Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

Recommended Posts


(about dispensationalism which i understand to be the ground for pre-trib)
One of the things i was taught in a dispensationalism commentary was,
Christ has two brides Israel and The church. (which I believe is false) If you believe that can you explain that to me? It seems to go against (Mt 19:4-9) (1Jo 3:5)


You know, there are so many verses on the subject you could start in a great many places, but I think I will just point to the prophecy in one chapter for now. It is 26 verses long, but it is worthwhile to look at in its entirety. The word of God will be blue as is my habit.

"Isaiah 49
1 Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.
2 And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid me;
3 And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.
4 Then I said, I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain: yet surely my judgment is with the LORD, and my work with my God.
5 And now, saith the LORD that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the LORD, and my God shall be my strength.
6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.
7 Thus saith the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth, to a servant of rulers, Kings shall see and arise, princes also shall worship, because of the LORD that is faithful, and the Holy One of Israel, and he shall choose thee.
8 Thus saith the LORD, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;
9 That thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth; to them that are in darkness, shew yourselves. They shall feed in the ways, and their pastures shall be in all high places.
10 They shall not hunger nor thirst; neither shall the heat nor sun smite them: for he that hath mercy on them shall lead them, even by the springs of water shall he guide them.
11 And I will make all my mountains a way, and my highways shall be exalted.
12 Behold, these shall come from far: and, lo, these from the north and from the west; and these from the land of Sinim.
13 Sing, O heavens; and be joyful, O earth; and break forth into singing, O mountains: for the LORD hath comforted his people, and will have mercy upon his afflicted.
14 But Zion said, The LORD hath forsaken me, and my Lord hath forgotten me.
15 Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee.
16 Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me.
17 Thy children shall make haste; thy destroyers and they that made thee waste shall go forth of thee.
18 Lift up thine eyes round about, and behold: all these gather themselves together, and come to thee. As I live, saith the LORD, thou shalt surely clothe thee with them all, as with an ornament, and bind them on thee, as a bride doeth.
19 For thy waste and thy desolate places, and the land of thy destruction, shall even now be too narrow by reason of the inhabitants, and they that swallowed thee up shall be far away.
20 The children which thou shalt have, after thou hast lost the other, shall say again in thine ears, The place is too strait for me: give place to me that I may dwell.
21 Then shalt thou say in thine heart, Who hath begotten me these, seeing I have lost my children, and am desolate, a captive, and removing to and fro? and who hath brought up these? Behold, I was left alone; these, where had they been?
22 Thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders.
23 And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the LORD: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me.
24 Shall the prey be taken from the mighty, or the lawful captive delivered?
25 But thus saith the LORD, Even the captives of the mighty shall be taken away, and the prey of the terrible shall be delivered: for I will contend with him that contendeth with thee, and I will save thy children.
26 And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh shall know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob."


Now, lets break this down a bit. Christ is speaking prophetically in verses 1-5. In verse three, the "Israel" there is specifically speaking of Christ just like it is in Hosea 11:1. God the Father is speaking to Christ in verses 6-12 and verse 13 is a general exclamation of gladness to no one in particular and to everyone at the same time. Verse 14 is speaking of the desolate Israel after they have rejected of God and God has sent Christ to the gentiles as described in verses 5-6. Verses 15 through 26 are then dealing with God's promises to heal and comfort stricken and forsaken Israel. That gives a decent picture in a nutshell of what is going to happen, but if you want specific verses where God the father says he is the husband of Israel and Christ is called the husband of the church that can be provided too.



Also somewhere though not by the majority I read one person thought people will be saved by works in the millennial kingdom. For some reasoning based on if the world is so great how can anyone be saved by faith (which i believe to be false). For one because of (Eph 2:8-9) and Ga (2:16). Also in the garden even Adam knowing of God, in the world so great and the instructions of God he ate the apple; and Israel also at many times if i remember correctly they knew of the great deliverance's and then later much of Israel had such unbelief and so that its no reason to justify works salvation in the millennial kingdom.


A few will teach that but I think that is totally wrong. Particularly in the light of this verse and a few others:

"Galatians 3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law." Law is not sufficient to get anyone saved in any dispensation. God realized if that was what he required no one could get saved so he made salvation possible by faith in his perfect substitute instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some think that some will be saved by works, based on the Sheep and the Goats.

