Eschatology part 3

[Moody]

Conclusions to the last 7 years, it is divided into two 3.5 years,

The first 3.5 years is the first coming of Jesus, the second 3.5 years is the second coming of Jesus, in between was inserted church era, which is the time we are in now, for how long we don’t know. Why inserted? because the prophecy is originally written only for Jews, Israeli. When Jesus second coming, those with Jesus from heaven, and those raptured, they were given glorious body like Jesus had, and they stop at the middle of the sky, people cannot see, then start to judge those people, judgement start from family first, and hence the 3 stories told by Jesus in Mathew chapter 24-25, at the same time, the earth has 3.5 years of catastrophe, after 3.5 years, those who are faithful servants, prepared virgins, will together with Jesus, coming down from sky to earth’s ground, the unprepared virgins, and unfaithful, will be left at the darkness of the sky, then everybody will see Jesus, the king, standing at the cloud coming down from sky to earth,, then they together rule the world for a thousand years, which is millennium, and those people left at the darkness of the sky or outer space maybe, they will not die, as they are already given the glorious body, but very very very lonely for a thousand years, it's a punishment, but not hell, then after that, the last chapters of revelation. Note that those who ruled the world together with Jesus, will continue to rule forever, as the last 2 chapters of revelation said.

First The syllabus to the Eschatology is Daniel 9: 24-27. Explantions here: https://christianforums.net/threads/eschatology-part-1.95644/

And so the syllabus of Jesus second coming told by Jesus himself is in Mathew chapter 24 and 25. It should be divided into 2 parts, 24:1~35 and 24:36 ~ 25:46

The first part is talking about…

a. before the 3.5 years of catastrophe, (24:4~14)
b. then 3.5 years catastrophe (24:15~29)
c. and then Jesus standing on cloud comiing down to earth from the sky (24:30)
d. and then recruiting the Israeli (24:31).

The second part is talking about…

a. precursor of second coming of Jesus and rapture(24:36~39), just like the time of Noah.
b. then about rapture and the judgement of Jesus to his servants and virgins, the three stories, and then
c. Jesus standing on cloud coming down to earth from sky (25:31) and then
d. Judgement to the world (25:32~36)

As you can see now, when Jesus coming down to earth from sky, there are 2 things happened,
Recruiting the Israeli
Judgement to those who are alive.

And so Mathew 24:4~31 and Mathew 24:36~25:46 are synchronized in time, as Jesus described his second coming. Note that this is what confusing the Eschatology today.

We also see that at the 3.5 years of catastrophe (24:22~24), the chosen is only point toward the Israeli, as the martyred saints were all died (will be describe next, in revelation) Besides the whole bible didn’t say anything that the second coming of Jesus is to recruiting the Christians, book of Ezekiel 39:28~29 said recruiting the Israeli.

After all of these, now it is very clear the key, the timeline to Eschatology is Daniel 9:24~27, and the description of second coming of Jesus is Mathew chapter 24 and 25.

next I will translate talk about revelation, which is even more clearer.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

You will likely be shocked to hear that many christians see these events, most of them except the second coming of Christ, as having happened in the past when God poured out his judgment on Jerusalem for crucifying the Christ. So all of the details you write about dissolve. So there are those who know a great deal about eschatology but do not agree with you. Just so you know. You are not educating the uneducated.

You and others write reams and reams and books and books on supposedly future events in great detail and what if it all happened in the past? Will you laugh at yourself and move on to what Jesus wants us to focus on (it is not eschatology but loving others as we love ourselves among other values?)

 

[theWind]

You will likely be shocked to hear that many christians see these events, most of them except the second coming of Christ, as having happened in the past when God poured out his judgment on Jerusalem for crucifying the Christ. So all of the details you write about dissolve. So there are those who know a great deal about eschatology but do not agree with you. Just so you know. You are not educating the uneducated.

You and others write reams and reams and books and books on supposedly future events in great detail and what if it all happened in the past? Will you laugh at yourself and move on to what Jesus wants us to focus on (it is not eschatology but loving others as we love ourselves among other values?)

The preterist view of Matt. 24 is absolute nonsense and has zero support from Scripture. It is a trending teaching in recent years that is absolute heresy.

Matt 24 is very obviously about the end times for many reasons and nobody reads that chapter honestly and sincerely and comes away with the notion that it is speaking of a historical event that already took place 2,000 years ago. That doctrine must be taught. And it is being taught by deceivers and the deceived.

 

[theWind]

because the prophecy is originally written only for Jews, Israeli.

Not one single word in the Bible was written only for the jews.

That is hog wash.

No prophecy of Scripture was ever intended only for private interpretation.
2 Peter 1:20

 

[theWind]

then everybody will see Jesus, the king, standing at the cloud coming down from sky to earth,, then they together rule the world for a thousand years, which is millennium,

The Bible doesn't allow for this fantasy that is so widely taught falsely.

