7. Douggg

    Douggg anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

    +1,717
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    It is east to tell. Revelation 12 starts out with 5 historical verses to identify the woman as Israel. The rest of the chapter is in direct chronological order of the 7 years.

    Revelation 12:6, the 1260 days is the first half. And Revelation 12:14, the time, times, half times is in the second half. The two halves are not expressed as both 1260 days, because some earth time passes as the war in (the second heaven) takes place. So what is left is the time, times, half times.

    Also that the 7 years are in Revelation 12 is by the crowns on the seven heads, but not the ten horns. This is because before the 7 years begin, king seven has come to power, and the prophecy of the seven kings complete.

    Compared to no crowns on the ten horns, because the beast has not come to power at the beginning of the seven years. He does not come to power until the middle part of the seven years. The ten horns have their crowns in Revelation 13, with 42 months left.
     
  8. Douggg

    Douggg anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

    +1,717
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    The great tribulation begins when the abomination of desolation is setup to be worshiped.
    Matthew 24:15.
     
  9. Douggg

    Douggg anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

    +1,717
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden of Eden because of sin. The entrance blocked from return by angels and with a flaming sword, Genesis 3:24. Yet you think Satan/his angels have free access to the third heaven, anytime they want?

    Satan can be summoned to the third heaven by God, but Satan does not have free access to the third heaven.
     
  10. Douggg

    Douggg anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

    +1,717
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Cast out of the third heaven, thousands of years ago. Cast out of the second heaven, future (in Revelation 12:7-9), which when that happens he will have only a time, times, half time left.
     
  11. parousia70

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

    +2,940
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    Yes, one of 7 ACTUAL 1st century Congregations of ACTUAL air breathing, blood pumping people alive in the 1st century...


    That's a patently non-literal and unbiblical explanation. How could Jesus Christ have promised those literal, first-century Asia Minor churches that he would perform all those things at his coming to them, and then not do it?

    That's certainly not a literal interpretation, nor a biblical one. The churches are first-century churches.

    How can you, with a straight face, claim MY interpretation, the PLAIN, LITERAL one is wrong, and your Interpretation, that turns the passage into an allegorical, mythical construct with ZERO biblical instruction, is correct?

    You have completely removed the original Sardis Church, to whom the letter was directly addressed and first delivered to, from ANY application of this verse.

    You have absolutely ZERO scriptural instruction to do so... you only do so because of your adherence to man-made unbiblical tradition.

    Tell me how did Revelation 3:3 apply directly to those who it was addressed to and FIRST received it?
    You don't believe it DID apply to them at all, do you?

    Obviously, had you been a first-century persecuted Christian who personally received this memo from St. John, you would have interpreted the book as speaking to your first-century scenario, persecution, and triumph. There is not any way you would have interpreted the book as NOT pertaining to you and your first-century time. After all, they were instructed to interpret it as pertaining to themselves. To have done otherwise would have been to disobey God's message. And, note that chapters 2-3 depict Christ as coming to their churches. So again, there is no way they would have interpreted the message as NOT pertaining to them in their day.

    You are spiritualizing away what John said when you try to apply it the way you think to do. The seven churches St John sent his vision to were all 1st-century churches that do not exist today anywhere on the planet. They are:

    Ephesus
    Smyrna
    Pergamum
    Thyatira
    Sardis
    Philadelphia
    Laodicea


    Each one of those Churches were Churches that St. John knew of personally. They were his own contemporaries. Each congregation had specific problems that were unique and Jesus promised each of those 1st-century congregations that He was going to come back for them (e.g., Rev 2:18-25; Rev 3:1-3).

    Now either Jesus Christ kept his promises to those first century Churches or he didn't. Jesus made them promises that he kept -- for our Lord is a Promise Keeper.

    To say that Jesus did not keep his promise to those to whom St. John was writing is to turn our Lord into a false prophet.

    Furthermore, nowhere in Revelation do we see St. John say that these Churches stand for, or "represent" segments of history or the Churches of any FUTURE time.

