Jump to content
CelinaCelinaCelina

How to Understand Revelation and Daniel

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Brother D said:

As for "seeing", that is a difference in detail between NT and OT cloud references, but I think a difference of style, not nature. 

Well, certainly you are entitled to hold your own opinion on the matter.  However, I am compelled to hold that the "seeing" aspect of these prophetic utterances is BIBLICALLY SIGNIFICANT to communicate the LITERAL, PHYSICAL nature of that which is being prophesied.
 

7 hours ago, Brother D said:

I have discussed the nature of idioms, such as an idiom has no obvious connection to the context, if taken literally.  But, if taken non-literally, it explains the context.  By this criteria, Jesus coming in the clouds appears to be an idiom.  Seeing Jesus coming on the clouds doesn't change that.  

Indeed, I understand your description concerning "the nature of idioms."  I just simply do NOT agree that it applies to the "cloud(s)" references in Matthew 24:30, Mark 13:26, Luke 21:27, and Revelation 1:7; for I hold that the "cloud(s)" references of these passages DO have a "connection to the context if taken literally," (1) as the return of our Lord Jesus Christ by the same manner in which He ascended (from the earth unto the heavens), (2) as a literal representation of His sovereign power and divine glory when He returns in His Second Coming to establish His thousand year reign upon the earth, (3) as an observable connection between the sovereign power and divine glory of the Lord Jesus Christ with the Lord (Jehovah) God of the Old Testament (because He actually and bodily IS the Lord God of the Old Testament), (4) as an observable connection with the prophetic utterance of Daniel 7:13-14, and (5) as an observable indication that the Lord Jesus Christ's kingdom rule is not of this earth, but is come down out of heaven.  As such, your continuing claim for the "idiom" nature of the prophetic utterance in Matthew 24:30, Mark 13:26, Luke 21:27, and Revelation 1:7, based upon the definitional nature of idioms, does not follow from my perspective. 

Your argument is as follows: The "cloud(s)" reference does not have an obvious connection to the context if taken literally; therefore, it must be an idiom.  My response is as follows: The "cloud(s)" reference does INDEED have an connection to the context if taken literally; therefore, there is no need to view it as an idiom.  Your reason for your argument (at least somewhat): Because you do not view the prophetic utterances of Matthew 24:30, Mark 13:26, Luke 21:27, and Revelation 1:7 as references unto our Lord Jesus Christ's Second Coming, but unto some other "coming."  My reason for my response (at least somewhat): Because I DO view these prophetic utterances as references unto our Lord Jesus Christ's Second Coming.

By the way, I did ask you in an earlier posting -- If you do not believe that Matthew 24:30, Mark 13:26, Luke 21:27, and Revelation 1:7 are prophetic utterances concerning our Lord Jesus Christ's (literal, bodily) Second Coming, what event do you believe that they reference?  I do not recall that you ever answered my question.  (If you did, and I missed it, I do apologize.)
 

7 hours ago, Brother D said:

The use of the word "see" could mean people will literally see Jesus.  But, it could also mean people will see what the idiom respresents. 

Except that Revelation 1:7 states, "And every eye shall see HIM." (not some idiom, but the Lord Jesus Christ Himself)
 

7 hours ago, Brother D said:

I believe in a physical return of Christ, but that doesn't mean any "coming" is that physical return of Christ.  I don't believe clouds have anything to do with the physical return of Christ (beyond, maybe, Jesus appearing from a cloud).   

Earlier in this discussion you acknowledged that Acts 1:9-11 does speak about our Lord Jesus Christ's Second Coming (although you have contended that Matthew 24:30, Mark 13:26, Luke 21:27, and Revelation 1:7 do not).  In Acts 1:9-11 we read, "And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.  And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven?  This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."  It appears to me that the matter of "cloud(s)" was significant enough for the angels to make reference unto it and for God the Holy Spirit to record it in the inspired Scriptures.  In fact, this passage reveals the the matter of literal, observable "cloud(s)" will be the very signal of our Lord Jesus Christ's Second Coming OUT FROM heaven.
 

7 hours ago, Brother D said:

I believe in a physical return of Christ, but that doesn't mean any "coming" is that physical return of Christ.  I don't believe clouds have anything to do with the physical return of Christ (beyond, maybe, Jesus appearing from a cloud).   It's Jesus' nature to come in power and great glory, even if just in judgement.  

First, in our Lord Jesus Christ's first coming He did not come with His sovereign power and divine glory on full display, because He had come primarily as the Father's servant and sacrifice.  However, in our Lord Jesus Christ's Second Coming He most certainly will come with His sovereign power and divine glory on full display, because He will come as King of kings and Lord of lords to establish His thousand year reign over all the earth.

Second, as I have indicated more than once in this discussion, the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ as prophesied in Matthew 24:30, Mark 13:26, and Luke 21:27 is contextually NOT "just in judgment," but is in BOTH judgment AND deliverance (redemption).
 

7 hours ago, Brother D said:

The judgement isn't the violence of the tribulation itself, but the result of the tribulation and what is symbolized by the sun, moon, and stars being darkened, the removal of the powers represented by those lights.  The Greek word translated "after" (after the tribulation) is usually translated "with".  This is not one event (tribulation) followed by a distinctly different event (coming in the clouds).

First, the matter of the sun, moon, and stars is NOT symbolic, but LITERAL, and is  thereby in itself a judgment upon the people of the earth.

Second, you are correct that the Greek word which is translated as "after" in Matthew 24:29 and Mark 13:24 is most commonly translated by the English preposition "with."  However, this fact in itself is somewhat misleading because it does not reveal the whole truth about the case.  The Greek word in this case is the Greek preposition "μετά" ("meta," Strong's #3326).  When this Greek preposition is joined with an object of the preposition in the Greek genitive case, this Greek preposition means "with."  However, when this Greek preposition is joined with an object of the preposition in the Greek accusative case, this Greek preposition means 'after."  So then, with what Greek case is this Greek preposition joined in Matthew 24:29 and Mark 13:24?  In both verses this Greek preposition is joined with an object of the preposition in the Greek accusative case, thus meaning "AFTER" (just as the King James translation translates it).  Even so, your attempt to use the Greek as support for your position on this matter is simply false.

Third, the grammatical and contextual flow of thought concerning the sequence of events proceeds as follows:  (1) After that tribulation . . ., (2) And then Christ's coming . . ., (3) And then the gathering . . .  As such, the great tribulation of those days and the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ most certainly ARE two distinctly different events, with one FOLLOWING the other.
 

7 hours ago, Brother D said:

I don't think your analysis is bad, as far as it goes.  But, the issue is making the whole chapter of Mark 13 (and related verses) work.  Jesus says that Temple then standing will be destroyed.  When asked when, he tells his followers that they will first be persecuted.  He tells them when they see a certain something, to run for the mountains. And, he says happen before his generation passes. Those things did happen how and when Jesus said, but if you take literally "coming in the clouds" than you have to pervert the meaning of the rest of what Jesus said.  E.g., "This generation" means his generation.  The grammar and context does not support the claim Jesus meant a future generation.

Actually, I have no problem with taking and unifying the prophesies of Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 literally, and with seeing some (large) portions of them as still being future.

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
grammar and spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Brother D said:

Let's, apply this rule to Jesus coming in the clouds.  What does the context say Jesus will do when he arrives. What function to the clouds serve?  How does the context discuss the travel-by-clouds statement?    See, no obvious relationship to the context.

1.  What does the context say our Lord Jesus Christ will do when He arrives?

Matthew 24:31 -- "And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."
Mark 13:27 -- "And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven."

Luke 21:28 -- "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh."

Luke 21:31 -- "So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand."

Matthew 24:37-41 -- "But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.  For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.  Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.  Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left."

Matthew 25:31-46 -- "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:  and before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.  Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.  Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?  When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?  Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?  And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.  Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.  Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?  Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.  And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."

So then, when He arrives, our Lord Jesus Christ will (1) deliver and gather His elect from across the whole world, (2) establish His kingdom reign on the earth, (3) judge all the nations for how they treated His brethren.