The church, gentiles are grafted into believing Israel, therefor they are one bride, believing Israel and believing gentiles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Messiah is the subject of the 70 weeks prophecy.

Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:

Rom 15:8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises [made] unto the fathers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Messiah is the subject of the 70 weeks prophecy.

Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:

Rom 15:8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises [made] unto the fathers:



Agreed.

Not any future Antichrist.

I was once loaned a book, The Coming Prince by Sir Robert Anderson. The book is based on the verse, Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;


The whole book is based on this prince. But the prince is not the subject of this verse, but his people. The prince is only mentioned in passing, so the "he" refers back to Messiah. Anderson was a leading police officer so should have read the scriptures more carefully, then he would have come to a different conclusion.

I remember once reading a book that said the scripture is silent on the so called gap between the 69th and 70th weeks. I can remember my dad saying "That is a very dangerous teaching, saying scripture is silent, so you can teach what you like.

So what does Anderson say on this?

If then the event which constitutes the epoch of the seventieth week must be as pronounced and certain as Nehemiah's commission and Messiah's death, it is of necessity still future.

And this is precisely what the study of the seventh chapter of Daniel will have led us to expect. All Christian interpreters are agreed that between the rise of the fourth beast and the growth of the ten horns there is a gap or parenthesis in the vision; and, as already shown, that gap includes the entire period between the time of Christ and the division of the Roman earth into the ten kingdoms out of which the great persecutor of the future is to arise. This period, moreover, is admittedly unnoticed also in the other visions of the book. There is therefore a strong a priori probability that it would be overlooked in the vision of the ninth chapter.


In other words, it isn't mentioned in the other prophecies of Daniel, so we already assume that it is not mentioned here, so we can teach what we like. Q.E.D. (Quite easily done.) Edited by Invicta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Agreed.

Not any future Antichrist.

I was once loaned a book, The Coming Prince by Sir Robert Anderson. The book is based on the verse, Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;


The whole book is based on this prince. But the prince is not the subject of this verse, but his people. The prince is only mentioned in passing, so the "he" refers back to Messiah. Anderson was a leading police officer so should have read the scriptures more carefully, then he would have come to a different conclusion.

I remember once reading a book that said the scripture is silent on the so called gap between the 69th and 70th weeks. I can remember my dad saying "That is a very dangerous teaching, saying scripture is silent, so you can teach what you like.

So what does Anderson say on this?



In other words, it isn't mentioned in the other prophecies of Daniel, so we already assume that it is not mentioned here, so we can teach what we like. Q.E.D. (Quite easily done.)



You can find his words here http://philologos.org/__eb-tcp/chap07.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far no-one has effectively challenged the obvious timing of Revelation, particularly the existence of the temple & the destruction of Jerusalem, the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. The close parallel between the Olivet prophecy of the destruction & the seals is admitted, but deferred to yet future "end times."

Rick, in his book summarily dismisses Preterism, claiming AD 70 was "before Revelation was written" without any Scriptural or historical support.

The problem with the futurist interpretation is that a book written for the blessing & encouragement of the suffering church in the first century is all about some future dispensation where believers have been removed by a supposed "rapture." The church has been waiting for 2 millennia for Darby, Scofield, Tim & Jerry (& Rick) to explain it all.

Time to look at the millennium of Rev. 20.

1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

Jesus bound Satan in order to free his captives, not only demon possessed Jews, but also of the nations.
Mat 12:28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. 29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house.

Jhn 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. 32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me.

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.

Satan is bound, the Gospel goes out to the nations as sinners who have been Eph 2:12 ..... without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: .... are made nigh by the blood of Christ.

Satan still has some influence from his prison, just as Mafia leaders exert their evil influence from our prisons. Note Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

Wickedness of man continues, but cannot prevail against Christ.

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

These are souls of martyrs, living & reigning with Christ. The wicked have done their worst against the saints - but the promise of Jesus is proved: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

Martyrdom & death continue through the millennium, & all believers who die pass into heaven. Our eternal life does not end with death. We live & reign with him, after all, as Jesus promises at the start of this book: 5 .... Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, 6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him [be] glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Jesus explains the first resurrection as conversion: Jhn 5:24 ¶ Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.



