Pictures of Two Comings

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yes, but there are different things in those verses like this verse shows Jesus coming with His angels not the saints and with blazing fire not the sword of His mouth so obviously not the same one-time event.

I'm sorry, but that is the kind of argument Premils use. It's not convincing. The sword of His mouth is a figurative reference, but the passages about Him coming with fire are literal. Revelation 19:11-21 does not refer to the literal way that Jesus will destroy His enemies, which will be by fire. But, it is the same event. As for it showing Him coming with His angels and not the saints, how do you come to that conclusion?

Revelation 19:14 And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses.

Don't those in fine linen include the wife/bride of Christ mentioned earlier? I would think so.

Revelation 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice and give Him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready.” 8 And to her it was granted to be arrayed in fine linen, clean and bright, for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints.

Revelation 19:14 shows the saints being with Him and not just His angels.

Yes, Jesus died just outside of the walls of Jerusalem but that was still considered Jerusalem, Revelation 11 does say that Jesus was killed in "the great city".

Not true. It says He was crucified near the city and outside the city gate. That was not Jerusalem.

Hebrews 13:10 We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat. 11 For the bodies of those animals, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned outside the camp. 12 Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered outside the gate.

If Jesus being crucified outside the gate means He was crucified in Jerusalem, then would you also claim that "the bodies of those animals, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned outside the camp" would have been considered to have been burned within the camp? Jesus was crucified outside of Jerusalem by God's design, in my opinion. To show that He wasn't only sacrificing Himself for the Jews, but also for the Gentiles.

Jerusalem bring called Sodom and Egypt to me symbolizes its morality and bondage.

Can you expand on this?

Weather Revelation refers to earthly Jerusalem or not has no bearing on who the seven letters are addressed too. The seven letters are personal messages to seven literal churches at the time of John writing it.

I disagree. If it was all about things related to Jerusalem and Israel, then I strongly believe it would have been addressed to churches in Israel or Jerusalem.

 

[Marty fox]

I'm sorry, but that is the kind of argument Premils use. It's not convincing. The sword of His mouth is a figurative reference, but the passages about Him coming with fire are literal. Revelation 19:11-21 does not refer to the literal way that Jesus will destroy His enemies, which will be by fire. But, it is the same event. As for it showing Him coming with His angels and not the saints, how do you come to that conclusion?

Revelation 19:14 And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses.

Don't those in fine linen include the wife/bride of Christ mentioned earlier? I would think so.

Revelation 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice and give Him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready.” 8 And to her it was granted to be arrayed in fine linen, clean and bright, for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints.

Revelation 19:14 shows the saints being with Him and not just His angels.

Yes they would include the saints but were you including the angles in chapter 19?

I didn't think you were because you never stated that in chapter 19.

Not true. It says He was crucified near the city and outside the city gate. That was not Jerusalem.

Hebrews 13:10 We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat. 11 For the bodies of those animals, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned outside the camp. 12 Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered outside the gate.

If Jesus being crucified outside the gate means He was crucified in Jerusalem, then would you also claim that "the bodies of those animals, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned outside the camp" would have been considered to have been burned within the camp? Jesus was crucified outside of Jerusalem by God's design, in my opinion. To show that He wasn't only sacrificing Himself for the Jews, but also for the Gentiles.

So for clarification what is "the great city" mentioned in chapter 11?

Can you expand on this?

Ezekiel chapter 16 shows that Jerusalem was unfaithful lusting after other Gods thus she lost her molarity. Jerusalem was under Roman bondage because of her unfaithfulness to God bondage

I disagree. If it was all about things related to Jerusalem and Israel, then I strongly believe it would have been addressed to churches in Israel or Jerusalem.

The messages to the seven letters are in contrast to the rest of Revelation

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yes they would include the saints but were you including the angles in chapter 19?

I didn't think you were because you never stated that in chapter 19.

I would include the angels there, yes. Why not? As I have pointed out before, not every second coming passage contains all of the same details about that event. Maybe by "this verse" you weren't talking about Revelation 19 and were talking about 2 Thess 1:7-8 instead? I mentioned both passages in my post, but you didn't specify which one you were referring to when you said "this verse". Anyway, why wouldn't the angels be there as well when heaven is opened and shown with His saints?

So for clarification what is "the great city" mentioned in chapter 11?

The same as what "the great city" is in other verses in Revelation. Mystery Babylon, which I believe is the spiritual opposite of the New Jerusalem, which is "the bride, the Lamb's wife" (the church). It's not an earthly city, it symbolizes the spiritual city that unbelievers are citizens of just like the New Jerusalem symbolizes the city that believers are citizens of.

Ezekiel chapter 16 shows that Jerusalem was unfaithful lusting after other Gods thus she lost her molarity. Jerusalem was under Roman bondage because of her unfaithfulness to God bondage

The messages to the seven letters are in contrast to the rest of Revelation

Why would that be the case? I disagree. The entire book deals with Jesus Christ and His church as well as the enemies of Jesus Christ and His church throughout the New Testament era up until the future second coming of Christ at which point the judgment will occur and the new heavens and new earth will be ushered in. The book has nothing to do with earthly Jerusalem or Israel.

 

[Marty fox]

I would include the angels there, yes. Why not? As I have pointed out before, not every second coming passage contains all of the same details about that event. Maybe by "this verse" you weren't talking about Revelation 19 and were talking about 2 Thess 1:7-8 instead? I mentioned both passages in my post, but you didn't specify which one you were referring to when you said "this verse". Anyway, why wouldn't the angels be there as well when heaven is opened and shown with His saints?

I also believe that they would be but Rev 19 doesn't specify who the ones in white are I believe that the ones in white are the saints but the angels would also be present.

The same as what "the great city" is in other verses in Revelation. Mystery Babylon, which I believe is the spiritual opposite of the New Jerusalem, which is "the bride, the Lamb's wife" (the church). It's not an earthly city, it symbolizes the spiritual city that unbelievers are citizens of just like the New Jerusalem symbolizes the city that believers are citizens of.

We are in agreement on what the New Jerusalem is.

Why would that be the case? I disagree. The entire book deals with Jesus Christ and His church as well as the enemies of Jesus Christ and His church throughout the New Testament era up until the future second coming of Christ at which point the judgment will occur and the new heavens and new earth will be ushered in. The book has nothing to do with earthly Jerusalem or Israel.