2.  What function do the clouds serve?

(1) To fulfill the return of our Lord Jesus Christ by the same manner in which He ascended (from the earth unto the heavens)
(2) To be a literal representation of His sovereign power and divine glory when He returns in His Second Coming to establish His thousand year reign upon the earth
(3) To be an observable connection between the sovereign power and divine glory of the Lord Jesus Christ with the Lord (Jehovah) God of the Old Testament (because He actually and bodily IS the Lord God of the Old Testament)
(4) To be an observable connection with the prophetic utterance of Daniel 7:13-14
(5) To be an observable indication that the Lord Jesus Christ's kingdom rule is not of this earth, but is come down out of heaven. 
(6) To distinguish Him from the false Christs of Matthew 24:23-26 and Mark 13:21-22.


3.  How does the context discuss the travel-by-clouds statement?

As a literal event that all the tribes of the earth shall literally SEE.


So then, a definite relationship to the context. No idiom needed.

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

1.  What does the context say our Lord Jesus Christ will do when He arrives?

Matthew 24:31 -- "And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

If Acts 1 were reversed, it would be something like this:  "Men of Galilee were looking up and they saw Jesus come into sight from out of a cloud.   When Jesus had come down, the men asked Jesus if he were going to now restore the kingdom to Israel.  Jesus stayed in Jerusalem and presented himself alive and spent 40 days speaking about the kingdom of God."

Jesus sending his angels, nor the other verses you posted, have nothing to do with a physical presence or an appearance  in clouds.   If "coming in the clouds" isn't an idiom, then there are no idioms in the Bible.

Quote

2.  What function do the clouds serve?

(1) To fulfill the return of our Lord Jesus Christ by the same manner in which He ascended (from the earth unto the heavens)
(2) To be a literal representation of His sovereign power and divine glory when He returns in His Second Coming to establish His thousand year reign upon the earth
(3) To be an observable connection between the sovereign power and divine glory of the Lord Jesus Christ with the Lord (Jehovah) God of the Old Testament (because He actually and bodily IS the Lord God of the Old Testament)
(4) To be an observable connection with the prophetic utterance of Daniel 7:13-14
(5) To be an observable indication that the Lord Jesus Christ's kingdom rule is not of this earth, but is come down out of heaven. 
(6) To distinguish Him from the false Christs of Matthew 24:23-26 and Mark 13:21-22.[/quote]

 

Quote

All six of those points seem really reaching.  1) "Coming in the clouds" is not same manner as Acts 1. 2) The passages about "coming in the clouds" contain no references to a 1000-year reign.  3) Do really you think "clouds" provides a needed connection with the OT?  4) Daniel 7 speaks of an eternal reign, not a 1000-year rain, besides Daniel uses "clouds" non-literally, in a vision.  5) You haven't shown "coming in the clouds" to be anything about a kingdom (vs. judgment).  But, if it were, do clouds really send a message that Christ's kingdom rule is not of this earth? 6) There is a small problem of people claiming to be Christ who are not, but there will be no problem for anyone to recognize Christ when he makes a literal return.  Besides, in our age, "coming with the clouds" can be faked by fake Christ.  TV makes it trivial. 

Quote

3.  How does the context discuss the travel-by-clouds statement?

As a literal event that all the tribes of the earth shall literally SEE.

You are referring to: Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

1) The context doesn't show it to be literal. All you have is "see" which can refer to seeing the judgment.  Compare to my illustration at the top of this post regarding Acts 1, what the context  might look like if it were literal.

2) The context shows this to mean judgement. Aside from the verse itself speaking of wailing, this verse is part of the introduction to Revelation which is a book about judgment. Likewise, Jesus' use of "coming in the clouds" is in the context of judgment of Jerusalem.  Taken literally, it doesn't fit, at all, the context.  It's a completely random statement, if taken literally.

3) It says those who pierced Jesus would see him.  If you take that literally, it has to be the first century, because those people aren't around now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Brother D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Acts 1 isn't reversed is it?

In fact it says:

Act 1:1-11
(1)  The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
(2)  Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:
(3)  To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
(4)  And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
(5)  For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
(6)  When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
(7)  And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
(8)  But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
(9)  And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.
(10)  And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
(11)  Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
 

(Sorry for Posting Bible verses - I know how much you hate it.....)

Funny that someone here wants to rewrite the Bible and (Mis)represent it in a certain way, but others want to just read what it says...….

I might just point out that there is no reason for anyone to assume that any of this is figurative.

(2)  Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:

Did Jesus literally do and teach things to the Apostles until He literally gave them the Great Commission, and was thereafter taken up? Was this taking up literal or figurative?

Let's look at the description of it from later in this passage:

(8)  But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
(9)  And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

Now, referencing vs 2 above which gives us a rough order of events: Jesus was taken up after Jesus had given commandments to the apostles, on that same day.

In vs 8 we see … Oh look at that: commandments are given to the Apostles. 

And vs 9 tells us - oh look at that: WHEN HE HAD SPOKEN THESE THINGS, WHILE THEY WATCHED, he was taken up - and then the Bible describes the manner in which He was taken up - specifically that WHILE THEY WATCHED a cloud received Him OUT OF THIER SIGHT.

Where is there any indication that any of this was other than literal. It talks of Jesus speaking with them and teaching them, and then of them watching Him as he is received up into a cloud, and it even states that as HE went into the cloud He went out of their sight.

So Jesus lifts up into the air and is received into a cloud - and I don't think there is any mention of judgement in this instance?

Now, none of this really makes any difference to the main part of this discussion, because at this point of the passage we are not talking about Jesus coming back at all, but simply about Him being received up into the sky and into a cloud.

But unfortunately for "Brother D" the passage doesn't finish there - 

(10)  And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
(11)  Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

Notice that it says they were stedfastly looking toward heaven "AS HE WENT UP" - I am going to take a guess here and suggest that the "Heaven" spoken of is not the spiritual place, but rather the sky - because that is where Jesus had just gone up into a cloud and these guys were stills taring upwards to see where He went I guess. I know if I saw that I would be astounded at such an unlikely thing happening. Some might even think it absurd to suggest that such a thing could even happen..... But nonetheless, the Bible records them looking "...toward heaven as He(Jesus) went up...."

Then two men stood by in white apparel - they are not named nor identified in any way, apart from the fact that they have a certain knowledge.

They asked the apostles "why stand ye gazing up into heaven?" I wonder why they asked such a thing - maybe these guys were standing up and looking up into the sky with their mouths wide open as though something amazing had just happened?

Then these guys said something interesting: "this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."

They said that Jesus - this same Jesus by the way, not some other Jesus - shall come in like manner as ye have seen Him go into heaven.

Now we have already established which heaven we are talking about - not the spiritual place, but the sky.

We have already established the MANNER in which He went up into heaven - sort of - He rose up into the air somehow. AND he rose up into a cloud until they couldn't see Him anymore.

Now these two guys dressed in white tell the apostles that Jesus will come back in the same manner in which He went.

That means He will come back physically - this same Jesus, not some spiritual Jesus.

That means that He will come back by the reverse of rising up into the air - He will drop down out of the air.

That means that He will become visible to those watching as He appears from a cloud.

All of this happened literally - the description is so clear and vivid that it has to be a literal event.

That means that at some time Jesus will appear out of a cloud and drop down out of that could in a controlled way.

THIS PASSAGE does not designate when that event will happen - just that IT WILL HAPPEN IN THE SAME MANNER as when He was received up into a cloud.

In this post I am not even suggesting that this is the same "Coming in the clouds" event that has been spoken of by others in this thread - I am just showing what the Bible actually says, rather than rewriting it. One would need to reference other passages that DO talk about Jesus coming in clouds to figure out which event is the one being spoken of here so literally.

 

Oh and although it has nothing to do with the whole cloud issue, Jesus answers them about their question by saying that they will not know the timing. Note however that it was a discussion that was had, but it is not relating to the cloud issue at all - in fact after the question about timing which Jesus answered by saying that only the Father knows, Jesus then has a whole section about the Great Commission BEFORE he is taken up.