7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
9 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.
10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

We can expect a final Satanic rebellion before Jesus returns for resurrection & judgement. Armageddon & the Gog & Magog wars speak of this. Not local to Israel & earthly Jerusalem, but wherever citizens of Jerusalem which is above [which] is free, which is the mother of us all. [wherever] the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth:

There is a pattern where God in mercy delays his judgment until man becomes unspeakably evil. e.g.

Gen 6:5 ¶ And GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually.

Gen 15:16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites [is] not yet full.

Gen 18:20 And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous; 21 I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.

Mat 23:32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. 33 [Ye] serpents, [ye] generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

Jesus allowed the Jews 40 years of Gospel grace before bringing about the prophesied destruction. He now allows a "millennium" of Gospel grace before bringing about the final judgement. That millennium is in God's time, as Peter explains in 2 Peter 3.

Notice the similarity of Rev. 20 & 2 Thes. 1:

4So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure:

5Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:

6Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;

7And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

8In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

10When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

In his previous letter, Paul explained that dead believers, who sleep in Jesus, will come with him.

Revelation is in our Bible, & is understood by the teaching of Jesus & the other Apostles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far no-one has effectively challenged the obvious timing of Revelation, particularly the existence of the temple & the destruction of Jerusalem, the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. The close parallel between the Olivet prophecy of the destruction & the seals is admitted, but deferred to yet future "end times."



Ian, I do not cosider that you have effectually established and early date.

You dismiss Irenius testimony but give no other witnesses to justify your view of an early date. As far as I can find, every early writer gives a late date.

The Great City where I Lord was crucified was Rome. He died ouside Jerusalem. He was crucified by Romans in greater Rome. He is still crucified in Rome, in the mass, Rome claims

The book of Revelation is written to the Church, and concerns the Church. There is no gap between the 7 Churches in chapter one and the Bride and the New Jeruslem at the end of the book. It is a continuos narrative of the tribulations on the Church through the ages and her final blessing.

The seven Churches, which the book is written to, represent the entire church and are shown as candlesticks. The two witnesses in Rev 11, who are also candlesticks, represent the church in her depressed state in the dark days of RCC oppression. Their resurrection represents the reformation. Edited by Invicta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



The seven Churches, which the book is written to, represent the entire church and are shown as candlesticks. The two witnesses in Rev 11, who are also candlesticks, represent the church in her depressed state in the dark days of RCC oppression. Their resurrection represents the reformation.

Could you explain this and provide support for this view?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Ian, I do not cosider that you have effectually established and early date.

You dismiss Irenius testimony but give no other witnesses to justify your view of an early date. As far as I can find, every early writer gives a late date.

REVELATION'S EARLY DATING

The internal evidence, & comparison with the Olivet prophecy, require an early date. We do not need the confused testimony of the ECFs.

The Great City where I Lord was crucified was Rome. He died ouside Jerusalem. He was crucified by Romans in greater Rome. He is still crucified in Rome, in the mass, Rome claims

The book of Revelation is written to the Church, and concerns the Church. There is no gap between the 7 Churches in chapter one and the Bride and the New Jeruslem at the end of the book. It is a continuos narrative of the tribulations on the Church through the ages and her final blessing.

The seven Churches, which the book is written to, represent the entire church and are shown as candlesticks. The two witnesses in Rev 11, who are also candlesticks, represent the church in her depressed state in the dark days of RCC oppression. Their resurrection represents the reformation.

That is totally unsubstantiated. If we lived further east, we would see the eastern church as the great enemy, rather than Rome, & they would see the rise of Islam.

There are principles we need to see & take heed, but that is not exegesis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some thoughts:

1. Whether Revelation was written before or after 70 A.D. makes no difference to the futurist, everything after Revelation 4 has not yet been fulfilled and no amount of twisting and turning and squeezing and shoving will change that.

2. Taking Revelation 1:3 as literal as possible means you have to make the whole rest of the book to not be very literal at all. You are standing the book on its head because of one verse which could mean a lot of different things.

