Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Faith Sharing Area => Topic started by: ~TW~ on June 11, 2015, 07:21:13 AM
-
Christians should know and have some idea of Revelation Chap 20. So can we presume Christ has returned and we are all happy and contented living on a paradise earth in the kingdom as some believe.All is well judgement has taken place.
17 Then I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the midst of heaven, “Come and gather together for the supper of the great God,[h] 18 that you may eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses and of those who sit on them, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, both small and great.”
19 And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. 20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21 And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh.
So no more problems BUT we read
7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.
Dear me here we were in a paradise earth all comfy and now this. Who are these nations and why has God let satan loose on us in his kingdom ?
Now I know Alien and others know the clear biblical answers to this,but to those Christians who see us living on Earth in a literal 1000 years can you tell us the answer as to why this happens.
~TW~
-
Are there any chiliasts (millenialists) on this forum anymore? Clearly the thousand years is a figurative of the time between Christ's advent and his return, for since the Ascension Christ has already taken his place at the righthand of the Father and rules his kingdom with his saints.
"The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou at my right hand: Until I make thy enemies thy footstool" and "I saw seats; and they sat upon them; and judgment was given unto them; and the souls of them that were beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and who had not adored the beast nor his image, nor received his character on their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
-
Are there any chiliasts (millenialists) on this forum anymore? Clearly the thousand years is a figurative of the time between Christ's advent and his return, for since the Ascension Christ has already taken his place at the righthand of the Father and rules his kingdom with his saints.
"The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou at my right hand: Until I make thy enemies thy footstool" and "I saw seats; and they sat upon them; and judgment was given unto them; and the souls of them that were beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and who had not adored the beast nor his image, nor received his character on their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
Thank you A_O I know you sail in the same end time ship as myself and Alien and our good man from Scotland,but in answer to your question we do still have chiliasts on board this forum so my thread is for them to answer.I don't think we will get many answers.
Take care A_O blessings.
~TW~
-
Christians should know and have some idea of Revelation Chap 20. So can we presume Christ has returned and we are all happy and contented living on a paradise earth in the kingdom as some believe.All is well judgement has taken place.
17 Then I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the midst of heaven, “Come and gather together for the supper of the great God,[h] 18 that you may eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses and of those who sit on them, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, both small and great.”
19 And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. 20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21 And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh.
So no more problems BUT we read
7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.
Dear me here we were in a paradise earth all comfy and now this. Who are these nations and why has God let satan loose on us in his kingdom ?
Now I know Alien and others know the clear biblical answers to this,but to those Christians who see us living on Earth in a literal 1000 years can you tell us the answer as to why this happens.
~TW~
In your interpretation;
Satan, is he currently in prison or not?
If not - has he been released (and when did that happen) or yet to be sent there?
If yes - when did he get sent down? Is he due for parole any time soon?
-
The answer can be found in the Harrowing of Hell.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrowing_of_Hell
-
Hi Alien,Anchorman,Spud and A_O on holiday tomorrow Friday :) not many visitors to this thread today so it would seem the american followers of Revelation 20 {you know what I mean} are not biting today.
Shame really because they are waiting for something which is not on the cards.
~TW~
-
Hi TW
I had a read of this this morning. I agree that the 1000 years are a symbol. I wonder if the premillenialists base their literal interpretation of the phrase, '1000 years', on its repetition- is it six times? within the passage. I had wondered if this repetition was significant at all, though not to the extent that it should be taken literally.
Have a good holiday
Spud
-
Why Revelation 20, when the narrative begins in Revelation 19:11 ?
-
Hi all :) now back from holiday, at home now so a chance now for a good rest.
Alien A_O and Spud and Anchorman a serious question for you all we know Satan is bound now.But could he ever have stopped the gospel from going out and in what way can he no longer deceive the nations ?
~TW~
-
but in answer to your question we do still have chiliasts on board this forum
Namely?
-
but in answer to your question we do still have chiliasts on board this forum
Namely?
Those Christians who believe in a literal millennium ,any way can you throw any light on my question.
~TW~
-
I think it should be remembered that - as prophecy - Revelation may not tell the events precisely as they occur. By its nature, revelation is pictorial, and will generally be pictorially specific to the ideas that its first hearers would understand. Perhaps more important is Jesus' teaching that we will not know the end times until they come, but that we will know them when they do.
-
Not to many takers to my question, But could he Satan, ever have stopped the gospel from going out and in what way can he no longer deceive the nations ?
~TW~
-
But could he Satan, ever have stopped the gospel from going out
Matthew 24 tells us that for the sake of the elect, the days of tribulation were cut short, which meant that Satan could not stop the gospel going out. It was because Jesus warned the disciples to look out for the abomination of desolation that they were able to escape and take the gospel out.
-
in what way can he no longer deceive the nations ?
He cannot unite them in the way that we are told will happen when he is loosed after the millennium.
-
Not to many takers to my question, But could he Satan, ever have stopped the gospel from going out and in what way can he no longer deceive the nations ?
~TW~
The only one deceived, is you!
-
Not to many takers to my question, But could he Satan, ever have stopped the gospel from going out and in what way can he no longer deceive the nations ?
~TW~
The only one deceived, is you!
BA I think Gordon may remove your post,I hope he does.This thread is way above you.
~TW~
-
Not to many takers to my question, But could he Satan, ever have stopped the gospel from going out and in what way can he no longer deceive the nations ?
~TW~
The only one deceived, is you!
BA I think Gordon may remove your post,I hope he does.This thread is way above you.
~TW~
Shouldn't that be, "below?" :)
-
But could he Satan, ever have stopped the gospel from going out
Matthew 24 tells us that for the sake of the elect, the days of tribulation were cut short, which meant that Satan could not stop the gospel going out. It was because Jesus warned the disciples to look out for the abomination of desolation that they were able to escape and take the gospel out.
ok, let's say that's the correct interpretation of Matthew 24:15-22:
“Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.
My question would then be, when did this happen? :
29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Because our Lord appears to be saying that these things will happen 'Immediately after the tribulation'.
-
2 Corrie thank you for your post,but we are not in Matt 24,but Rev 20
The question is Why does Satan have to be bound ? what is the purpose.
~TW~
-
I've heard it explained that there will be fakers that resent God's rule and resent the saints. Satan will draw them out, they will be exposed.
"And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them." Rev. 20:9
Now I will put back on my panmillenialist hat. Yes that's right, I'm a panmillenialst. Do you want to know what that is? You want to hear? Here we go. I don't know for sure which is the right position on this. I do know that should we be wrong on our position, it does not alter our salvation. I am a panmillenialist because whatever position one takes, wrong or right, it will all pan out in the end.
-
2 Corrie thank you for your post,but we are not in Matt 24,but Rev 20
The question is Why does Satan have to be bound ? what is the purpose.
~TW~
When Christ descended into Hades he preached the Gospel to the dead there, as St. Peter says in one of his epistles. Then he had Satan bound and now he has no power over death to hold the dead in Hades. Rather the way to heaven has now been opened and the saints live and reign with Christ.
-
2 Corrie thank you for your post,but we are not in Matt 24,but Rev 20
The question is Why does Satan have to be bound ? what is the purpose.
~TW~
When Christ descended into Hades he preached the Gospel to the dead there, as St. Peter says in one of his epistles. Then he had Satan bound and now he has no power over death to hold the dead in Hades. Rather the way to heaven has now been opened and the saints live and reign with Christ.
Thank you A_O good shot well done .Johnny yes we are all of the Pan class at the end of the day but as A_O said bound now and in the 1000 years now.Also 2 Corrie the points you raised are all in the past.
~TW~
-
But could he Satan, ever have stopped the gospel from going out
Matthew 24 tells us that for the sake of the elect, the days of tribulation were cut short, which meant that Satan could not stop the gospel going out. It was because Jesus warned the disciples to look out for the abomination of desolation that they were able to escape and take the gospel out.
ok, let's say that's the correct interpretation of Matthew 24:15-22:
“Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.
My question would then be, when did this happen? :
29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Because our Lord appears to be saying that these things will happen 'Immediately after the tribulation'.
Hi 2Corrie
Hopefully TW won't mind if we digress a bit.
A straightforward reading, to me, says that this is talking about the fall of the temple spoken of at the beginning of the chapter, and that soon after this would be the second coming, the end of the world and the judgment day. That's what confuses a lot of people, because the world didn't end then, as we know.
In the past I've toyed with the idea that the whole passage refers to AD 70, as preterists teach. But this passage was preached on in our Church earlier this year. The man said that verse 36, "But about that day or hour no one knows" is talking about the future second coming, whereas the first part of chapter 24 talks about AD 70.
At the time, I didn't really see how he arrived at this conclusion, because as I said above, it seems as though the second coming was to follow immediately after the tribulation (AD 70 and the preceding persecution).
After TW put this thread up, I was browsing the web on the subject, and I'm now seeing a possible explanation- that 'these things' in verse 34 refers to the fall of Jerusalem and the temple; and 'that day or hour' in verse 36 is referring his second coming, after that event. In other words, 'no-one knows about that day or hour' is referring back to verses 29-31.
This would mean that, having predicted the fall of Jerusalem within the disciples' lifetime, Jesus then clarified what he meant when he said his return would follow 'immediately after that'. His return would be at some unknown day and hour after the fall of Jerusalem. In other words, it is still future.
Hope that makes sense. I recall reading this interpretation on the website of St Helens church in London, of which I was a member at one time.
-
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+20
Well I read it.
I've alway's been told it was written in code and was not meant to be taken literally.
However, one thing I did notice on this reading is that those who weren't in the book of life ( non Christians presumably) don't get cast into hell until the second death which seems to come after the thousand years.
It's a very confusing passage and most scholars I have spoken to don't put much store in the actual meaning.
Obviously other Christians vary.
🌹
Hi Rose good to have you hear in many ways it is written in a code but it can be understood more later out for bible study.
~TW~
-
Rose you wrote------However, one thing I did notice on this reading is that those who weren't in the book of life ( non Christians presumably) don't get cast into hell until the second death which seems to come after the thousand years.
----------------------------------------------------------
You presumed right those in the book of life are those who are saved,the second death follows after the 1000 years which ends on the last day /final trumpet.
~TW~
-
But could he Satan, ever have stopped the gospel from going out
Matthew 24 tells us that for the sake of the elect, the days of tribulation were cut short, which meant that Satan could not stop the gospel going out. It was because Jesus warned the disciples to look out for the abomination of desolation that they were able to escape and take the gospel out.
ok, let's say that's the correct interpretation of Matthew 24:15-22:
“Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.
My question would then be, when did this happen? :
29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Because our Lord appears to be saying that these things will happen 'Immediately after the tribulation'.
Hi 2Corrie
Hopefully TW won't mind if we digress a bit.
A straightforward reading, to me, says that this is talking about the fall of the temple spoken of at the beginning of the chapter, and that soon after this would be the second coming, the end of the world and the judgment day. That's what confuses a lot of people, because the world didn't end then, as we know.
In the past I've toyed with the idea that the whole passage refers to AD 70, as preterists teach. But this passage was preached on in our Church earlier this year. The man said that verse 36, "But about that day or hour no one knows" is talking about the future second coming, whereas the first part of chapter 24 talks about AD 70.
At the time, I didn't really see how he arrived at this conclusion, because as I said above, it seems as though the second coming was to follow immediately after the tribulation (AD 70 and the preceding persecution).
After TW put this thread up, I was browsing the web on the subject, and I'm now seeing a possible explanation- that 'these things' in verse 34 refers to the fall of Jerusalem and the temple; and 'that day or hour' in verse 36 is referring his second coming, after that event. In other words, 'no-one knows about that day or hour' is referring back to verses 29-31.
This would mean that, having predicted the fall of Jerusalem within the disciples' lifetime, Jesus then clarified what he meant when he said his return would follow 'immediately after that'. His return would be at some unknown day and hour after the fall of Jerusalem. In other words, it is still future.
Hope that makes sense. I recall reading this interpretation on the website of St Helens church in London, of which I was a member at one time.
Fair Comment Spud and I would say correct.Now a tit-bit for 2 corrie--------------9 I, John, your brother and companion (sharer and participator) with you in the tribulation and kingdom and patient endurance [which are] in Jesus Christ, was on the isle called Patmos, [banished] on account of [my witnessing to] the Word of God and the testimony (the proof, the evidence) for Jesus Christ.
Notice 2 Corrie the tribulation that John now mentions is ongoing and AD 70 is in the past.
~TW~
-
Interesting, so according to TW the Millennium is characterised by a time of great tribulation!
And the Domitian persecution is ongoing ;)
-
Interesting, so according to TW the Millennium is characterised by a time of great tribulation!
And the Domitian persecution is ongoing ;)
Has there ever been, in history, a time when there is not great tribulation, somewhere?
-
Interesting, so according to TW the Millennium is characterised by a time of great tribulation!
And the Domitian persecution is ongoing ;)
2corrie please read what is written AD 70 was a time of tribulation,John in Rev 1 states the time for those then was tribulation and history backs it up.
It is the words tribulation which can cause confusion.
Stick with the points of the thread you introduced Matt 24 it is past history we are in Rev 20
~TW
-
AD 70 is a figure of something, probably a great tribulation which will occur before our Lord returns.
-
AD 70 is a figure of something, probably a great tribulation which will occur before our Lord returns.
It seems to fit the final conflict here.----------------until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.
then the final day is ushered in.
~TW~
-
2 Corrie thank you for your post,but we are not in Matt 24,but Rev 20
The question is Why does Satan have to be bound ? what is the purpose.
~TW~
When Christ descended into Hades he preached the Gospel to the dead there, as St. Peter says in one of his epistles. Then he had Satan bound and now he has no power over death to hold the dead in Hades. Rather the way to heaven has now been opened and the saints live and reign with Christ.
Peter says (1 Peter 3:20) that he preached to the spirits in prison, who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. I'm not sure how to take this- did they get a second chance to be saved?
Also, how exactly did he bind Satan? Was this preaching that Peter mentions, somehow the mechanism by which that took place? I say that because in Luke 10 we are told that demons submitted to the disciples when they preached that the kingdom of God was near. Would you say that Christ preached to the spirits of all the people in Hades, including those from after Noah's time? Was that what bound Satan?
Thanks.
-
I've heard it explained that there will be fakers that resent God's rule and resent the saints. Satan will draw them out, they will be exposed.
"And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them." Rev. 20:9
Now I will put back on my panmillenialist hat. Yes that's right, I'm a panmillenialst. Do you want to know what that is? You want to hear? Here we go. I don't know for sure which is the right position on this. I do know that should we be wrong on our position, it does not alter our salvation. I am a panmillenialist because whatever position one takes, wrong or right, it will all pan out in the end.
Before you had put your panmillenialist hat back on, what were you? Just trying to fit the bit in bold into the context of a non-literal thousand years.
-
AD 70 is a figure of something, probably a great tribulation which will occur before our Lord returns.
It seems to fit the final conflict here.----------------until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.
then the final day is ushered in.
~TW~
Sounds like you have some kind of special knowledge - but given by whom?
-
2 Corrie thank you for your post,but we are not in Matt 24,but Rev 20
The question is Why does Satan have to be bound ? what is the purpose.
~TW~
When Christ descended into Hades he preached the Gospel to the dead there, as St. Peter says in one of his epistles. Then he had Satan bound and now he has no power over death to hold the dead in Hades. Rather the way to heaven has now been opened and the saints live and reign with Christ.
Peter says (1 Peter 3:20) that he preached to the spirits in prison, who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. I'm not sure how to take this- did they get a second chance to be saved?
Also, how exactly did he bind Satan? Was this preaching that Peter mentions, somehow the mechanism by which that took place? I say that because in Luke 10 we are told that demons submitted to the disciples when they preached that the kingdom of God was near. Would you say that Christ preached to the spirits of all the people in Hades, including those from after Noah's time? Was that what bound Satan?
Thanks.
In the iconography of the Church (the Harrowing Of Hell) we see angels binding Satan and Christ leading the OT saints out of Hades, beginning with Adam and Eve. The angels represent the power of the gospel and I think that Christ preached to all the dead there, though that doesn't mean all had ears to hear, so to speak.
-
So when our Lord said 'immediately', He did not actually mean 'immediately'. Sorry you've lost me!
btw, rewind to Rev 19:11, then we can talk.
-
So when our Lord said 'immediately', He did not actually mean 'immediately'. Sorry you've lost me!
btw, rewind to Rev 19:11, then we can talk.
I said it was a possible explanation! If we take 'immediately' to mean immediately, then, we have to take 'you' in v. 32-33 to mean the disciples who were with Jesus at the time.
-
AD 70 is a figure of something, probably a great tribulation which will occur before our Lord returns.
It seems to fit the final conflict here.----------------until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.
then the final day is ushered in.
~TW~
Sounds like you have some kind of special knowledge - but given by whom?
Not special knowledge,a study of this book is the answer.I do have the knowledge of London if that is any help drove a cab for thirty years :)
~TW~
-
2 Corrie thank you for your post,but we are not in Matt 24,but Rev 20
The question is Why does Satan have to be bound ? what is the purpose.
~TW~
When Christ descended into Hades he preached the Gospel to the dead there, as St. Peter says in one of his epistles. Then he had Satan bound and now he has no power over death to hold the dead in Hades. Rather the way to heaven has now been opened and the saints live and reign with Christ.
Peter says (1 Peter 3:20) that he preached to the spirits in prison, who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. I'm not sure how to take this- did they get a second chance to be saved?
Also, how exactly did he bind Satan? Was this preaching that Peter mentions, somehow the mechanism by which that took place? I say that because in Luke 10 we are told that demons submitted to the disciples when they preached that the kingdom of God was near. Would you say that Christ preached to the spirits of all the people in Hades, including those from after Noah's time? Was that what bound Satan?
Thanks.
Spud will get back to you on this.
~TW~
-
AD 70 is a figure of something, probably a great tribulation which will occur before our Lord returns.
It seems to fit the final conflict here.----------------until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.
then the final day is ushered in.
~TW~
Sounds like you have some kind of special knowledge - but given by whom?
Not special knowledge,a study of this book is the answer.I do have the knowledge of London if that is any help drove a cab for thirty years :)
~TW~
Ah, so you're used to going round in circles, then. :)
-
AD 70 is a figure of something, probably a great tribulation which will occur before our Lord returns.