(6)  When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
(7)  And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DaveW said:

But Acts 1 isn't reversed is it?

"Shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go" doesn't mean reversed?  Isn't "come" the reverse of "go"?  Besides, that's not the point.  I was illustrating what it might look like if "coming in the clouds" were literal.  As I have repeatedly pointed out, if taken literally "coming with the clouds" has no connection to the context, compared to Acts 1 were leaving to the cloud is flows with the context.   The nature of an idiom is that it doesn't connect, or flow, with the context, if taken literally.   

And vs 9 tells us - oh look at that: WHEN HE HAD SPOKEN THESE THINGS, WHILE THEY WATCHED, he was taken up - and then the Bible describes the manner in which He was taken up - specifically that WHILE THEY WATCHED a cloud received Him OUT OF THIER SIGHT.

Where is there any indication that any of this was other than literal.

What's sad about this is if you haven't understood that I take Acts 1 literally, then you haven't been following my reasoning.

THIS PASSAGE does not designate when that event will happen - just that IT WILL HAPPEN IN THE SAME MANNER as when He was received up into a cloud.

Acts 1 also doesn't designate that Christ coming as he left, "he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight", is the "coming in the clouds" at Jerusalem's judgement.  The context and language is very different.    

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Brother D said:

"Shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go" doesn't mean reversed?  Isn't "come" the reverse of "go"?  Besides, that's not the point.  I was illustrating what it might look like if "coming in the clouds" were literal.  As I have repeatedly pointed out, if taken literally "coming with the clouds" has no connection to the context, compared to Acts 1 were leaving to the cloud is flows with the context.   The nature of an idiom is that it doesn't connect, or flow, with the context, if taken literally.   

 

 

And here was me hoping that for once you would keep your word - but no, you answered me anyway, even though you said you would ignore me...….. 🤣

There is no need to reverse the passage of the Bible, except to misrepresent what it is saying - which is what you did. How about you just use the Bible itself. It says what it says, no need to rewrite it.

 

15 minutes ago, Brother D said:

Acts 1 also doesn't designate that Christ coming as he left, "he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight", is the "coming in the clouds" at Jerusalem's judgement.  The context and language is very different. 

Another misrepresentation:

I said:

41 minutes ago, DaveW said:

In this post I am not even suggesting that this is the same "Coming in the clouds" event that has been spoken of by others in this thread - I am just showing what the Bible actually says, rather than rewriting it. One would need to reference other passages that DO talk about Jesus coming in clouds to figure out which event is the one being spoken of here so literally.

You simply cannot help but misrepresent other here for the purposes of misleading readers.

I was VERY VERY VERY clear about what I was posting - you chose to ignore what I wrote so that you could try to make it look like I was wrong.

You just can't help yourself can you? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bro. D

I find it quite ironic that your profile indicates that you are an Independent Fundamental Baptist and you have stated that you are a "traditional Baptist", and yet in all of your posts there is not one real Baptist that agrees with your beliefs.

It makes me wonder if you can provide even one credible Baptist writer or expositor that agrees with your "opinions".

You have stated that you were "always a Baptist" and yet when pointedly asked to provide your salvation experience and what church you attend you totally ignored the request.

You don't seem to like references to Scripture and prefer to replace Scripture with your personal opinions, expecting others to take your word over what the Bible plainly says.

You call the plain inspired Word of God, "absurd" simply because you can't understand how certain things can be possible, such as Jesus riding on a cloud.

These are not the actions or beliefs that traditional Baptists hold dear as traditional Baptist doctrine.

I, for one, would welcome you being completely honest and stating clearly your salvation experience as well as what Baptist churches you have attended or now attend.

I write none of this in a spirit of sarcasm or contention, but instead as a simple request for clarification. After all, we are commanded to:  
1Jo 4:1  Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

Please note that I am quoting Scripture here, not accusing you of being a false prophet. If you come among God's people attempting to teach things contrary to traditional Baptist doctrine, we are commanded to critically examine both your doctrine and person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 6:02 AM, Brother D said:
On ‎7‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 9:57 PM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

1.  What does the context say our Lord Jesus Christ will do when He arrives?

Matthew 24:31 -- "And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

If Acts 1 were reversed, it would be something like this:  "Men of Galilee were looking up and they saw Jesus come into sight from out of a cloud.   When Jesus had come down, the men asked Jesus if he were going to now restore the kingdom to Israel.  Jesus stayed in Jerusalem and presented himself alive and spent 40 days speaking about the kingdom of God."

Jesus sending his angels, nor the other verses you posted, have nothing to do with a physical presence or an appearance  in clouds.   If "coming in the clouds" isn't an idiom, then there are no idioms in the Bible.

I am not exactly sure why you presented your comments about Acts 1 in relation to that portion of my posting, since I did not reference Acts 1 at all in that portion of my posting.

You had asked the question, as follows:

Quote

Let's, apply this rule to Jesus coming in the clouds.  What does the context say Jesus will do when he arrives. (emboldening added by Pastor Scott Markle)

I gave answer by quoting a series of passages that were specifically from the contexts of Matthew 24-25, Mark 13, and Luke 21, as follows:

On ‎7‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 9:57 PM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Matthew 24:31 -- "And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."
Mark 13:27 -- "And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven."

Luke 21:28 -- "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh."

Luke 21:31 -- "So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand."

Matthew 24:37-41 -- "But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.  For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.  Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.  Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left."

Matthew 25:31-46 -- "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:  and before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.  Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.  Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?  When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?  Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?  And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.  Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.  Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?  Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.  And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."

Then I summarized what we learn from these passages, as follows:

On ‎7‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 9:57 PM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

So then, when He arrives, our Lord Jesus Christ will (1) deliver and gather His elect from across the whole world, (2) establish His kingdom reign on the earth, (3) judge all the nations for how they treated His brethren.

Throughout this entire answer unto your question, I did NOT make even a single reference unto Acts 1 AT ALL - Because your question asked about the contexts of Matthew 24:30, Mark 13:26, and Luke 21:27; and Acts 1 is NOT within those contexts.  On the other hand, Matthew 24-25, Mark 13, and Luke 21 ARE the contexts for those verses.

However, the fact that you chose to quote only the first verse of the series that I quoted in my posting, and chose not to make any reference unto my summary statement, causes me to wonder if you even noted and considered the Biblical information of my entire posting.  If you did not, then such would reveal that you are not much of real BIBLE student - since a real BIBLE STUDENT would take whatever time necessary to read, study, and understand any portion of Scripture that is relevant to the discussion.
 

On ‎7‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 9:57 PM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

2.  What function do the clouds serve?

(1) To fulfill the return of our Lord Jesus Christ by the same manner in which He ascended (from the earth unto the heavens)
(2) To be a literal representation of His sovereign power and divine glory when He returns in His Second Coming to establish His thousand year reign upon the earth
(3) To be an observable connection between the sovereign power and divine glory of the Lord Jesus Christ with the Lord (Jehovah) God of the Old Testament (because He actually and bodily IS the Lord God of the Old Testament)
(4) To be an observable connection with the prophetic utterance of Daniel 7:13-14
(5) To be an observable indication that the Lord Jesus Christ's kingdom rule is not of this earth, but is come down out of heaven. 
(6) To distinguish Him from the false Christs of Matthew 24:23-26 and Mark 13:21-22.

On ‎7‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 6:02 AM, Brother D said:

All six of those points seem really reaching.  1) "Coming in the clouds" is not same manner as Acts 1. 2) The passages about "coming in the clouds" contain no references to a 1000-year reign.  3) Do really you think "clouds" provides a needed connection with the OT?  4) Daniel 7 speaks of an eternal reign, not a 1000-year rain, besides Daniel uses "clouds" non-literally, in a vision.  5) You haven't shown "coming in the clouds" to be anything about a kingdom (vs. judgment).  But, if it were, do clouds really send a message that Christ's kingdom rule is not of this earth? 6) There is a small problem of people claiming to be Christ who are not, but there will be no problem for anyone to recognize Christ when he makes a literal return.  Besides, in our age, "coming with the clouds" can be faked by fake Christ.  TV makes it trivial. 

