"""So then, ever since PENTECOST,""
From your understanding what verses teach how the HS was received at Pentecost (early Acts) compared to today ?
Please list the relevant verses
Who is Paul discussing in 2 Thessalonians 2?
- Thread starter CTK
- Start date
-
- Tags
- daniel paul revelation
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
From your understanding what verses teach how the HS was received at Pentecost (early Acts) compared to today ?
Please list the relevant verses
Peter, I did not write the word “Okay” because I agreed… it was because I was not going to argue with him.
Earburner
Well-Known Member
Absolutely!
And here is the body of biblical evidence to prove out the reality about THAT deceiving spirit of antichrist, which infects and corrupts MANY people.
1 John 2:18
Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
1 John 2:22
Who is a liar but he [all] that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1 John 4:3
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2 John 1:7
For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
Last edited:
Earburner
Well-Known Member
I have provided the scriptures! If you don't understand them, please seek the Holy Spirit for His teaching. 1 Cor. 2:13.
Pentecost was the beginning of many Jews being converted unto Christ, thus becoming in their conversion of themselves, a NEW creature of the NEW nation of God's Born again Saints.
Edit: Therefore, in that frame of thinking, (New) Jerusalem (Gal. 4:26) HAS BEEN and still is, being safely inhabited. Zech. 14:8-11.
By the way, New Jerusalem is not about buildings and land, it's about people who have been given the Gift of Eternal life NOW (1 John 5:13), and are only waiting for the Day of Jesus' Glorious return from Heaven, who in that moment, "in the twinkling of an eye", "shall change us into the likeness of His Resurrection.
Last edited:
You say you don’t, but then you do.
You’re importing 2 Peter 3’s description of cosmic dissolution and using it to redefine Matthew 24’s Noah analogy. But Matthew 24 NEVER states the purpose of the comparison is to define the scope of judgment. it uses Noah to illustrate suddenness and unawareness (“you do not know what day”). That is why the application in verse 42 is watchfulness, not cosmological extent. You are forcing a reconciliation that isn’t necessary.
The direct object of “escape” in Luke 21:36 is “all these things,” not “that day.” The phrase is plural in scope and therefore broader than a single day or moment. Luke also provides no explicit limitation restricting it only to the events of “that day.” Therefore, it is grammatically reasonable to understand “all these things” as referring to the broader sequence of events Jesus has been describing rather than only the final events at His coming.
In other words, there is nothing in the grammar of Luke 21:36 that limits it to “pray to be counted worthy to escape that day.” The text allows for the reading: escape all these things (the days of vengeance, wrath upon this people, the trampling of Jerusalem, cosmic signs, and related events) and stand before the Son of Man.
So you would argue it makes no sense to pray to escape “the days of vengeance to fulfill all that is written” and “wrath on this people”?
But that’s not the purpose of the comparison. Vs 42 states the purpose of the comparison.
It would be on thing if paul only said “God will repay those oppressing you at the revelation of Christ from heaven”, in 2 Thessalonians. Then I would agree, syntactically and grammatically, the Thessalonians being alive would not necessarily matter.
However, that’s not all Paul says. Paul also said: “and to YOU being oppressed, relief (ἄνεσιν) at the revealing of Christ from heaven.”
You = Thessalonians
Per thayers : ἄνεσιν - relief, rest, from persecutions, 2 Thessalonians 1:7;
The Thessalonians would receive rest/relief from persecution AT the coming of the Lord. Them being alive now matters.
So…..I’ve already stated 2 peter 3 is about the delayed parousia.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
I don't. You can't tell me what I'm doing. We don't think alike at all, so how do you think you can pretend to know how I think and that you can speak for me? You can't.
That is implied because He specifically mentions that the flood "took them all away" and immediately after that He said "so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.". If you were able to remove your extreme preterist doctrinal bias, you would see that He was comparing the scope of the destruction that would occur at His second coming to the scope of the destruction in the flood in Noah's day. He did not point out that the flood destroyed all unbelievers for nothing.
That's part of what He was illustrating. You ignore what else He was illustrating because of your extreme preterist bias.
No, I'm not.
This shows your lack of ability to understand context. Jesus was talking about "all these things" that would occur on "that day". He was talking about believers escaping it because unbelievers would not escape it because of it happening so suddenly. He's not talking about escaping a period of time that would occur suddenly. He's talking about things that would occur suddenly on the day of His second coming. That's why in 1 Thessalonians 5:2-4 Paul indicates that unbelievers in spiritual darkness "shall not escape" the "sudden destruction" that will come upon them unexpectedly when Jesus comes.
The context of the verse says otherwise, but you often miss the context of scripture.
You're not even thinking here. The context is of praying to be worthy to escape something that unbelievers would not be able to escape and it would be something that would occur suddenly that unbelievers would have no inkling that it was coming. How does that describe what happened in 70 AD when unbelieving Jews most definitely had an inkling of what was coming when the Roman armies came and surrounded Jerusalem?