It seems to fit the final conflict here.----------------until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.
then the final day is ushered in.
~TW~
Sounds like you have some kind of special knowledge - but given by whom?
Not special knowledge,a study of this book is the answer.I do have the knowledge of London if that is any help drove a cab for thirty years :)
~TW~
Ah, so you're used to going round in circles, then. :)
Well no one is going round in circles my post have been solid,in the millennium now, Satan bound now,and a question which was
7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.
Dear me here we were in a paradise earth all comfy and now this. Who are these nations and why has God let Satan loose on us in his kingdom ?
Now I know Alien and others know the clear biblical answers to this,but to those Christians who see us living on Earth in a literal 1000 years can you tell us the answer as to why this happens.
~TW~
-
Dear me here we were in a paradise earth all comfy and now this. Who are these nations and why has God let Satan loose on us in his kingdom ?
Now I know Alien and others know the clear biblical answers to this,but to those Christians who see us living on Earth in a literal 1000 years can you tell us the answer as to why this happens.
Here's a premillennialist answer, TW:-
http://www.gotquestions.org/release-Satan.html
Now I understand why 2Corrie wanted to rewind to Rev 19:11.
-
Let me state my reason, it is simple, that is where the narrative begins.
-
Peter says (1 Peter 3:20) that he preached to the spirits in prison, who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. I'm not sure how to take this- did they get a second chance to be saved?
Also, how exactly did he bind Satan? Was this preaching that Peter mentions, somehow the mechanism by which that took place? I say that because in Luke 10 we are told that demons submitted to the disciples when they preached that the kingdom of God was near. Would you say that Christ preached to the spirits of all the people in Hades, including those from after Noah's time? Was that what bound Satan?
Thanks.
Hi Spud,
It is interesting to compare three passages in 1 Peter where the word ‘preached’ is used in most English translations. These are:
1 Peter 1:12. It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.
1 Peter 1:25. But the word of the Lord remains forever. And this word is the good news that was preached to you.
1 Peter 3:18-20. For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.
In the first two passages the Greek word translated as preached is the word ‘euaggelizo’ which means to ‘declare (or bring) glad (or good) tidings. So it is a word denoting the preaching of the Gospel.
However in 1 Peter 3:18-20 a different Greek word is used. I have no doubt that Peter deliberately chose this word because he wished to make it clear that this was not the same sort of ‘preaching’ as mentioned earlier. The word Peter used here is the word ‘kerusso’, which means ‘to make proclamation or to herald (as a public crier would do). A victorious general would proclaim his victory and the defeat of the enemy. In a Biblical context it could also apply to announcing a divine truth, and while this could mean the good news of the Gospel it could equally apply to a divine truth which is not necessarily good news for the hearers.
So my view is that it is incorrect to use this passage to suggest that those beyond the grave are given a further opportunity to hear the gospel and find salvation. Such an interpretation is not only in direct contradiction with other Scriptures (e.g. Luke 16:26 and Hebrews 9:27) but also conflicts with the overall thrust of 1 Peter.
I think it is preferable to understand this passage as Jesus going to make proclamation to the forces of evil and declaring that they had not won the victory as they imagined. Just when Satan and his minions were celebrating what they thought was their greatest victory, Jesus gate-crashed their party and proclaimed their greatest defeat. The cross had triumphed over the grave and sin and the way was now open for man to again be reconciled to God. Satan had been dealt a mortal blow. His victory celebration came to an abrupt and ignominious end.
The next challenge is to now go to 1 Peter 4:6 and work out how this fits in to the overall pattern of things. A topic for another day.
A final thought on the view of Satan being bound at the present time. Peter also says, ‘Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour’ If that is a description of Satan while bound, I would certainly have no wish to encounter him when he is not.
Enjoy your day, Dave
-
Dear me here we were in a paradise earth all comfy and now this. Who are these nations and why has God let Satan loose on us in his kingdom ?
Now I know Alien and others know the clear biblical answers to this,but to those Christians who see us living on Earth in a literal 1000 years can you tell us the answer as to why this happens.
Here's a premillennialist answer, TW:-
http://www.gotquestions.org/release-Satan.html
Now I understand why 2Corrie wanted to rewind to Rev 19:11.
Thanks Spud but if you cant see the flaws in that then !
~TW~
-
In reply to Dave the first part of your post it is a yes. The last part--------------A final thought on the view of Satan being bound at the present time. Peter also says, ‘Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour’ If that is a description of Satan while bound, I would certainly have no wish to encounter him when he is not.
How about a few comments from you in which you tell us how you see bound and its meaning. For you Dave-------
http://www.cprf.co.uk/articles/revelation20.htm#.VY7we_lVhBd
~TW~
-
Thanks Spud but if you cant see the flaws in that then !
~TW~
I thought it was a good summary of their view, easy to read.
-
Thanks Spud but if you cant see the flaws in that then !
~TW~
I thought it was a good summary of their view, easy to read.
And very easy to see the flaws.Spud think on this Jesus was asked if a man has more then one wife who is he married to,now what was the answer and then you will see the flaws.
~TW~
-
Let me state my reason, it is simple, that is where the narrative begins.
my views have nothing to do with quoted site. simply a straight forward reading of the narrative - ignoring the man made chapter breaks. rewind to Rev 19:11.
Dave, pass that brick wall over will you ;)
-
So Spud you are back to Rev 19: 11 agree or disagree .
~TW~
-
rewind to Rev 19:11
And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war.
The rider is Christ, and he has a double edged sword coming from his mouth, with which he smites the nations. This is symbolic, agreed?
-
Symbolic of what, that is important.
-
Thanks Spud but if you cant see the flaws in that then !
~TW~
I thought it was a good summary of their view, easy to read.
Strange, considering that we are supposed to be enjoying the millennium reign of Christ right now, that I see no sign of people beating their swords into ploughshares!
Recently in this country a lion managed to wander outside the boundaries of a game reserve and into adjacent farm land. At the last count it had killed fourteen sheep. Seems that someone forgot to tell this big kitty that he was supposed to lie down with the calf (and the lamb) and eat straw like the ox! (Isaiah 9).
In chapter 65 Isaiah repeats similar sentiments and expands further on them. He tells us of the coming time when:
I will rejoice in Jerusalem and be glad in my people; no more shall be heard in it the sound of weeping and the cry of distress. No more shall there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not fill out his days, for the young man shall die a hundred years old, and the sinner a hundred years old shall be accursed. They shall build houses and inhabit them; they shall plant vineyards and eat their fruit. They shall not build and another inhabit; they shall not plant and another eat; for like the days of a tree shall the days of my people be, and my chosen shall long enjoy the work of their hands. They shall not labour in vain or bear children for calamity, for they shall be the offspring of the blessed of the LORD, and their descendants with them. Before they call I will answer; while they are yet speaking I will hear. The wolf and the lamb shall graze together; the lion shall eat straw like the ox, and dust shall be the serpent's food. They shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain,” says the LORD. (Isaiah 65:19-25).
If what we are seeing in the Middle East today is the fulfilment of this millennial prophecy then all I can say is, ‘stop the world, I want to get off’.
I certainly do not see many ‘young men’ dying at a hundred, or old men with lifespans equal to the days of a tree (1000 years?). As for no more hurting or destroying (killing) in all my holy mountain – all we are seeing is escalating carnage.
Today’s world is so far removed from the picture the Scriptures paint of the golden age of the Millennium that I find it amazing that anyone could equate the two.
-
"The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou at my right hand: Until I make thy enemies thy footstool" and "I saw seats; and they sat upon them; and judgment was given unto them; and the souls of them that were beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and who had not adored the beast nor his image, nor received his character on their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
If the "thousand years" is not a figure of the time between the resurrection and our Lord's return on the last day, then neither does our Lord sit at the righthand of the Father nor do the saints live and reign with him which means that our Lord descended into Hades in vain and St. Stephen Protomartyr was hallucinating.
-
"The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou at my right hand: Until I make thy enemies thy footstool" and "I saw seats; and they sat upon them; and judgment was given unto them; and the souls of them that were beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and who had not adored the beast nor his image, nor received his character on their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
If the "thousand years" is not a figure of the time between the resurrection and our Lord's return on the last day, then neither does our Lord sit at the righthand of the Father nor do the saints live and reign with him which means that our Lord descended into Hades in vain and St. Stephen Protomartyr was hallucinating.
Well considering that those words of David from Psalm 110 were written almost exactly 1000 years before the crucifixion why not argue that Jesus was sitting at the right hand of the Father during that time and that the Millennium must thus correspond to the 1000 year period from David to Messiah.
Which is really saying that I find no contradiction between the Scriptures you quoted and the view of a post second coming Millenial reign ushered in by Christ on His return.
-
"The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou at my right hand: Until I make thy enemies thy footstool" and "I saw seats; and they sat upon them; and judgment was given unto them; and the souls of them that were beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and who had not adored the beast nor his image, nor received his character on their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
If the "thousand years" is not a figure of the time between the resurrection and our Lord's return on the last day, then neither does our Lord sit at the righthand of the Father nor do the saints live and reign with him which means that our Lord descended into Hades in vain and St. Stephen Protomartyr was hallucinating.
Well considering that those words of David from Psalm 110 were written almost exactly 1000 years before the crucifixion why not argue that Jesus was sitting at the right hand of the Father during that time and that the Millennium must thus correspond to the 1000 year period from David to Messiah.
Which is really saying that I find no contradiction between the Scriptures you quoted and the view of a post second coming Millenial reign ushered in by Christ on His return.
Except that the Incarnation happenned, that is the Word became flesh, at a certain point in time.
-
Thanks Spud but if you cant see the flaws in that then !
~TW~
I thought it was a good summary of their view, easy to read.
Strange, considering that we are supposed to be enjoying the millennium reign of Christ right now, that I see no sign of people beating their swords into ploughshares!
Recently in this country a lion managed to wander outside the boundaries of a game reserve and into adjacent farm land. At the last count it had killed fourteen sheep. Seems that someone forgot to tell this big kitty that he was supposed to lie down with the calf (and the lamb) and eat straw like the ox! (Isaiah 9).
In chapter 65 Isaiah repeats similar sentiments and expands further on them. He tells us of the coming time when:
I will rejoice in Jerusalem and be glad in my people; no more shall be heard in it the sound of weeping and the cry of distress. No more shall there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not fill out his days, for the young man shall die a hundred years old, and the sinner a hundred years old shall be accursed. They shall build houses and inhabit them; they shall plant vineyards and eat their fruit. They shall not build and another inhabit; they shall not plant and another eat; for like the days of a tree shall the days of my people be, and my chosen shall long enjoy the work of their hands. They shall not labour in vain or bear children for calamity, for they shall be the offspring of the blessed of the LORD, and their descendants with them. Before they call I will answer; while they are yet speaking I will hear. The wolf and the lamb shall graze together; the lion shall eat straw like the ox, and dust shall be the serpent's food. They shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain,” says the LORD. (Isaiah 65:19-25).
If what we are seeing in the Middle East today is the fulfilment of this millennial prophecy then all I can say is, ‘stop the world, I want to get off’.
I certainly do not see many ‘young men’ dying at a hundred, or old men with lifespans equal to the days of a tree (1000 years?). As for no more hurting or destroying (killing) in all my holy mountain – all we are seeing is escalating carnage.
Today’s world is so far removed from the picture the Scriptures paint of the golden age of the Millennium that I find it amazing that anyone could equate the two.
Bravo
-
Symbolic of what, that is important.
The sword represents the Gospel, which kills them (19:21). Getting eaten by the birds symbolizes being cursed, in other words eternally damned.
-
"The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou at my right hand: Until I make thy enemies thy footstool" and "I saw seats; and they sat upon them; and judgment was given unto them; and the souls of them that were beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and who had not adored the beast nor his image, nor received his character on their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
If the "thousand years" is not a figure of the time between the resurrection and our Lord's return on the last day, then neither does our Lord sit at the righthand of the Father nor do the saints live and reign with him which means that our Lord descended into Hades in vain and St. Stephen Protomartyr was hallucinating.
Well considering that those words of David from Psalm 110 were written almost exactly 1000 years before the crucifixion why not argue that Jesus was sitting at the right hand of the Father during that time and that the Millennium must thus correspond to the 1000 year period from David to Messiah.
Which is really saying that I find no contradiction between the Scriptures you quoted and the view of a post second coming Millenial reign ushered in by Christ on His return.
Except that the Incarnation happenned, that is the Word became flesh, at a certain point in time.
The final six chapters of Isaiah are magnificent ones to read, and in their prophetic context need to be carefully noted. Starting at 61:1-3 is the prophecy of the coming of Messiah who will not only usher in the ‘favourable year of the Lord’ but also the ‘day of vengeance of our God’ and as the one who will comfort those who mourn. A consequence of Messiah’s advent seen from there through to Chapter 62 is the true restoration of God’s ancient people, Israel, and recognition by the Gentiles that they are now those truly blessed by the Lord. But then we are also given a picture in Chapter 63 of ‘the day of vengeance of our God which must take place before the true Millennial Kingdom of Chapter 65 can be ushered in.
Now Jesus read from Isaiah 61:1-2a in the synagogue at Nazareth at the start on His ministry, (Luke 4:16-21). And it is highly significant that He stopped half way through Isaiah 61:2 at the ‘favourable year of our Lord’ omitting the sections on the ‘day of vengeance of our God’ and ‘to comfort those who mourn’. Also significant that He ‘closed the book’ and announced that ‘today this prophecy has been fulfilled in your hearing. The implication being that the time of the ‘day of vengeance’ and ‘comforting those who mourn’ had not yet arrived. With hindsight we know that these, and events beyond this in Isaiah would await their fulfilment until the Second Coming. Sandwiched between these two events would be the Church age – what I think some German theologians termed ‘Der Zwischen Zeit’.
But the concept of two stages to Messiah’s ministry was a truth that was not revealed to the OT prophets. They all write as though the coming of Messiah would be a single event. Paul refers to the time we are now living in as the mystery of the Church. Peter tells us that, ‘concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating, ‘ trying but failing to truly understand what they were receiving from the Lord. Even John the Baptist asked the Pharisees who it was who had warned them of the wrath to come, i.e. the imminent Day of Vengeance.
But the key issue here is that the Isaiah prophecy is quite clear that the Millennial Age does not precede the Day of Vengeance of our God (Chapter 63) but is subsequent to it (Chapters 65-66). It follows both the Incarnation and the Day of Vengeance. In my understanding this is a serious, if not fatal, objection, to the view that the Millennium corresponds to the period between the first and second Advents. We are still in the ‘Zwischen Zeit’ waiting for the return of the Lord in judgement for this to happen.
-
The Church is Israel and our Lord already rules his kingdom hence, "The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou at my right hand: Until I make thy enemies thy footstool. The Lord will send forth the sceptre of thy power out of Sion: rule thou in the midst of thy enemies", which is why the holy council at Constantinople condemned chiliasm.
-
Symbolic of what, that is important.
The sword represents the Gospel, which kills them (19:21). Getting eaten by the birds symbolizes being cursed, in other words eternally damned.
The sword is the word of God, and His enemies will be eternally damned. Do you agree that the second coming of the Lord and the defeat of His enemies is in view here?
-
The Church is Israel.
Go and read the Scriptures carefully. The Abrahamic Covenant is a good place to start. God is always true to His promises and He will fulfil all His promises to Abraham. In fact you do not really need to go beyond this to realise that the Church is not Israel, irrespective of the views of the Council of Constantinople.
-
It is because the scriptures are such an integral part of the life of the Church, it is because I have read the scriptures, that both the Church and I see that the Church clearly is Israel.
-
It is because the scriptures are such an integral part of the life of the Church, it is because I have read the scriptures, that both the Church and I see that the Church clearly is Israel.
I'm with Marcion here: "the church is Israel’s replacement and is now to receive all that had been promised to Israel."
-
It is because the scriptures are such an integral part of the life of the Church, it is because I have read the scriptures, that both the Church and I see that the Church clearly is Israel.
I' 'with Marcion here: "the church is Israel’s replacement and wis now to receive all that had been promised to Israel."
Hi BA,
Fair enough if you hold that view. But how about some solid Scriptural backing in support. Not forgetting to also provide some arguments based on Scripture as to why you think that my understanding of Isaiah 61 to 66 is in error.
-
It is because the scriptures are such an integral part of the life of the Church, it is because I have read the scriptures, that both the Church and I see that the Church clearly is Israel.
I'm with Marcion here: "the church is Israel’s replacement and wis now to receive all that had been promised to Israel."
Hi BA,
Fair enough if you hold that view. But how about some solid Scriptural backing in support. Not forgetting to also provide some arguments based on Scripture as to why you think that my understanding of Isaiah 61 to 66 is in error.
Hi,
Can I refer you to some of the sites available on Marcion and his beliefs, which deal with this in depth.
No time for in-depth discussion now (still haven't had my breakfast!!); but talk of vengeance is, for me, total anathema:
"“But as for you who forsake the Lord
and forget my holy mountain,
who spread a table for Fortune
and fill bowls of mixed wine for Destiny,
12 I will destine you for the sword,
and all of you will fall in the slaughter;
for I called but you did not answer,
I spoke but you did not listen.
You did evil in my sight
and chose what displeases me.”
That is completely at odds with the God Jesus teaches us about, which is essentially a God of love and forgiveness.
-
Hi,
Can I refer you to some of the sites available on Marcion and his beliefs, which deal with this in depth.
I don't think we should derail this thread with another discussion on Marcion. Perhaps a topic for another day.
Plus the fact that I do not believe a meaningful discussion on eschatology and the place of Israel in God's plans can be conducted on the basis of the New Testament only.
-
It is because the scriptures are such an integral part of the life of the Church, it is because I have read the scriptures, that both the Church and I see that the Church clearly is Israel.
Romans 11?
-
It is because the scriptures are such an integral part of the life of the Church, it is because I have read the scriptures, that both the Church and I see that the Church clearly is Israel.
Romans 11?
Exactly! It proves my point.
-
It is because the scriptures are such an integral part of the life of the Church, it is because I have read the scriptures, that both the Church and I see that the Church clearly is Israel.
Romans 11?
Exactly! It proves my point.
