The 144,000 before God at the end.

[covenantee]

It was your interpretation we are talking about. So you need Josephus more than the Word of God.

Josephus is your final authority.

It was your interpretation that you are talking about. So you need yourself more than the Word of God.

You are your final authority.

 

[Timtofly]

He was with them and delivered them safely to the other side. For us, of course, that "other side" is glory.

That is not what is being said. Noah came out still a sinner. If the other side is glory, then we do leave the earth, which was the point denied. The point is not being saved from. The point is being sent to another location, ie heaven.

If the church just comes back to the earth (or never leaves) as the point you agree with, then you don't agree with your post trib doctrine. You contradict the point that leaving prior to this time of judgment means leaving earth forever. It does not mean staying throughout the tribulation never killed and then suddenly finding yourself in heaven.

No one gets the type correct any way. This is not about the church staying on the earth. This is about Israel staying through Jacob's trouble. The church left before Noah got into the ark of safety. The church does not return to the earth, period.

Obviously getting out of the ark still on the earth means living on the earth another 1,000 years as Revelation 20 exemplifies. Then the church returns after the NHNE. So Amil cannot really use the ark, because the ark did not rise into Paradise and was stuck in heaven, unable to return to the earth, as you imagine in your scenario.

People tend to forget that the Olivet Discourse was given to those who had not even grasped the Gospel and the Cross, yet. They were presented with eschatology prior to soteriology. People today are still arguing over soteriology. Now human theology has changed most of the parables Jesus gave as eschatology into soteriology, they cannot get either doctrines correct.

 

[Timtofly]

There is no idol in Christ's prophecy in Matthew 24:15. The abomination of desolation is identified in the synoptic verse Luke 21:20 as the Roman armies, and corroborated in Daniel 9:26-27, to which Christ refers also in Matthew 24:15. Thus there is three-way corroboration between Daniel 9:26-27, Matthew 24:15, and Luke 21:20.

There are no Roman armies mentioned in Daniel 9:26-27.

So Daniel cannot corroborate your interpretation. There are no Roman armies mentioned in Matthew 24 either. The only corroboration and final authority you use is not Scripture at all. It is the writings of Josephus.

You only know that the armies in Luke 21:20 are Romans either from an historical guess or the writings of Josephus. So you take Josephus and insert his writings into Scripture, and get your interpretation.

No one is arguing nor denying that Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed in 70AD. Most don't insert 70AD into Scripture to make a doctrinal statement of fact.

The people that destroy in Daniel 9:26 are the Jews of the first century. The Jews condemned their own flesh and blood to a Cross even though He was innocent. Messiah was cut off, because that was God's plan. They then destroyed their own way of life in retribution to their involvement in that plan. That is the point Gabriel gave to Daniel.

 

[PinSeeker]

I agree that the 1260 days (42 months, time, times and half a time) represents the interadvent period, but disagree slightly in that I see the 1260 days as leading up to the beginning of Satan's little season. The reason I say that is because there is a symbolic 3.5 day time period which occurs after the 1,260 days ends... This is all symbolic and I'm not going to go into how I interpret all of this here, but the point is that it does reference a time period as occurring after the 1,260 days ends, which is described as "three and a half days". I believe Jesus returns at the end of that symbolic three and a half days.

Well, I understand the three and a half days of Revelation 11:2 as the same period as the three and a half years... it repeats on a smaller scale the period of 42 months (Revelation 11:2) also described as 1260 days (Revelation 11:3, 12:6) and the "time, times, and half a time" (three and a half years, Revelation 12:14).

Maybe the real... well, difference of opinion... between us concerns, more generally speaking, the "two witnesses" of Revelation 11... who they are and when they appear. I would just say, for now at least, that Revelation 11:1-14 gives a general visionary representation of the witness of the church and God’s preservation and vindication of that witness. The two witnesses are two lampstands (Revelation 11: 4), which, corresponding with Revelation 1:20, are churches (1:20). There are not two different churches, of course, but only one, Christ's Church. But Scripture requires two witnesses to confirm testimony (Deuteronomy 19:15, Matthew 18:16). So the two witnesses of Revelation 11 may ~ and I believe do ~ symbolize the saints, as the parallel between Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:7 suggests.

I agree in principle concerning "Satan's little season," or, as John puts it in Revelation 20, the "little while" in which Satan is "released," or "loosed." But I see Satan's loosing as still in the inter-advent period leading up to the return of Christ but at the very end, after the fullness of the Gentiles has been brought into Israel and the partial hardening now on Israel removed (as Paul puts it in Romans 11:25-26), God's millennium (Revelation 20:3), the "thousand years," which, "after that" Satan will be "released for a little while"... but still before Christ's return.

