Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Recommended Posts

  • Members

OR

"He" refers the last person mentioned, the prince that shall come, and the prince that shall come confirms the covenant for 7 years, then stops animal sacrifices and commits the abomination of desolation.

No twisting, stretching, or subtracting of the text is needed.


Is it OK to quote the Russian Synodal Translation (Masoratic/Textus Receptus based) on this particular verse or is the RST inferior though based on the same text? This is one of those verses where the RST has a different reading from the KJV.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

OR

"He" refers the last person mentioned, the prince that shall come, and the prince that shall come confirms the covenant for 7 years, then stops animal sacrifices and commits the abomination of desolation.

No twisting, stretching, or subtracting of the text is needed.


Yes there is. The prince who was to come was not the subject of that statement. The subject is the people of the prince who is to come., therefore the he must refer back to Messiah the prince. Titus did come and his people did destroy the temple against his orders. Even if the prince was the subject, which he isn't, the he would still refer back to Messiah the Prince as he is the subject of the whole prophecy. In the OT you will often find pronouns refer back to earlier people mentioned.

You absolutely ignore the fact that the city and sanctuary were both destroyed by the Roman troops, If you cannot get that right, and make something that has clearly happened, to still be in the future, how can anyone trust your interpretations and predictions about the future.

Some on the board decry the use of commentators, yet they base their interpretations on the notes of a convicted fraudster.

If you take time, and it will take time, to study the history of dispensationalism, as I have, you will find that it eminates from Jesuits. The saddest part of it, is that this teaching denies the true scripture teaching that the papacy is the antichrist, taught by all non Catholic Christians,from the time the papacy got its full powers in about 1200, till about 1800 and as a result Rome is widely now widely considered to be a true Christian church. Remember when he calls himself Vicar of Christ, the pope is using a Latin equivalent of the Greek Antichrist. Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Re 8:7 ¶ 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.
Re 8:8 And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood;
Re 8:9 And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed.
Re 8:10 And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters;
Re 8:11 And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.
Re 8:12 And the fourth angel sounded, and the third part of the sun was smitten, and the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; so as the third part of them was darkened, and the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise.
Re 8:13 And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!

Nothing like this has ever happened on this earth, & it will not happen until during the tribulations take place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I did some reading on the rapture today and for some reason the focus was upon pre-mil, post-mil and a-mil views. the post-mil view was pretty much dismissed and the a-mil view was also dismissed but given a bit more attention.

What I found interesting that with regards to the pre-mil rapture view, only the view that the rapture would occur prior to the tribulation was presented. I've noticed over the years this is often the case, with no mention at all of the mid-trib or post-trib rapture views. This seems odd, especially since the pre-trib and mid-trib views are so very close in their views, only varying a little and, of course, most prominently with regards to whether the rapture will occur pre-trib or mid-trib.

Likely this is because most of the books and articles written on this topic are by pre-trib folks, but it hardly helps to ignore these other views.

Similarly, I've noticed there seems to be more people, many who were once staunch pre-tribbers, who now espouse mid-trib. Has anyone else noticed this and do you have any ideas as to why this is occuring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Similarly, I've noticed there seems to be more people, many who were once staunch pre-tribbers, who now espouse mid-trib. Has anyone else noticed this and do you have any ideas as to why this is occuring?


Apostasy!

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." - 2 Timothy 4:3-4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Oh yes, we lust for tribulation..being persecuted gives us sinful pleasure..that makes a ton of sense..


For most of these "no rapture" folks and the like, in order to hold to these heresies, they must hold to other heresies, so the Scriptures make some sort of sense to them even though their "proof" is full of contradictions and ignorance.

It has been erroneously said that a Pre-Tribulation Rapture followed by the Millenial Reign of Christ are new "inventions". These folks have not read the writings of first century Christians. All this apostasy ran amok again (first with Popery) with the proliferation of corrupt bible translations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



For most of these "no rapture" folks and the like, in order to hold to these heresies, they must hold to other heresies, so the Scriptures make some sort of sense to them even though their "proof" is full of contradictions and ignorance.

It has been erroneously said that a Pre-Tribulation Rapture followed by the Millenial Reign of Christ are new "inventions". These folks have not read the writings of first century Christians. All this apostasy ran amok again (first with Popery) with the proliferation of corrupt bible translations.

Is it right to call ones differening view of the end times heresy? That term gets tossed around a lot and much of the time it's used out of context. Just wondering.

The first century Christians wrote many things, much of which contradicts one another. Many, if not most, modern Baptists of the more conservative and IFB varieties, most often dismiss their writings. That wasn't the case with earlier generations of Baptists who did refer to their writings.

It's amazing how quickly the world, the flesh and the devil corrupted Christianity. Sometimes we marvel at some of the beliefs held by some of the church fathers, or whatever they are often called, but when we read from Acts on in Scripture we can see the battle for the soundness of various local churches being played out.

I'm currently studying, once again, books on the pre-mil/pre-trib rapture and someone is supposed to be sending me a book which they say explains their view and belief in a pre-mil/mid-trib rapture.

Along with this, I'm also studying Ezekiel 38 & 39 (which I started a thread about), as well as a book on Spurgeon.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Views on the millennium don't constitute heresy by themselves. Views on the rapture only vary in dispensationalism. I consider dispensationalism itself heresy for the reasons I stated in the Gap thread. All non-dispensational systems (or lack of systems) would be considered post-trib, tho there is much more that can be said about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't know what, if anything, Corrie Ten Boom called herself, but I know she firmly believed that Christians would have to go through the Tribulation. It's been a long time since I read it, but what she had to say was pretty powerful, whether she was right or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



For most of these "no rapture" folks and the like, in order to hold to these heresies, they must hold to other heresies, so the Scriptures make some sort of sense to them even though their "proof" is full of contradictions and ignorance.

It has been erroneously said that a Pre-Tribulation Rapture followed by the Millenial Reign of Christ are new "inventions". These folks have not read the writings of first century Christians. All this apostasy ran amok again (first with Popery) with the proliferation of corrupt bible translations.


I have read many of them and have never seen anything in them to suggest a pre trib rapture. What the did teach was that the emperor and the empire would be removed, then tha antichrist would came, then the end of all things.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



The point isn't translation vs catching up vs rapture. The point is that it is the same event as the resurrection. I believe in a rapture at the second coming and the resurrection if you want to call it that. It's just not a separate event is what my point is.

What dead are raised in verse 16? The verse answers this, The dead IN CHRIST. Not all the dead but the dead in Christ. The saved. Then verse seventeen says we which are alive. Does this refer to all living? No, as it says we will be ever with the Lord. The lost are not included in this verse. It specifies that very clear.
Link to comment
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.



×
×
  • Create New...