Perhaps you'd like to ellaborate, because as I read it, it proves the exact opposite!
-
The olive tree is Israel. The faithless Jews were cut off and the Gentiles grafted on.
-
The olive tree is Israel. The faithless Jews were cut off and the Gentiles grafted on.
And part darkness has come upon Israel the Church until the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled! Perhaps the one thing on this thread that we could all be in agreement with.
-
I would agree :(
-
Symbolic of what, that is important.
The sword represents the Gospel, which kills them (19:21). Getting eaten by the birds symbolizes being cursed, in other words eternally damned.
The sword is the word of God, and His enemies will be eternally damned. Do you agree that the second coming of the Lord and the defeat of His enemies is in view here?
The second coming is pictured in 20:9. See 2 Thess 1:7, 2 Thess 2:8, 2 Peter 3:10-13, where it is referred to as a fiery ordeal.
-
Symbolic of what, that is important.
The sword represents the Gospel, which kills them (19:21). Getting eaten by the birds symbolizes being cursed, in other words eternally damned.
The sword is the word of God, and His enemies will be eternally damned. Do you agree that the second coming of the Lord and the defeat of His enemies is in view here?
The second coming is pictured in 20:9. See 2 Thess 1:7, 2 Thess 2:8, 2 Peter 3:10-13, where it is referred to as a fiery ordeal.
Do you seen any parallel between 2 Thess 2:8 and Rev 19:20 ?
-
Nice to see the thread has exploded in to life,a lot to take in since I last looked,Just to say will reply later and I to hold the Church is Israel.
Dave M you have not answered my question.
~TW~
-
rewind to Rev 19:11
And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war.
The rider is Christ, and he has a double edged sword coming from his mouth, with which he smites the nations. This is symbolic, agreed?
Sorry Spud the rider on the white horse is not Jesus,the 4 horsemen are Christ appointed instruments of Judgement.
This also shows that Dave M has it wrong,Dave M tells us we have to much trouble in the world to be in the millennium he has not read
Rev 6 :1:7. Also Spud DO NOT confuse the white horse in Rev 6 with the account in Rev 19.
Also remember Spud the term IT IS GIVEN Christ is not given permission by any one he is lord of all he give permission.
The Horses can be given names Conquest-Bloodshed-Famine-Death
~TW~
-
Nice to see the thread has exploded in to life,a lot to take in since I last looked,Just to say will reply later and I to hold the Church is Israel.
Dave M you have not answered my question.
~TW~
\
Why not simply accept what Scripture says as being correct? Satan is bound, thrown into the pit, the pit is shut and sealed, thus isolating him completely and making it impossible for him to move around the earth (from going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it as Job 1:7 says). So in Revelation 20 he is totally neutralised and is incapable of deceiving even the nations. Such a description stands in total conflict to the notion of him being free to prowl around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour’.
The fact that I as a Christian have the authority through the power of the Spirit to ‘bind Satan’ in a local sense and hence neutralise his attacks on me does not fall into the same category at all. Satan can still prowl around but I can negate his attempts to attempt to deceive me.
-
rewind to Rev 19:11
And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war.
The rider is Christ, and he has a double edged sword coming from his mouth, with which he smites the nations.
The rider of the white horse in Rev 19:11 is undoubtedly Christ, coming to fight on behalf of His people (Israel) and to defeat the Antichrist and the nations who are alliance with him and to bind the evil one for the duration of the millennium. This takes place right at the end of Tribulation. You might care to look at the great battle for Jerusalem in Zech 14 which in my view is the same event.
Of course this white horse and its rider are not to be confused with the white horse of Rev 6. This is much earlier in Tribulation and here the rider is an evil conqueror, either the Antichrist or one of his minions, intent on global conquest and establishing the world wide reign of the beast.
-
rewind to Rev 19:11
And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war.
The rider is Christ, and he has a double edged sword coming from his mouth, with which he smites the nations. This is symbolic, agreed?
Sorry Spud the rider on the white horse is not Jesus,the 4 horsemen are Christ appointed instruments of Judgement.
This also shows that Dave M has it wrong,Dave M tells us we have to much trouble in the world to be in the millennium he has not read
Rev 6 :1:7. Also Spud DO NOT confuse the white horse in Rev 6 with the account in Rev 19.
Also remember Spud the term IT IS GIVEN Christ is not given permission by any one he is lord of all he give permission.
The Horses can be given names Conquest-Bloodshed-Famine-Death
~TW~
Hi TW, I was talking about the rider on the white horse in Revelation 19.
-
rewind to Rev 19:11
And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war.
The rider is Christ, and he has a double edged sword coming from his mouth, with which he smites the nations. This is symbolic, agreed?
Sorry Spud so we have a White Horse in Rev 6 along with 3 other horses conquest-bloodshed-famine-and - death which we see all around us today.Now a reading of Rev 19 we have The Lord here and this is the 2nd coming the final day,now Dave M how do you fit in a 1000 years after the final day.
~TW~
Sorry Spud the rider on the white horse is not Jesus,the 4 horsemen are Christ appointed instruments of Judgement.
This also shows that Dave M has it wrong,Dave M tells us we have to much trouble in the world to be in the millennium he has not read
Rev 6 :1:7. Also Spud DO NOT confuse the white horse in Rev 6 with the account in Rev 19.
Also remember Spud the term IT IS GIVEN Christ is not given permission by any one he is lord of all he give permission.
The Horses can be given names Conquest-Bloodshed-Famine-Death
~TW~
Hi TW, I was talking about the rider on the white horse in Revelation 19.
-
Nice to see the thread has exploded in to life,a lot to take in since I last looked,Just to say will reply later and I to hold the Church is Israel.
Dave M you have not answered my question.
~TW~
\
Why not simply accept what Scripture says as being correct? Satan is bound, thrown into the pit, the pit is shut and sealed, thus isolating him completely and making it impossible for him to move around the earth (from going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it as Job 1:7 says). So in Revelation 20 he is totally neutralised and is incapable of deceiving even the nations. Such a description stands in total conflict to the notion of him being free to prowl around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour’.
The fact that I as a Christian have the authority through the power of the Spirit to ‘bind Satan’ in a local sense and hence neutralise his attacks on me does not fall into the same category at all. Satan can still prowl around but I can negate his attempts to attempt to deceive me.
Doesn't this suggest that it is the Church that binds Satan during the millennium? In Matthew 16:18-19 Peter is given the key to the kingdom of heaven. He is told at the same time that whatever he binds and looses on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven. In Matthew 18:18 this is mentioned in the context of Church discipline, which involves binding Satan. So the key in Revelation 20:1 is this same key, which Jesus gave to Peter and the apostles.
-
Nice to see the thread has exploded in to life,a lot to take in since I last looked,Just to say will reply later and I to hold the Church is Israel.
Dave M you have not answered my question.
~TW~
\
Why not simply accept what Scripture says as being correct? Satan is bound, thrown into the pit, the pit is shut and sealed, thus isolating him completely and making it impossible for him to move around the earth (from going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it as Job 1:7 says). So in Revelation 20 he is totally neutralised and is incapable of deceiving even the nations. Such a description stands in total conflict to the notion of him being free to prowl around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour’.
The fact that I as a Christian have the authority through the power of the Spirit to ‘bind Satan’ in a local sense and hence neutralise his attacks on me does not fall into the same category at all. Satan can still prowl around but I can negate his attempts to attempt to deceive me.
Doesn't this suggest that it is the Church that binds Satan during the millennium? In Matthew 16:18-19 Peter is given the key to the kingdom of heaven. He is told at the same time that whatever he binds and looses on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven. In Matthew 18:18 this is mentioned in the context of Church discipline, which involves binding Satan. So the key in Revelation 20:1 is this same key, which Jesus gave to Peter and the apostles.
Spud you are being mislead first Rev 19 note READ THIS 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.-----------------------
This is the Great Day the End the Final Battle NOW the op posers of God are Gone .But in REV 20 we read -------------------- 2 He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. 3 He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.------------So Spud what nations will not be deceived? We have no nations they went in REV 19
~TW~
-
Hi,
Can I refer you to some of the sites available on Marcion and his beliefs, which deal with this in depth.
I don't think we should derail this thread with another discussion on Marcion. Perhaps a topic for another day.
Plus the fact that I do not believe a meaningful discussion on eschatology and the place of Israel in God's plans can be conducted on the basis of the New Testament only.
I do not believe that Israel has a special place in God's Plan: it is for all, and to leave the New Testament out of your discussion is to, in effect, renounce the teaching of Jesus. Is that what you mean? If not, how does the teaching of Jesus, and later Paul, fit into this?
-
This is the Great Day the End the Final Battle NOW the op posers of God are Gone ....
...So Spud what nations will not be deceived? We have no nations they went in REV 19
~TW~
Very well put, TW. Now I recall you saying that Rev 19 and 20 are not in sequence. I am more persuaded that they are in sequence, and that Rev 19 refers to something which happened before Satan was definitively bound. Rev 19 refers to the beast from the sea (Rev 13) being destroyed. This beast represents the Gentile empire which protected Israel and culminated in the Roman empire:
The four beasts were cherubim protectors for Israel, just as the Metal Man of Daniel 2 was. God established the gentile empire for this purpose from Nebuchadnezzar to Vespasian. Each head of the beast, in turn, was called to bare its teeth and fangs to ward off the enemies of the saints. When the Babylonians stopped protecting the church (Daniel 5), God brought in the righteous Cyrus and Darius. When the Persians stopped protecting the church, God brought in Alexander as a deliverer (Zechariah 9). When the Greeks stopped protecting the church, God brought in the Romans (Daniel 11). The Romans are seen protecting the church throughout Acts, but in Revelation 13, Satan seduces the beast to turn against God’s people.
http://www.biblicalhorizons.com/biblical-horizons/no-73-a-correction-on-daniel-7/
Also in Rev 19, the false prophet (beast from the earth, Rev 13) is destroyed. This beast I take to be the Herod-Highpriesthood complex, which is represented by its two horns.
After the destruction of the Herodian temple, this beast is redundant, which is what Rev 19 means when it says it was destroyed. Similarly after AD 70, Rome was no longer part of God's plan for his people. This is pictured as destruction in the lake of fire.
The Millennium, then, began after these events.
-
Symbolic of what, that is important.
The sword represents the Gospel, which kills them (19:21). Getting eaten by the birds symbolizes being cursed, in other words eternally damned.
The sword is the word of God, and His enemies will be eternally damned. Do you agree that the second coming of the Lord and the defeat of His enemies is in view here?
The second coming is pictured in 20:9. See 2 Thess 1:7, 2 Thess 2:8, 2 Peter 3:10-13, where it is referred to as a fiery ordeal.
Do you seen any parallel between 2 Thess 2:8 and Rev 19:20 ?
Yes I do, and I'm revising my thoughts about this.
This link shows how in II Thess. Paul's mention of the coming of Christ could refer to his judgment on Jerusalem:
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Hyper/0000_preston_second-thess.html
(NB that website contains hyperpreterism saying that the resurrection took place in AD 70. I do not agree with this)
-
Rev. 20:10 confirms that chapters 19 and 20 are in sequence, when it says that the devil was thrown into the lake of fire, where the beast and false prophet are. They are there already, having been put there in 19:20.
-
Rev. 20:10 confirms that chapters 19 and 20 are in sequence, when it says that the devil was thrown into the lake of fire, where the beast and false prophet are. They are there already, having been put there in 19:20.
I was reading that today and came to the same conclusion, then I compared to Rev 16:12-14 which seems to have parallels, but seems to refer to the last battle. What do you think?
-
In Rev 19 the picture is clear the 2nd Coming the End the Final Day.We are clearly told goodbye nations.
Rev 20 tells us Satan is bound in order the nations are not deceived,I understand this and have no problems but for those who have a literal 1000 years the question is where did these nations come from.
So I maintain the millennium now,Satan bound now the four horses Conquest-bloodshed- famine-death ride out now Rev 6 but some time in the future Satan will be released for a short time.
Also as I told Spud months ago you do not read Revelation in a Chronological order.What you have are a series of events starting and ending.
~TW~
-
Rev. 20:10 confirms that chapters 19 and 20 are in sequence, when it says that the devil was thrown into the lake of fire, where the beast and false prophet are. They are there already, having been put there in 19:20.
I was reading that today and came to the same conclusion, then I compared to Rev 16:12-14 which seems to have parallels, but seems to refer to the last battle. What do you think?
I think the last battle, still to come, is pictured in 20:7-10. Rev 16:12-16 pictures the same battle as in 19:17-21.
-
In Rev 19 the picture is clear the 2nd Coming the End the Final Day.We are clearly told goodbye nations.
Revelation 19:21 is not talking about a physical battle. Unless the Lord had very strong teeth.
-
In Rev 19 the picture is clear the 2nd Coming the End the Final Day.We are clearly told goodbye nations.
Revelation 19:21 is not talking about a physical battle. Unless the Lord had very strong teeth.
Spud you need to concentrate------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. It is the birds ? vultures maybe that have the strong teeth.
~TW~
-
In Rev 19 the picture is clear the 2nd Coming the End the Final Day.We are clearly told goodbye nations.
Revelation 19:21 is not talking about a physical battle. Unless the Lord had very strong teeth.
Spud you need to concentrate------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. It is the birds ? vultures maybe that have the strong teeth.
~TW~
I was thinking of holding a sword in His mouth, which would require strong teeth.
-
Rev. 20:10 confirms that chapters 19 and 20 are in sequence, when it says that the devil was thrown into the lake of fire, where the beast and false prophet are. They are there already, having been put there in 19:20.
Hi Spud,
Apologies for not coming back to you earlier on some of your previous posts. Have been running Bible Studies and also hiking in our superb mountains and enjoying the beauty of God's (young??) creation over the past couple of days. Will try and respond when I am able.
I agree with the above that chapters 19 and 20 are in sequence and also noting in particular 2 Corrie's important reminder about not being influenced by artificial chapter divisions. I would also place Rev 18 before Chapter 16 but in my view 16, 18 and 19 are all late Tribulation events. Rev 17 also precedes Rev 16 & 18 but in my view much earlier, probably around mid-Tribulation. Rev 17 is best understood as the destruction of the Apostate Church whereas Chapter 18 probably represents the destruction of the evil commercial (and also political) systems of the world.
Enjoy your day, Dave
-
This link shows how in II Thess. Paul's mention of the coming of Christ could refer to his judgment on Jerusalem:
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Hyper/0000_preston_second-thess.html
(NB that website contains hyperpreterism saying that the resurrection took place in AD 70. I do not agree with this)
[/quote]
Hi Spud,
Well I am pleased to see that you reject an AD70 resurrection. But quite honestly when you comes across statements like this which are complete nonsense, surely it should be obvious that the author has zero theological insights, has a very low regard for the authority of Scripture and that the Spirit has nothing to say to him. Best suggestion I can make is that you reject such sources in their entirety as being totally unreliable..
-
In Rev 19 the picture is clear the 2nd Coming the End the Final Day.We are clearly told goodbye nations.
Rev 20 tells us Satan is bound in order the nations are not deceived,I understand this and have no problems but for those who have a literal 1000 years the question is where did these nations come from.
So I maintain the millennium now,Satan bound now the four horses Conquest-bloodshed- famine-death ride out now Rev 6 but some time in the future Satan will be released for a short time.
Also as I told Spud months ago you do not read Revelation in a Chronological order.What you have are a series of events starting and ending.
~TW~
One small problem concerning the total absence of the nations. Zech 14 also tells us about this same great battle when all the nations come against Jerusalem and are soundly defeated. But then in Zech 14:16 we are informed that all the survivors ('any who are left of all the nations that came up against Jerusalem') will be required to come up to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles. So the armies themselves may have been totally wiped out but not the totality of the inhabitants of the nations. They are still alive and kicking (maybe only just) in Rev 20.
-
In Rev 19 the picture is clear the 2nd Coming the End the Final Day.We are clearly told goodbye nations.
Rev 20 tells us Satan is bound in order the nations are not deceived,I understand this and have no problems but for those who have a literal 1000 years the question is where did these nations come from.
So I maintain the millennium now,Satan bound now the four horses Conquest-bloodshed- famine-death ride out now Rev 6 but some time in the future Satan will be released for a short time.
Also as I told Spud months ago you do not read Revelation in a Chronological order.What you have are a series of events starting and ending.
~TW~
One small problem concerning the total absence of the nations. Zech 14 also tells us about this same great battle when all the nations come against Jerusalem and are soundly defeated. But then in Zech 14:16 we are informed that all the survivors ('any who are left of all the nations that came up against Jerusalem') will be required to come up to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles. So the armies themselves may have been totally wiped out but not the totality of the inhabitants of the nations. They are still alive and kicking (maybe only just) in Rev 20.
Read Rev 19 the birds pick at the bones.
All Gone Dave.
~TW~
-
In Rev 19 the picture is clear the 2nd Coming the End the Final Day.We are clearly told goodbye nations.
Rev 20 tells us Satan is bound in order the nations are not deceived,I understand this and have no problems but for those who have a literal 1000 years the question is where did these nations come from.
So I maintain the millennium now,Satan bound now the four horses Conquest-bloodshed- famine-death ride out now Rev 6 but some time in the future Satan will be released for a short time.
Also as I told Spud months ago you do not read Revelation in a Chronological order.What you have are a series of events starting and ending.
~TW~
One small problem concerning the total absence of the nations. Zech 14 also tells us about this same great battle when all the nations come against Jerusalem and are soundly defeated. But then in Zech 14:16 we are informed that all the survivors ('any who are left of all the nations that came up against Jerusalem') will be required to come up to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles. So the armies themselves may have been totally wiped out but not the totality of the inhabitants of the nations. They are still alive and kicking (maybe only just) in Rev 20.
Read Rev 19 the birds pick at the bones.
All Gone Dave.
~TW~
Fortunately a careful reading of Rev 19:18-19 shows that it supports Zechariah in that it was the armies of the kings of the earth that had been assembled to do battle against the armies of heaven, Rev 19:14, that were all gone. Back home at the ranch those who were not part of these armies were not consumed. God's word does not contradict itself.
-
TW, 2Corrie, Dave, ad_O et al,
This is not easy stuff imo. I usually find something to contradict what I thought was a correct interpretation when studying Revelation. Plus it is 30 degrees which doesn't help the concentration!