3. The Olivet prophecy is not evidence of anything when it comes to the date of Revelation being written. Part of the Olivet Prophecy is the "end of the world," which includes events that have not yet been fulfilled.

4. Glad your enjoying the free book I sent you, Ian. I didn't go hog wild on Preterism in my book because it's not a defense of futurism. It's an easy to read harmony of Revelation written from a futurist standpoint. It's a specific study that I looked for thirteen years ago and never found. If I covered every little quirk and viewpoint the book would easily be three times as big.

5. I am a futurist because I care more about interpreting the Bible with the Bible than anything else. The first argument always raised against futurism and dispensationalism is NEVER the Bible, but always "you got that teaching from so-and-so." You folks should find a better argument because that's just not convincing to a serious student of the Bible.

Edited by Rick Schworer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some thoughts:

1. Whether Revelation was written before or after 70 A.D. makes no difference to the futurist, everything after Revelation 4 has not yet been fulfilled and no amount of twisting and turning and squeezing and shoving will change that.

Such emotive language does not contribute to understanding. You say "everything" but does that mean some things have been fulfilled? If so, what?

2. Taking Revelation 1:3 as literal as possible means you have to make the whole rest of the book to not be very literal at all. You are standing the book on its head because of one verse which could mean a lot of different things.

No. We have to seek to understand Revelation according to normal Scriptural principles, understanding the symbolism in comparison with related Scripture. There are many alusions to OC prophecy.

3. The Olivet prophecy is not evidence of anything when it comes to the date of Revelation being written. Part of the Olivet Prophecy is the "end of the world," which includes events that have not yet been fulfilled.

The close similarity with the Olivet prophecy means that we must first consider Rev. in relation to Jesus' prophecy. I have shown that the significance of the symbolism in Rev. 6 relates to the end of empires as prophesied in Isa. 13 & Eze. 32, & can equally well relate to the end of Jerusalem & the temple, as happened in AD 70.

The disciples asked about the end of the world, but world can have various meanings. The fact that they asked does not mean that Jesus answered that question with the understanding you demand. After all, he had specifically prophesied the AD 70 destruction (within this generation) & that occasioned their questions.

4. Glad your enjoying the free book I sent you, Ian. I didn't go hog wild on Preterism in my book because it's not a defense of futurism. It's an easy to read harmony of Revelation written from a futurist standpoint. It's a specific study that I looked for thirteen years ago and never found. If I covered every little quirk and viewpoint the book would easily be three times as big.

Like all futurist books, it assumes what it sets out to teach.

5. I am a futurist because I care more about interpreting the Bible with the Bible than anything else. The first argument always raised against futurism and dispensationalism is NEVER the Bible, but always "you got that teaching from so-and-so." You folks should find a better argument because that's just not convincing to a serious student of the Bible.

Have I ever used that argument? My arguments are entirely founded on Scripture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some thoughts:

1. Whether Revelation was written before or after 70 A.D. makes no difference to the futurist, everything after Revelation 4 has not yet been fulfilled and no amount of twisting and turning and squeezing and shoving will change that.


Such emotive language does not contribute to understanding.


You know I love you brother, but I just can't help myself. Bring on the emoticons! :reaction:

1. I know what hasn't been fulfilled. How about all the oceans of the world being turned to blood and all sea life being killed? :blink: How exactly does that fit into 70 A.D. again? :o What about those 100 pound hailstones and the boils all over the kingdom of the Beast? Did all the Romans get boils in 70 A.D.? :huh:

2. So all of the detail in Revelation is symbolic, just like all of Ez. 40-48? :smilie_loco:4 Why would anyone believe that when the prophesies of Christ's First Coming (stripes, beard ripped out, no bones broken, born in Bethlehem, betrayed by a friend, etc...) were all very specific? The prophesy of the Nation of Israel leaving Egypt was specific. Can you scientifically show examples in Scripture where a prophecy is given in specific terms, as in Revelation, and has been fulfilled some sort of ambiguous non-descript way as you are suggesting? When does God not mean what He says when it comes to specific future events that He painstakingly describes, as he does in Revelation?