Well, I certainly do NOT agree that these points are "reaching."  Rather, I believe that they are all BIBLICALLY SIGNIFICANT.  Thus I reject your attempt to trivialize them.  Even so, I find your argument (that the reference unto cloud(s) is idiomatic because it lacks literal value) to be empty, which is the very reason that you have been completely unable to sway me toward your position on this matter.  You have one foundational argument -- It is an idiom because it (supposedly) lack literal value.  I strongly disagree with that foundational argument, as per the extensive BIBLE study of my postings.  Therefore, as your foundational argument falls, so your position falls with it.

1)  Acts 1:9 indicates that in His ascension our Lord Jesus Christ was received (carried) by a cloud (singular) out of the disciples' SIGHT (the reference unto physical sight is worthy of notice).  Acts 1:11 indicates that our Lord Jesus Christ will come back "in like manner" as the disciples had "SEEN him go into heaven" (again, the reference unto physical sight is worthy of notice).  That observable MANNER was by a CLOUD (singular).  Considering the specific Greek prepositions in each passage, we learn the following: Matthew 24:30 indicates a coming of our Lord Jesus Christ UPON (Greek preposition "epi") the clouds (plural) of heaven; Mark 13:26 indicates a coming of our Lord Jesus Christ IN (Greek preposition "en") clouds (plural); and Luke indicates a coming of our Lord Jesus Christ IN (Greek preposition "en") a cloud (singular).  Now, either each of these three passages is talking about a different coming, because one speaks about coming upon plural clouds, whereas another speaks about coming in plural clouds, whereas another speaks about coming in a singular cloud.  Or, all three passages are a legitimate BIBLICAL way for describing the SAME event, whether upon or in plural or singular cloud(s).  If all three of these passages are indeed a BIBLICALLY legitimate way to describe the same event, then the reference unto a singular cloud in Acts 1:9-11 cannot simply be ruled out simply because it only reference a cloud in the singular, since Luke 21:27 also only references a cloud in the singular.  (It is also worthy of notice that both the Gospel of Luke and the Book of the Acts were written by the same inspired penman.)  Furthermore, it is worthy of notice that EVERY SINGLE ONE of these passages specifies that the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ WILL BE SEEN.  (Yes, I know that you believe these references unto seeing simply to be stylistic and thus trivial; however, I consider them to be a significant signal for the literal nature of these prophetic utterances in literal fulfillment of the promise that was made in Acts 1:11.)

2)  Luke 21:31 (which is a part of the context for Luke 21:27) speaks about the establishing of the KINGDOM upon the earth, and Matthew 25:31 (which is a part of the context for Matthew 24:30) speaks about our Lord Jesus Christ sitting "upon the throne of his glory" in order to judge the nations of the world.  Indeed, the kingdom reign of our Lord Jesus Christ upon the earth most certainly is reference within these contexts.

3)  Yes, I really DO think that. 

4)  Indeed, Daniel 7 does speak about an eternal kingdom because the kingdom reign of our Lord Jesus Christ upon the earth, that will begin with the thousand year reign (as per Revelation 19-20), will not be broken, but will continue into the eternal reality of the New Heaven, New Earth, and New Jerusalem.

5)  Note my comment for #2) above.

6)  False Christs are NOT a "small problem."  The spirit of antichrist is NOT a "small problem."  The antichrist himself, who will himself be a false christ, will NOT be a "small problem, but will move the majority population of the whole earth to worship him, and thereby damn themselves unto the eternal torment of hell.  NOT a "small problem" AT ALL.    Even so , I am compelled to say that your trivialization of Biblical matters is somewhat offensive to this Bible student.
 

On ‎7‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 9:57 PM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

3.  How does the context discuss the travel-by-clouds statement?

As a literal event that all the tribes of the earth shall literally SEE.

So then, a definite relationship to the context. No idiom needed.

On ‎7‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 6:02 AM, Brother D said:

You are referring to: Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

1) The context doesn't show it to be literal. All you have is "see" which can refer to seeing the judgment.  Compare to my illustration at the top of this post regarding Acts 1, what the context  might look like if it were literal.

2) The context shows this to mean judgement. Aside from the verse itself speaking of wailing, this verse is part of the introduction to Revelation which is a book about judgment. Likewise, Jesus' use of "coming in the clouds" is in the context of judgment of Jerusalem.  Taken literally, it doesn't fit, at all, the context.  It's a completely random statement, if taken literally.

3) It says those who pierced Jesus would see him.  If you take that literally, it has to be the first century, because those people aren't around now.

No sir. I was referring to Matthew 24:30 -- "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."  Therefore, your comments about the context of Revelation 1:7 are not really relevant.

________________________________________________________

Now then, it has not really been my expectation throughout this discussion that I would convince you to change your position.  Rather, it has been my primary intention to demonstrate unto the audience that there are definite BIBLICAL answer for your doubtful disputations.  Thus at this time I now speak to the audience of this discussion -- Throughout this thread discussion between Brother D and myself (Pastor Scott Markle), one of us has engaged the discussion primarily through actual, extensive Bible study, whereas the other has engaged the discussion primarily through personal declarations.  As members of the audience, it is your responsibility to discern which is which, and to recognize that one method stands upon the authority of God's own Word, whereas the other method stands upon the authority of a man's personal word.  

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To those who may be interested:

1.  It is worthy to notice the reference unto SEEING throughout the following prophecies concerning our Lord Jesus Christ's coming.

Matthew 24:30 -- "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."

Mark 13:26 -- "And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory."

Luke 21:27 -- "And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory."

Acts 1:9-11 -- "And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.  And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."
Revelation 1:7 -- "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him.  Even so, Amen."


2.  Considering the different references to clouds in these passages and considering the specific Greek prepositions involved, we find the following:

Matthew 24:30 -- Our Lord Jesus Christ will come UPON (Greek preposition "epi") the clouds (plural) of heaven.
Mark 13:26 -- Our Lord Jesus Christ will come IN (Greek preposition "en") the clouds (plural).
Luke 21:27 -- Our Lord Jesus Christ will come IN (Greek preposition "en") a cloud (singular).
Revelation 1:7 -- Our Lord Jesus Christ will come WITH (Greek preposition "meta") clouds (plural).
Acts 1:9-11 -- Our Lord Jesus Christ will come "IN LIKE MANNER" as the disciples had seen Him go.  They saw a cloud (singular) receive (carry) Him away.  Therefore, our Lord Jesus Christ will come, being carried by a cloud (singular).

If we join all of this together, we understand the following:  When He returns, our Lord Jesus Christ will come in and by a singular cloud, being surrounded under and around by a plurality of clouds, so as to come with a plurality of clouds.


3.  Considering the phrase in Revelation 1:7, "And they also which pierced him."

John 19:34 indicates that a single Roman solider pierced Jesus' side -- "But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water."
Psalm 22:16 also speaks about the piercing of his hands and his feet -- "For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet."
This piercing of His hands and His feet was also accomplished by Roman soldiers.

John 19:37 indicates that these piercings, especially that of His side, fulfilled an Old Testament prophecy -- "And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced."
The Old Testament prophecy is that of Zechariah 12:10 -- "And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn."

This Old Testament prophecy indicates that the reference to those who pierced Him is a reference unto "the house of David" and "the inhabitants of Jerusalem."
Yet Jesus was not literally, physically pierced by "the house of David" or "the inhabitants of Jerusalem," but literally, physically by Roman soldiers.
So then, we may understand that the phrase in Revelation 1:7 does NOT apply literally unto the Roman soldiers, but prophetically unto "the inhabitants of Jerusalem" at the time when our Lord Jesus Christ shall return in His Second Coming.  Indeed, the phrase in Revelation 1:7 refers unto the children of Israel, who will mourn with repentance at His coming.