Grace and peace to you!

 

[covenantee]

There are no Roman armies mentioned in Daniel 9:26-27.

So Daniel cannot corroborate your interpretation. There are no Roman armies mentioned in Matthew 24 either. The only corroboration and final authority you use is not Scripture at all. It is the writings of Josephus.

You only know that the armies in Luke 21:20 are Romans either from an historical guess or the writings of Josephus. So you take Josephus and insert his writings into Scripture, and get your interpretation.

No one is arguing nor denying that Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed in 70AD. Most don't insert 70AD into Scripture to make a doctrinal statement of fact.

The people that destroy in Daniel 9:26 are the Jews of the first century. The Jews condemned their own flesh and blood to a Cross even though He was innocent. Messiah was cut off, because that was God's plan. They then destroyed their own way of life in retribution to their involvement in that plan. That is the point Gabriel gave to Daniel.

Daniel 9:26
...the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;

The Roman armies physically destroyed the city and sanctuary.

 

[Timtofly]

It was your interpretation that you are talking about. So you need yourself more than the Word of God.

You are your final authority.

No the topic is this:

There is no idol in Christ's prophecy in Matthew 24:15. The abomination of desolation is identified in the synoptic verse Luke 21:20 as the Roman armies, and corroborated in Daniel 9:26-27, to which Christ refers also in Matthew 24:15. Thus there is three-way corroboration between Daniel 9:26-27, Matthew 24:15, and Luke 21:20.

This post was never in response to any of my post. This is your argument under discussion. You are making claims, not me. I am pointing out your points are not found in Scripture, but inserted by you.

 

[Timtofly]

Well, I understand the three and a half days of Revelation 11:2 as the same period as the three and a half years... it repeats on a smaller scale the period of 42 months (Revelation 11:2) also described as 1260 days (Revelation 11:3, 12:6) and the "time, times, and half a time" (three and a half years, Revelation 12:14).

Except the 3.5 years is Satan's kingdom. The 3.5 days are the vials of God's wrath poured out on that kingdom. Are you saying that Satan's little season is not time given to Satan, but just God's wrath on Satan?

Seems pretty evident that those 42 months are the same period of time as the two witnesses are on the earth. The 3.5 days are when they lay dead. Are they then dead for 3.5 years and not being a thorn in Satan's side, speaking out against this 3.5 year reign of terror?

 

[covenantee]

No the topic is this:



This post was never in response to any of my post. This is your argument under discussion. You are making claims, not me. I am pointing out your points are not found in Scripture, but inserted by you.

The topic was the historical confirmations of Jesus' warnings of deceivers in Matthew 24.

Remember?

 

[PinSeeker]

That is not what is being said.

LOL! I understand your opinion.

Noah came out still a sinner.

Sure he did. I didn't suggest otherwise.

The point is being sent to another location, ie heaven.

Well, the wrong point...

If the church just comes back to the earth (or never leaves) as the point you agree with, then you don't agree with your post trib doctrine.

I am not a post-tribulation believer. I've been very clear about that.

You contradict the point that leaving prior to this time of judgment means leaving earth forever.

I'm... not even sure how you got here. And am not interested in finding out. Everyone is here for the final Judgment (if that speaks to your line of thought, whatever that is...). No one leaves until Jesus sends those on His proverbial left (who were resurrected to judgment) away and they obediently depart (Matthew 7:21-23, Matthew 25:41-46, John 5:29).

The church left before Noah got into the ark of safety. The church does not return to the earth, period. Obviously getting out of the ark still on the earth means living on the earth another 1,000 years as Revelation 20 exemplifies. Then the church returns after the NHNE.

I will ask again (rhetorically, of course): What color are the skies in your world, Timtofly?

So Amil cannot really use the ark, because the ark did not rise into Paradise and was stuck in heaven, unable to return to the earth, as you imagine in your scenario.

LOL! How your mind works, Timtofly, is a complete mystery to me. I don't imagine or think the nonsense you imagine me to imagine in any way, form, or fashion. I will certainly agree with you that the ark did not "rise into Paradise and was stuck in heaven, unable to return to earth." I'm not sure you would agree or not, but that is complete nonsense.

People tend to forget that the Olivet Discourse was given to those who had not even grasped the Gospel and the Cross, yet.

