Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Who will be "left behind"?
- Thread starter JohnR
- Start date
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Vic C. said:
I have heard both positions and they have merit, but that is not a uniquely SDA thing, it has historic support throughout history. In order for me to be fairly compared to an SDA I would have to believe things unique to them, no? The big thing with SDA is their view on the Seventh Day, thus their name.
When I made the remark about SDA, I should have said “SDA likeâ€Â. Not to include their Sunday worship, and other extraneous doctrines.
Their basic doctrines are Amillennium, and this is what I was referring to. What I would like to know; if you place Matt. 24, and the first 18 chapters of Revelation in history is: where can you put all the judgments, and destruction, and have civilization as we know it still standing. This is definitely not the millennium, and it is not hell (but pretty close), so where do you put us. There is no way to consider all of this symbolic, or allegorical, at least not in my opinion.
I know there are a number of prominent scholars that do see it this way, if you trust their opinions. But in my opinion it is one of the weakest, and has the most questionable holes in it of any interpretation.
Their basic doctrines are Amillennium, and this is what I was referring to. What I would like to know; if you place Matt. 24, and the first 18 chapters of Revelation in history is: where can you put all the judgments, and destruction, and have civilization as we know it still standing. This is definitely not the millennium, and it is not hell (but pretty close), so where do you put us. There is no way to consider all of this symbolic, or allegorical, at least not in my opinion.
I know there are a number of prominent scholars that do see it this way, if you trust their opinions. But in my opinion it is one of the weakest, and has the most questionable holes in it of any interpretation.
Dee Dee Warren said
Dee Dee, you seem MUCH too smart to believe that what we read in Revelation chapters 1-18 or so, is history. First, is this really what you believe? And second, if so, do you "spiritualize" many verses to get around what they really say, so that you can make them seem like history?
(For instance, the five months of torture: the little beasties that sting people will a sting like a scorpion, or the beasties that kill 1/3 of mankind - within a few months, or the sea turning to blood, or the grass buring up.)
Third, if you knew that John wrote Revelation in 95 AD, or sometime near this, would this change your opinion?
Coop
Dee Dee, you seem MUCH too smart to believe that what we read in Revelation chapters 1-18 or so, is history. First, is this really what you believe? And second, if so, do you "spiritualize" many verses to get around what they really say, so that you can make them seem like history?
(For instance, the five months of torture: the little beasties that sting people will a sting like a scorpion, or the beasties that kill 1/3 of mankind - within a few months, or the sea turning to blood, or the grass buring up.)
Third, if you knew that John wrote Revelation in 95 AD, or sometime near this, would this change your opinion?
Coop
Vic C.
Member
I see the word tribulation just three times in the OT, The context dictates it is not from God. The text says we should turn to the Lord to deliver us from tribulation.lecoop said:
Deuteronomy 4:30, Judges 10:14. 1 Samuel 26:24.
I see tribulation mentioned 19 times in the NT. All but two verses dictate it is not of God.
Matthew 13:21, Matthew 24:21, Matthew 24:29, Mark 13:24, John 16:33, Acts 14:22, Romans 5:3, Romans 8:35, Romans 12:12, 2 Corinthians 1:4, 2 Corinthians 7:4, 1 Thessalonians 3:4, 2 Thessalonians 1:6, Revelation 1:9, Revelation 2:9, Revelation 2:10, Revelation 7:14.
The Wrath of God is The Day of the Lord and it is mentioned 20 times in the OT and another five times in the NT.
Isaiah 2:12, Isaiah 13:6, Isaiah 13:9, Jeremiah 46:10, Ezekiek 13:5, Ezekiel 30:3, Joel 1:15, Joel 2:1, Joel 2:11, Joel 2:31, Joel 3:14, Amos 5:18, Amos 5:20, Obadiah 1:15, Zephaniah 1:7, Zephaniah 1:14, Zechariah 14:1, Malachi 4:5.
Words like darkness, terrible, dreadful are used to describe this Wrath.
Acts 2:20, 1 Corinthians 5:5, 2 Corinthians 1:14, 1 Thessalonians 5:2, 2 Peter 3:10... I'll even include 2 Thessalonians 2:2 because it is interpreted as Day of the Lord and Day of Christ.