3. I have no problem with examining Revelation in proximity with Matthew 24, or the other way around. I encourage it. Matthew 24 hasn't been completely fulfilled yet. :eye: :eye:

4. It assumes you take Revelation as literal as possible when you read it.

5. You just did when you were yammering on about how we've waited two millennia for Darby and friends to come along and show us the truth. Invicta uses that argument all the time. :bang:I give you credit though, you don't do it all that much. :thumb:

Round and round we go, where we stop nobody knows.... :beatdeadhorse:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Olivet prophecy is not evidence of anything when it comes to the date of Revelation being written. Part of the Olivet Prophecy is the "end of the world," which includes events that have not yet been fulfilled.

The close similarity with the Olivet prophecy means that we must first consider Rev. in relation to Jesus' prophecy. I have shown that the significance of the symbolism in Rev. 6 relates to the end of empires as prophesied in Isa. 13 & Eze. 32, & can equally well relate to the end of Jerusalem & the temple, as happened in AD 70.

The disciples asked about the end of the world, but world can have various meanings. The fact that they asked does not mean that Jesus answered that question with the understanding you demand. After all, he had specifically prophesied the AD 70 destruction (within this generation) & that occasioned their questions.


Note that there are three separate questions asked by his disciples in response to Christs prophecy of the destruction of the temple in Matthew 24 verse two.

"Matthew 24:1-3 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?"

Christs answer also spans all three events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wanted to let everyone posting know that I'm reading these posts and giving them due consideration. I hope it remains civil and productive. Looking forward to the next installments. :coffee2:


So do I brother John.

Matt 24: 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
They didn't. That doesn't make me a preterist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rick:
1. Whether Revelation was written before or after 70 A.D. makes no difference to the futurist, everything after Revelation 4 has not yet been fulfilled and no amount of twisting and turning and squeezing and shoving will change that.

Ian:
Such emotive language does not contribute to understanding. You say "everything" but does that mean some things have been fulfilled? If so, what?

Rick:
1. I know what hasn't been fulfilled. How about all the oceans of the world being turned to blood and all sea life being killed? :blink: How exactly does that fit into 70 A.D. again? :o What about those 100 pound hailstones and the boils all over the kingdom of the Beast? Did all the Romans get boils in 70 A.D.? :huh:


I asked "does that mean some things have been fulfilled? If so, what?" and you answer "I know what hasn't been fulfilled."

My point, of course is that there is general agreement (I hope) that much of the Olivet prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70. (Read Luke 21 if you don't agree.) The close parallel between the seals & Olivet, and Luke 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. , as well as the destruction in Rev. 11 demand consideration.

===============

Can no-one refute my post #82 on the millennium?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I asked "does that mean some things have been fulfilled? If so, what?" and you answer "I know what hasn't been fulfilled."

My point, of course is that there is general agreement (I hope) that much of the Olivet prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70. (Read Luke 21 if you don't agree.) The close parallel between the seals & Olivet, and Luke 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. , as well as the destruction in Rev. 11 demand consideration.

===============

Can no-one refute my post #82 on the millennium?


Yes, I agree that the part of the Olivet Prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem has been fulfilled. The times of the Gentiles are right now. Where I disagree is when you say that because the Seals resemble part of the Olivet Prophecy therefore Revelation has been fulfilled.

1. The Seals in their entirety do not resemble the Olivet Prophecy, only the Sixth Seal does. We could go into detail, but it's obvious to anyone with a Bible.

2. Even if all the Seals did resemble the Olivet Prophecy, that doesn't satisfy the fact that most of the Trumpets and Vials do not.

3. The Sixth Seal is the bodily return of Christ, which is yet future. It resembles the part of the Olivet Prophecy that is yet future as well.

What do I think has been fulfilled in Revelation? Typical futurist stuff: Rev. 4:1 is the rapture, so everything before it (seven church ages) we're either in it or it has been fulfilled.

In answer to post #82, you claim that we are in the Millennium. Then you claim that at the end of this age there is to be a battle, Armageddon and Gog and Magog. The problem is, Armageddon is in chapter 19, then the 1,000 years are in chapter 20, and then following that time span there is Gog and Magog. You're off by at least 1,000 years on Armageddon. If we're in the 1,000 years - then you 1) can't reference Armageddon as a future battle and must spiritualize it, or 2) show me in history where Jesus came down on a white Horse in war?

