Tribulation...

[Sam21]

I'm not going to post all the verses again that illustrate how Christ was leading His disciples and apostles to the conclusion that His retuen would be in their lifetime. I've done that several times on several threads.

So the question that remains is, if Christ said He was coming back in their lifetimes, then either He was lying or our understanding of what His coming means has to change.

Put another way, if I leave a note telling you - by name - that I am coming to see you soon and someone with the same name finds the note 2,000 years later, what is the most reasonable, logical conclusion they could draw from it: that the note was meant for them or for the person to whom it was written in the past?

This is the problem with the view some people here are taking: we know who Christ's audience was, we know what the signs were, we even know that most - if not all - were fulfilled by the time 70 AD rolled around, and yet people want to make Christ's words intended for the people of His time about us!

One doesn't have to be a preterist to understand this stuff: one simply has to begin with the premise that Christ was telling His disciples the truth and take Him at His word. That's all.

Was God lying when He told Adam that he would surely die in the day he ate of the tree? Adam live over 900 years past that day. Did you ever stop to think that maybe God was telling us something about spiritual words right off the bat? You say Jesus lied if He didn't return in the first century, then by that reasoning God lied when Adam did not fall over dead and return to the dust on the day he ate from the tree.

 

[Sam21]

The first was the destruction of the temple in 70 ad, the second and seperate question was when was the end, and his return. They recognised that his return was in the end.

I agree with this. On another note,you do recognize that God ALLOWED the disciples(church)to believe that Jesus "could"return before the death of John the apostle. Jesus did not say directly that He would return before the death of John but His statement,"what if I will that he tarry till I come", was enough to make the church believe that Jesus would "probably"come before the death of John. Conclusion,God wanted the first church to believe that Jesus could return in their lifetime although it was not in the plan of God for it to happen as we can see today.

 

[jasoncran]

I agree with this. On another note,you do recognize that God ALLOWED the disciples(church)to believe that Jesus "could"return before the death of John the apostle. Jesus did not say directly that He would return before the death of John but His statement,"what if I will that he tarry till I come", was enough to make the church believe that Jesus would "probably"come before the death of John. Conclusion,God wanted the first church to believe that Jesus could return in their lifetime although it was not in the plan of God for it to happen as we can see today.

common sense. i like this.

 

[Hitch]

common sense. i like this.

God misleading the church is common sense?

 

[Stormcrow]

God wanted the first church to believe that Jesus could return in their lifetime although it was not in the plan of God for it to happen as we can see today.

So God is a liar???

Wow! 2

 

[Stormcrow]

Was God lying when He told Adam that he would surely die in the day he ate of the tree? Adam live over 900 years past that day. Did you ever stop to think that maybe God was telling us something about spiritual words right off the bat? You say Jesus lied if He didn't return in the first century, then by that reasoning God lied when Adam did not fall over dead and return to the dust on the day he ate from the tree.

This was all addressed here.

Ironic that you would insinuate that I was calling God a liar when you did so explicitly with this post:

God wanted the first church to believe that Jesus could return in their lifetime although it was not in the plan of God for it to happen as we can see today.

So it seems as though you would rather call God a liar than adjust your theology to fit His Word.

What a shame.

 

[warhorse]

So ,, do you have any quotes from Jesus saying he's coming back to set up his kingdom? That is what Sam claimed to have . Surely you noticed the part of Sam's post emphasized in red?

I have shown you quotes from Jesus that show he will return and gather his elect to him, and quotes from angels that he will reign on the throne of David. And there are endless scriptures in the O & NT pointing to the millinial reign of christ.
Do you have any quotes from Jesus that show that the moon is not made from cheese, no. Does that mean then that the moon is made from cheese, no. A lack of direct statement's from Jesus himself on the subject does not nullify a doctrine so clearly discribed in both testiments.

 

[warhorse]

I agree with this. On another note,you do recognize that God ALLOWED the disciples(church)to believe that Jesus "could"return before the death of John the apostle. Jesus did not say directly that He would return before the death of John but His statement,"what if I will that he tarry till I come", was enough to make the church believe that Jesus would "probably"come before the death of John. Conclusion,God wanted the first church to believe that Jesus could return in their lifetime although it was not in the plan of God for it to happen as we can see today.

No!!! i think that God clearly killed that concept that was running wild in that day with 2 thess 2
v2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

The destruction of the son of perdition comes with the presence of the lord, and the return of the lord comes after the falling away. There should be no confusion on this. it may be hard to define the falling away, but the revelation of the son of perdition, and his destruction is pictured three times in the OT, and has not been fullfilled as they also lead to the day of the lord.

Here is just one sample.
Eze 28v16 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.
17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.
18 Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.

 

[reba]

God is deceptive?


I have my views of Scripture.. Some maybe correct some not. If i dont have an answer for my views I just say i dont know. Never ever would think of God being deceptive ( and no that was not the word used but that is the thought) to force my theory out of Scripture. My goodness

 

[Hitch]

I have shown you quotes from Jesus that show he will return and gather his elect to him, and quotes from angels that he will reign on the throne of David. And there are endless scriptures in the O & NT pointing to the millinial reign of christ.