It's not contextually reasonable.
No, I wouldn't argue that, but I'm saying you're missing the context of what Jesus was talking about. He was talking about a global event that would affect "all those who dwell on the face of the whole earth" and it would be something that unbelievers would not see coming ahead of time ("no one knows the day or hour"). That's why Jesus compared His coming to what happened in Noah's day and in Lot's day. When those events occurred, unbelievers had no idea what was coming and then they were suddenly destroyed. They didn't even have any chance at all of trying to escape. Jesus indicated that's how it will be when He comes again (Matthew 24:35-39). The way that believers will escape is that we will be changed to put on bodily immortality and we will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air when He comes again at the last trumpet (1 Thess 4:14-5:4, 1 Cor 15:22-23,50-54).
I will add this, though. I do think it would be a little odd for Jesus to tell them to pray to be worthy of escaping what was coming in Jerusalem because He had already indicated that the way they would escape that is by fleeing to the mountains. Would they really need to pray that they would be worthy to escape when they already knew what they needed to do to escape? It seems that fleeing the mountains is not something they would need to pray to be worthy of doing. It seems that the need to pray to escape would relate to a need for God to supernaturally protect them from what was coming on "all those who dwell on the face of the whole earth" which unbelievers "shall not escape" (1 Thess 5:2-3).
Last edited:
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
It's part of the purpose of the comparison, as any unbiased person reading what He actually said can see. You make the mention of the flood having destroyed all unbelievers completely pointless and meaningless, as I already told you. You can deny that all you want, but it's true.
Okay.
So? Why does that require them to be alive when He returns?
Revelation 6:9 When He opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held. 10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, until You judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” 11 Then a white robe was given to each of them; and it was said to them that they should rest a little while longer, until both the number of their fellow servants and their brethren, who would be killed as they were, was completed.
Assume that the souls John saw included the Thessalonian believers who were persecuted back then in Paul's day. Do you not think that they will feel relief once Jesus comes to once and for all judge the world (Acts 17:31, Matthew 25:31-46) when He will avenge those who were persecuted and killed "for the word of God and for the testimony which they held"? Of course they will.
That opinion does not take into account what will happen when Jesus returns. This is why your preterist perspective clouds your vision of scripture. You're never thinking of what will happen in the future. You're always just thinking of what happened in the past.
Matthew 24:1-34, contains a series of events leading up to the coming of the son of man and culminating in the words “this generation shall not pass away until all these things happen”
the parables following these vs do not address everything within vs 1-34. The parables are primarily exhortations about what do while waiting.
If you want to talk about not knowing the day or hour, then I will put more emphasis on the parables. If you want to talk about what events are to occur within Jesus’ generation, then I’ll put more weight on vs 1-34.
How so?
Historically, many Jews involved in the First Jewish–Roman War (AD 66–73) believed that God would intervene on their behalf, protect Jerusalem and the Temple, and deliver them from the Romans. Josephus records that various rebels and false prophets encouraged the people with expectations of divine deliverance and miraculous salvation.
Therefore, despite the warning signs and the Roman siege, many did not expect the Temple’s destruction at all, making it impossible for them to know the precise day or hour when it would occur.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
They address what will happen at the coming of the Son of Man, none of which happened in 70 AD. There was no judgment of all people in 70 AD, the destruction that occurred was not unexpected to everyone before it actually happened in 70 AD, there was no sense in which everyone was either taken or left in 70 AD, heaven and earth did not pass away in 70 AD, not all unbelievers were killed in any sense (locally or globally) in 70 AD and so on.
See above.
I don't find this to be a valid argument. What Jesus described would be something that no one would see coming. Matthew 24 and other scriptures describe His coming as being like the coming of a thief in the night. It would be completely unexpected until it happens. No one sees it coming before the thief actually comes. You say "many did not expect the Temple’s destruction at all". Jesus did not indicate that many would not know the day or hour of His coming, He indicated that no one would know the day or hour of His coming until the day and hour came. That includes believers. He said only the Father knew the day or hour of His second coming. Believers obviously saw the city and the temple's destruction coming and they fled to the mountains as Jesus instructed before it happened. So, what happened in 70 AD simply does not fit Jesus's description of Him coming and His wrath coming down without anyone seeing it coming ahead of time. Jesus said it would be like the days of Noah when unbelievers had no clue at all of what was coming until the flood actually came and that just does not describe what happened in 70 AD. You said "many" unbelievers didn't expect the temple to be destroyed, which means that some did expect it, but Jesus said His coming would be completely unexpected by unbelievers (only believers would recognize signs that it was near) just as a thief comes unexpectedly without anyone seeing him coming.
Last edited:
The comparison’s point is made in vs 42 : “stay awake for you do not know the day”
Jesus did NOT say “stay awake for it will come upon the whole earth under heaven.”