Dave, you mentioned ch. 17 and 18. I wanted to point out how part of this passage is very similar to Ezekiel 16, which describes Jerusalem as a harlot. I would recommend people read that and ask: this harlot who is destroyed in Revelation 17 and 18- could John be talking about Jerusalem here, and would that fit in with Jesus' prediction of the destruction of that city? Bear in mind Rev 11:8 (cf Rev 16:19, 18:10) which says the 'great city' is where the Lord was crucified.
If this is correct, and if Revelation is a sequential story, then it must be that the millennium follows AD 70 which is pictured in 17-18.
Remember to look through Ezekiel 16.
-
If correct, and if Revelation is a sequential story, then the millennium follows AD 70.
--------------------------------------------So you agree with me the millennium is now :) good.
~TW~
-
TW- yes, I reckon the millennium is now, even though Satan seems to be unbound a lot of the time.
-
TW- yes, I reckon the millennium is now, even though Satan seems to be unbound a lot of the time.
Could it be you need to look at what God is doing Judgments for example.Or do you think he is doing nothing,Revelation says he is very busy.
~TW~
-
In Rev 19 the picture is clear the 2nd Coming the End the Final Day.We are clearly told goodbye nations.
Rev 20 tells us Satan is bound in order the nations are not deceived,I understand this and have no problems but for those who have a literal 1000 years the question is where did these nations come from.
So I maintain the millennium now,Satan bound now the four horses Conquest-bloodshed- famine-death ride out now Rev 6 but some time in the future Satan will be released for a short time.
Also as I told Spud months ago you do not read Revelation in a Chronological order.What you have are a series of events starting and ending.
~TW~
One small problem concerning the total absence of the nations. Zech 14 also tells us about this same great battle when all the nations come against Jerusalem and are soundly defeated. But then in Zech 14:16 we are informed that all the survivors ('any who are left of all the nations that came up against Jerusalem') will be required to come up to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles. So the armies themselves may have been totally wiped out but not the totality of the inhabitants of the nations. They are still alive and kicking (maybe only just) in Rev 20.
Read Rev 19 the birds pick at the bones.
All Gone Dave.
~TW~
Fortunately a careful reading of Rev 19:18-19 shows that it supports Zechariah in that it was the armies of the kings of the earth that had been assembled to do battle against the armies of heaven, Rev 19:14, that were all gone. Back home at the ranch those who were not part of these armies were not consumed. God's word does not contradict itself.
Verse 18 lists two groups of four:
1) kings, generals, mighty men, horses and their riders.
2) all people, free and slave, small and great.
The grouping into fours here suggests a worldwide scope (four corners of the earth imagery).
Group 2 suggests all people, not just military.
-
The key word Spud is All, as in all people there is no room for a JW paradise earth the final day is the final day.
Also an interesting question for Dave M and others is.
What is the Lord doing today.
~TW~
-
In Rev 19 the picture is clear the 2nd Coming the End the Final Day.We are clearly told goodbye nations.
Rev 20 tells us Satan is bound in order the nations are not deceived,I understand this and have no problems but for those who have a literal 1000 years the question is where did these nations come from.
So I maintain the millennium now,Satan bound now the four horses Conquest-bloodshed- famine-death ride out now Rev 6 but some time in the future Satan will be released for a short time.
Also as I told Spud months ago you do not read Revelation in a Chronological order.What you have are a series of events starting and ending.
~TW~
One small problem concerning the total absence of the nations. Zech 14 also tells us about this same great battle when all the nations come against Jerusalem and are soundly defeated. But then in Zech 14:16 we are informed that all the survivors ('any who are left of all the nations that came up against Jerusalem') will be required to come up to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles. So the armies themselves may have been totally wiped out but not the totality of the inhabitants of the nations. They are still alive and kicking (maybe only just) in Rev 20.
Read Rev 19 the birds pick at the bones.
All Gone Dave.
~TW~
Fortunately a careful reading of Rev 19:18-19 shows that it supports Zechariah in that it was the armies of the kings of the earth that had been assembled to do battle against the armies of heaven, Rev 19:14, that were all gone. Back home at the ranch those who were not part of these armies were not consumed. God's word does not contradict itself.
Verse 18 lists two groups of four:
1) kings, generals, mighty men, horses and their riders.
2) all people, free and slave, small and great.
The grouping into fours here suggests a worldwide scope (four corners of the earth imagery).
Group 2 suggests all people, not just military.
Four groups representing a typical composition of an army in the time John was writing and even today in many places. Just have a look at the mix of people being forced into service in a place like Africa at the present times. Press gangs were still operating in England not that far back. So I see no conflict with my position.
I also have a real problem with the view that the nations are completely eliminated in that this stands in contradiction to Zech 14 which is clearly a chapter on Messiah's coming and the full establishment of His Kingdom. This is a time when the Lord will be King over all the earth and His name will be the only one (Vs 9). Yet there are still nations around to attend the Feast of Tabernacles.
-
The key word Spud is All, as in all people there is no room for a JW paradise earth the final day is the final day.
Also an interesting question for Dave M and others is.
What is the Lord doing today.
~TW~
Well one thing He is definitely doing is sitting at the right hand of the Father and making intercession for the saints.
-
TW, 2Corrie, Dave, ad_O et al,
This is not easy stuff imo. I usually find something to contradict what I thought was a correct interpretation when studying Revelation. Plus it is 30 degrees which doesn't help the concentration!
Dave, you mentioned ch. 17 and 18. I wanted to point out how part of this passage is very similar to Ezekiel 16, which describes Jerusalem as a harlot. I would recommend people read that and ask: this harlot who is destroyed in Revelation 17 and 18- could John be talking about Jerusalem here, and would that fit in with Jesus' prediction of the destruction of that city? Bear in mind Rev 11:8 (cf Rev 16:19, 18:10) which says the 'great city' is where the Lord was crucified.
If this is correct, and if Revelation is a sequential story, then it must be that the millennium follows AD 70 which is pictured in 17-18.
Remember to look through Ezekiel 16.
Hi Spud.
Let me start by stating why Rev 17 cannot be about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Amongst serious Christians there is general agreement that Revelation was written around AD 95 - 96. Rev 1:19 says, 'Therefore write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things'. The things which you have seen is best understood as the vision of the Lord which John was given in Chapter 1. The things which are would then refer to the letters to the seven churches in Asia Minor at the time.
So what about 'the things which will take place after these things'? Well in Rev 4:1 John in his vision is called to heaven in order that he might be shown, 'what must take place after these things'. However you might understand and try and interpret all the symbolism from Rev 4 onwards, Rev 4:1 is a simple straight forward statement translated into simple straight forward English from simple straight forward Greek. From here on in Revelation John is being given visions of things which are to take place in the future going forward from the present. And the future must be looking forward from AD 95/96 not looking back to AD 70. Retrospective interpretation of prophecy violates sound principles of Biblical exegesis in my view.
Now Ezekiel 16 is undoubtedly about Jerusalem. This is stated plainly in verse 2. This section was probably written before 586 BC and therefore the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in that year is the most probable fulfilment.
But irrespective of whether Ezekiel 16 is referring to the 586 BC or AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem it has no bearing on Rev 17 because Rev 17 is clearly not about Jerusalem. Rev 17 is about the judgement of the great harlot. And verse 1 gives us a critical clue as to her possible identity. She is the one 'who sits on many waters. Now have a look at Jeremiah 51. Together with Jer 50 this is a prophecy against Babylon. And in Jer 51:13 Babylon is describe as 'you who dwell by many waters'. So the harlot is clearly associated with the Babylon that symbolise the evil centre of power of the Beast, not Jerusalem. Rev 17:7-9 gives added support to this.
So in my view there is no case to equate Ezek 16 with Rev 17.
Enjoy your day.
Dave
-
TW, 2Corrie, Dave, ad_O et al,
This is not easy stuff imo. I usually find something to contradict what I thought was a correct interpretation when studying Revelation. Plus it is 30 degrees which doesn't help the concentration!
Dave, you mentioned ch. 17 and 18. I wanted to point out how part of this passage is very similar to Ezekiel 16, which describes Jerusalem as a harlot. I would recommend people read that and ask: this harlot who is destroyed in Revelation 17 and 18- could John be talking about Jerusalem here, and would that fit in with Jesus' prediction of the destruction of that city? Bear in mind Rev 11:8 (cf Rev 16:19, 18:10) which says the 'great city' is where the Lord was crucified.
If this is correct, and if Revelation is a sequential story, then it must be that the millennium follows AD 70 which is pictured in 17-18.
Remember to look through Ezekiel 16.
In my opinion I would argue that the thousand years begins at the resurrection or at the very latest at the ascension when Christ takes his place at the righthand of the Father.
-
The key word Spud is All, as in all people.
~TW~
This is what I thought, but apparently Dave hasn't noticed it yet.
-
Sorry to upset you, but this long thread is totally irrelevant and frankly, a waste of time.
-
TW, 2Corrie, Dave, ad_O et al,
This is not easy stuff imo. I usually find something to contradict what I thought was a correct interpretation when studying Revelation. Plus it is 30 degrees which doesn't help the concentration!
Dave, you mentioned ch. 17 and 18. I wanted to point out how part of this passage is very similar to Ezekiel 16, which describes Jerusalem as a harlot. I would recommend people read that and ask: this harlot who is destroyed in Revelation 17 and 18- could John be talking about Jerusalem here, and would that fit in with Jesus' prediction of the destruction of that city? Bear in mind Rev 11:8 (cf Rev 16:19, 18:10) which says the 'great city' is where the Lord was crucified.
If this is correct, and if Revelation is a sequential story, then it must be that the millennium follows AD 70 which is pictured in 17-18.
Remember to look through Ezekiel 16.
In my opinion I would argue that the thousand years begins at the resurrection or at the very latest at the ascension when Christ takes his place at the righthand of the Father.
No Problem with that.
~TW~
-
The key word Spud is All, as in all people.
~TW~
This is what I thought, but apparently Dave hasn't noticed it yet.
In Genesis 14:20 Abraham gave Melchizedek a tenth of all he had. How do you interpret "all' here?
-
Sorry to upset you, but this long thread is totally irrelevant and frankly, a waste of time.
Why would a discussion on the Revelation of our Lord be irrelevant?
-
Here's where I'm at: Rev 19 and 20 are sequential and the parallels with Rev 16 support the idea that the context is the great battle at the time of our Lord's return.
Here's where I become confused:
Satan being bound now, and released just before the last battle - I can see how this interpretation can come about from reading some of the texts - it makes sense to think that there is one last battle - not one either side of future millennium. This view would also reconcile the apparent two judgements (judgement of the nations, and the white throne judgement) it makes some sort of sense if they are one.
The thing which prevents me completely buying into the above however, is that we then have to throw away or spiritualise all the old testament prophecies relating to the millennium period. (Davem has already referred to many of these).
Thoughts?
-
Sorry to upset you, but this long thread is totally irrelevant and frankly, a waste of time.
Why would a discussion on the Revelation of our Lord be irrelevant?
It almost seems you guys are making it up as you go along_ the thread is full of conflicting interpretations; and in the end, nobody really knows what the Book is all about, or whether it is actually credible.
-
I also have a real problem with the view that the nations are completely eliminated
I think you are right in the sense that Rev. 16:16 and Rev. 19 picture a spiritual battle between the Church and the Roman Empire ('oikumenes', 16:14), rather than all the nations.
-
TW, 2Corrie, Dave, ad_O et al,
This is not easy stuff imo. I usually find something to contradict what I thought was a correct interpretation when studying Revelation. Plus it is 30 degrees which doesn't help the concentration!
Dave, you mentioned ch. 17 and 18. I wanted to point out how part of this passage is very similar to Ezekiel 16, which describes Jerusalem as a harlot. I would recommend people read that and ask: this harlot who is destroyed in Revelation 17 and 18- could John be talking about Jerusalem here, and would that fit in with Jesus' prediction of the destruction of that city? Bear in mind Rev 11:8 (cf Rev 16:19, 18:10) which says the 'great city' is where the Lord was crucified.
If this is correct, and if Revelation is a sequential story, then it must be that the millennium follows AD 70 which is pictured in 17-18.
Remember to look through Ezekiel 16.
In my opinion I would argue that the thousand years begins at the resurrection or at the very latest at the ascension when Christ takes his place at the righthand of the Father.
No Problem with that.
~TW~
I agree that the binding of Satan occurred at the resurrection. But it also talks about Satan being not just bound, but thrown into the abyss, and it being sealed over him, I think there is a good case for saying that Satan could not be fully prevented from deceiving the nations until the Jews and 'Judaizers' (who tried to persuade Christians to return to Jewish ways) were dealt with. The temple's destruction accomplished that.
-
Sorry to upset you, but this long thread is totally irrelevant and frankly, a waste of time.
Why would a discussion on the Revelation of our Lord be irrelevant?
It almost seems you guys are making it up as you go along_ the thread is full of conflicting interpretations; and in the end, nobody really knows what the Book is all about, or whether it is actually credible.
Well it would seem that way to you,you have no interest in this book. :) Why not post your objections ONE AT A TIME
Spud the point of this thread is to say the millennium is now and not future.
~TW~
-
and.
Why would a discussion on the Revelation of our Lord be irrelevant?
It almost seems you guys are making it up as you go along_ the thread is full of conflicting interpretations; and in the end, nobody really knows what the Book is all about, or whether it is actually credible.
Well it would seem that way to you,you have no interest in this book. :) Why not post your objections ONE AT A TIME
Spud the point of this thread is to say the millennium is now and not future.
~TW~
I've already posted my objections; and to save time, I did them all in one go - see above.
-
Here's where I'm at: Rev 19 and 20 are sequential and the parallels with Rev 16 support the idea that the context is the great battle at the time of our Lord's return.
Here's where I become confused:
Satan being bound now, and released just before the last battle - I can see how this interpretation can come about from reading some of the texts - it makes sense to think that there is one last battle - not one either side of future millennium. This view would also reconcile the apparent two judgements (judgement of the nations, and the white throne judgement) it makes some sort of sense if they are one.
The thing which prevents me completely buying into the above however, is that we then have to throw away or spiritualise all the old testament prophecies relating to the millennium period. (Davem has already referred to many of these).
Thoughts?
I think it's important to understand just how glorious the present millennial kingdom is, then it is easier to see how OT prophecies are fulfilled now.
-
Here's where I'm at: Rev 19 and 20 are sequential and the parallels with Rev 16 support the idea that the context is the great battle at the time of our Lord's return.
Here's where I become confused:
Satan being bound now, and released just before the last battle - I can see how this interpretation can come about from reading some of the texts - it makes sense to think that there is one last battle - not one either side of future millennium. This view would also reconcile the apparent two judgements (judgement of the nations, and the white throne judgement) it makes some sort of sense if they are one.
The thing which prevents me completely buying into the above however, is that we then have to throw away or spiritualise all the old testament prophecies relating to the millennium period. (Davem has already referred to many of these).
Thoughts?
I think it's important to understand just how glorious the present millennial kingdom is, then it is easier to see how OT prophecies are fulfilled now.
Indeed well said.
~TW~
-
But they are not all being fulfilled now eg:
They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.
And the a wolf will dwell with the lamb, And the leopard will lie down with the young goat,
And the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; And a little boy will lead them. Also the cow and the bear will graze,
Their young will lie down together, And the alion will eat straw like the ox. The nursing child will play by the hole of the cobra, And the weaned child will put his hand on the viper’s den. They will not hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain,For the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord As the waters cover the sea.
No longer will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, Or an old man who does not live out his days;
For the youth will die at the age of one hundred And the one who does not reach the age of one hundred Will be thought accursed.
At that time they will call Jerusalem ‘The Throne of the Lord,’ and all the nations will be gathered to it, to Jerusalem, for the name of the Lord; nor will they walk anymore after the stubbornness of their evil heart.
In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell securely; And this is His name by which He will be called, ‘The Lord our righteousness.’
“For from the arising of the sun even to its setting, My name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense is going to be offered to My name, and a grain offering that is pure; for My name will be great among the nations,” says the Lord of hosts.
To list but a few. I look around me and can only deduce that we are NOT in the millennium now.
-
Here's where I'm at: Rev 19 and 20 are sequential and the parallels with Rev 16 support the idea that the context is the great battle at the time of our Lord's return.
Here's where I become confused:
Satan being bound now, and released just before the last battle - I can see how this interpretation can come about from reading some of the texts - it makes sense to think that there is one last battle - not one either side of future millennium. This view would also reconcile the apparent two judgements (judgement of the nations, and the white throne judgement) it makes some sort of sense if they are one.
The thing which prevents me completely buying into the above however, is that we then have to throw away or spiritualise all the old testament prophecies relating to the millennium period. (Davem has already referred to many of these).
Thoughts?
Perhaps you should not spend too much time concerning yourself with the Judgement of the Nations. After all we have it on the authority of some here that before we get there the nations will all be gone!! :P :P
-
2 Corrie,
Post 123. Well said.
-
I agree that the binding of Satan occurred at the resurrection. But it also talks about Satan being not just bound, but thrown into the abyss, and it being sealed over him, I think there is a good case for saying that Satan could not be fully prevented from deceiving the nations until the Jews and 'Judaizers' (who tried to persuade Christians to return to Jewish ways) were dealt with. The temple's destruction accomplished that.
Morning Spud,
Well it is good to see that you recognise that there are significant differences in the two and have now separated them by a forty year period. All you need do now is fast forward the Rev 20 passage by another 2000+ years and you will be getting close to being spot on the money. :) :) :)
On a more serious note I have referred quite often in previous posts to passages such as Zech 14, Isaiah 61-66 and others in order to give Scriptural support to my views . Unless I have missed some posts, nobody has provided any arguments in an attempt to counter my views and interpretations of such passages. Would be very interested to hear how you understand Zech 14. Also on how you understand Abraham giving a tenth of all to Melchizedek.
Enjoy your day, Dave
-
I agree that the binding of Satan occurred at the resurrection. But it also talks about Satan being not just bound, but thrown into the abyss, and it being sealed over him, I think there is a good case for saying that Satan could not be fully prevented from deceiving the nations until the Jews and 'Judaizers' (who tried to persuade Christians to return to Jewish ways) were dealt with. The temple's destruction accomplished that.