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, to those in the audience who may be interested:

The reason that Brother D is so driven to argue for the idiomatic nature of Matthew 24:29-20, Mark 13:24-26, and Luke 21:25-27 is not simply due to the principle of his belief concerning the definition of Biblical idioms.  Rather, he is so driven because he believes that these prophecies were fulfilled in and around 70 AD, through events at that time concerning God's judgment upon the children of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.  However, there was no literal occurrence of the prophetic utterances in these passages at that time.  Therefore, if these prophetic utterances are to be taken literally, they could NOT have been fulfilled at that time since they did not so occur literally.  However, if he takes these prophetic utterances as idiomatic, then he can adapt them and apply them unto the events of that time, and so claim their past fulfillment.  Indeed, Brother D would also do the same with the great majority of the prophetic utterances within the Book of the Revelation.

Now, Brother D's most foundational position will be to focus upon those phrases concerning "this generation" or concerning the "soon," or "quick," or "at hand" fulfillment of these prophecies.  For him and his position, it all really does begin on that foundational ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this clarification Bro. Scott. The thought of his position being Preterist did cross my mind when he posted things such as you pointed out referring to "soon, "quick", "at hand". and "this generation." But I didn't follow through with reasoning it out since Preterism is a relatively new subject for me. I never even heard of the term before joining OB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/16/2018 at 10:39 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

1)  Acts 1:9 indicates that in His ascension our Lord Jesus Christ was received (carried) by a cloud (singular) out of the disciples' SIGHT (the reference unto physical sight is worthy of notice).  Acts 1:11 indicates that our Lord Jesus Christ will come back "in like manner" as the disciples had "SEEN him go into heaven" (again, the reference unto physical sight is worthy of notice).  That observable MANNER was by a CLOUD (singular).  Considering the specific Greek prepositions in each passage, we learn the following: Matthew 24:30 indicates a coming of our Lord Jesus Christ UPON (Greek preposition "epi") the clouds (plural) of heaven; Mark 13:26 indicates a coming of our Lord Jesus Christ IN (Greek preposition "en") clouds (plural); and Luke indicates a coming of our Lord Jesus Christ IN (Greek preposition "en") a cloud (singular).  Now, either each of these three passages is talking about a different coming, because one speaks about coming upon plural clouds, whereas another speaks about coming in plural clouds, whereas another speaks about coming in a singular cloud.  Or, all three passages are a legitimate BIBLICAL way for describing the SAME event, whether upon or in plural or singular cloud(s).  If all three of these passages are indeed a BIBLICALLY legitimate way to describe the same event, then the reference unto a singular cloud in Acts 1:9-11 cannot simply be ruled out simply because it only reference a cloud in the singular, since Luke 21:27 also only references a cloud in the singular.  (It is also worthy of notice that both the Gospel of Luke and the Book of the Acts were written by the same inspired penman.)  Furthermore, it is worthy of notice that EVERY SINGLE ONE of these passages specifies that the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ WILL BE SEEN.  (Yes, I know that you believe these references unto seeing simply to be stylistic and thus trivial; however, I consider them to be a significant signal for the literal nature of these prophetic utterances in literal fulfillment of the promise that was made in Acts 1:11.)

2)  Luke 21:31 (which is a part of the context for Luke 21:27) speaks about the establishing of the KINGDOM upon the earth, and Matthew 25:31 (which is a part of the context for Matthew 24:30) speaks about our Lord Jesus Christ sitting "upon the throne of his glory" in order to judge the nations of the world.  Indeed, the kingdom reign of our Lord Jesus Christ upon the earth most certainly is reference within these contexts.

3)  Yes, I really DO think that. 

4)  Indeed, Daniel 7 does speak about an eternal kingdom because the kingdom reign of our Lord Jesus Christ upon the earth, that will begin with the thousand year reign (as per Revelation 19-20), will not be broken, but will continue into the eternal reality of the New Heaven, New Earth, and New Jerusalem.

5)  Note my comment for #2) above.

6)  False Christs are NOT a "small problem."  The spirit of antichrist is NOT a "small problem."  The antichrist himself, who will himself be a false christ, will NOT be a "small problem, but will move the majority population of the whole earth to worship him, and thereby damn themselves unto the eternal torment of hell.  NOT a "small problem" AT ALL.    Even so , I am compelled to say that your trivialization of Biblical matters is somewhat offensive to this Bible student.
 

No sir. I was referring to Matthew 24:30 -- "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."  Therefore, your comments about the context of Revelation 1:7 are not really relevant.

________________________________________________________

Now then, it has not really been my expectation throughout this discussion that I would convince you to change your position.  Rather, it has been my primary intention to demonstrate unto the audience that there are definite BIBLICAL answer for your doubtful disputations.  Thus at this time I now speak to the audience of this discussion -- Throughout this thread discussion between Brother D and myself (Pastor Scott Markle), one of us has engaged the discussion primarily through actual, extensive Bible study, whereas the other has engaged the discussion primarily through personal declarations.  As members of the audience, it is your responsibility to discern which is which, and to recognize that one method stands upon the authority of God's own Word, whereas the other method stands upon the authority of a man's personal word.  

I addressed the key verse/phrase Dispensationalists use to deny Mark 13 (and related) is a prophesy of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.  Jesus didn't physically come in 70 AD. I pointed out that the Old Testament sometimes uses clouds symbolically for judgement.  I pointed out "Jesus coming in the clouds" has the quality of an idiom because the context makes no discussion of the verse as if it's literal.  And, the verse itself seems to have a pointless reference to clouds, if taken literally. 

You countered that the "coming in the clouds" is like manner, in reverse, of Acts 1.  I pointed how Acts 1 is very different.   In Acts 1, the cloud serves a function.  The context treats the  ascension as a literal event.  And, the concept of judgement is completely absent from the context. 

I believe all your arguments against my position is pleading.  You point to Luke Luke 21:31 and you say it speaks about the establishing of the KINGDOM upon the earth.  But, that comment about the kingdom isn't closely connected with Jesus coming in the clouds.  Jesus has already moved on and started a parable before speaking of the kingdom of God.   Even worse for your argument, Jesus often spoke about the kingdom of God being near or at hand, and he's not talking about a physical kingdom.

I addressed your key verse.  Now you can address the rest of the chapter. 

Which Temple is Jesus pointing to, that will be destroyed?

Who is Jesus telling will be persecuted and beaten in synagogues?

Did Rome not surround Jerusalem and cause desolation in 70 AD?

What do you think the definition of "this" is?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brother D said:

I addressed the key verse/phrase Dispensationalists use to deny Mark 13 (and related) is a prophesy of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.  Jesus didn't physically come in 70 AD. 

That is very correct. Our Lord Jesus Christ did NOT literally return in 70 AD, which is the reason that you are so driven to view the prophetic utterances of Matthew 24:30, Mark 13:26, and Luke 21:27 as idiomatic.  Because if you do not take them as idiomatic, but as literal, then you cannot claim their fulfillment at that time.

1 hour ago, Brother D said:

I pointed out that the Old Testament sometimes uses clouds symbolically for judgement. 

And while acknowledging that such is SOMETIMES true, I provided an extensive study of the Old Testament wherein I demonstrated that clouds are also use in connection with the Lord (Jehovah) God for a number of OTHER characteristics as well.  Furthermore, I demonstrated with a grammatic study that in the contexts of Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, the coming of the Lord is NOT what results in the judgment, since it comes AFTER the judgment and since it BRINGS deliverance for the Lord's elect.  Finally, I demonstrated that the most closely related characteristic of the Lord to the clouds within Matthew 24:30, Mark 13:26, and Luke 21:27 is NOT His judgment, but His POWER AND GREAT GLORY. (Not reaching at all, for it is ALL right there in the inspired Word of God)

1 hour ago, Brother D said:

I pointed out "Jesus coming in the clouds" has the quality of an idiom because the context makes no discussion of the verse as if it's literal.  And, the verse itself seems to have a pointless reference to clouds, if taken literally. 