All one needs to do is look at all the end times passages that clearly show the earth is completely destroyed at Christ's coming.

The saved meet Jesus in the sky and are forever with Him then. Nothing about Him coming down to the earth. 1 Thess. 4:17

The earth is eliminated with fire down to the very elements.
2 Peter 3:10

Nowhere outside of Rev. 20 is there any mention of any thousand years upon a physical earth after Christ's return. Compare all of these major end times passages that line up perfectly.
Matt. 24:29-31
2 Peter 3:10-22
2 Thess. 1:7-9
Isaiah 13:9-11
Nah. 1:5

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The preterist view of Matt. 24 is absolute nonsense and has zero support from Scripture. It is a trending teaching in recent years that is absolute heresy.

Matt 24 is very obviously about the end times for many reasons and nobody reads that chapter honestly and sincerely and comes away with the notion that it is speaking of a historical event that already took place 2,000 years ago. That doctrine must be taught. And it is being taught by deceivers and the deceived.

Ok, well I know when I’ve met a wall. It is a fact that the Rapture/ Dispensationalism view was particular embraced by the Americans and no one else. Having said that, I’ll move on.

 

[dwb001]

The Bible doesn't allow for this fantasy that is so widely taught falsely.

All one needs to do is look at all the end times passages that clearly show the earth is completely destroyed at Christ's coming.

The saved meet Jesus in the sky and are forever with Him then. Nothing about Him coming down to the earth. 1 Thess. 4:17

The earth is eliminated with fire down to the very elements.
2 Peter 3:10

Nowhere outside of Rev. 20 is there any mention of any thousand years upon a physical earth after Christ's return. Compare all of these major end times passages that line up perfectly.
Matt. 24:29-31
2 Peter 3:10-22
2 Thess. 1:7-9
Isaiah 13:9-11
Nah. 1:5

But Rev 20 IS in the Bible... so that would be the source of the Millennium question.
I am not denying the other verses you post... please don't deny the verses I quote.

 

[theWind]

But Rev 20 IS in the Bible... so that would be the source of the Millennium question.
I am not denying the other verses you post... please don't deny the verses I quote.

I'm not sure exactly what I said that you're replying to, but I never said Rev. 20 wasn't in the Bible.

I said the interpretation of it that is the foundation of the Pre-Mil, Millennium period after Christ's return, doctrine is found nowhere in Scripture. Rev. 20 is misinterpreted to create the notion of there being a 1,000 year period of time upon the physical earth after Christ's return.

That is incorrect.

Look at these verses that you said you don't deny:
2 Peter 3:10
1 Thess. 1:7-9
Isaiah 13:9-11
Nah. 1:5

Do you see how they don't allow for any earth to be left for people to live upon after that time? The earth is destroyed.

Down to its most basic elements.

Destroyed.

That happens immediately after Christ returns and gathers His people on "the Last Day."

Last Day means there will be no more days upon the earth after that one.

The book of John mentions The Last Day six times. You will find Jesus Himself speaking about the Last Day five of those times.

John 6:39, 40, 44, 54
John 11:24
John 12:48

This is plain Scripture. There is truly no reason at all for debate, but the world has taught people absolute lies about God and His Word. So, ... here we are. Arguing/debating about some of the most basic, fundamental, Truths of the Bible. And they are very easy to prove.

It's all right there in the book for any and all to see.

 

[dwb001]

I'm not sure exactly what I said that you're replying to, but I never said Rev. 20 wasn't in the Bible.

I said the interpretation of it that is the foundation of the Pre-Mil, Millennium period after Christ's return, doctrine is found nowhere in Scripture. Rev. 20 is misinterpreted to create the notion of there being a 1,000 year period of time upon the physical earth after Christ's return.

That is incorrect.

Look at these verses that you said you don't deny:
2 Peter 3:10
1 Thess. 1:7-9
Isaiah 13:9-11
Nah. 1:5

Show me in Revelation where the Millennium is not mentioned(ruled out).
In Revelation where is the Earth destroyed... before or after the 1000 year period mentioned in Rev 20?
Show me in all the verses you mentioned the exact timeline that shows the destruction of Earth is immediately upon Jesus' return.

Do you see how they don't allow for any earth to be left for people to live upon after that time? The earth is destroyed.

Down to its most basic elements.

Destroyed.

That happens immediately after Christ returns and gathers His people on "the Last Day."

Show the timeline of "immediately".
"the Last Day"... You mean a day that is like a thousand years?

Last Day means there will be no more days upon the earth after that one.

The book of John mentions The Last Day six times. You will find Jesus Himself speaking about the Last Day five of those times.