Morning Spud,
Well it is good to see that you recognise that there are significant differences in the two and have now separated them by a forty year period. All you need do now is fast forward the Rev 20 passage by another 2000+ years and you will be getting close to being spot on the money. :) :) :)
On a more serious note I have referred quite often in previous posts to passages such as Zech 14, Isaiah 61-66 and others in order to give Scriptural support to my views . Unless I have missed some posts, nobody has provided any arguments in an attempt to counter my views and interpretations of such passages. Would be very interested to hear how you understand Zech 14. Also on how you understand Abraham giving a tenth of all to Melchizedek.
Enjoy your day, Dave
Keep looking in will get back to you on those scriptures.
~TW~
-
Morning Dave,
Thanks. During the forty year period 30-70AD, the Church was in danger of being seduced back to Judaism, or persecuted until gone, or both. The combined Jewish establishment, false Christians and the Roman oppressors would have prevented the gospel from being taken out to the nations, had AD 70 and the subsequent battle of Armageddon not taken place.
Regarding Armageddon, I should say that some commentators think the following:
There are no mountains of Megiddo, only the Plains of Megiddo. ... Other scholars, including C. C. Torrey, Kline and Jordan argue that the word is derived from the Hebrew moed (מועד), meaning "assembly". Thus, "Armageddon" would mean "Mountain of Assembly," which Jordan says is "a reference to the assembly at Mount Sinai, and to its replacement, Mount Zion."[10]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armageddon
The symbolic use of the name, 'Babylon', to represent Jerusalem, is also prerequisite for the interpretation that I think works best. When you apply to the religious establishment that opposed Christ, the symbols of Sodom, Egypt, and Babylon, then familiar patterns can be seen that remind us of Lot's exodus from Sodom, and Israel's Exoduses from Egypt and Babylon.
I will answer your other questions when I can.
Chow.
-
But they are not all being fulfilled now eg:
They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.
And the a wolf will dwell with the lamb, And the leopard will lie down with the young goat,
And the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; And a little boy will lead them. Also the cow and the bear will graze,
Their young will lie down together, And the alion will eat straw like the ox. The nursing child will play by the hole of the cobra, And the weaned child will put his hand on the viper’s den. They will not hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain,For the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord As the waters cover the sea.
No longer will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, Or an old man who does not live out his days;
For the youth will die at the age of one hundred And the one who does not reach the age of one hundred Will be thought accursed.
At that time they will call Jerusalem ‘The Throne of the Lord,’ and all the nations will be gathered to it, to Jerusalem, for the name of the Lord; nor will they walk anymore after the stubbornness of their evil heart.
In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell securely; And this is His name by which He will be called, ‘The Lord our righteousness.’
“For from the arising of the sun even to its setting, My name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense is going to be offered to My name, and a grain offering that is pure; for My name will be great among the nations,” says the Lord of hosts.
To list but a few. I look around me and can only deduce that we are NOT in the millennium now.
Oh yes we are :)
These quotes relate to the rescue of Israel from exile. But they are also pictures of how God was going to rescue the whole world from its greater captivity to sin. This was accomplished at the cross.
-
But they are not all being fulfilled now eg:
They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.
And the a wolf will dwell with the lamb, And the leopard will lie down with the young goat,
And the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; And a little boy will lead them. Also the cow and the bear will graze,
Their young will lie down together, And the alion will eat straw like the ox. The nursing child will play by the hole of the cobra, And the weaned child will put his hand on the viper’s den. They will not hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain,For the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord As the waters cover the sea.
No longer will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, Or an old man who does not live out his days;
For the youth will die at the age of one hundred And the one who does not reach the age of one hundred Will be thought accursed.
At that time they will call Jerusalem ‘The Throne of the Lord,’ and all the nations will be gathered to it, to Jerusalem, for the name of the Lord; nor will they walk anymore after the stubbornness of their evil heart.
In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell securely; And this is His name by which He will be called, ‘The Lord our righteousness.’
“For from the arising of the sun even to its setting, My name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense is going to be offered to My name, and a grain offering that is pure; for My name will be great among the nations,” says the Lord of hosts.
To list but a few. I look around me and can only deduce that we are NOT in the millennium now.
Oh yes we are :)
These quotes relate to the rescue of Israel from exile. But they are also pictures of how God was going to rescue the whole world from its greater captivity to sin. This was accomplished at the cross.
2 Corrie could you give references to your scriptures also I know you believe in a JW type 1000 years,but the question is.
How do you explain living in Gods paradise a 1000 years and then God sets Satan on these people. After that, he must be set free for a short time {Satan} why is he set free ?
~TW~
-
Morning Dave,
Thanks. During the forty year period 30-70AD, the Church was in danger of being seduced back to Judaism, or persecuted until gone, or both. The combined Jewish establishment, false Christians and the Roman oppressors would have prevented the gospel from being taken out to the nations, had AD 70 and the subsequent battle of Armageddon not taken place.
Regarding Armageddon, I should say that some commentators think the following:
There are no mountains of Megiddo, only the Plains of Megiddo. ... Other scholars, including C. C. Torrey, Kline and Jordan argue that the word is derived from the Hebrew moed (מועד), meaning "assembly". Thus, "Armageddon" would mean "Mountain of Assembly," which Jordan says is "a reference to the assembly at Mount Sinai, and to its replacement, Mount Zion."[10]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armageddon
The symbolic use of the name, 'Babylon', to represent Jerusalem, is also prerequisite for the interpretation that I think works best. When you apply to the religious establishment that opposed Christ, the symbols of Sodom, Egypt, and Babylon, then familiar patterns can be seen that remind us of Lot's exodus from Sodom, and Israel's Exoduses from Egypt and Babylon.
I will answer your other questions when I can.
Chow.
Hi Spud,
Some interesting thoughts there. One or two comments in response.
While Judaism and some early Christian heresies can clearly be seen pre-AD70, the claimed 'binding of satan' in that year seems to have had virtually no impact in reducing their attacks on the true faith (apart possibly from Judaism). While we do see evidence of early Gnosticism in some of Paul's writings (and 1 John AD 85?) it was post AD70 that they really became a much greater threat. Docetism, second century Gnosticism and Marcion c 140 AD all challenged the true faith (despite satan being bound).
Jewish persecution was never going to be truly effective without Roman support. Its main consequence was to disperse believers away from Jerusalem into the Empire thus hastening the spread of the gospel. Not exactly central to the plans of the evil one in the run up to AD 70.
Roman persecution was not seen until c AD 65-67 in the time of Nero. For the first 35 years of its history the existence of Roman rule aided the Church more than impeded it. As has often been noted the Roman peace which prevailed and their excellent system of roads greatly facilitated the safe travel of the early Christian evangelists. Acts 18:12-16 (c AD 50) is an example of the Romans protecting the early Church from Jewish attacks. Apart from Nero it was after AD 70 that we find the greatest persecutions of the early Church, again despite satan being 'totally bound'.
One thought on Babylon. In 1 Peter 5:13 Peter writes, 'She who is in Babylon, ....., sends greetings...' Which Babylon is this? Most commentators equate it with Rome, as the majority opinion is that Peter wrote his letter from there. A few think he was writing from a small town called Babylon located in Mesopotamia. Hardly any think he means Jerusalem. One needs to interpret the use of the word in terms of the context used. And in Rev 17:9 the harlot is associated with seven mountains, which would strongly suggest Rome. Whether this is the physical Rome or a proxy name for the centre of the Beast's evil empire can be debated but it is not Jerusalem in my view.
-
Dave M would you care to list 2 verses we can look at in Zec 14 then later we can go to the other two chapters you mention
~TW~
-
Hi Dave,
Why do commentators think Peter wrote from Rome? I just wonder if the traditions of him preaching in Rome are based on this verse and on a faulty interpretation of Babylon in Revelation.
Regarding the importance of AD 70, we are told that the destruction of the city was God's judgment on those who rejected Jesus. Matthew 23:35.
If the beast fits with Rome, and the Harlot is pictured as sitting on the beast, this means the harlot is somehow closely reliant on Rome in her persecution of the saints. You said yourself: "Jewish persecution was never going to be truly effective without Roman support". So it makes sense that the harlot is Jewry.
-
Hi Spud going back and looking at Dave M post reply 45 we have this---Today’s world is so far removed from the picture the Scriptures paint of the golden age of the Millennium that I find it amazing that anyone could equate the two.
Spud it is Dave M who takes the 3 chapters he quoted earlier and it is he who equate's the 3 chapters with the millennium.
His mistake is we have no mention of a millennium in those chapters.If you want to know for sure what the millennium is about then it is revelation.So the comments of Dave are null and void.Also for Dave this is worth a read.
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Modern/2001_demar_zechariah-14.html
~TW~
-
Keep looking in will get back to you on those scriptures.
~TW~
And mine too please (post 123) references can easily be googled. When will these things be fulfilled if not in the future millennium?
-
Keep looking in will get back to you on those scriptures.
~TW~
And mine too please (post 123) references can easily be googled. When will these things be fulfilled if not in the future millennium?
Thanks 2 Corrie I do wish you would reference scripture for example Isa 2:4 They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.
A few questions for you concerning this scripture when we have dealt with this we will go to the others.
1 Who are these people as revelation tells us there are no people left please read------
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.
2 What is meant by the Final Day and last trumpet.
3 Is this Final Day before the millennium starts or after.
~TW~
-
Hi Dave,
Why do commentators think Peter wrote from Rome? I just wonder if the traditions of him preaching in Rome are based on this verse and on a faulty interpretation of Babylon in Revelation.
Regarding the importance of AD 70, we are told that the destruction of the city was God's judgment on those who rejected Jesus. Matthew 23:35.
If the beast fits with Rome, and the Harlot is pictured as sitting on the beast, this means the harlot is somehow closely reliant on Rome in her persecution of the saints. You said yourself: "Jewish persecution was never going to be truly effective without Roman support". So it makes sense that the harlot is Jewry.
Morning Spud,
It is very much part of Church tradition that Peter spent the last few years of his life in Rome, that he wrote 1 Peter while in Rome either shortly before the persecution under Nero commenced (~AD64) or early during that persecution (~AD 65-66) and that he was martyred there around AD 67. But you are quite correct in taking the view that all church 'tradition' needs to be approached with a healthy degree of scepticism.
However, the view of Peter being in Rome during the last years of his life is not derived from his comment about Babylon in Chap 5. I am speaking from memory but both Eusebius, one of the great early church historians and Origen support the view of Peter being in Rome. And as far as I can ascertain this is a widely held view amongst commentators today.
While the destruction of Jerusalem was undoubtedly a consequence of Jesus being rejected by His people, I would refer to my earlier post #108 that the plain statements of Rev 4:1 demand that all events in Revelation from that point onwards need to be interpreted in terms of events future from ~AD95-96 when the book was written. Unless you have a compelling argument as to why that is a faulty conclusion, and the need to include for some ‘retrospective fulfilment’ in our interpretation of prophecy, I can only maintain my view that the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem does not feature in the prophetic scope of Revelation going forward from Rev 4.
It is a perfect mid-winter's day here at the southern tip of Africa. Beautiful sunshine, blue, blue sky, not a cloud in sight, not a breath of wind and a temperature heading close to 20C. Will be spending most of the day enjoying the outdoors but might pop in occasionally.
Enjoy your day. Dave
-
Hi Dave, thanks for reminding me about Rev. 4:1. I will have a think about this with regard to AD 70. Thanks for your points about Peter in Babylon. I suppose that if Rome is meant here, then that would be an argument against it symbolizing Jerusalem in the book of Revelation.
-
Regarding Isa 2:4 They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.
In context, this passage seems to contain symbolic language, a bit like in Ezekiel 37 where a valley of dry bones comes to life. So when it says that the mountain of the house of the Lord is going to be raised above all the other mountains (v.1), we can see that the subsequent description of what will happen during this time is not meant to be taken too literally.
-
It is very much part of Church tradition that Peter spent the last few years of his life in Rome, that he wrote 1 Peter while in Rome either shortly before the persecution under Nero commenced (~AD64) or early during that persecution (~AD 65-66) and that he was martyred there around AD 67.
This article presents the case for Peter's Babylon being Jerusalem, rather than Rome:
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Hyper/0000_siverd_babylon.html
-
While the destruction of Jerusalem was undoubtedly a consequence of Jesus being rejected by His people, I would refer to my earlier post #108 that the plain statements of Rev 4:1 demand that all events in Revelation from that point onwards need to be interpreted in terms of events future from ~AD95-96 when the book was written.
What is your evidence for this date, please?
-
I haven't followed this over-involved thread, but I came across this blog on another forum: I cannot give credit to the blogger as he/she was unnamed:
" The Revelation Of Sinner John
Date: Sun Jul 05 2015 23:35:49 GMT+0100 (BST)
The entire book of Revelation can be proven wrong mainly by one chapter alone, Revelation 20 in these contradictory verses, 10 and 14:
Revelation 20: 10; "And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever."
14; "Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death."
This nonsense is also repeated here:
Revelation 21: 8; "But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars--their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." (Why can't anyone actually know that god is real? Trust me, unbelief in something that seems impossible is not a crime worthy of capital punishment. It is simply a strong feeling of doubt in someone who doesn't know whether it is true or false by not having enough evidence. Believing is not the same as knowing because all beliefs become obsolete once knowledge is attained. Thus people mainly believe because they do not know. By not knowing believers can only hope, or trust, or have faith that god exists.)
No one in a coherent state of mind would have so deliberately contradicted himself as John did no more than four verses after he wrote verse 10. That contradiction is most important because it is the main reason why anyone even cares about the book of Revelation, at all. Most Christians are literally scared half to death of that outrageous nonsense!
Okay, Christians, please pay close attention: There is absolutely, positively, and definitely no possible way to be thrown into a "lake of fire" to be "tormented day and night for ever and ever" and to die a "second death" there, as well.
It can either be one way or the other, Not Both!"
What make you of that?
-
What make you of that?
Nothing. The person who wrote it obviously does not know what he's talking about.
-
What make you of that?
Nothing. The person who wrote it obviously does not know what he's talking about.
Ah, one of our resident theologians. Where did you study then?
-
What make you of that?
Nothing. The person who wrote it obviously does not know what he's talking about.
Ah, one of our resident theologians. Where did you study then?
What has that got to do with anything?
-
What make you of that?
Nothing. The person who wrote it obviously does not know what he's talking about.
Ah, one of our resident theologians. Where did you study then?
What has that got to do with anything?
I'm asking on what grounds you dismiss the piece. What qualifies you to do so? Are you trained in theology, or are you like the other posters on this thread, just making it up as you go along. Nobody truly knows what Revelation is about, but you seem to feel that you are in a position to make assertions about it.
-
What make you of that?
Nothing. The person who wrote it obviously does not know what he's talking about.
Ah, one of our resident theologians. Where did you study then?
What has that got to do with anything?
I'm asking on what grounds you dismiss the piece. What qualifies you to do so? Are you trained in theology, or are you like the other posters on this thread, just making it up as you go along. Nobody truly knows what Revelation is about, but you seem to feel that you are in a position to make assertions about it.
Why does someone have to be trained in theology to come to any iNformed conclusion concerning the Apocalypse of St. John? Anyway, you'll find plenty of trained theologians who will dismiss the piece. You dismiss the Apocalypse because you are a rank heretic.
-
What make you of that?
Nothing. The person who wrote it obviously does not know what he's talking about.
Ah, one of our resident theologians. Where did you study then?
What has that got to do with anything?
I'm asking on what grounds you dismiss the piece. What qualifies you to do so? Are you trained in theology, or are you like the other posters on this thread, just making it up as you go along. Nobody truly knows what Revelation is about, but you seem to feel that you are in a position to make assertions about it.
Why does someone have to be trained in theology to come to any iNformed conclusion concerning the Apocalypse of St. John? Anyway, you'll find plenty of trained theologians who will dismiss the piece. You dismiss the Apocalypse because you are a rank heretic.
I dismiss it mainly because I don't know what it means, and because it simply does not persuade me of its authenticity or value to Christians.
-
BA
Why does it have to persuade you though?
Your beliefs are not based on evidence
-
BA
Why does it have to persuade you though?
Your beliefs are not based on evidence
My beliefs are based on the evidence of NT witness. I would be interested to test your beliefs, but as an atheist, you have none, which is a pretty sterile state to be in, isn't it.
-
BA
Why does it have to persuade you though?
Your beliefs are not based on evidence
My beliefs are based on the evidence of NT witness. I would be interested to test your beliefs, but as an atheist, you have none, which is a pretty sterile state to be in, isn't it.
But you have claimed that you choose your beliefs!
Why do you need evidence?
Can you choose to believe something when you feel the evidence points a different way?
-
One day and a thousand years are the same to God...
King James 2000 Bible
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
Would that be heavenly or earthly years?
God created a mature earth in 7 days... Which would have normally taken many millions according to man.
Why are you asking questions you are not qualified to ask or even answer?
-
King James Bible
But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
There is nothing that TW knows that no other Christian will know unless it isn't really in line with the teachings of God through the Prophets and Christ...
Revelation 8:7King James Version (KJV)
7 The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up.
Revelation 9:18King James Version (KJV)
18 By these three was the third part of men killed, by the fire, and by the smoke, and by the brimstone, which issued out of their mouths.
Revelation 16:3King James Version (KJV)
3 And the second angel poured out his vial upon the sea; and it became as the blood of a dead man: and every living soul died in the sea.
These have not yet happened... What could create such a situation by todays standards?
Unless you are willing to explain everything in the book of Revelations then perhaps you should heed it's warnings...
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Keep from discussing the book of Revelations unless you are going to explain it all,explain that is- because that is what God wants.
It is clear the book of Revelations is for the believer.
It announces that which are to happen... However, for the believer we know we can trust God to give us what we need to know when we need to know it.
John 16:13King James Version (KJV)
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
Knowledge about the Book of Revelation from it's early days as a letter from John was clearly understood only by believers in that time.
In Christ, every man is forgiven and receives the truth by the Holy Spirit to help them in their daily lives.
Let me remind you what Christ said: "No one comes to the Father but by me." He is the way the truth and life.