By the way, if everything before Revelation 19 is spiritual or doesn't mean what it says, why should we expect anything different from Revelation 20 and on? :smilie_loco:4 Don't you think that's a little inconsistent? The language of the book remains constant all the way through, but you're trying to say that Gog and Magog and everything that follows it is literal - but most everything before it is spiritual and applies to 70A.D.? Edited by Rick Schworer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
S-D:
Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?"

Christ's answer also spans all three events.


What is the meaning of "world" in context? Should we understand it as "age," i.e. the OC age - which is clearly prophesied with the destruction of the temple?

"World" is used in various ways, & several words are translated "world":
Mat 24:3 ¶ And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what [shall be] the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? αἰῶνος

Jhn 12:19 The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him. κόσμος

Luk 4:5 And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. οἰκουμένης

Luk 20:34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: αἰῶνος

Jhn 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. κόσμος x3

Jhn 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. κόσμου

Luk 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. οἰκουμένην

Kosmos, aiōn, oikoumenē, all translated "world" (& with other translations in the KJV) but have a different significance. I'm not correcting the KJV, but seeking a right understanding.
In 1 Peter 3:3, [worldly] adornment is κόσμος, giving us the word "cosmetics."

Note that Mat. 24:3 is aiōn, variously translated: AV — ever 71, world 38, never + 3364 + 1519 + 3588 6, evermore 4, age 2, eternal 2, misc 5.

Is it right to understand the disciples question as as referring to the end of the world in the sense of creation - the physical universe? Is that what they would expect in the light of his prophecy of the temple destruction?

His coming was the prophesied judgement of the generation that rejected him. (Mar 12:9 What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do? he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others. That coming would bring about the end of the OC world, or age - aiōn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Old Covenant ended at Calvary with the veil being rent in twain, not 70 A.D. From what you're saying, if the OC ended at 70 A.D then for about forty years after the resurrection people still had a reason to offer animal sacrifices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Old Covenant ended at Calvary with the veil being rent in twain, not 70 A.D. From what you're saying, if the OC ended at 70 A.D then for about forty years after the resurrection people still had a reason to offer animal sacrifices.

I agree, BUT, during that transitional period, sacrifices did continue, although OC worship was obsolete.

AD 70 brought all the symbols of the OC to an absolute & visible end.

Even Paul joined in sacrificial worship.

Act 18:21 But bade them farewell, saying, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem:

Act 21:26 ¶ Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.

Hbr 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.
Edited by Covenanter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I agree, BUT, during that transitional period, sacrifices did continue, although OC worship was obsolete.

AD 70 brought all the symbols of the OC to an absolute & visible end.

Even Paul joined in sacrificial worship.

Act 18:21 But bade them farewell, saying, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem:

Act 21:26 ¶ Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.

Hbr 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.


Wow, something you and I agree on! :clapping:

Well, maybe not: we sort of agree. I'm still sketchy on this and still trying to work it out, but I believe the OC ended at the cross (as you do), but that the NC hasn't begun yet. The reason why I believe that is because I think the OC and the NC are entirely centered on the Nation of Israel. You and I are under the New Testament, and the NC will begin with the Nation of Israel at the Second Coming when they accept Christ.

The passages in Hebrews and Joel that refer to the NC are speaking of Israel. You take that to mean spiritual Israel, I take it to mean ethnic Israel. If it's ethnic, then the New Covenant hasn't begun yet and won't begin until the Jews accept Christ.

Hebrews tells us that a testament is in force after someone is dead, as in "my last will and testament...." Therefore, technically, the New Testament began with the death of Christ, putting us under the New Testament. A covenant is an agreement or contract involving two or more parties. Before the Old Covenant, there was an Adamic, Noahic, and Abramic covenant which involved something on the part of man and a performance or benefit on the part of God. Those are bilateral contracts.