John 6:39, 40, 44, 54
John 11:24
John 12:48

This is plain Scripture. There is truly no reason at all for debate, but the world has taught people absolute lies about God and His Word. So, ... here we are. Arguing/debating about some of the most basic, fundamental, Truths of the Bible. And they are very easy to prove.

It's all right there in the book for any and all to see.

And so is the Millennium there for all to see.
Remember that Revelation is the only book of the NT that is commissioned by Jesus.
John was commanded to write Revelation. No other book of the NT was created by a command of Jesus.
So when I look to what I should believe... The foundation would be the book closest to Jesus' orders.

 

[theWind]

Show me in Revelation where the Millennium is not mentioned(ruled out).

I'm not playing your childish games. That's not what I claimed and you're well aware of that.

Show me in all the verses you mentioned the exact timeline that shows the destruction of Earth is immediately upon Jesus' return.

It doesn't have to be in every verse. The verses correspond with one another to indicate to the reader that they are depicting the same event. It's common sense.

Sun, moon, stars darken/fall, etc.

Same event.

And so is the Millennium there for all to see.

The millennium is a non-literal time period, in a non-literal book that identifies itself as symbolic, signified and prophetic. That event begins when Christ's kingdom began, when all power and authority in heaven and earth was given to Him, and ends when He returns and gathers His people. That's when He turns His kingdom over to the Father. 1 Cor. 15:24

Remember that Revelation is the only book of the NT that is commissioned by Jesus.

It's a totally legitimate book of symbols, significations and prophecy. All non-literal.

John was commanded to write Revelation. No other book of the NT was created by a command of Jesus.
So when I look to what I should believe... The foundation would be the book closest to Jesus' orders.

Believe it.

It's 100% legit.

Just HIGHLY misinterpreted.

If the enemy wanted to select a book from Scripture to widely misinterpret to the masses, so as to lead many astray, he couldn't have chosen a better book than Revelation. It is prophetic from beginning to end.

 

[dwb001]

I'm not playing your childish games. That's not what I claimed and you're well aware of that.

It doesn't have to be in every verse. The verses correspond with one another to indicate to the reader that they are depicting the same event. It's common sense.

Sun, moon, stars darken/fall, etc.

So you have failed to show the timeline.
Show the timeline... why could there not be a day in between... 1 day=1000 years.

Same event.

The millennium is a non-literal time period, in a non-literal book that identifies itself as symbolic, signified and prophetic. That event begins when Christ's kingdom began, when all power and authority in heaven and earth was given to Him, and ends when He returns and gathers His people. That's when He turns His kingdom over to the Father. 1 Cor. 15:24

Very literal book. Don't pull out Rev 1:1... signified. If that is your basis you have missed all the context of that verse.

It's a totally legitimate book of symbols, significations and prophecy. All non-literal.

All literal.

Believe it.

It's 100% legit.

Just HIGHLY misinterpreted.

There is the problem... the book is not to be interpreted.
Read Rev 1:3... read, hear, keep.... not interpret or understand.

 

[theWind]

1 day=1000 years.

Show me your evidence for that and I'll show you why you're wrong.

Bring that tired verse from Peter now.

Very literal book. Don't pull out Rev 1:1... signified. If that is your basis you have missed all the context of that verse.

The context of that verse?

What a joke.

It's the first verse of the book, dude. What context is it that only you have picked up on and nobody else?

Seriously?

All literal.

Uhh ... no.

Not at all.

Beasts with 7-10 heads?

Women riding them?

Seals and bowls and trumpets, etc.?

Come on. You're embarrassing yourself.

There is the problem... the book is not to be interpreted.
Read Rev 1:3... read, hear, keep.... not interpret or understand.

Right because we're not to understand or interpret anything that might contradict the lies we are fed all day long about God's Word.

Okay then.

 

[dwb001]

Show me your evidence for that and I'll show you why you're wrong.

Bring that tired verse from Peter now.

So that verse from Peter is not in the bible?

The context of that verse?

What a joke.

It's the first verse of the book, dude. What context is it that only you have picked up on and nobody else?

Seriously?

"...signified it by his angel..." don't just cut out the single word... then use a single definition from a dictionary.
The angel did the signifying... the making known.... the authenticating.

Uhh ... no.

Not at all.

Beasts with 7-10 heads?

Women riding them?

Seals and bowls and trumpets, etc.?

Come on. You're embarrassing yourself.

We will see... won't we.
Maybe not literal(in the textbook definition)... but literature-al.

Right because we're not to understand or interpret anything that might contradict the lies we are fed all day long about God's Word.

Okay then.

Where did that come from? You say the Bible is all lies? Who is feeding you lies about God's Word?
I am just reading the text and you are bringing up the idea that it is all a pack of lies... On your head be it.

 

[theWind]

So that verse from Peter is not in the bible?