And I pointed out that this claim is false based upon the emphasis to literal seeing that is referenced in all of the passages, just as it is in Acts 1:9-11.  The seeing aspect of Acts 1:9-11 is that which emphasizes its literal nature, and the seeing aspect of Matthew 24:30, Mark, 13:26, and Luke 21:27.  (Yes, I know that you want this seeing aspect to be "just stylistic;" but in truth it is Biblically significant.)  Thus there is NO pointlessness in the reference unto literal clouds.  In fact, there is great deal of Biblical point, as I have presented above.

1 hour ago, Brother D said:

You countered that the "coming in the clouds" is like manner, in reverse, of Acts 1.  I pointed how Acts 1 is very different.   In Acts 1, the cloud serves a function.  The context treats the  ascension as a literal event.  And, the concept of judgement is completely absent from the context. 

Actually, I have countered your argument with a whole series of Biblical studies, including a Biblical study of Acts 1:9-11.  Furthermore, Acts 1:9-11 is NOT very different.  The literal nature of the cloud in Acts 1:9 is bound up with the aspect of seeing.  The prophecy of our Lord Jesus Christ literal return by a literal cloud as per Acts 1:11 is also bound up with the aspect of seeing.  And ALL of the prophetic utterances of Matthew 24:30, Mark 13:26, Luke 21:27, and Revelation 1:7 include the aspect of literal seeing.  Finally, I have demonstrated with Bible study that although Actus 1:11 does not specifically mention judgment in relation to our Lord Jesus Christ's Second Coming, other passages of God's Holy Word certainly DO.  

1 hour ago, Brother D said:

I believe all your arguments against my position is pleading.  You point to Luke Luke 21:31 and you say it speaks about the establishing of the KINGDOM upon the earth.  But, that comment about the kingdom isn't closely connected with Jesus coming in the clouds.  Jesus has already moved on and started a parable before speaking of the kingdom of God.   Even worse for your argument, Jesus often spoke about the kingdom of God being near or at hand, and he's not talking about a physical kingdom.

Well, let us see how close or far Luke 21:31 actually is in the context of Luke 21:27.

Luke 21:27-31 -- "And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great gloryAnd when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.  And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; when they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand.  So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brother D said:

I addressed your key verse.  Now you can address the rest of the chapter. 

Which Temple is Jesus pointing to, that will be destroyed?

Who is Jesus telling will be persecuted and beaten in synagogues?

Did Rome not surround Jerusalem and cause desolation in 70 AD?

What do you think the definition of "this" is?

1.  The Lord Jesus Christ was pointing to the temple in Jerusalem that was then standing in His very day.

2.  Those who will be persecuted and beaten in Jewish synagogues and before various government officials are New Testament church age preachers of the gospel.

3.  Rome most certainly and literally DID surround Jerusalem and DID bring desolation to Jerusalem in 70 AD, literally destroying the temple in Jerusalem so that there literally was not one stone left standing upon another.  However, in 70 AD the abomination of desolation did not stand in the temple of Jerusalem.  THAT will occur when the antichrist sets himself up within the (rebuilt) temple, professing himself to be Messiah and God.

4.  The word "this" is a demonstrative pronoun that grammatical points to something or someone present in the context.  

So, now some questions in return:

1.  Are the children of Israel still falling by the edge of the sword?

2.  Were the children of Israel lead away captive into all nations, and are they still scattered among those nations?

3.  Is Jerusalem still being trodden down of the Gentiles?

4.  Has the times (plural) of the Gentiles already been fulfilled, or are we still in the midst of the times (plural) of the Gentiles?  (Note: To answer this question you might want to consider Romans 11:25-27.)

5.  Are all of these things to be taken literally or idiomatically?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

1.  The Lord Jesus Christ was pointing to the temple in Jerusalem that was then standing in His very day.

2.  Those who will be persecuted and beaten in Jewish synagogues and before various government officials are New Testament church age preachers of the gospel.

3.  Rome most certainly and literally DID surround Jerusalem and DID bring desolation to Jerusalem in 70 AD, literally destroying the temple in Jerusalem so that there literally was not one stone left standing upon another.  However, in 70 AD the abomination of desolation did not stand in the temple of Jerusalem.  THAT will occur when the antichrist sets himself up within the (rebuilt) temple, professing himself to be Messiah and God.

4.  The word "this" is a demonstrative pronoun that grammatical points to something or someone present in the context.  

So, now some questions in return:

1.  Are the children of Israel still falling by the edge of the sword?

2.  Were the children of Israel lead away captive into all nations, and are they still scattered among those nations?

3.  Is Jerusalem still being trodden down of the Gentiles?

4.  Has the times (plural) of the Gentiles already been fulfilled, or are we still in the midst of the times (plural) of the Gentiles?  (Note: To answer this question you might want to consider Romans 11:25-27.)

5.  Are all of these things to be taken literally or idiomatically?

You are mostly right about those events, which Jesus spoke of, happening in 70 AD.  But, in fact desolation did come in 70 AD, and wouldn't you think that something causing that would be an abomination?

Your definition of "this" comes up a little short. 

1 (used to indicate a person, thing, idea, state, event, time, remark, etc., as present, near, just mentioned or pointed out, supposed to be understood, or by way of emphasis): This is my coat.
2 (used to indicate one of two or more persons, things, etc., referring to the one nearer in place, time, or thought; opposed to that😞
This is Liza and that is Amy.

If Jesus meant a generation other than his, one far off, he would have said "that generation".  Also, since Jesus doesn't mention any generation in context, the only generation he could be referring to is his generation.  You wouldn't say "this house needs cleaning" when you mean another house that you haven't mentioned (even then, you'd be using bad grammar to say "this house" when you mean another).

Don't you think it complicates your "that generation" argument when you concede the the Temple Jesus spoke of being destroyed was destroyed in Christ's generation and that Christ's followers were beaten in Jewish synagogues in Christ's generation, and that Jerusalem was surrounded by armies in 70 AD.  That Temple can't be destroyed again.  It's hard to imagine Christians today being beaten in jewish synagogues (in significant numbers), but at least you can imagine Jerusalem being surrounded again.  In fact, desolation was caused in 70 AD.  All you're quibbling about is what constitutes an abomination, apparent not the Roman army that caused the desolation, nor Roman general who claimed divinity who stood in the Temple, immediately before its destruction.

1) The 7-year Jewish-Roman wars ended in 73 AD with the fall of Masada.  There were some battles early after that when Jews tried to restore Judea.  But, it's been a very, very long time that Jews in significant numbers have fallen to swords.  And, I don't expect any future wars to be fought with swords.  So-called Jews are not children of Israel, but regardless, they're not falling by the edge of the sword.

2) Yes, in 70 AD, those Jews who weren't killed were scattered, just as Jesus predicted, along with the Temple being destroyed.  His generation.

3) No Jerusalem is still not being trodden down by the gentiles.   People you believe aren't gentiles control Jerusalem.  But, Jesus was referring to Roman war on Jerusalem (the topic of the chapter).  "Trodden down" is from a word that is only used in the Bible in the context of violence or crushing.  Jerusalem hasn't been trodden down much since the first century. 

4) The times of the gentiles being fulfilled doesn't mean an end to gentiles, but the fulfillment of the times of the gentiles is when the fullness of the gentiles has come into Israel (the church), and the Old Covenant is no more.  This happened with the Temple's destruction.

5) The only thing I take idiomatically is the one paragraph with Jesus coming in the clouds and stars falling, both clouds and stars are used symbolically in the OT. And, the context here implies they're idioms (e.g. what resulted form the stars falling), even if the reader didn't know clouds and stars were established idioms in the OT.  I take everything else literally.  Dispensationalists only pretend to take the chapter literally.    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Brother D said:

You are mostly right about those events, which Jesus spoke of, happening in 70 AD.  But, in fact desolation did come in 70 AD, and wouldn't you think that something causing that would be an abomination?