There were certainly some ~ many, presumably ~ present who had not grasped the Gospel or the Cross ~ had not believed ~ to that point, yes.

They were presented with eschatology prior to soteriology.

Disagree. Jesus's main points at the Mount of Olives was that the Gospel is open to everyone, that everyone is "eligible," and that this Gospel is... well, I'll just say all-encompassing. and that He Himself is (as He says in John 14:6) the way, the truth, and the life.

People today are still arguing over soteriology.

Sure.

Now human theology has changed most of the parables Jesus gave as eschatology into soteriology, they cannot get either doctrines correct.

Well, I'm glad that you think you have it all straight, Timtofly. But I would exhort you to... be careful... Actually, to repent... Being really happy with yourself is... well, among a few other things, that's kind of what the evil one wants for you (for him)...

Are you saying that Satan's little season is not time given to Satan, but just God's wrath on Satan?

Nope.

Seems pretty evident

Yeah, what "seems pretty evident" to you, Timtofly, is... an issue.

...those 42 months are the same period of time as the two witnesses are on the earth. The 3.5 days are when they lay dead. Are they then dead for 3.5 years and not being a thorn in Satan's side, speaking out against this 3.5 year reign of terror?

I don't disagree with you here, Timtofly, actually, at least not completely. We obviously disagree regarding the nature of the two witnesses of Revelation 11. In answer to your question, I'll just answer in the same way that Jesus answered the Pharisees during His triumphal entry into Jerusalem who ordered Him to rebuke His disciples in Luke 19:39. He answered, in Luke 19:40, “I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out.”

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Timtofly]

Daniel 9:26
...the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;

The Roman armies physically destroyed the city and sanctuary.

So you have changed your stance that the Prince to come is a Roman?

The Romans did the heavy lifting of moving the stones around. They certainly did not destroy the city from within like the Jews themselves did.

There is more than one way to destroy something. God destroyed the OT Covenant by tearing the temple veil from top to bottom. Sorta like tearing up a contract. Are you giving that credit to the Romans who nailed Jesus to the Cross? It was the Jews who demanded the Romans to do their work for them. The Jews would not tear down the stones from Jerusalem. They had to get the Romans to do that for them. But the city was already destroyed from within at that point.

 

[Timtofly]

The topic was the historical confirmations of Jesus' warnings of deceivers in Matthew 24.

Remember?

Still your point. I was using Luke 21.

 

[covenantee]

Still your point. I was using Luke 21.

Jesus' point. He issued the warnings.

Yes, Luke 21:8 refers to deceivers as well.

 

[covenantee]

So you have changed your stance that the Prince to come is a Roman?

The Romans did the heavy lifting of moving the stones around. They certainly did not destroy the city from within like the Jews themselves did.

There is more than one way to destroy something. God destroyed the OT Covenant by tearing the temple veil from top to bottom. Sorta like tearing up a contract. Are you giving that credit to the Romans who nailed Jesus to the Cross? It was the Jews who demanded the Romans to do their work for them. The Jews would not tear down the stones from Jerusalem. They had to get the Romans to do that for them. But the city was already destroyed from within at that point.

There is only one individual identified as a prince in Daniel 9:24-27.

He is Messiah the Prince.

Messiah was/is not a Roman.

 

[Timtofly]

I am not a post-tribulation believer. I've been very clear about that.

Well I can only go by what you actually post. You claimed glory was the end of the trip in this symbolic ark going through the tribulation. If glory is not heaven, then you just seem to keep your own beliefs cloaked in mystery, while disagreeing with parts of what other posters post.

I don't even know what you mean by post tribulation believer, as if believer is something different that the rapture.

Even some pre-trib rapture adherents claim the 144k are not the church, and do not go through the tribulation, because they still are not correct about the tribulation. The Seals are not the tribulation. The first 6 Trumpets are the tribulation, called Jacob's trouble, and the 144k are from Jacob who are on the earth during the Trumpets and Thunders. They are sealed to withstand this time of judgment, because they have a job to do on the earth like the original 12 had along side of Jesus as Messiah during the first coming. There is not 144k names listed because obviously that would give away the thief in the night moment. When 144k with those names were born, then that would be a fulfilled prophecy. But to just dismiss that 1200 were sealed from each tribe of Jacob as just mere symbolism is missing the point made in Scripture about the time of Jacob's trouble.

John is not arguing the doctrine of soteriology. He actually witnessed these humans still alive on earth being sealed by an angel. And it was after the 6th Seal was already opened. This sealing was in preparation for the sounding of the Trumpets.