There is no other way but Spirit and Truth. So no natter what you and your friends believer about Revelation 20 the only true way to God is Jesus Christ and the only true sign of belonging to Christ and knowing God is the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
Hence Christs own words...Matthew 7:22-23King James Version (KJV)
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
What you or anyone else thinks they know about the book of Revelations does not and never will replace the truth that Christ taught about believers belonging to him because they believe in who he is and are baptised with the Spirit.
You can speak about Revelations but don't make out that it somehow makes you the only true believers. Because true believers know some may make errors about the bible but the truth of Christ is the only way to be saved and that not all believers have to same gift.
All believers do not need to worry about Revelations because they trust in God,Christ and the Spirit from God to give them what they need when they need it....
-
Sass we are discussing this
Christians should know and have some idea of Revelation Chap 20. So can we presume Christ has returned and we are all happy and contented living on a paradise earth in the kingdom as some believe.All is well judgement has taken place.
17 Then I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the midst of heaven, “Come and gather together for the supper of the great God,[h] 18 that you may eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses and of those who sit on them, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, both small and great.”
19 And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. 20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21 And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh.
So no more problems BUT we read
7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.
Dear me here we were in a paradise earth all comfy and now this. Who are these nations and why has God let satan loose on us in his kingdom ?
Now I know Alien and others know the clear biblical answers to this,but to those Christians who see us living on Earth in a literal 1000 years can you tell us the answer as to why this happens.
So Sass the subject is above please keep to it.
~TW~
-
While the destruction of Jerusalem was undoubtedly a consequence of Jesus being rejected by His people, I would refer to my earlier post #108 that the plain statements of Rev 4:1 demand that all events in Revelation from that point onwards need to be interpreted in terms of events future from ~AD95-96 when the book was written.
What is your evidence for this date, please?
Hi Spud,
The AD 95-96 date is widely held, Amongst the prominent early church figures both Eusebius and Clement of Alexandria give that as a date of writing. In terms of more recent scholars we have William Barclay (going back some decades now) on the one end of the theological spectrum and the Dallas Theological Seminary on the other end, both agreeing on this date. In the more central conservative evangelical ground F.F. Bruce, the late Scottish scholar, for whom I have great respect, also has a late first century date. My copy of the Lion Handbook to the Bible also confirms this.
In terms of Study Bibles which I possess, the introductions to Revelation in both the ESV and NASB give a 95-96 date as does the Amplified Bible.
So I believe I am correct in saying that AD 95-96 is a widely held date and probably represents a majority opinion.
-
The key word Spud is All, as in all people.
~TW~
This is what I thought, but apparently Dave hasn't noticed it yet.
In Genesis 14:20 Abraham gave Melchizedek a tenth of all he had. How do you interpret "all' here?
Exactly that a 10th which is not all.
~TW~
-
While the destruction of Jerusalem was undoubtedly a consequence of Jesus being rejected by His people, I would refer to my earlier post #108 that the plain statements of Rev 4:1 demand that all events in Revelation from that point onwards need to be interpreted in terms of events future from ~AD95-96 when the book was written.
What is your evidence for this date, please?
Hi Spud,
The AD 95-96 date is widely held, Amongst the prominent early church figures both Eusebius and Clement of Alexandria give that as a date of writing. In terms of more recent scholars we have William Barclay (going back some decades now) on the one end of the theological spectrum and the Dallas Theological Seminary on the other end, both agreeing on this date. In the more central conservative evangelical ground F.F. Bruce, the late Scottish scholar, for whom I have great respect, also has a late first century date. My copy of the Lion Handbook to the Bible also confirms this.
In terms of Study Bibles which I possess, the introductions to Revelation in both the ESV and NASB give a 95-96 date as does the Amplified Bible.
So I believe I am correct in saying that AD 95-96 is a widely held date and probably represents a majority opinion.
Hi Dave,
I've found one statement by Irenaeus which seems to be the one most widely believed to indicate an AD 95 date for Revelation:
We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm
There is reason to suggest that Irenaeus meant that John (not the Apocalypse) was seen towards the end of Domitian's reign. Apparently the word 'that' can also be translated as 'he'. I'll have to check this. See also the opening paragraph which says, 'and those men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony [to it]'
-
Hi Spud I aimed this thread to those who go for a literal millennium and my question was.
Why does God according to their teaching set Satan on them{those in this paradise earth}near the end of this literal 1000 years for what purpose ?
We could add is this before the final day /last trumpet or after,know one seems to know.
~TW~
-
One day and a thousand years are the same to God...
King James 2000 Bible
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
Would that be heavenly or earthly years?
God created a mature earth in 7 days... Which would have normally taken many millions according to man.
Why are you asking questions you are not qualified to ask or even answer?
Revelation is written in symbols, so the thousand years are most likely to be symbolic too.
Do you think God would give us a book that could not be interpreted? Most people, including me, do not have enough knowledge of the Old Testament to understand Revelation. But I think its recipients, in the seven churches, would have been able to.
-
Hi Spud I aimed this thread to those who go for a literal millennium and my question was.
Why does God according to their teaching set Satan on them{those in this paradise earth}near the end of this literal 1000 years for what purpose ?
We could add is this before the final day /last trumpet or after,know one seems to know.
~TW~
How would you answer this from an amillennial point of view?
Btw, I've just been reading from that link you posted on Zechariah 14. It is very informative.... :)
-
Hi Spud I aimed this thread to those who go for a literal millennium and my question was.
Why does God according to their teaching set Satan on them{those in this paradise earth}near the end of this literal 1000 years for what purpose ?
We could add is this before the final day /last trumpet or after,know one seems to know.
~TW~
How would you answer this from an amillennial point of view?
Btw, I've just been reading from that link you posted on Zechariah 14. It is very informative.... :)
How would I answer it Spud very easy first listen to what I sent you.Right we are in the millennium now when will the end be,I have no idea.We see the apostasy in the church.We see the visible church being slowly screwed by governments and anti Christian ideas coming into focus the third person of the unholy Trinity is very busy {the false prophet}.Economics ,well just look around,the black,red and pale horse very busy,and sometime before the end Satan is allowed to do his worse and then comes the final day /last trumpet and all is wrapped up.
Hope that helps Spud
~TW~
-
Hi Spud I aimed this thread to those who go for a literal millennium and my question was.
Why does God according to their teaching set Satan on them{those in this paradise earth}near the end of this literal 1000 years for what purpose ?
We could add is this before the final day /last trumpet or after,know one seems to know.
~TW~
How would you answer this from an amillennial point of view?
Btw, I've just been reading from that link you posted on Zechariah 14. It is very informative.... :)
How would I answer it Spud very easy first listen to what I sent you.
Hm, that guy likes the sound of his own voice. That rings alarm bells. Right we are in the millennium now when will the end be,I have no idea.We see the apostasy in the church.We see the visible church being slowly screwed by governments and anti Christian ideas coming into focus the third person of the unholy Trinity is very busy {the false prophet}.Economics ,well just look around,the black,red
and pale horse very busy,and sometime before the end Satan is allowed to do his worse and then comes the final day /last trumpet and all is wrapped up.
Hope that helps Spud
~TW~
Am listening to the first of the talks about the Millennium. I still have a problem with the view that in ch. 19 all non-Christians are literally killed. The sword coming out of the mouth of the rider on the white horse is not a literal sword. It's symbolic of the tongue, which implies a kind of 'death' that comes from hearing God's word and not accepting it.
-
Spud ----Am listening to the first of the talks about the Millennium. I still have a problem with the view that in ch. 19 all non-Christians are literally killed. The sword coming out of the mouth of the rider on the white horse is not a literal sword. It's symbolic of the tongue, which implies a kind of 'death' that comes from hearing God's word and not accepting it.
-------------------------------------------
Spud that is the final judgement the End of the world.
~TW~
-
Can I ask, what do you understand the beast to represent?
-
Can I ask, what do you understand the beast to represent?
Which one in the unholy trinity we have Satan the first beast and the second beast.
~TW~
-
Hi Spud,
The AD 95-96 date is widely held, Amongst the prominent early church figures both Eusebius and Clement of Alexandria give that as a date of writing. In terms of more recent scholars we have William Barclay (going back some decades now) on the one end of the theological spectrum and the Dallas Theological Seminary on the other end, both agreeing on this date. In the more central conservative evangelical ground F.F. Bruce, the late Scottish scholar, for whom I have great respect, also has a late first century date. My copy of the Lion Handbook to the Bible also confirms this.
In terms of Study Bibles which I possess, the introductions to Revelation in both the ESV and NASB give a 95-96 date as does the Amplified Bible.
So I believe I am correct in saying that AD 95-96 is a widely held date and probably represents a majority opinion.
Hi Dave,
I've found one statement by Irenaeus which seems to be the one most widely believed to indicate an AD 95 date for Revelation:
We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm
There is reason to suggest that Irenaeus meant that John (not the Apocalypse) was seen towards the end of Domitian's reign. Apparently the word 'that' can also be translated as 'he'. I'll have to check this. See also the opening paragraph which says, 'and those men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony [to it]'
Hi Spud,
Thanks for the quote from Irenaeus and the link. Interesting stuff. Somehow I seem to have missed that reference for an ~AD95 Dave
-
One day and a thousand years are the same to God...
King James 2000 Bible
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
Would that be heavenly or earthly years?
God created a mature earth in 7 days... Which would have normally taken many millions according to man.
Why are you asking questions you are not qualified to ask or even answer?
Revelation is written in symbols, so the thousand years are most likely to be symbolic too.
Do you think God would give us a book that could not be interpreted? Most people, including me, do not have enough knowledge of the Old Testament to understand Revelation. But I think its recipients, in the seven churches, would have been able to.
Of course Daniel was told to seal up his Book until the time of the end. Certainly as far as I can see that has been the case. Until recent times all attempts at producing a coherent commentary of Daniel have been pretty conclusive failures. Whether more recent ones will prove to me more correct remains to be seen,
-
Hi Spud going back and looking at Dave M post reply 45 we have this---Today’s world is so far removed from the picture the Scriptures paint of the golden age of the Millennium that I find it amazing that anyone could equate the two.
Spud it is Dave M who takes the 3 chapters he quoted earlier and it is he who equate's the 3 chapters with the millennium.
His mistake is we have no mention of a millennium in those chapters.If you want to know for sure what the millennium is about then it is revelation.So the comments of Dave are null and void.Also for Dave this is worth a read.
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Modern/2001_demar_zechariah-14.html
~TW~
Hi TW,
I was under the impression that you subscribed to the Historicist approach to the interpretation of Revelation. But here you are quoting Preterist articles. So now I am confused. Going from bad to worse are you an Historicist, a Partial Preterist or a Full Preterist?
-
Can I ask, what do you understand the beast to represent?
Which one in the unholy trinity we have Satan the first beast and the second beast.
~TW~
The first beast from the sea, the seven headed one.
-
The reason I asked what the beast from the sea represents is more to do with what its heads and horns represent. If the beast symbolizes the Roman empire, then the heads and horns can be explained in terms of its various emperors. If that is wrong, it is still necessary to interpret what they represent if we are going to claim that 19:11ff and 20:7-10 refer to the same event (the second coming and the end of the world).
-
The reason I asked what the beast from the sea represents is more to do with what its heads and horns represent. If the beast symbolizes the Roman empire, then the heads and horns can be explained in terms of its various emperors. If that is wrong, it is still necessary to interpret what they represent if we are going to claim that 19:11ff and 20:7-10 refer to the same event (the second coming and the end of the world).
Have sent you a pm will sort it out.
~TW~
-
The reason I asked what the beast from the sea represents is more to do with what its heads and horns represent. If the beast symbolizes the Roman empire, then the heads and horns can be explained in terms of its various emperors. If that is wrong, it is still necessary to interpret what they represent if we are going to claim that 19:11ff and 20:7-10 refer to the same event (the second coming and the end of the world).
I very much agree! The unholy trinity of Satan, the beast (The anti-christ) and the false prophet. If they are marching about now who are they TW?
-
"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;
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." 2Thessalonians 2:3,4
-
Seven heads are all of the beasts in Daniel 7 combined:
1 Babylonian empire
2 Persian empire
3 Greeks under Alexander
4 Hellenistic Syria
5 Hellenistic Egypt
6 Hellenistic Rome
7 Imperial Rome
NB the Greek beast had 4 heads (3-6).
Ten horns: these are all on the seventh head (Dan 7:7) so they represent the first ten Roman Emperors who reigned before AD 70:
Julius, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Galba, Vitellius, Otho, Vespasian.
-
The reason I asked what the beast from the sea represents is more to do with what its heads and horns represent. If the beast symbolizes the Roman empire, then the heads and horns can be explained in terms of its various emperors. If that is wrong, it is still necessary to interpret what they represent if we are going to claim that 19:11ff and 20:7-10 refer to the same event (the second coming and the end of the world).
I very much agree! The unholy trinity of Satan, the beast (The anti-christ) and the false prophet. If they are marching about now who are they TW?
Not a problem 2 Corrie answers very soon,but I am still waiting for you to answer my last post to you.
~~TW~
-
The reason I asked what the beast from the sea represents is more to do with what its heads and horns represent. If the beast symbolizes the Roman empire, then the heads and horns can be explained in terms of its various emperors. If that is wrong, it is still necessary to interpret what they represent if we are going to claim that 19:11ff and 20:7-10 refer to the same event (the second coming and the end of the world).
Hi spud here is how I understand your questions and points.First the beast comes out of the Sea what is the Sea ,I see it as the Nations
ISA 17:12
12 Hark, the uproar of a multitude of peoples! They roar and thunder like the noise of the seas! Ah, the roar of nations! They roar like the roaring of rushing and mighty waters!
13 The nations will rush and roar like the rushing and roaring of many waters—but [God] will rebuke them, and they will flee far off and will be chased like chaff on the mountains before the wind, and like rolling thistledown or whirling dust of the stubble before the storm.
Rev 17:15
15 And [the angel further] said to me, The waters that you observed, where the harlot is seated, are races and multitudes and nations and dialects (languages).
Now this first beast is closely associated with the beast that comes out of the abyss
Rev 11 :7
7 But when they have finished their testimony and their evidence is all in, the beast (monster) that comes up out of the Abyss (bottomless pit) will wage war on them, and conquer them and kill them.
The sea -born beast symbolizes the persecuting power of Satan embodied in all the nations and governments of the world throughout Church history in all it's forms,which are far to many to list.
This beast is a slave to Satan and the second beast in the trinity,crowns on horns, where as Satan {Dragon} has his crown on head and he rules the nations through this trinity.
A note to 2 corrie when you answer my question I will reply to yours.
Here is the question--------------------------Why does God according to their teaching set Satan on them{those in this paradise earth}near the end of this literal 1000 years for what purpose ?
We could add is this before the final day /last trumpet or after,know one seems to know.
~TW~
-
Hi TW,
Sorry for the delay in replying. I don't disagree with your post; it is often possible to identify people and situations now which could be said to be represented symbolically in Revelation.
I still believe there is good reason to think that, excluding the post-millennial attack of Satan and the final judgment, its symbols were originally applied to people and events that took place within the generation of the disciples. I think this, firstly because Revelation says several times that these events were to take place 'shortly'. Secondly, because Jesus in his parables and in discourse with his disciples spoke of the nearness of the approaching judgment.
-
Hi TW,
Sorry for the delay in replying. I don't disagree with your post; it is often possible to identify people and situations now which could be said to be represented symbolically in Revelation.
I still believe there is good reason to think that, excluding the post-millennial attack of Satan and the final judgment, its symbols were originally applied to people and events that took place within the generation of the disciples. I think this, firstly because Revelation says several times that these events were to take place 'shortly'. Secondly, because Jesus in his parables and in discourse with his disciples spoke of the nearness of the approaching judgment.
Yes Spud I can name two roman chaps in connection with this Nero and Domitian.But all in all the idea of a paradise earth type millennium is a no go.
~TW~
-
Hi TW,
I still believe there is good reason to think that, excluding the post-millennial attack of Satan and the final judgment, its symbols were originally applied to people and events that took place within the generation of the disciples. I think this, firstly because Revelation says several times that these events were to take place 'shortly'. Secondly, because Jesus in his parables and in discourse with his disciples spoke of the nearness of the approaching judgment.
A good issue to keep in mind for some future thread. How we should approach the interpretation of prophecy in general could produce some interesting debates
-
Yes Spud I can name two roman chaps in connection with this Nero and Domitian.
I think Nero was the first emporer to actually demand that everybody worshipped him (though I might be wrong). If so then this would make sense of Rev. 13:12. The land beast representing, in part, the corrupt chief priests, who said earlier,"we have no king but Caesar".
But all in all the idea of a paradise earth type millennium is a no go.
~TW~
-
Yes Spud I can name two roman chaps in connection with this Nero and Domitian.
I think Nero was the first emporer to actually demand that everybody worshipped him (though I might be wrong). If so then this would make sense of Rev. 13:12. The land beast representing, in part, the corrupt chief priests, who said earlier,"we have no king but Caesar".
But all in all the idea of a paradise earth type millennium is a no go.
~TW~
Also Spud an interesting scripture comes later,And the sea was no more,we know this refers to nations,so for God to fight the nations at the end of the 1000 years is another big No No, as we have no nations.
Then I saw "a new heaven and a new earth," for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.
it all fits together.
~TW~
-
Just to clarify, do you mean that the sea in that verse is purely symbolic? If so, does that mean that the new heaven and earth is also purely symbolic?
-
Just to clarify, do you mean that the sea in that verse is purely symbolic? If so, does that mean that the new heaven and earth is also purely symbolic?
I think it means just that but will check Then I saw "a new heaven and a new earth," for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.
~TW~
-
Spud Matthew Henry puts it better then me.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/matthew-henry-complete/revelation/21.html
~TW~
-
Yes Spud I can name two roman chaps in connection with this Nero and Domitian.
I think Nero was the first emporer to actually demand that everybody worshipped him (though I might be wrong). If so then this would make sense of Rev. 13:12. The land beast representing, in part, the corrupt chief priests, who said earlier,"we have no king but Caesar".
But all in all the idea of a paradise earth type millennium is a no go.
~TW~
Also Spud an interesting scripture comes later,And the sea was no more,we know this refers to nations,so for God to fight the nations at the end of the 1000 years is another big No No, as we have no nations.