The Davidic covenant was an example of a unilateral contract, only one side is obligated to perform - that side was the Lord. It's like saying, "Son, you'll have this house one day..." The kid isn't obligated to do anything - he's getting a house "some day," and that's all there is to it. Regardless, under this covenant, David is given the "sure mercies of David" that Saul never had, and promised that a member of his line would reign in Israel forever. This is highly significant because one of the last kings of Israel, JeConiah, of the line of David, was rejected of God and told that no one from his line would ever reign with the blessing of God. Jesus Christ is from the earthly line of David, but not the genetic, therefore He can take advantage of one blessing and dodge the curse of the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Wow, something you and I agree on! :clapping:

Well, maybe not: we sort of agree. I'm still sketchy on this and still trying to work it out, but I believe the OC ended at the cross (as you do), but that the NC hasn't begun yet. The reason why I believe that is because I think the OC and the NC are entirely centered on the Nation of Israel. You and I are under the New Testament, and the NC will begin with the Nation of Israel at the Second Coming when they accept Christ.

The passages in Hebrews and Joel that refer to the NC are speaking of Israel. You take that to mean spiritual Israel, I take it to mean ethnic Israel. If it's ethnic, then the New Covenant hasn't begun yet and won't begin until the Jews accept Christ.

Hebrews tells us that a testament is in force after someone is dead, as in "my last will and testament...." Therefore, technically, the New Testament began with the death of Christ, putting us under the New Testament. A covenant is an agreement or contract involving two or more parties. Before the Old Covenant, there was an Adamic, Noahic, and Abramic covenant which involved something on the part of man and a performance or benefit on the part of God. Those are bilateral contracts.

The Davidic covenant was an example of a unilateral contract, only one side is obligated to perform - that side was the Lord. It's like saying, "Son, you'll have this house one day..." The kid isn't obligated to do anything - he's getting a house "some day," and that's all there is to it. Regardless, under this covenant, David is given the "sure mercies of David" that Saul never had, and promised that a member of his line would reign in Israel forever. This is highly significant because one of the last kings of Israel, JeConiah, of the line of David, was rejected of God and told that no one from his line would ever reign with the blessing of God. Jesus Christ is from the earthly line of David, but not the genetic, therefore He can take advantage of one blessing and dodge the curse of the other.


Rick

I find your reasoning hard to understand. Your view seems to omit the scriptures that say we, as gentiles are grafted in to Israel.

Ro 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
Ro 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
Ro 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
Ro 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?

We are one church or congregation., not separarte.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rick

I find your reasoning hard to understand. Your view seems to omit the scriptures that say we, as gentiles are grafted in to Israel.

Ro 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
Ro 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
Ro 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
Ro 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?

We are one church or congregation, not separarte.


Great question.

There are two Israels in Romans.

Romans 9:6, "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:"

One is ethnic and the other is spiritual. We're spiritual Israel, lost Jews are ethnic.

You stopped short of a very important verse:

Romans 11:25, "For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in."

Now, that can't be talking about spiritual Israel. We're not blinded by God for a specific time because we rejected the Gospel. It's ethnic Israel that is blinded for a certain amount of time.

Very next verse...

Romans 11:26, "And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:"

Still talking about the same Israel, the ethnic one that is blinded right now until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in. THAT Israel will be saved one day. What follows next is THEIR covenant:

Romans 11:27, "For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins."

When all of national Israel is saved is when all of their sins are taken away and the New Covenant comes in. If you think this verse is talking about spiritual Israel, you and me, read the very next verse:

Romans 11:28, "As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes."

You and I, spiritual Israel, are not enemies of the gospel - but ethnic Israel in her current state is. Israel in her current state is partially blinded as well, but the nation of Israel will one day be saved and have all her sins taken away. Edited by Rick Schworer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Davidic covenant was an example of a unilateral contract, only one side is obligated to perform - that side was the Lord. It's like saying, "Son, you'll have this house one day..." The kid isn't obligated to do anything - he's getting a house "some day," and that's all there is to it. Regardless, under this covenant, David is given the "sure mercies of David" that Saul never had, and promised that a member of his line would reign in Israel forever. This is highly significant because one of the last kings of Israel, JeConiah, of the line of David, was rejected of God and told that no one from his line would ever reign with the blessing of God. Jesus Christ is from the earthly line of David, but not the genetic, therefore He can take advantage of one blessing and dodge the curse of the other.


You want to re-phrase that? I think I have a good idea what your talking about but I want to make sure your saying what I think you mean rather than what it looks like you said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 48 Guests (See full list)

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...