If you think you need to invoke the human theological argument of parallelism. That is adding to the book of Revelation. John never pointed out to read his writings as a series of parallels. So why should we? To do so misses many points from throughout Scripture, that then have to be changed to not contradict themselves.

 

[PinSeeker]

Well I can only go by what you actually post.

That's the problem, Timtofly. You don't go by what I post. The only question, then, really, is whether you actually ~ mistakenly ~ think you do, or you're purposely changing what I post into something it's not.

You claimed glory was the end of the trip in this symbolic ark going through the tribulation.

No, I did not. I would never do such a thing.

I don't even know what you mean by post tribulation believer, as if believer is something different that the rapture.

LOL! Wow. There are different views regarding the tribulation and when it is... what time period it covers.

Even some pre-trib rapture adherents claim the 144k are not the church, and do not go through the tribulation....

Sure. That's not me; I am neither a pre-trib rapture adherent, nor do I believe that believers do not go through the tribulation.

...they still are not correct about the tribulation.

Agreed.

The Seals are not the tribulation. The first 6 Trumpets are the tribulation, called Jacob's trouble, and the 144k are from Jacob who are on the earth during the Trumpets and Thunders. They are sealed to withstand this time of judgment, because they have a job to do on the earth like the original 12 had along side of Jesus as Messiah during the first coming. There is not 144k names listed because obviously that would give away the thief in the night moment. When 144k with those names were born, then that would be a fulfilled prophecy. But to just dismiss that 1200 were sealed from each tribe of Jacob as just mere symbolism is missing the point made in Scripture about the time of Jacob's trouble.

John is not arguing the doctrine of soteriology. He actually witnessed these humans still alive on earth being sealed by an angel. And it was after the 6th Seal was already opened. This sealing was in preparation for the sounding of the Trumpets.

Ugh.

If you think you need to invoke the human theological argument of parallelism. That is adding to the book of Revelation.

In... your opinion.

Can you just not stop, Timtofly? Are you just not able to say, "You know, yeah, let's stop." Can you just not do that?

John never pointed out to read his writings as a series of parallels.

And he never pointed out otherwise, either. But still, it is what it is. Among other things, you are reading it at the exclusion of the rest of Scripture. I'm quite sure you will deny that. Again, it is what it is.

To do so misses many points from throughout Scripture, that then have to be changed to not contradict themselves.

Opinions are like noses; everybody has one (or a thousand).

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Timtofly]

There is only one individual identified as a prince in Daniel 9:24-27.

He is Messiah the Prince.

Messiah was/is not a Roman.

Neither is Prince.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Neither is Prince.

Dan 9:25-26
(25) Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
(26) And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Clearly, the people of the anointed prince, the Jews, the people of the Old Testament Congregation, that should come did in fact destroy the Sanctuary. Didn't Christ Himself tell the Jews, "Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up." And they did, and He did! He was not talking about the physical temple being destroyed but the temple of his body representing the very congregation of Israel who came against Him! Selah! Therefore, along with the death of Christ, the temple fell signifies the fall of the Old Testament congregation. And she have lost her kingdom representation of God but in three days, Christ rebuilt that temple, this time with the NEW testament congregation. This is the congregation that Christ gave the kingdom to that produced fruits (salvation of the Gentiles AND Jews in the New Testament.

Mat 21:42-45
(42) Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
(43) Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
(44) And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
(45) And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.

The Old Testament congregation fell and the Prince did confirm the Covenant with a New Testament congregation...in three days with His resurrection. And it was that same Prince Messiah in that same context. Not an evil prince, not the prince Titus, not the Antichrist of future events, but the same Messiah the Prince that was spoken of in that verse. In our exegesis, which is the one where scripture interprets scripture, the only prince mentioned there (according to God's word) is Messiah, the anointed. Not your invented evil one.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Daniel 9:26
...the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;

The Roman armies physically destroyed the city and sanctuary

Sorry. It is not what Daniel 9:26 talked about. Look at my previous post explaining this.

Now, with due respect, the error of this type of World Event/History/Josephus type eschatology and interpretations is that it misses the point of scripture completely by keeping their eyes not on the Word/Christ, but on alleged history or events. By straining at a gnat, this system causes Christians to swallow a camel. It is a sad fact that most Christians still tend to this "Historicist type" of interpreting in presuming the fall of Israel took place in AD 70, when the Bible tells us plainly that it was at the cross. They miss the point by listening not to scripture but to ungodly Historian named Josephus. So just as surely as the Judaizers missed the point when Christ said "destroy this Temple and in three days I will rebuild it," Christians miss the point today. Neither let God be the interpreter, instead, they were/are reasoning it out in their own minds and through their own interpretations of historical events. There's nothing really different today than it was then. Nothing New.