Then I saw "a new heaven and a new earth," for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.
it all fits together.
~TW~
If the sea stood for the gentiles, and if as Matthew Henry says, some understand all that is said in these last two chapters to refer to the state of the church here on earth, could the verse be indicating that there is no longer any distinction between Jew and Gentile?
-
Yes Spud I can name two roman chaps in connection with this Nero and Domitian.
I think Nero was the first emporer to actually demand that everybody worshipped him (though I might be wrong). If so then this would make sense of Rev. 13:12. The land beast representing, in part, the corrupt chief priests, who said earlier,"we have no king but Caesar".
But all in all the idea of a paradise earth type millennium is a no go.
~TW~
Also Spud an interesting scripture comes later,And the sea was no more,we know this refers to nations,so for God to fight the nations at the end of the 1000 years is another big No No, as we have no nations.
Then I saw "a new heaven and a new earth," for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.
it all fits together.
~TW~
If the sea stood for the gentiles, and if as Matthew Henry says, some understand all that is said in these last two chapters to refer to the state of the church here on earth, could the verse be indicating that there is no longer any distinction between Jew and Gentile?
Yes the Church is Israel .
~TW~
-
Charles Spurgeon on the meaning of "new heavens and new earth", in one of his sermons:
Did you ever regret the absence of the burnt-offering, or the red heifer, or any one of the sacrifices and rites of the Jews? Did you ever pine for the feast of tabernacle, or the dedication? No, because, though these were like the old heavens and earth to the Jewish believers, they have passed away, and we now live under the new heavens and a new earth, so far as the dispensation of divine teaching is concerned. The substance is come, and the shadow has gone: and we do not remember it (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, vol. xxxvii, p. 354).
Kenneth Gentry, "Navigating the Book of Revelation", p.173 says,
Isaiah prophesies the Church age by using dramatic new creation language: “For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former things shall not be remembered or come into mind” (Isaiah 65:17).
(This might answer Dave's question about Isaiah's prophecies)
http://kloposmasm.com/2010/04/19/revelation-chapter-21-part-1-verses-1-4/
-
Also Spud an interesting scripture comes later,And the sea was no more,we know this refers to nations,so for God to fight the nations at the end of the 1000 years is another big No No, as we have no nations.
My commentary says that the physical Gentile sea died when the second bowl was poured out, in ch 16. This was in AD 70. The sea which was no longer there at 21:1 is the heavenly sea, which contained the souls of the righteous dead (cf 20:13). I think this is going by a sequential interpretation of the visions in 17:1-22:5.
-
Hi Spud at last we have a shilling for the meter.
~TW~
-
Hi Spud at last we have a shilling for the meter.
~TW~
I found some nice Americans to chat with about eschatology, on the carm.org forum.
-
Hi Spud at last we have a shilling for the meter.
~TW~
I found some nice Americans to chat with about eschatology, on the carm.org forum.
Well tell us about it a lot of strange things come out of America.
~TW~
-
A good issue to keep in mind for some future thread. How we should approach the interpretation of prophecy in general could produce some interesting debates
We could take Isaiah 13 as an example. This contains a prophecy against Babylon, yet in the middle of the chapter, it says the sun, moon and stars will not show their light. Given that sun moon and stars represented Joseph's family, in his dream, do we agree that Isaiah also intends them to symbolize various rulers of Babylon, and similarly in the olivet discourse Jesus does also ?
-
A good issue to keep in mind for some future thread. How we should approach the interpretation of prophecy in general could produce some interesting debates
We could take Isaiah 13 as an example. This contains a prophecy against Babylon, yet in the middle of the chapter, it says the sun, moon and stars will not show their light. Given that sun moon and stars represented Joseph's family, in his dream, do we agree that Isaiah also intends them to symbolize various rulers of Babylon, and similarly in the olivet discourse Jesus does also ?
Hi Spud,
I suppose the short answer is ‘No’. My view is that Isaiah does not intend the sun moon and stars to symbolise various rulers of Babylon, and neither does Jesus in the Olivet discourse.
I think we need to note Isaiah 13:6 here. ‘Wail, for the day of the LORD is near; as destruction from the Almighty it will come!
I think the term ‘the day of the Lord’ needs to be understood in two possible ways dependent on the context in which it is used.
First it can refer to that final time in history when the Lord returns and exercises judgement on the whole earth. Secondly it also refers to those times when the Lord intervenes directly during the course of history to exercise judgement on a particular nation or group of peoples who have taken their sin and rebellion against Him to a level which the Lord is no longer prepared to tolerate. Isaiah 13 is one of the latter category. As is so often the case in prophecy, these historically fulfilled events also serve as a type and a pointer to a final and complete yet future fulfilment which will take place at the time of the coming ‘great and terrible day of the Lord’ (Micah 4:5).
In all cases such an intervention is a cataclysmic event as is clearly seen in the Book of Revelation. I speak, of course, as one who adopts a futurist approach to Revelation. So it is only to be expected that the prophets would use dramatic imagery in attempting to emphasise the catastrophic nature of the event. So not surprising that this would include symbolism related to cataclysmic events in the celestial realm.
Now as regards the final ‘great and terrible day of the Lord’ I would not be surprised if these celestial disasters manifested themselves as being literally true. Time will tell. But I am comfortable with a more symbolic interpretation in the case of Isaiah 13:10. However, I would not exclude the possibility of some more literal fulfilment having taken place. Considering Babylon’s geographical location I would not preclude the possibility of a strong Shamal wind whipping up a dust storm of sufficient magnitude to have obscured the celestial bodies for several days at the time of the fulfilment of the prophecy.
So to conclude. My understanding in brief. Isaiah 10:13. Symbolism? Probably. Representing the various rulers of Babylon? No. Representing actual celestial bodies? Yes.
Finally a question in reply to a question. Isaiah 13:3. Who are ‘my consecrated ones, my mighty men my proudly exulting ones’ whom the Lord has Himself commanded and summoned to execute His anger?
Enjoy your day, Dave
-
Hi TW,
I still believe there is good reason to think that, excluding the post-millennial attack of Satan and the final judgment, its symbols were originally applied to people and events that took place within the generation of the disciples. I think this, firstly because Revelation says several times that these events were to take place 'shortly'. Secondly, because Jesus in his parables and in discourse with his disciples spoke of the nearness of the approaching judgment.
A good issue to keep in mind for some future thread. How we should approach the interpretation of prophecy in general could produce some interesting debates
Do you a prophecy in mind Dave,why not post it,give us a chance to talk about it.
~TW~
-
A good issue to keep in mind for some future thread. How we should approach the interpretation of prophecy in general could produce some interesting debates
We could take Isaiah 13 as an example. This contains a prophecy against Babylon, yet in the middle of the chapter, it says the sun, moon and stars will not show their light. Given that sun moon and stars represented Joseph's family, in his dream, do we agree that Isaiah also intends them to symbolize various rulers of Babylon, and similarly in the olivet discourse Jesus does also ?
Hi Spud,
I suppose the short answer is ‘No’. My view is that Isaiah does not intend the sun moon and stars to symbolise various rulers of Babylon, and neither does Jesus in the Olivet discourse.
I think we need to note Isaiah 13:6 here. ‘Wail, for the day of the LORD is near; as destruction from the Almighty it will come!
I think the term ‘the day of the Lord’ needs to be understood in two possible ways dependent on the context in which it is used.
First it can refer to that final time in history when the Lord returns and exercises judgement on the whole earth. Secondly it also refers to those times when the Lord intervenes directly during the course of history to exercise judgement on a particular nation or group of peoples who have taken their sin and rebellion against Him to a level which the Lord is no longer prepared to tolerate. Isaiah 13 is one of the latter category. As is so often the case in prophecy, these historically fulfilled events also serve as a type and a pointer to a final and complete yet future fulfilment which will take place at the time of the coming ‘great and terrible day of the Lord’ (Micah 4:5).
In all cases such an intervention is a cataclysmic event as is clearly seen in the Book of Revelation. I speak, of course, as one who adopts a futurist approach to Revelation. So it is only to be expected that the prophets would use dramatic imagery in attempting to emphasise the catastrophic nature of the event. So not surprising that this would include symbolism related to cataclysmic events in the celestial realm.
Now as regards the final ‘great and terrible day of the Lord’ I would not be surprised if these celestial disasters manifested themselves as being literally true. Time will tell. But I am comfortable with a more symbolic interpretation in the case of Isaiah 13:10. However, I would not exclude the possibility of some more literal fulfilment having taken place. Considering Babylon’s geographical location I would not preclude the possibility of a strong Shamal wind whipping up a dust storm of sufficient magnitude to have obscured the celestial bodies for several days at the time of the fulfilment of the prophecy.
So to conclude. My understanding in brief. Isaiah 10:13. Symbolism? Probably. Representing the various rulers of Babylon? No. Representing actual celestial bodies? Yes.
Finally a question in reply to a question. Isaiah 13:3. Who are ‘my consecrated ones, my mighty men my proudly exulting ones’ whom the Lord has Himself commanded and summoned to execute His anger?
Enjoy your day, Dave
Thanks for an interesting post, Dave, and I agree that the astral imagery serves to illustrate the cataclysmic nature of God's intervention in the history of various nations. But I would go further and again refer to Joseph's dream, where the sun, for example, represents his father. The reason for this seems to be that on day 4, God appointed the sun, moon and stars to govern time. So in later poetic writing, people who governed were symbolized by the sun and the moon, or the stars. The king of Babylon was referred to as the morning star in Isaiah 14:12.
You seem to be implying, for example, that the darkening of the sun (Isaiah 13:10) could represent an eclipse. I think this is true, but that it further points to the extinction of (particular) earthly governments on 'the day of the Lord'. This expression "...refers to the rising of the sun- the sun of God's searching light that shows up sin and brings judgment, the sun of God's blazing heat that destroys sin". (to quote from J. B. Jordan's book, Through New Eyes).
Regarding the Olivet discourse, the same can be said for Matthew 24:29, except that Jesus is the sun which shows up sin in the nations as the gospel is taken to them.
PS in answer to your question, I would say that it is the Medes and Persians.
-
Thanks for an interesting post, Dave, and I agree that the astral imagery serves to illustrate the cataclysmic nature of God's intervention in the history of various nations. But I would go further and again refer to Joseph's dream, where the sun, for example, represents his father. The reason for this seems to be that on day 4, God appointed the sun, moon and stars to govern time. So in later poetic writing, people who governed were symbolized by the sun and the moon, or the stars. The king of Babylon was referred to as the morning star in Isaiah 14:12.
You seem to be implying, for example, that the darkening of the sun (Isaiah 13:10) could represent an eclipse. I think this is true, but that it further points to the extinction of (particular) earthly governments on 'the day of the Lord'. This expression "...refers to the rising of the sun- the sun of God's searching light that shows up sin and brings judgment, the sun of God's blazing heat that destroys sin". (to quote from J. B. Jordan's book, Through New Eyes).
Regarding the Olivet discourse, the same can be said for Matthew 24:29, except that Jesus is the sun which shows up sin in the nations as the gospel is taken to them.
PS in answer to your question, I would say that it is the Medes and Persians.
Hi Spud,
Thanks for the response. I think the different views on our understanding of Isaiah 13:10 is perhaps representative of the differences in the pre-millennial and amillennial approach to prophecy. Those with an amil view tend to ascribe a much higher level of symbolism to prophecy, perhaps because they hold that the great bulk of OT prophecies were fulfilled by AD 70 or earlier. Premil advocates, on the other hand, would argue that large chunks remain unfulfilled and await a final fulfilment, which will probably be in a more literal sense in many instances.
I am certainly extremely reluctant to ascribe symbolism to the Olivet Discourse and believe we should view these events as being real physical manifestations in the celestial bodies. In this context it is instructive to compare the parallel Luke account to Matthew 24:29. In Matt 24:29 we read, ‘Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken’. But Luke (21:25-26) adds an interesting additional phrase. “And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth distress of nations in perplexity because of the roaring of the sea and the waves, people fainting with fear and with foreboding of what is coming on the world. For the powers of the heavens will be shaken
So in addition to the celestial events, Luke also informs us that these signs will be accompanied by terrestrial events of such a magnitude that they will cause peoples fainting with fear. And Luke specifically mentions the roaring of the seas and the waves – real actual physical events. I suspect they could include tsunamis on a scale which would make those we have seen in recent times to pale in comparison when compared to them, triggered by some of the other violent events, like earthquakes, as mentioned by Jesus in the course of this teaching.
But the main point is that I have real problems with an approach to Biblical exegesis which requires one verse (Luke 21:25) to be interpreted symbolically when the very next verse demands a literal interpretation. And if this requires Luke 21:25 to be interpreted literally then we need to do the same for Matt 24:29. So the premil view is that this section of the Olivet Discourse refers to post-rapture which, as Revelation makes clear, is a time when all hell breaks loose on earth, a consequence in many instances of catastrophic natural disasters.
.
As regards the Medes and Persians being the people referred to in Isaiah 13:3, this view is held by many. But perhaps you will not be surprised to hear that I do not hold to this view. True in 13:17 we find the Medes specifically mentioned and they do play an important role in Babylon’s final demise. But they are not those described in 13:3. But more about this in my next post when I can find the time to do so.
-
Thanks for an interesting post, Dave, and I agree that the astral imagery serves to illustrate the cataclysmic nature of God's intervention in the history of various nations. But I would go further and again refer to Joseph's dream, where the sun, for example, represents his father. The reason for this seems to be that on day 4, God appointed the sun, moon and stars to govern time. So in later poetic writing, people who governed were symbolized by the sun and the moon, or the stars. The king of Babylon was referred to as the morning star in Isaiah 14:12.
You seem to be implying, for example, that the darkening of the sun (Isaiah 13:10) could represent an eclipse. I think this is true, but that it further points to the extinction of (particular) earthly governments on 'the day of the Lord'. This expression "...refers to the rising of the sun- the sun of God's searching light that shows up sin and brings judgment, the sun of God's blazing heat that destroys sin". (to quote from J. B. Jordan's book, Through New Eyes).
Regarding the Olivet discourse, the same can be said for Matthew 24:29, except that Jesus is the sun which shows up sin in the nations as the gospel is taken to them.
PS in answer to your question, I would say that it is the Medes and Persians.
Hi Spud,
Thanks for the response. I think the different views on our understanding of Isaiah 13:10 is perhaps representative of the differences in the pre-millennial and amillennial approach to prophecy. Those with an amil view tend to ascribe a much higher level of symbolism to prophecy, perhaps because they hold that the great bulk of OT prophecies were fulfilled by AD 70 or earlier. Premil advocates, on the other hand, would argue that large chunks remain unfulfilled and await a final fulfilment, which will probably be in a more literal sense in many instances.
I am certainly extremely reluctant to ascribe symbolism to the Olivet Discourse and believe we should view these events as being real physical manifestations in the celestial bodies. In this context it is instructive to compare the parallel Luke account to Matthew 24:29. In Matt 24:29 we read, ‘Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken’. But Luke (21:25-26) adds an interesting additional phrase. “And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth distress of nations in perplexity because of the roaring of the sea and the waves, people fainting with fear and with foreboding of what is coming on the world. For the powers of the heavens will be shaken
So in addition to the celestial events, Luke also informs us that these signs will be accompanied by terrestrial events of such a magnitude that they will cause peoples fainting with fear. And Luke specifically mentions the roaring of the seas and the waves – real actual physical events. I suspect they could include tsunamis on a scale which would make those we have seen in recent times to pale in comparison when compared to them, triggered by some of the other violent events, like earthquakes, as mentioned by Jesus in the course of this teaching.
But the main point is that I have real problems with an approach to Biblical exegesis which requires one verse (Luke 21:25) to be interpreted symbolically when the very next verse demands a literal interpretation. And if this requires Luke 21:25 to be interpreted literally then we need to do the same for Matt 24:29. So the premil view is that this section of the Olivet Discourse refers to post-rapture which, as Revelation makes clear, is a time when all hell breaks loose on earth, a consequence in many instances of catastrophic natural disasters.
.
As regards the Medes and Persians being the people referred to in Isaiah 13:3, this view is held by many. But perhaps you will not be surprised to hear that I do not hold to this view. True in 13:17 we find the Medes specifically mentioned and they do play an important role in Babylon’s final demise. But they are not those described in 13:3. But more about this in my next post when I can find the time to do so.
Dave a slight change first with a pre-mill view you are sadly living in cloud cuckoo land many years ago,many many years ago I had a pre mill pastor.I did not know what the terms were pre-post-non meant nothing to me.
I had no idea of any of these terms,so he gives me a book read this he says Hal Lindsey Late Great Planet Earth this will kick off soon he says,also we have sent all the parts to Israel to build the new temple.All that was over 30 years ago Hal Lindsey is said by many now to be a false prophet.
Why not show me the pre trip rapture in the bible,Dave you cant do it because it is not there. Prove me wrong.
http://www.heisnear.com/FalseProphecyTeachersToday.html
~TW~
-
Dave i am assuming you are pre-mill sorry if you are not.I hope you you are not with the wacky left behind lot.
~TW~
-
If you are basing your views of pre-mil on Late Great Planet Earth, then :(
Better to base views on the scripture than on pop fiction
-
If you are basing your views of pre-mil on Late Great Planet Earth, then :(
Better to base views on the scripture than on pop fiction
Many people do base this view on crackpot Americans,all you have to do is show me the rapture where Christ returns invisibly takes his church and comes back 7 years later.So I wait. :)
~TW~
-
A message for Dave,
Thanks for your reply, regarding in particular, Luke's version of the Olivet discourse. I get very bogged down when discussing this sometimes, so I'll quickly make a point about that particular passage then go back and re-read your post, and hopefully answer it more later.
Luke adds a phrase about the roaring and tossing of the sea, which makes men perplexed and faint from terror. You say this demands a literal interpretation; maybe, but a quick google for me located a similar verse - Isaiah 5:30, in which the roar of an army is clearly in view when talking about the roaring of the sea. So I would be inclined to think Jesus was being cryptic when he used that imagery, and thinking of war in some sense. I remain open to a future, literal fulfilment though.
By the way, when I mentioned the sun being darkened in my previous post, I am aware that I didn't interpret that very exactly, but made a more general statement about the extinction of governmental powers.