However, "the abomination of desolation" about which our Lord Jesus Christ prophesied in Matthew 24:15 & Mark 13:14, our Lord HIMSELF described as "the abomination of desolation, SPOKEN OF BY DANIEL THE PROPHET," which will "stand in the holy place."  Therefore, we MUST consider that information which is revealed in Daniel the prophet concerning this "abomination of desolation" in order to understand it aright.  Furthermore, it MUST be something or someone that stands "IN THE HOLY PLACE" of the temple, a place "where it ought not."  As such, the desolation of Jerusalem, which is the desolation of a city, is NOT equivalent to "the abomination of desolation."  Could "the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet," have stood "in the holy place" at or around the same time as the desolation of Jerusalem?  It could have; however, the two descriptives themselves are not equivalent descriptives.  In order to discern if "the abomination of desolation" event occurred at that same time, we must understand better what it is, as per Daniel's prophecy; and then we must discern if such an event literally occurred at or around 70 AD.
 

3 hours ago, Brother D said:

Your definition of "this" comes up a little short. 

1 (used to indicate a person, thing, idea, state, event, time, remark, etc., as present, near, just mentioned or pointed out, supposed to be understood, or by way of emphasis): This is my coat.
2 (used to indicate one of two or more persons, things, etc., referring to the one nearer in place, time, or thought; opposed to that😞
This is Liza and that is Amy.

No sir, my definition for the demonstrative pronoun "this" was precisely accurate.  And by definition, there are TWO possibilities of meaning for its usage by our Lord Jesus Christ in the verses under question.  In fact, those TWO possibilities are even revealed by the definition that you gave above.  Let us consider:

1.  Used to indicate a person, thing, idea, state, event, time, remark, ects, (POSSIBILITY #1) as present, near (POSSIBILITY #2) just mentioned or pointed out, supposed to be understood, or by way of emphasis.
2.  Used to indicate one of two or more persons, things, etc., referring to the one nearer in place, time, or thought; opposed to that.

First, let us understand that the secondary definition above actually is NOT applicable because it requires an indication and comparison between ONE OF TWO OR MORE.  Our Lord Jesus Christ did NOT mention or compare two or more different generations; therefore, this usage for the demonstrative pronoun "this" is not the one for the context under question.

Second, in the statement of our Lord Jesus Christ, He used the demonstrative pronoun "this" as an adjective to modify the noun "generation."  By definition the noun "generation" indicates a group of people at a certain period of time.  The TWO possibilities for our Lord's usage thereof are (1) as a reference unto the group of people in His audience at that present time UNTO whom He was speaking, or (2) as a reference unto the group of people that He just mentioned who would SEE the event of "the abomination of desolation" and who would SEE the "signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars," ABOUT whom He was speaking.  In the first possibility, He was indicating "this generation," you, the very group who are standing and hearing right now.  In the second possibility, He was indicating "this generation," the very group about which I have just been speaking that will actually see these events unfold.

So which possibility is the correct one in this context?  Actually, the answer to that question requires a correct understanding concerning "the abomination of desolation," since the event of "the abomination of desolation" is that which will START a whole series of events that directly lead unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ "in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory" and unto the gathering together of HIs elect "from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I am now at somewhat of an advantage, since Brother D has been kicked out of the forum and can no longer respond with any counter arguments.  Nevertheless, for the sake of the audience, I do believe that some matters should be brought to a form of conclusion.  Even so, I shall yet post a few additional postings to this thread.

On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 6:41 AM, Brother D said:

Don't you think it complicates your "that generation" argument . . .

I did NOT make a "that generation" argument.  Rather, as per my posting above, I made a "THIS generation" argument.  I just made certain that we recognized ALL of the possibilities for the grammatical usage of the demonstrative pronoun "this," rather than just the one which supports my personal agenda.

On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 6:41 AM, Brother D said:

Don't you think it complicates your "that generation" argument when you concede the the Temple Jesus spoke of being destroyed was destroyed in Christ's generation and that Christ's followers were beaten in Jewish synagogues in Christ's generation, and that Jerusalem was surrounded by armies in 70 AD.  That Temple can't be destroyed again.  It's hard to imagine Christians today being beaten in jewish synagogues (in significant numbers), but at least you can imagine Jerusalem being surrounded again. 

No, I do not think that there is any complication at all, because I understand that our Lord's prophecy revealed the judgment against Jerusalem in 70 AD, as well as a judgment against the whole world sometime in the future.  Now, for the details on this matter, I shall be presenting another posting that provides the time-line of events as prophesied by our Lord in Matthew 24-25, Mark 13, and Luke 21.

Indeed, that temple which was destroyed in 70 AD cannot be destroyed again.  Thus I believe that a third temple shall be built.

First, it is not hard to imagine Christians being beaten in Jewish synagogues today.  Second, the requirement of "significant numbers" is NOT provided in these passages of Scripture.  Third, Matthew 24:9 simply presents this as follows -- "Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake."  Not at all hard to image that Christians will be afflicted and killed even today, nor that they shall be hated of all nations for Christ's name's sake.  Mark 13:9 presents this as a three-fold matter -- "But take heed to yourselves: [1] for they shall deliver you up to counsils; AND [2] in synagogues ye shall be beaten: AND [3] ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them."  As long as any part of this is still occurring, this prophesy can still be considered to be in effect.  So then, even if I were to concede that it is hard to image Christians being beaten in Jewish synagogues, it is not at all hard to image Christians being brought before counsels, rulers, and kings in persecution for Christ's name's sake.  In like manner, Luke 21:12 also presents this as a three-fold matter of persecution -- "But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, [1] delivering you up to the synagogues, AND [2] into prisons, [3] being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake."  No sir, not at all hard to image Christians being persecuted and imprisoned by various kings and rulers today.

On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 6:41 AM, Brother D said:

In fact, desolation was caused in 70 AD.  All you're quibbling about is what constitutes an abomination, apparent not the Roman army that caused the desolation, nor Roman general who claimed divinity who stood in the Temple, immediately before its destruction.

Grammatical and contextual precision in Bible study is NOT "quibbling."  Rather, it is the very manner for "rightly dividing" God's Holy Word of Truth.  The desolation of Jerusalem did indeed occur in 70 AD, just as our Lord Jesus Christ prophesied in Luke 21:20; and the oppression of Jerusalem and the children of Israel by the Gentiles continues unto this day, just as our Lord Jesus Christ prophesied in Luke 21:24.  (By the way, the phrase "times [plural] of the Gentiles indicates an extended series of generational (or larger) time periods.  Even so, this very phrase itself indicates contextually that our Lord Jesus Christ was not speaking about the generation standing before Him through the phrase "this generation" in Luke 21:32.)  Furthermore, I am not seeking simply to define "what constitutes an abomination."  Rather, I am seeking to define what constitutes "the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet."  That is a more specific abomination than just any abomination, as per our Lord Jesus Christ's own declaration.  (By the way, the fact that Brother D did not even make reference unto Daniel's prophecies concerning the abomination of desolation reveals something about the type of Bible student that he was -- or was not.)  Finally, I am not aware of ANY historical source which indicates that Titus stood in the temple claiming to be God, just before the destruction of the temple.  If Brother D were still here, I would request his historical source for this claim.  If he had provided one or more, I would certainly have considered it.  If he did not provide at least one, we would be left with simply taking his personal declaration as a valid authority -- something that I myself simply WOULD NOT be willing to do.

On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 6:41 AM, Brother D said:

1) The 7-year Jewish-Roman wars ended in 73 AD with the fall of Masada.  There were some battles early after that when Jews tried to restore Judea.  But, it's been a very, very long time that Jews in significant numbers have fallen to swords.  And, I don't expect any future wars to be fought with swords.  So-called Jews are not children of Israel, but regardless, they're not falling by the edge of the sword.

2) Yes, in 70 AD, those Jews who weren't killed were scattered, just as Jesus predicted, along with the Temple being destroyed.  His generation.

3) No Jerusalem is still not being trodden down by the gentiles.   People you believe aren't gentiles control Jerusalem.  But, Jesus was referring to Roman war on Jerusalem (the topic of the chapter).  "Trodden down" is from a word that is only used in the Bible in the context of violence or crushing.  Jerusalem hasn't been trodden down much since the first century. 