The same attributes given this Wrath in the OT are suggested in the NT.
The Bible seems to attribute tribulation in just about case as something we are to experience as a result of just living (and living for Christ). Some of it from the Adversary, permitted by God, but not from HIM. Wrath is from God Himself and is directed at those who delibertly defy or deny Him and also directed at those who have persecuted HIS people throughout the age(s).
As an afterthought, wrath is mentioned 151 times in the OT and 47 times in the NT. Some 'honorable' mentions:
Matthew 3:7, Luke 3:7, Luke 21:23, John 3:36, Romans 1:18, Romans 2:5, Romans 13:4, Ephesians 5:6, Colossians 3:6, 1 Thessalonians 1:10, 1 Thessalonians 2:16, Revelation 6:16, Revelation 6:17, Revelation 11:18, Revelation 14:10, Revelation 14:19, Revelation 15:1, Revelation 15:7, Revelation 16:1, Revelation 16:19, Revelation 19:15.
... all verse references are from the KJV.
Vic C. said:
Great answer, Vic, but just not to the right question! Please try again?
Since we are speaking of end time events, since you mentioned the "great tribulation," and since the book of Revelation is the most complete treatis of end time events, I would like to see where you see the "wrath of God," and where you see "great tribulation" in the book of Revelation. On another post, you said, speaking of the 144,000, "I believe they will be sealed for protection during the GT and Wrath." Therefore, I assume that you believe that both the GT and wrath will come after this sealing.
P
preterist
Guest
: preterist said:
You should know as well as any of us: the "end times" spoken of by Daniel and Jesus:
Dan 12
4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end:
9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.
13 But go thou thy way till the end be:
Mat. 13
30 Let both grow together until the harvest:...
39 ...the harvest is the end of the world...
40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
Matt 24:3
...Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
Coop
Vic C. said:
Great! Now I can ask more questions!
I think we both agree that the time of this great tribulation will be after the abomination event. Agreed?
When John does not introduce the beast until the 13th chapter, why would you believe that the abomination would be in chapter 6?
Rev 13
1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
And when we see evidence of the "woman" fleeing the abomination event in chapter 12:
Revelation 12
6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
You will notice that in each of these verses, there is the time frame of 3 1/2 years, which is, of course, the last half of the week. Therefore, these are all "midpoint" verses. So again, with this much evidence that John is just now (chapter 12 and 13) getting to the midpoint of the week, why would you pick the midpoint in chapter 6?
If you believe that John [and the HS] "mixed up" the chronology, why?
Have you tried to put together a chronology that does not have to alter John [and the HS's] chronology? IF so, what was it that caused you to back away from that? In other words, what is it that forces you to believe a chronology that is so different than what John shows us?
Coop
P
preterist
Guest
lecoop said:
But what "end times" was Peter living in? Youkeep avoiding this very important question.
1Pe 1:20 who was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but was manifested at the end of times for your sake,
What is Peter referring to here:
1Pe 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore of sound mind, and be sober unto prayer:
What "end of all things" was Peter referring to 2000 years ago? Were they "at hand" or was Peter mistaken?
In the verses you quoted, the actual word translated "world" is actually "age"
Mat 13:39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is a full end of the age, and the reapers are messengers.
αἰών
aiōn
ahee-ohn'
From the same as G104; properly an age; by extension perpetuity (also past); by implication the world; specifically (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future): - age, course, eternal, (for) ever (-more), [n-]ever, (beginning of the, while the) world (began, without end). Compare G5550.
Mat 13:39 ο3588 T-NSM δε1161 CONJ εχθρος2190 A-NSM ο3588 T-NSM σπειρας4687 V-AAP-NSM αυτα846 P-APN εστιν1510 V-PAI-3S ο3588 T-NSM διαβολος1228 A-NSM ο3588 T-NSM δε1161 CONJ θερισμος2326 N-NSM συντελεια4930 N-NSF αιωνος165 N-GSM εστιν1510 V-PAI-3S οι3588 T-NPM δε1161 CONJ θερισται2327 N-NPM αγγελοι32 N-NPM εισιν1510 V-PAI-3P
preterist said:
Of course it is "age." We are living in the age of the Gentile church. One day, the fulness of the Gentiles will have come in, and this age will close. Since God sees time MUCH differently than we do, He considered the early days of the church as " the last days." If the year of 33AD was " the last days," how much more are we today at the very end of the age."