I just wanted to make that observation about your post, have a good day and I hope all is well down there :)
Edit: Another reference to the roar of the sea:
"Oh, the raging of many nations–they rage like the raging sea! Oh, the uproar of the peoples–they roar like the roaring of great waters!" Isaiah 17:12
-
PS in answer to your question, I would say that it is the Medes and Persians.
Hi Spud,
To get back to Isaiah 13:3 and the identity of ‘my consecrated ones, my mighty men my proudly exulting ones’ whom the Lord has Himself commanded and summoned to execute His anger.
My preferred view is that Isaiah actually had the Assyrian army in mind here. This is a complex issue and I do not have all the historical facts readily available at my fingertips but one or two comments in support.
The Assyrians were the dominant power in Isaiah’s day. During his lifetime they had taken the northern kingdom into exile in 722BC and had also besieged Jerusalem ~700BC during the reign of Hezekiah. But Jerusalem was miraculously delivered in accordance with the word given by the Lord to Isaiah.
Babylon at that time was still in Chaldean hands and even then was marked as a centre of occult and evil practices which were an abomination to the Lord. Also the Assyrians regarded Babylon as territory which belonged to them. In 698BC Babylon finally fell to the Assyrians and the city was sacked with much loss of and destruction. I think this was the initial event in the total fulfilment of the prophecy. Interesting that Babylon was subsequently rebuilt by Sennacherib’s son, while it was under Nebuchadnezzar that it reached its full glory.
We do, of course find the Medes mentioned in verse 17 and there are two possible ways of understanding this. First Isaiah says that the Lord is going to stir up the Medes against them. By ‘them’ Isaiah might well mean the Assyrians themselves who certainly deserved God’s wrath for their treatment and attacks on His people. And indeed the Assyrian empire was finally destroyed by a Chaldean-Median coalition in 612–609 BC, an event which paved the way for the rise of the Chaldeans.
Second it is also possible that Isaiah had the Chaldeans in mind and their conquest of Babylon in 539 BC when he talks of the ‘them’. In which event this is another of those prophecies where we need to recognise a two stages fulfilment, the first covering verses 1-16 and the second verses 17-22. I have no strong preference either way.
My main problem with associating the whole of Isaiah 13 solely with the Medes and Persians is that the city structure of Babylon was left virtually untouched by the fall to the Medes and Persians, in contrast to the damage wrought by the Assyrians. True there would have been considerable looting and pillaging but there was little damage to the essential structure of the city. As you are probably aware Babylon fell virtually without a ‘shot being fired’ and the Medes simply moved in and established it as their headquarters.
It is worth noting that in verses 17-19 the prophesied events are directly attributed to the Medes as illustrated by terms such as, ‘who will not value silver’ or ‘their bows will mow down’ or again ‘they will have no compassion’. But from verse 19 on when we starting moving into the final demise of Babylon there is no direct reference to the Medes. Babylon simply becomes a wasteland.
Which is exactly what happened. After the Medes and Persians the Greeks moved in. Indeed Alexander the Great died there. After his death the Seleucid kings made it their headquarters. It was only during this period that the Seleucid kings eventually built a new capital, Seleucia, to the east on the Tigris River resulting in a migration of the population away from Babylon. And given the scarcity of building materials in the desert, many of the structures of Babylon were broken down and the cut stone etc. transported to Seleucia for use there. And over time Babylon decayed to a ruin, uninhabited, a place where only desert creatures were to be found, the owl and the ostrich, goats, hyenas and jackals, exactly as prophesied. And to date it has never been rebuilt. Altogether a marvellous prophecy fulfilled in history.
Enjoy your day, Dave
-
Dave a slight change first with a pre-mill view you are sadly living in cloud cuckoo land many years ago,many many years ago I had a pre mill pastor.I did not know what the terms were pre-post-non meant nothing to me.
I had no idea of any of these terms,so he gives me a book read this he says Hal Lindsey Late Great Planet Earth this will kick off soon he says,also we have sent all the parts to Israel to build the new temple.All that was over 30 years ago Hal Lindsey is said by many now to be a false prophet.
Why not show me the pre trip rapture in the bible,Dave you cant do it because it is not there. Prove me wrong.
~TW~
For the record I would term myself a non-dogmatic premillennialist. Premil because in my view I find this to be the approach which can comfortably accommodate the greatest number of Scripture passages with the least number of uncomfortable bedfellows. Non-dogmatic because as long as there are some residual Scriptures which do not seem to make a good fit with the premil view I need to continue to seek answers and to remain open and willing to modify my views if necessary and to certainly recognise the need not to insist that I have the only correct view.
For me the amil view probably accommodates best those Scriptures which do not comfortably fit into the premil approach. But then I find a much larger proportion of uncomfortable bedfellows in the amil position.
I really struggle with the post-mil position.
I suspect that when we are all gathered in glory and look back at what actually happened it will not be so much an issue of who was right and who was wrong, but rather one of who was least wrong. And somehow I very much doubt it will seem all that important, We will probably simply have a good laugh about it over a celestial beer or something and then go back to more important activities such as being ‘lost in wonder, love and praise’ to quote that great Wesley hymn.
I think it was David Pawson who once said, ‘Are you a-mil, pre-mil or post-mil? That is a-pre-post-erous question’!
But this debate is currently concerned with Isaiah 13 and I have no wish to get it side tracked into a general debate on millennial controversies.
-
A message for Dave,
Thanks for your reply, regarding in particular, Luke's version of the Olivet discourse. I get very bogged down when discussing this sometimes, so I'll quickly make a point about that particular passage then go back and re-read your post, and hopefully answer it more later.
Luke adds a phrase about the roaring and tossing of the sea, which makes men perplexed and faint from terror. You say this demands a literal interpretation; maybe, but a quick google for me located a similar verse - Isaiah 5:30, in which the roar of an army is clearly in view when talking about the roaring of the sea. So I would be inclined to think Jesus was being cryptic when he used that imagery, and thinking of war in some sense. I remain open to a future, literal fulfilment though.
By the way, when I mentioned the sun being darkened in my previous post, I am aware that I didn't interpret that very exactly, but made a more general statement about the extinction of governmental powers.
I just wanted to make that observation about your post, have a good day and I hope all is well down there :)
Edit: Another reference to the roar of the sea:
"Oh, the raging of many nations–they rage like the raging sea! Oh, the uproar of the peoples–they roar like the roaring of great waters!" Isaiah 17:12
Hi Spud
It seems Dave does not want to play ball,but when you read the bible allow the new to refer to the old it makes more sense for example.
We have 6 After that I heard what sounded like the shout of a vast throng, like the boom of many pounding waves, and like the roar of terrific and mighty peals of thunder, exclaiming, Hallelujah (praise the Lord)! For now the Lord our God the Omnipotent (the All-Ruler) reigns!
7 Let us rejoice and shout for joy [exulting and triumphant]! Let us celebrate and ascribe to Him glory and honor, for the marriage of the Lamb [at last] has come, and His bride has prepared herself.
Here the shouting of the people is likend to PEOPLE also we read this 21 Then I saw a new [a]sky (heaven) and a new earth, for the former sky and the former earth had passed away (vanished), and there no longer existed any sea.
Why is there no sea in the new heaven and earth let us read on 3 Then I heard a mighty voice from the throne and I perceived its distinct words, saying, See! The abode of God is with men, and He will live (encamp, tent) among them; and they shall be His people, and God shall personally be with them and be their God.
4 God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death shall be no more, neither shall there be anguish (sorrow and mourning) nor grief nor pain any more, for the old conditions and the former order of things have passed away.
The answer is the anti-Christian nations are no more they are judged and gone the sea {people} were no more
Here is another example of the sea=people 5 By fearful and glorious things [that terrify the wicked but make the godly sing praises] do You answer us in righteousness (rightness and justice), O God of our salvation, You Who are the confidence and hope of all the ends of the earth and of those far off on the seas;
6 Who by [Your] might have founded the mountains, being girded with power,
7 Who still the roaring of the seas, the roaring of their waves, and the tumult of the peoples,
Spud try not to get involved with the pre-left behind heretics.
~TW~
-
Dave a slight change first with a pre-mill view you are sadly living in cloud cuckoo land many years ago,many many years ago I had a pre mill pastor.I did not know what the terms were pre-post-non meant nothing to me.
I had no idea of any of these terms,so he gives me a book read this he says Hal Lindsey Late Great Planet Earth this will kick off soon he says,also we have sent all the parts to Israel to build the new temple.All that was over 30 years ago Hal Lindsey is said by many now to be a false prophet.
Why not show me the pre trip rapture in the bible,Dave you cant do it because it is not there. Prove me wrong.
~TW~
For the record I would term myself a non-dogmatic premillennialist. Premil because in my view I find this to be the approach which can comfortably accommodate the greatest number of Scripture passages with the least number of uncomfortable bedfellows. Non-dogmatic because as long as there are some residual Scriptures which do not seem to make a good fit with the premil view I need to continue to seek answers and to remain open and willing to modify my views if necessary and to certainly recognise the need not to insist that I have the only correct view.
For me the amil view probably accommodates best those Scriptures which do not comfortably fit into the premil approach. But then I find a much larger proportion of uncomfortable bedfellows in the amil position.
I really struggle with the post-mil position.
I suspect that when we are all gathered in glory and look back at what actually happened it will not be so much an issue of who was right and who was wrong, but rather one of who was least wrong. And somehow I very much doubt it will seem all that important, We will probably simply have a good laugh about it over a celestial beer or something and then go back to more important activities such as being ‘lost in wonder, love and praise’ to quote that great Wesley hymn.
I think it was David Pawson who once said, ‘Are you a-mil, pre-mil or post-mil? That is a-pre-post-erous question’!
But this debate is currently concerned with Isaiah 13 and I have no wish to get it side tracked into a general debate on millennial controversies.
OK Dave outline Isa 13 post your problems and I will look at them and it may make sense to you,but I go strictly with the bible.
~TW~
-
If you are basing your views of pre-mil on Late Great Planet Earth, then :(
Better to base views on the scripture than on pop fiction
Many people do base this view on crackpot Americans,all you have to do is show me the rapture where Christ returns invisibly takes his church and comes back 7 years later.So I wait. :)
~TW~
There was only ever two comings of Christ prophesied.... not three.
-
If you are basing your views of pre-mil on Late Great Planet Earth, then :(
Better to base views on the scripture than on pop fiction
Many people do base this view on crackpot Americans,all you have to do is show me the rapture where Christ returns invisibly takes his church and comes back 7 years later.So I wait. :)
~TW~
There was only ever two comings of Christ prophesied.... not three.
Sweet Pea yes that is right you need to tell that to 2 Corrie.Dave I do not see any problems with Isaiah 13 it seems very straigtforward.
Take care Dave.
~TW~
-
Question from Dave---- Isaiah 13:3. Who are ‘my consecrated ones, my mighty men my proudly exulting ones’ whom the Lord has Himself commanded and summoned to execute His anger?
Answer -----------The Medes and Persians.
~TW~
-
A message for Dave,
Thanks for your reply, regarding in particular, Luke's version of the Olivet discourse. I get very bogged down when discussing this sometimes, so I'll quickly make a point about that particular passage then go back and re-read your post, and hopefully answer it more later.
Luke adds a phrase about the roaring and tossing of the sea, which makes men perplexed and faint from terror. You say this demands a literal interpretation; maybe, but a quick google for me located a similar verse - Isaiah 5:30, in which the roar of an army is clearly in view when talking about the roaring of the sea. So I would be inclined to think Jesus was being cryptic when he used that imagery, and thinking of war in some sense. I remain open to a future, literal fulfilment though.
By the way, when I mentioned the sun being darkened in my previous post, I am aware that I didn't interpret that very exactly, but made a more general statement about the extinction of governmental powers.
I just wanted to make that observation about your post, have a good day and I hope all is well down there :)
Edit: Another reference to the roar of the sea:
"Oh, the raging of many nations–they rage like the raging sea! Oh, the uproar of the peoples–they roar like the roaring of great waters!" Isaiah 17:12
Hi Spud,
Thanks. Some good Scriptural quotations there. And I would agree that in all the above Isaiah is using imagery to highlight his warnings. So in 5:30 it would be incorrect to postulate the literal roar of a lion or the literal raging of the sea.
Perhaps where we diverge in our approach is as follows. In all the verses quoted above Isaiah qualifies his descriptions with phrase such as 'like the roaring of the sea' Similarly in 5:29 Isaiah says the noise of the Chaldean army is a roaring 'like a lioness....'. So Isaiah makes it clear that he is using imagery or comparisons to press home his point and we need to interpret this in the symbolism that he uses.
However, in Luke 21:25 Jesus simply says that it will be the roaring of the sea and the waves that will cause men to faint from fear. There is no suggestion in the text that Jesus is using the roaring of the sea to illustrate the nature of some other event. And because we are given absolutely no indication that these words are intended to be understood in a symbolic way, my approach is that this is a plain statement which Jesus is making and we need to interpret it as such.
Bed time down south but enjoy the rest of your day.
-
If Russia roared=sea and America roared=sea then this---------which makes men perplexed and faint from terror,would seem to make sense.
Not hard to understand.
~TW~
-
Question from Dave---- Isaiah 13:3. Who are ‘my consecrated ones, my mighty men my proudly exulting ones’ whom the Lord has Himself commanded and summoned to execute His anger?
Answer -----------The Medes and Persians.
~TW~
That might well be correct and many ascribe to that view. But the historical facts offer strong support for the Assyrians being more likely candidates whose actions against Babylon provide a better match to the prophecy than do the Medes and Persians. See my post #202,
-
If Russia roared=sea and America roared=sea then this---------which makes men perplexed and faint from terror,would seem to make sense.
Not hard to understand.
~TW~
The sight of huge tsunamis, or gaint waves created by other causes, heading towards the shores would have an equally terrifying effect. This cannot be ruled out and is consistent with the plain statements of Jesus and the general tenor of the Olivet Discourse in places, which includes many natural disasters.
-
If Russia roared=sea and America roared=sea then this---------which makes men perplexed and faint from terror,would seem to make sense.
Not hard to understand.
~TW~
The sight of huge tsunamis, or gaint waves created by other causes, heading towards the shores would have an equally terrifying effect. This cannot be ruled out and is consistent with the plain statements of Jesus and the general tenor of the Olivet Discourse in places, which includes many natural disasters.
Well in reply the sea representing people can be found in scripture, tsunamis are not likely to cause the end of the world and in general context sea representing terror by people fits the bill rather better in Matt 24 then a tsunamis.
Also you can ask the question .What destroyed the Temple in 70 ad a tsunami or people out of control and filled with murder.
~TW~
-
Dave you posted this------------------ Matthew 24:29. In Matt 24:29 we read, ‘Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken’. But Luke (21:25-26) adds an interesting additional phrase. “And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth distress of nations in perplexity because of the roaring of the sea and the waves, people fainting with fear and with foreboding of what is coming on the world. For the powers of the heavens will be shaken
----------------------------------------------------
If you apply sea to people/nations as it is{fact} in scripture,and apply sun/moon/stars as a picture {also shown in scripture} of De-Creation the world groaning as the verse 30 approaches--------30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn and beat their breasts and lament in anguish, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory [in brilliancy and splendor].
This is it the last day the final trumpet.So no big mystery's here.
~TW~
-
If you are basing your views of pre-mil on Late Great Planet Earth, then :(
Better to base views on the scripture than on pop fiction
Many people do base this view on crackpot Americans,all you have to do is show me the rapture where Christ returns invisibly takes his church and comes back 7 years later.So I wait. :)
~TW~
He doesn't come invisibly!
He comes on the clouds heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. (from Mat. 24)
When does this happen? After the tribulation and before the Day of the Lord. Methinks you have me confused with a pre-tribber.
-
How many times is our Lord supposed to return then?
-
How many times is our Lord supposed to return then?
Once. How long was His first coming in duration?
-
If you are basing your views of pre-mil on Late Great Planet Earth, then :(
Better to base views on the scripture than on pop fiction
Many people do base this view on crackpot Americans,all you have to do is show me the rapture where Christ returns invisibly takes his church and comes back 7 years later.So I wait. :)
~TW~
He doesn't come invisibly!
He comes on the clouds heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. (from Mat. 24)
When does this happen? After the tribulation and before the Day of the Lord. Methinks you have me confused with a pre-tribber.
Glad to hear you are not a pre trib wacko,but they believe he returns invisibly.
~TW~
-
How many times is our Lord supposed to return then?
Once. How long was His first coming in duration?
Good. Well, you got that right. Usually millenialists have Christ returning twice, thrice or gawd knows how many times.
-
You will know you are near the end when the Russians march down the hills of Jerusalem.
-
You will know you are near the end when the Russians march down the hills of Jerusalem.
Moderator: quoted content removed.
Oh so you pick and choose what happens in the last times..
Wait and see...
I don't remember the scriptures ever referring to the Russians. It's more likely that we will know the end is near when the faithless Jews, that is those who never converted to Christ, commit their final act of apostasy by building a new temple in Jerusalem (no doubt aided by a large number of Evangelicals).
-
You will know you are near the end when the Russians march down the hills of Jerusalem.
Moderator: quoted content removed.
Oh so you pick and choose what happens in the last times..
Wait and see...
I don't remember the scriptures ever referring to the Russians. It's more likely that we will know the end is near when the faithless Jews, that is those who never converted to Christ, commit their final act of apostasy by building a new temple in Jerusalem (no doubt aided by a large number of Evangelicals).
AO sad to say they do read this into scripture,{Russians}when challenged on it they vanish. :)
~TW~
-
I don't remember the scriptures ever referring to the Russians. It's more likely that we will know the end is near when the faithless Jews, that is those who never converted to Christ, commit their final act of apostasy by building a new temple in Jerusalem (no doubt aided by a large number of Evangelicals).
Is that in the Bible??
-
I don't remember the scriptures ever referring to the Russians. It's more likely that we will know the end is near when the faithless Jews, that is those who never converted to Christ, commit their final act of apostasy by building a new temple in Jerusalem (no doubt aided by a large number of Evangelicals).
Is that in the Bible??
Spud it is what people read into it and can easily be disproved.You know what a cowboy builder is,well we have now, a lot of cowboy christians small c.
~TW~