"...signified it by his angel..." don't just cut out the single word... then use a single definition from a dictionary.
The angel did the signifying... the making known.... the authenticating.

We will see... won't we.
Maybe not literal(in the textbook definition)... but literature-al.

Where did that come from? You say the Bible is all lies? Who is feeding you lies about God's Word?
I am just reading the text and you are bringing up the idea that it is all a pack of lies... On your head be it.

Help me understand why you believe we even need a thousand year period on the earth after Christ returns and I'll help you understand why you're mistaken.

What do you believe is the purpose for that time period?

 

[dwb001]

Help me understand why you believe we even need a thousand year period on the earth after Christ returns and I'll help you understand why you're mistaken.

What do you believe is the purpose for that time period?

Because Jesus said it would happen.
Why would you say that a clear verse in Revelation is a lie?
I don't need the 1k years.
I have no purpose for 1k years.
But apparently Jesus does.

It fits with the time the Thyatirian Church would rule the nations. Rev 20:4

 

[theWind]

Because Jesus said it would happen.

Wrong again.

Guess your reading skills aren't what you thought they were.

John said he saw it in a non-literal vision.

And he never said he saw that it wouldn't begin until after Christ returned to the earth.

I don't need the 1k years.
I have no purpose for 1k years.
But apparently Jesus does.

Jesus is utilizing that non-literal time period upon the earth right now - reigning from within every True Spirit-filled Believer all over the world as we speak. That period ends in Matt. 24:29-31 just as 1 Cor. 15:24 tells us it does.

 

[dwb001]

Wrong again.

Guess your reading skills aren't what you thought they were.

Please keep this professional.

John said he saw it in a non-literal vision.

Maybe you didn't read my previous posts... here or other discussions.
You say a non-literal vision... I say literal.

And he never said he saw that it wouldn't begin until after Christ returned to the earth.

How can "they" reign with Christ if Christ isn't there?
So I guess Rev 19 the King of Kings is not Jesus?

Jesus is utilizing that non-literal time period upon the earth right now - reigning from within every True Spirit-filled Believer all over the world as we speak. That period ends in Matt. 24:29-31 just as 1 Cor. 15:24 tells us it does.

I disagree.
I see no proof of your interpretation.
Did I not say earlier that I hold Revelation as the foundation and all other end times references pale in comparison.
Jesus told John to write Revelation... Jesus never(as far as I recall) gave any similar command to other writers. Or do you have a reference that says He did?

 

[theWind]

Maybe you didn't read my previous posts... here or other discussions.
You say a non-literal vision... I say literal.

Maybe you didn't read your previous posts.
What you actually said was this:

Maybe not literal(in the textbook definition)... but literature-al.

That's not literal.

And it's the Bible itself that designates Revelation as non-literal.

How can "they" reign with Christ if Christ isn't there?

He is present with all Believers in Spirit. He will return physically.

So I guess Rev 19 the King of Kings is not Jesus?

It is.

I disagree.
I see no proof of your interpretation.

That's because you cannot see the Truth.

The proof is in all of the end times passages that I have posted.

Did I not say earlier that I hold Revelation as the foundation and all other end times references pale in comparison.
Jesus told John to write Revelation... Jesus never(as far as I recall) gave any similar command to other writers. Or do you have a reference that says He did?

None of that speaks to the case that Revelation is not literal.

Rev. is all True, all legit, just not all physical/literal events..

It is almost all symbolic.

I've given plenty of examples from the Bible to make my case.

 

[dwb001]

Maybe you didn't read your previous posts.
What you actually said was this:

That's not literal.

And it's the Bible itself that designates Revelation as non-literal.

Claim without evidence.
Please show your work.

He is present with all Believers in Spirit. He will return physically.

Proof?
Show the physical return verse please.

It is.

You just confirmed that the King of Kings is not Jesus?
Interesting claim.

That's because you cannot see the Truth.

Keep it civil, please.

The proof is in all of the end times passages that I have posted.

Show in Revelation your proof passages.
Other references do not contain time markers so they remain open to interpretation.

None of that speaks to the case that Revelation is not literal.

Rev. is all True, all legit, just not all physical/literal events..

It is almost all symbolic.

Proof?
Otherwise we just disagree... get over it.

I've given plenty of examples from the Bible to make my case.

I asked for examples from Revelation... not out of context verse grabbing.

 

[theWind]

Keep it civil, please.

Give the false accusations a rest, please.

That's twice you have falsely accused me of being uncivil/unprofessional and I've been nothing but cordial and lighthearted here.

You will have to completely fabricate me breaking rules here if you wish to have a reason to ban me. Won't be a bit surprised if you do, either.

If you can't beat em, ban em! Right?

Back to the topic at hand:

Do you believe the Millennium period theory, that involves a time after Christ's return, is for the purpose of Land Promises to the jews/Israel?