Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

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

Mark 9:1


Recommended Posts

  • Members


Clear as day that some of the disciples would live for 2,000 years ????


There is the problem with such an argument Cov. In order for it to refer to His second coming one would have to say that their are some alive now who are 2000 years old.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members
I don't have to get around anything. I just have look at what the Lord's Word says. Revelation 1:1 states that the things in the book are figurative (symbolic).

That's what I expected you to say, it's a very convenient argument but I don't buy it, I believe the Book literally wherever possible, and Rev 1:1 states that it's about things that must come to pass, and that's NOT symbolism.

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Coc333, It's a pointless exercise for me to discuss this subject with you if you are going to dismiss away scripture as being figurative and not actually meaning what it says.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


That's what I expected you to say, it's a very convenient argument but I don't buy it, I believe the Book literally wherever possible, and Rev 1:1 states that it's about things that must come to pass, and that's NOT symbolism.

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Coc333, It's a pointless exercise for me to discuss this subject with you if you are going to dismiss away scripture as being figurative and not actually meaning what it says.


It isn't convenient, it is what the scripture actually says whether you "buy it" or not. It states that in verse one. The Book of Revelation is symbolic. Yes, there are literal things in it. The first 3 chapters for the most part is literal.

Do you believe that Revelation is describing our future? Do you believe that the seven churches in chapters 2 and 3 are seven literal churches or is it symbolic?

I am not dismissing anything. I am simply reading what is actually there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


That's what I expected you to say, it's a very convenient argument but I don't buy it, I believe the Book literally wherever possible, and Rev 1:1 states that it's about things that must come to pass, and that's NOT symbolism.

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Coc333, It's a pointless exercise for me to discuss this subject with you if you are going to dismiss away scripture as being figurative and not actually meaning what it says.

While the opening verse declares that the Revelation is signified it must be understood in terms of real events & people. e.g. the Lion & the Lamb both refer to the Lord Jesus.

Chapter 11, refers to the temple & to the destruction of Jerusalem & indicates that much of the vision is dealing with that dreadful judgement prophesied by the Lord Jesus in his Olivet prophecy. That guides in our interpretation of the symbolism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Rev 1.1. Signified, means told by signs or symbols. I have noticed that some will not discuss anything other than what they have been taught, or brainwashed so they cannot see what the scripture plainly says.

The signs, once they are given and explained in a prophecy, do not change throughout the scripture, genesis to Revelation, the signs or symbols mean the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Rev 1.1. Signified, means told by signs or symbols. I have noticed that some will not discuss anything other than what they have been taught, or brainwashed so they cannot see what the scripture plainly says.

The signs, once they are given and explained in a prophecy, do not change throughout the scripture, genesis to Revelation, the signs or symbols mean the same.

Please give some e.gs.

Is the lion consistently Christ or Satan?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members




Both! The lion signifies strength, so yes the symbolism is consistent.

WOW !!!!???!!!!

I suppose the point of your claim that signs must be consistently interpreted is that because believers are built into a living temple that the "temple of God" in 2 Thes. 2 must signify the church, taken over by Rome, with the Pope as "the man of sin."

There is no reason to see the temple of God in 2 Thes. as a symbol. The context is not symbolic. It is a straightforward prophecy of the events leading up to the AD 70 destruction - which must take place before the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


WOW !!!!???!!!!

I suppose the point of your claim that signs must be consistently interpreted is that because believers are built into a living temple that the "temple of God" in 2 Thes. 2 must signify the church, taken over by Rome, with the Pope as "the man of sin."

There is no reason to see the temple of God in 2 Thes. as a symbol. The context is not symbolic. It is a straightforward prophecy of the events leading up to the AD 70 destruction - which must take place before the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.


From the Invisible church thread

Now, turn to 1 Tim. 3:15

1Ti 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

The house of God is the temple. Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



In what sense can you say that the church (kingdom) has flopped? Just because many reject the truth does not mean that the truth has failed or flopped. As a matter of fact, the Word teaches us that most will reject it.

You can question my thinking if you desire but the truth is that the Bible teaches that the kingdom is the church (Matt 16:18-19). Now, this does not mean that the kingdom will not some day be delivered up to the Father; it will be but what will never happen is some 1000 year reign on earth. The Bible simply does not teach that as a matter of fact, it contradicts it.


I never said the church flopped. I said if someone holds your position you would have to say it flopped since there is no way you can say Christ's 1,000 year reign of peace and righteousness has been realized on this planet. Only a deluded fool would think that.

And nowhere in Matt. 16:18-19 does it say the church is the kingdom. Only a papist would say that. It say the keys of the kingdom of heaven would be given to Peter and it's debatable whether this has actually occured yet.

As far as the 1,000 year reign I don't know how Revelation 20:4 can't be any clearer unless you allegorized the whole book which puts you on very, very dangerous ground. Edited by Wilchbla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


WOW !!!!???!!!!

I suppose the point of your claim that signs must be consistently interpreted is that because believers are built into a living temple that the "temple of God" in 2 Thes. 2 must signify the church, taken over by Rome, with the Pope as "the man of sin."

There is no reason to see the temple of God in 2 Thes. as a symbol. The context is not symbolic. It is a straightforward prophecy of the events leading up to the AD 70 destruction - which must take place before the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.


You are 100% correct here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


Clear as day that some of the disciples would live for 2,000 years ????


No, clear as day that since the context of the passage in which Christ makes his promise is speaking of his literally, physical Second Coming then the promise that Christ made to the disciples about seeing "the Son of man coming in his kingdom" had to be fulfilled in TYPE by his transfiguration. Why? Because all the disciples would taste death before his return.

I was just refuting the claim by some that what Christ was talking about was the coming of the church and not his Second Coming. There is nothing in the context concerning the church. It's all about his literal, physical return.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



I never said the church flopped. I said if someone holds your position you would have to say it flopped since there is no way you can say Christ's 1,000 year reign of peace and righteousness has been realized on this planet. Only a deluded fool would think that.

And nowhere in Matt. 16:18-19 does it say the church is the kingdom. Only a papist would say that. It say the keys of the kingdom of heaven would be given to Peter and it's debatable whether this has actually occured yet.

As far as the 1,000 year reign I don't know how Revelation 20:4 can't be any clearer unless you allegorized the whole book which puts you on very, very dangerous ground.


Looks like I am not the only one on here that can be rude.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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



×
×
  • Create New...