    St. John simply doesn't allow for such an allegorical, mythical construct of his letter written and urgently sent to those ACTUAL 1st-century Churches with this opening warning:

    Revelation 1:1,3
    The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which MUST soon take place...Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things which are written in it for the time is at hand.

    We can trust that our Lord did not make promises to St. John and those 7 Churches that He failed to keep.
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  12. _Dave_

    _Dave_ Active Member Supporter

    399
    +199
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Your hermeneutics is at 180-degrees opposite of mine.

    You are a preterist. I am not. Never the twain shall meet. You're a smart person, and have obviously already heard and rejected all of the arguments that I would present in trying to correct your misinterpretations. So, I have no desire to go where everyone else has already gone before and hash it out with you all over again. That could go on ad infinitum. It might be your thing, but it's not mine.

    Let's leave it at that and move on. I'm counting on you to be gracious now and considerate in closing this part of the debate. OK?
     
  13. parousia70

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

    +2,940
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    Right.
    Mine is a Literal Hermeneutic, based on what the literal text actually says, and how it literally applied to the original audience, to whom the letters were Literally addressed and Literally hand-delivered to, while yours is an allegorical, mythical construct based on post-apostolic, Man-made tradition, that removes the original receivers from ANY application at all.

    They typically don't mesh very well, that is true.

    Well.. ALL Christians are preterist... we only vary by degree.
    I'm just a little bit further down the spectrum than you at the moment...
    but I'll never say never, for I once was where you are now :)

    Done.
    Our readers most definitely have enough information from us both now, to draw their own conclusions on whos interpretation has the weight of scripture behind it.

    Thank you for your input. It was very useful and most enlightening.
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2019
  14. Original Happy Camper

    Original Happy Camper One of GODS Children I am a historicist Supporter

    +860
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    Which do you follow Protestant, Roman Catholic or your own private interpretation?

    Who Did the Reformers (Protestant) Say Is Antichrist?
    What Did The Reformers Believe? - Who is the Antichrist


    Martin Luther (1483 - 1546)
    "nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the church; while he yet sits in the church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny." (Martin Luther, First Principles, pp. 196-197)

    John Calvin (1509 - 1564)
    "Though it be admitted that Rome was once the mother of all Churches, yet from the time when it began to be the seat of Antichrist it has ceased to be what it was before. Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman Pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt .. I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol.3, p.149)

    John Knox (1505 - 1572)
    Yea, to speak it in plain words; lest that we submit ourselves to Satan, thinking that we submit ourselves to Jesus Christ, for, as for your Roman kirk, as it is now corrupted, and the authority thereof, whereon stands the hope of your victory, I no more doubt but that it is the synagogue of Satan, and the head thereof, called the pope, to be that man of sin, of whom the apostle speaks." (John Knox, The History of the Reformation of Religion in Scotland, p.65)

    Thomas Cranmer (1489 - 1556)
    "Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of Antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons." (Works by Cranmer, vol.1, pp.6-7)

    Roger Williams (1603 - 1683)
    Pastor Williams spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself...speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws; but he is the son of perdition." (The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers by Froom, Vol. 3, pg. 52)

    The Baptist Confession of Faith (1689)
    "The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church, in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner; neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ." (1689 Baptist Confession of Faith)

    The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646)
    "There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalts himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God." (1646 Westminster Confession of Faith)

    John Wesley (1703 - 1791)
    "... In many respects, the Pope has an indisputable claim to those titles. He is, in an emphatical sense, the man of sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled, the son of perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers, destroyed innumerable souls, and will himself perish everlastingly. He it is that opposeth himself to the emperor, once his rightful sovereign; and that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped - Commanding angels, and putting kings under his feet, both of whom are called gods in scripture; claiming the highest power, the highest honour; suffering himself, not once only, to be styled God or vice-God. Indeed no less is implied in his ordinary title, "Most Holy Lord," or, "Most Holy Father." So that he sitteth - Enthroned. In the temple of God - Mentioned Rev. xi, 1. Declaring himself that he is God - Claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone." (John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon The New Testament, p.216)

    Charles Spurgeon (1834 - 1892)
    "It is the bounden duty of every Christian to pray against Antichrist, and as to what Antichrist is no sane man ought to raise a question. If it be not the popery in the Church of Rome there is nothing in the world that can be called by that name. If there were to be issued a hue and cry for Antichrist, we should certainly take up this church on suspicion, and it would certainly not be let loose again, for it so exactly answers the description."