So, again, end means end. What happens after the end? Of course, the beginning of a different "age." It will be the millennial reign of Christ. However, before we get there, those remaining on the earth will have a very bumpy ride!
Peter was living in the beginning of the age of the Gentile church. If the Holy Spirit chose to call those days, "the end of all things," that is His choice. Again, if the end was "at hand" then, it is due any day now: it would behoove us to stay ready.
If the Father chose to put "the end" off for a while, so more Gentiles could enter in, I will not argue with Him.
Coop
P
preterist
Guest
An Age that has no end:
Eph 3:21 to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, forever. Amen.
So you believe that God chose not to communicate with His creation in words we could understand. Interesting. Lets follow that logic:
Mat 24:33 So you, likewise, when you see all these things, shall know that it is near, at the doors.
Near? According to your logic “near†could mean 1000’s of years. So the events of Matt. 24 really don’t help us at all do they.
Luk 21:28 And when these things begin to happen, then look up and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near.
Look up, for your redemption draws near to Me but is still 4000 years away in “man timeâ€Â.
But if one is to ignore the very clear time-statements of scripture, then your view must be applicable. However I chose to believe God communicated with us in terms we could understand.
Secondly, the writer of Hebrews said the “last days†were at the time of Jesus’ Ministry:
Heb 1:1 God, who at many times and in many ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds,
That puts the “last days†prior to the Church Age even beginning.
Thirdly you have the Disciples asking about the end of an age that hasn’t even begun yet:
Mat 24:3 And when he is sitting on the mount of the Olives, the disciples came near to him by himself, saying, `Tell us, when shall these be? and what is the sign of thy presence, and of the full end of the age?'
It seems to me they would be asking about the end of the age they were living in instead of the age that had not even begun yet(Church Age).
So the “last days†really means 1000s of years? Do you think this is how the 1st century Jews believed?
And, according to you he was also living at the end of it. Make sense to you?
But He didn’t, thus your problem.
P
preterist
Guest
Vic C. said:
Eph. 3:21??
P
preterist
Guest
So then, “glory in the Church†is not forever?
No, the NT writers used the same type of language as the OT writers. See Is.13:10.
Isa 13:10 For the stars of the heavens, and their constellations, Cause not their light to shine, Darkened hath been the sun in its going out, And the moon causeth not its light to come forth.
This describes the fall of Babylon by the hands of the Medes. It is not to be taken literally. Do you really believe stars will land on earth in our future? Consider the size of earth and the size of stars.
The events of Matt 24 are past. Many are recorded in Acts.
Soon? But you said that is God’s “soon†not man’s soon. Right? Are you now saying soon really means soon? Is this the same “day of the Lord†found in Malachi 4?
Once again what does “near" mean? You seem to say “near†means one thing in one passage then turn around and say it means something totally different in another passage.
Wasn’t this your time motto: “Since God sees time MUCH differently than we do,â€Â
You are changing your argument. You were not saying the end of the Old Covenant Age was the last days, you said the entire Church Age was the “last daysâ€Â. Now you say the end of the Old Covenant Age(4000 years) was the ‘last daysâ€Â. Which is it?
You are correct, they were asking about the end of the Jewish Age. Isn’t it interesting that they asked that question right after Jesus talked about the destruction of the Temple. Perhaps they were familiar with Daniel’s prophecies.
Why the gap? What in Daniel’s prophecy would lead you to believe there is a 2000+ year gap? Daniel’s seventy weeks are based upon the seventy years of captivity. Was there a gap in between the 69th and 70th year of the Babylonian captivity? When Jesus came offering the Kingdom did He know of this gap?
Think about your statement. Why did they believe that? Could it be because that is what Jesus taught?
Ye
Not quite, you say he lived in both the beginning of the age and also at the end of it.
You are correct, Paul also taught he was at the end of the age.
No, I have no problem with the words, I take them at face value. No need to re-define time-indicators.
You don’t by chance attend Sheridan Road Baptist do you?