You would think Jesus or the apsotles would have brought that out LOL

Do you have any quotes from Jesus that show that the moon is not made from cheese, no. Does that mean then that the moon is made from cheese, no. A lack of direct statement's from Jesus himself on the subject does not nullify a doctrine so clearly discribed in both testiments.

Your trouble is not in the dearth of direct statements from Christ regarding the kingdom but rather that none of them support any kind of temporal reign. In fact the speak of this;

Mark 1:15
And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.


Neither can you quote an apostle teaching a temporal kingdom, but as Jesus before they did have plenty to say about the kingdom and every word is their apostolic interpretation.. Its just that none of it helps you.

Do you need to review Paul's definition?



Sam writes

Jesus said He would return in the sky and gather His saints,repay the evil world,bind satan, and establish His kingdom,why do you not believe these words of Jesus?



​

 

[Hitch]

God is deceptive?


I have my views of Scripture.. Some maybe correct some not. If i dont have an answer for my views I just say i dont know. Never ever would think of God being deceptive ( and no that was not the word used but that is the thought) to force my theory out of Scripture. My goodness

The god who looses to satan after 1,000 years of personal administration is a god who needs to fib.

 

[reba]

How does God rule 1000 years with a rod of iron and still loose? When does God ever win? Some of these posts read to me that the Cross was not enough. Who is this lame god?

I read here God didn't really mean what He said in Genesis !

I will never sing Victory in Jesus again in quite the same way.

 

[Hitch]

How does God rule 1000 years with a rod of iron and still loose? When does God ever win? Some of these posts read to me that the Cross was not enough. Who is this lame god?

I read here God didn't really mean what He said in Genesis !

I will never sing Victory in Jesus again in quite the same way.

Futurism has always pushed a low view of the cross. As you know the entire Scofield/Chafer/DTS dogma was built on the idea that the church is parenthetical in history.

 

[Sam21]

God is deceptive?


I have my views of Scripture.. Some maybe correct some not. If i dont have an answer for my views I just say i dont know. Never ever would think of God being deceptive ( and no that was not the word used but that is the thought) to force my theory out of Scripture. My goodness

if there be a prophet I will make Myself known unto him...in dark speeches. Most of the OT people inspired to write by the Spirit did not even know what they were writing about,there is a spiritual war going on and God uses mystery with His word. God told satan that the son of the woman would bruise his head, it is obvious from the story that satan went after Able because he was the person who would do him in,however the real person did not appear for at least 4000 more years(Christ). It is obvious that God allowed,even encouraged, the first century church to believe that Jesus would return in their lifetime,from where we are today we know that Jesus would not return for at least 1900 years. It is not deception,God deals with us where we are at, the first century church needed to believe that Christ return was about to occur,Jesus told them it was not for them to know the times and no one knew the day or hour,so God did not lie,God cannot lie.

 

[Sam21]

How does God rule 1000 years with a rod of iron and still loose? When does God ever win? Some of these posts read to me that the Cross was not enough. Who is this lame god?

I read here God didn't really mean what He said in Genesis !

I will never sing Victory in Jesus again in quite the same way.

why would anyone suppose that God loses because people of their free will chose to go with satan and evil? Would the Spirit of God inspire someone to say that God loses because people of their free will chose evil over righteousness? I would not say,"who is this lame God",but who presumes to call God lame?

 

[reba]

Sam you say God can not lie yet you dont believe Him...


I am a moderator i have to not post here for a while. This is too much.

 

[Sam21]

Sam you say God can not lie yet you dont believe Him...


I am a moderator i have to not post here for a while. This is too much.

Reba,I do not believe God lied when He told Adam that he would surely die in the day he ate of the fruit, I believe Adam begin to die immediately on eating from the tree and in time his body completely died,and I believe that is what God meant. The second choice is a man made concept of death that did not really occur(spritural death). Have you ever read the Jesus I never knew, it is a book about how christians have made the bible fit so that it makes more sense to us.

 

[Stormcrow]

It is obvious that God allowed,even encouraged, the first century church to believe that Jesus would return in their lifetime,from where we are today we know that Jesus would not return for at least 1900 years.

When you're trying to crawl out of the hole you've dug, the first rule of thumb is to STOP DIGGING! :o

It is not deception,God deals with us where we are at, the first century church needed to believe that Christ return was about to occur,Jesus told them it was not for them to know the times and no one knew the day or hour,so God did not lie,God cannot lie.

Wow!!! 2 You've completely gone off the rails with this: God leading the early church to believe one thing so He could do something completely different???

You've completely substituted the plain, direct words of Christ and the apostles for a doctrine that calls God a liar and then try to justify it. How utterly sad.

 

[Stormcrow]

The second choice is a man made concept of death that did not really occur(spritural death).

OK, now this is bordering on heresy. 2

 

[Elijah674]

OK, now this is bordering on heresy. 2

Bordering?