    "Popery is contrary to Christ’s Gospel, and is the Antichrist, and we ought to pray against it. It should be the daily prayer of every believer that Antichrist might be hurled like a millstone into the flood and for Christ, because it wounds Christ, because it robs Christ of His glory, because it puts sacramental efficacy in the place of His atonement, and lifts a piece of bread into the place of the Saviour, and a few drops of water into the place of the Holy Ghost, and puts a mere fallible man like ourselves up as the vicar of Christ on earth; if we pray against it, because it is against Him, we shall love the persons though we hate their errors: we shall love their souls though we loath and detest their dogmas, and so the breath of our prayers will be sweetened, because we turn our faces towards Christ when we pray." (Michael de Semlyen, All Roads Lead to Rome)

    And Many More ...
    You can see above what the reformers believed. And there were many more reformers who knew the truth that the pope was the leader of the antichrist church, including; William Tyndale, John Wycliffe, Philipp Melanchthon, Huldreich Zwingli, The Translators of the King James Bible, and so on.

     
  15. brian57

    brian57 Junior Member

    119
    +23
    Christian
    Private
    It's in the bottomless pit or abyss which is the place of non existence , even tho the nations that make up the Beast are still around. It existed once doesn't exist now but will exist again in the future.
     
  16. Original Happy Camper

    Original Happy Camper One of GODS Children I am a historicist Supporter

    +860
    United States
    SDA
    Married

    Before anybody can answer this question they will have to identify the beast.
     
  17. David Kent

    David Kent Well-Known Member

    +450
    United Kingdom
    Baptist
    Married
    UK-Conservative
    Post rapture believers are not conservative, they are modernists.

    God didn't wait till 1948 till Israel began to return. Till 1848 the Turks allowed no more that 500 Jews to live in Jerusalem, but at that date the British forced them to remove that restriction.
     
  18. David Kent

    David Kent Well-Known Member

    +450
    United Kingdom
    Baptist
    Married
    UK-Conservative
    That is easy. In Daniel seven there are four beasts, Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome. Rome is the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
    At the time Revelation was written the sixth king was reigning. Five had fallen they were Kings, 1st Republic, 2nd republic, Dictator, Triumverate,. The one reigning at the time was Emperors, the seventh to come was Christian Emperors.
    • Revelation 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
    The beast that was and is not is of the seven, the papacy, the eighth head, but a revival of the seventh.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2019
  19. Douggg

    Douggg anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

    +1,717
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    They saw the world through the lens of the times they lived. And interpreted bible prophecy accordingly. With 100% looking back accuracy from where we are now, we know that it was not time of the end. The understanding of the prophecies were sealed until our time.

    Revelation 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

    So as your question - "Which do you follow Protestant, Roman Catholic or your own private interpretation?" - my answer is neither. The lens I am viewing bible prophecy and the Antichrist study of our times, the end times, and as God has opened my eyes. Which we in this day and age have the elements of the parable of the fig tree in place - which in the reformers' day did not have.
     
  20. David Kent

    David Kent Well-Known Member

    +450
    United Kingdom
    Baptist
    Married
    UK-Conservative
    You are still repeating that fable.

    The fig tree does not represent anyone in that expression. Luke 21:29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; 30 When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand.
    Matthew 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.


    When the fig tree and all the trees send forth shoot in the spring you know that summer is coming, so when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies its desolation is near.
     
Loading...