Because people have their eyes so firmly on physical history and worldly events, rather than spiritual "biblically verified" events, they don't grasp the significance of the prophesy. The same reason Christians have looked for Keyser, Hitler, the European market, The Pope, Palestine, Israel, Russia Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bush, Saddam, Obama, Trump, and Hamas War, as somehow prophetic. And have been doing so for year after year, always being proven wrong. Because they look to world history and men as interpreters instead of Biblical history, the biblical record, and God as interpreters. It is the age-old error of "unsound hermeneutics" rather than intellect or reason. For example:

Mark 9:11-12

• "And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come?
• And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought."

It's not that the prophecy was wrong, it was that their "historicist type" interpretation of it was wrong. The moral of the story, you cannot take a historical biblical text from the period in which it was constructed, and try and force a historical/physical fulfillment based on that text. Just because something in text was stated historically in the Old Testament doesn't mean Elijah would be reincarnated, or a literal/physical city called Babylon was going to either exist, or fall, to fulfill the Biblical prophesy of these things happening. Once we start to practice a sound logical and reasonable system of accepting that "interpretations belonging to God," the Bible opens up exponentially. And we come to see the error of such a historicist (the belief in ongoing historical fulfillment) hermeneutic. Remember, that is why the Judaizers missed the coming of their Messiah. Because they were looking for a historical king that would come and set them free from Roman rule, government and bondage. You will never come to a correct interpretation by applying this biblically historical text from the period in which it was constructed, to the same [type] fulfillment today.

Hope this helps clarify some things.

 

[covenantee]

Neither is Prince.

What verse refers to Prince Neither?

 

[covenantee]

Sorry. It is not what Daniel 9:26 talked about. Look at my previous post explaining this.

Now, with due respect, the error of this type of World Event/History/Josephus type eschatology and interpretations is that it misses the point of scripture completely by keeping their eyes not on the Word/Christ, but on alleged history or events. By straining at a gnat, this system causes Christians to swallow a camel. It is a sad fact that most Christians still tend to this "Historicist type" of interpreting in presuming the fall of Israel took place in AD 70, when the Bible tells us plainly that it was at the cross. They miss the point by listening not to scripture but to ungodly Historian named Josephus. So just as surely as the Judaizers missed the point when Christ said "destroy this Temple and in three days I will rebuild it," Christians miss the point today. Neither let God be the interpreter, instead, they were/are reasoning it out in their own minds and through their own interpretations of historical events. There's nothing really different today than it was then. Nothing New.

Because people have their eyes so firmly on physical history and worldly events, rather than spiritual "biblically verified" events, they don't grasp the significance of the prophesy. The same reason Christians have looked for Keyser, Hitler, the European market, The Pope, Palestine, Israel, Russia Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bush, Saddam, Obama, Trump, and Hamas War, as somehow prophetic. And have been doing so for year after year, always being proven wrong. Because they look to world history and men as interpreters instead of Biblical history, the biblical record, and God as interpreters. It is the age-old error of "unsound hermeneutics" rather than intellect or reason. For example:

Mark 9:11-12

• "And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come?
• And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought."

It's not that the prophecy was wrong, it was that their "historicist type" interpretation of it was wrong. The moral of the story, you cannot take a historical biblical text from the period in which it was constructed, and try and force a historical/physical fulfillment based on that text. Just because something in text was stated historically in the Old Testament doesn't mean Elijah would be reincarnated, or a literal/physical city called Babylon was going to either exist, or fall, to fulfill the Biblical prophesy of these things happening. Once we start to practice a sound logical and reasonable system of accepting that "interpretations belonging to God," the Bible opens up exponentially. And we come to see the error of such a historicist (the belief in ongoing historical fulfillment) hermeneutic. Remember, that is why the Judaizers missed the coming of their Messiah. Because they were looking for a historical king that would come and set them free from Roman rule, government and bondage. You will never come to a correct interpretation by applying this biblically historical text from the period in which it was constructed, to the same [type] fulfillment today.

Hope this helps clarify some things.

The destructions of Jerusalem and Israel were both physical and spiritual events.

Both events were absolutely indispensable to signal the final annihilation and disappearance of the old covenant, and to herald the inauguration and establishment of the New Covenant.

Both events were under the complete command and control of Messiah the Prince.

Neither event can be dismissed or denied.