4) The times of the gentiles being fulfilled doesn't mean an end to gentiles, but the fulfillment of the times of the gentiles is when the fullness of the gentiles has come into Israel (the church), and the Old Covenant is no more.  This happened with the Temple's destruction.

5) The only thing I take idiomatically is the one paragraph with Jesus coming in the clouds and stars falling, both clouds and stars are used symbolically in the OT. And, the context here implies they're idioms (e.g. what resulted form the stars falling), even if the reader didn't know clouds and stars were established idioms in the OT.  I take everything else literally.  Dispensationalists only pretend to take the chapter literally.    

1)  Actually, swords were used in battles over and against Jerusalem for hundreds of years after 70 AD.  Furthermore, swords are still used at times as weapons in the battles and skirmishes of the middle east.  Finally, "swords" is representative of any and all forms of weapon.

2)  And they are still scattered across the whole world, as per our Lord's prophesy in Luke 21:24 - because "the times of the Gentiles" has not yet come to its fulfilled conclusion.

3)  Oh, but Jerusalem most certainly IS still being "trodden down" with oppression unto this very day.  Actually, throughout the centuries since the first century, Jerusalem has been fought over and trodden down a great number of times.  This is simply a historical FACT.

4)  Never said that the times of the Gentiles being fulfilled meant an end to the existence of the Gentiles.  Indeed, the fulfillment for the times of the Gentiles IS when the FULNESS of the Gentiles shall come in, as per Romans 11:25, which will lead to the deliverance of ALL the children of Israel, as per Romans 11:26-27.  This FULNESS of the Gentiles has NOT YET been completed.  As far as the ending of the old covenant from Mount Sinai, that ended at the cross of Christ, not at the destruction of temple in 70 AD.  The New Testament/Covenant was established in Christ's shed blood, sacrificial death, miraculous resurrection, and glorious exaltation.  When the New Testament/Covenant was thereby established, the old covenant was taken away.  

5)  By his own acknowledgement, Brother D DOES take some of the prophesy as idiomatic.  By my own claim, I take NONE of the prophesy as idiomatic, but as grammatically and contextually precise and literal.  Now, Brother D attempts to disparage my claim with the accusation that I only PRETEND to take the chapter literally.  Yet his accusation is NOT valid just because he claimed it to be so.  Rather, he must provide evidence for the accuracy of his accusation in order for it to be established as having validity; but he is no longer able to do that because he ha been kicked out of the forum.  Even so, at the beginning of this posting, I acknowledged my advantage for the remainder of this threads postings.

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bro. Scott, I son't believe that if he were still here he could provide any further argument in addition to what he has already provided time and time again. Saying the same thing over and over just doesn't make it so, especially when what he has declared has been proven wrong at every turn.

I myself would not go as far as declaring him a false teacher, simply because he is not a teacher of any form. But I would say without any hesitation that he has been and still is seriously deluded and/or misled. Whether this is something he learned by listening to others or something he arrived at by himself I do not know. I tend to lean toward him being self taught, simply because of the ridiculous nature of many of his arguments. I have never personally heard this kind of teaching from any kind of Baptist.

So post on brother, it will be good information to any future folks who stumble upon this thread. Besides, most of this is really deep stuff that most people never get to hear preached simply because so few pastors are knowledgeable enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning Matthew 24:1 - 25:46, Mark 131-37, Luke 21:5-36 (Part 1).

First, let us recognize that Matthew 24:1 – 25:46, Mark 13:1-37, and Luke 21:5-36 are parallel passages concerning the same teaching event of our Lord Jesus Christ’s ministry.

Second, let us recognize that this teaching event of our Lord’s ministry was delivered in response to questions that the disciples had asked.  In fact, the disciples had asked TWO sets of questions. 

A few days before our Lord’s crucifixion, He engaged in teaching at the temple in Jerusalem.  Upon one of those occasions, as He was leaving the temple, some of His disciples pointed out the glory of the temple building.

Matthew 24:1 — And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.”
Mark 13:1 — And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!”
Luke 21:5 — And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,”

In response, our Lord Jesus Christ prophesied concerning the destruction of that temple.

Matthew 24:2 — 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.”
Mark 13:2 — And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings?  There shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”
Luke 21:6 — As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

Then in response to our Lord’s prophecy, the disciples asked their two sets of questions.

Matthew 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?
Mark 13:3–4 — And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, tell us, when shall these things be?  And what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?”
Luke 21:7 — And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things be?  And what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?”

In each of these three passages, it is recorded that the disciples asked two questions.  However, in both Mark 13:3-4 and Luke 21:7 the two questions both concern the SAME matter; for both questions in both of these passages are about “these things.”  Now, since our Lord Jesus Christ had just prophesied concerning the destruction of the temple, the matter of “these things” must concern that very destruction.  On the other hand, in Matthew 24:3 the two questions concern DIFFERENT matters; for the first question is also about “these things,” but the second question is about the Lord’s coming and the end of the world.  So then, the TWO sets of questions by the disciples were as follows:

1.  Set #1 – Concerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem
     A.  WHEN shall these things [the destruction of the temple] be?
     B.  WHAT SIGN will there be when these thing [the destruction of the temple] shall come to pass?

2.  Set #2 – Concerning the Lord’s coming and the world’s end
     A.  WHAT shall be the SIGN of thy coming?
     B.  WHAT shall be the SIGN . . . of the end of the world?

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
layout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/26/2017 at 5:00 AM, CelinaCelinaCelina said:

I've read the book of Revelation and Daniel at least twice before, but I wasn't really able to understand the prophecies therein.
I know that the Holy Spirit will guide you of all truth but I don't really know how to understand it.

I can read some opinions from other Christians but how will I know if they are right?

How were you guys able to finally understand those books?
 

Helpful to remember that the Revelation ties directly into Daniel and other OT prophecies, so the key to the symbols will be found in those other prophetic books. Also important to realise that the Book was written to address both immediate situations at time of John, and also was addressing future end time events still yet to come.

The churches mentioned by John addresed by jesus would refer to various churches throughout the Church Age, and some see them as historical churches, as in various stages of the state of the Church going forward.

Please remember also that the main person of the Book is Jesus Christ, not the antichrist, as some weant to elevate that person to being the main person of the prophecy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Celina, celina, celina...

 

Agreed, if we know Daniel properly, its chronology and exact dating, then it must also coincide exactly with Revelation and its chronology and exact dating..

 

One is a compliment of the other, and both must match if we get it right and exact, and we do have to after the Covenant START begins.

 

And blessed be the Philippines, a truly Christian country, and an amazing Christian President..The Lord bless and keep him.Im definitely not political there or here or anywhere, but President Duarte has brough law and oreder, even though he cant do it all. GBY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just trying out this format, please forgive if wrong....

DaComb, Revelation is about Jesus' victory over the AntiChrist and the False Prophet, and our unity together under HIS earthly leadership of Revelation 11, etc with our Two Witnesses. So again, there is a parallel, and we do have to know the opposition, and the exact times of our GATHERING and fleeing and fight to the end....

Know the Lord, know prophecy, and know the opposition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2018 at 7:21 PM, Davidjayjordan said:

Just trying out this format, please forgive if wrong....

DaComb, Revelation is about Jesus' victory over the AntiChrist and the False Prophet, and our unity together under HIS earthly leadership of Revelation 11, etc with our Two Witnesses. So again, there is a parallel, and we do have to know the opposition, and the exact times of our GATHERING and fleeing and fight to the end....

Know the Lord, know prophecy, and know the opposition.

There are no scriptures though that even hin thtta we will know the eaxact hour of His rapture event, as we are just commanded to be ready for it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Bro, the exact hour is 84 hours after our two Christian prophets are killed by the AC, and lie in the steets of Jerusalem for 3.5 days until the Lord comes in the air for them and ALL others in the first RESURRECTION

 

Rev 11

And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.

These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.

And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.

And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.

10 And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth.

11 And after three days and an half the spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.

12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.

 

Im not allowed to make a NEW TOPIC with these WORDS OF GOD, but maybe I am allowed to answer you HEREON, with an answer for you.

Edited by Davidjayjordan

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, 46 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...