Just because Jesus compared it to the suddenness and unexpectedness of the flood doesn’t require that he was comparing it to the geographical scope, especially considering his summation of the comparison’s purpose in vs 42 doesn’t say anything about geographical scope. You are forcing that upon the text via external passages like 2 peter 3 and your framework.
if Jesus said “stay awake for it will come upon the whole earth under heaven.”, I would totally agree with you that the purpose of the comparison was about judgement on a geographical scope. But such is not the case.
Before we get to context, we need to establish what the grammar allows.
In Luke 21:36, “these things” (ταῦτα) is a plural expression. Naturally, it points to a plurality of referents rather than a single event. Additionally, it’s not “some” but “ALL” these things.
Your argument seems to be that “these things” refer to the plural events of “that day”
Earlier in post 417, you identified the events associated with “that day” as including:
- the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory,
- the redemption of believers,
- the coming of the kingdom of God,
- heaven and earth passing away.
Yet Jesus says believers should pray to escape ALL these things. Not some, not part, but ALL.
Surely believers are not praying to escape ALL the events you included for “that day”:
- the redemption of believers,
- the coming of the kingdom
To argue that believers are to pray to escape “ALL these things” on “that day”, which, according to you, also includes the coming of the kingdom, and redemption of believers, is untenable.
It makes much more sense to understand Jesus as telling His disciples to pray that they may escape all the events He had just described leading up to the revealing of the Son of Man.
Grammatically, “all these things” points back to the plurality of events Jesus had been discussing. If Jesus intended only one specific event, He could have said so. Instead, He refers to “all these things that are about to take place.”
Moreover, the purpose clause that follows—“and to stand before the Son of Man”—fits naturally with escaping the judgments, tribulations, persecutions, distress, and other events that precede His coming. The contrast is between experiencing those events and being preserved so as to stand before the Son of Man.
Therefore, the most natural reading is that “all these things” refers to the series of events Jesus has just outlined, not merely a single event isolated from the broader context.
We disagree on how broadly γῆ (“earth/land”) should be understood in Luke 21:35. Therefore, when you argue that “the context is global,” that conclusion depends on an assumption I do not share. More importantly, you have not provided evidence from Luke itself that γῆ must be taken in a global sense.
In fact, the immediate context of the Olivet Discourse in Gospel of Luke 21 is explicitly concerned with two questions: (1) when the temple will be destroyed, and (2) what signs will precede that event. That framing is inherently Jerusalem- and temple-centered, not global in scope. Nothing in Luke 21, on its own terms, requires a worldwide referent.
It is also significant that Luke 21 does not contain the Noah or Lot comparisons. Those interpretive frameworks appear elsewhere.
By contrast, Luke 17 does include both the Noah and Lot comparisons, explicitly used to emphasize the suddenness and unexpectedness of the revealing of the Son of Man. In that same context, Luke 17 also includes urgency and non-retreat language: when the decisive moment arrives, the response is not to return to one’s house for possessions (Luke 17:31).
This closely parallels the language found in Matthew 24:17, where those in Judea are instructed not to go back into their homes to retrieve belongings in the context of the abomination of desolation and the ensuing flight.
If Jesus had already told them to flee when they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies (Luke 21:20-21), then praying to be counted worthy makes perfect sense. Not everyone who heard Jesus’ words would remain faithful, recognize the signs, trust His warning, and act accordingly. Being counted worthy could refer to being among those faithful disciples who heed His instructions and thus escape the coming days of vengeance to fulfill all that is written and wrath on this people
Additionally, The force of the “worthy” argument also depends on the manuscript tradition being followed. In some textual variants the emphasis is not “being counted worthy” in a moral/judicial sense, but more along the lines of “having strength/ability to escape.” - a different Greek word all together. That shifts the focus away from moral qualification and toward endurance or capacity in the midst of events.
It’s included in the Noah story, but that doesn’t mean that’s the main point of Jesus’ comparison. Jesus doesn’t say - “stay awake for it will come upon the whole earth under heaven”.
the purpose is suddenness and unexpectedness. per vs 42 - stay awake because you do not know the day.
Would dead Thessalonians be granted Relief from persecution at the coming of Christ? No they are dead. They weren’t suffering persecution by their oppressors after death. They received relief from persecution at death in that scenario. The souls aren’t given relief from persecution in revelation 6, so not sure how that’s applicable. They could still be avenged, I agree.
However, Paul tells the Thessalonians relief/freedom/liberation from their persecution is given AT the revealing of Christ from heaven.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
I'm not saying it's necessarily the main point of comparison, but it's a point of comparison. He did not specifically point out that the flood killed everyone outside of the ark for nothing. But, you think He did.
That's part of His point, yes. Maybe even the main point. But, not His only point. But, as for the suddenness and unexpectedness, it doesn't fit what happened in 70 AD. The idea is that no one would know the day or hour of His coming until He actually came. In the case of unbelievers, no one would know His wrath is approaching and getting near until it actually occurred. That's the idea of Him coming unexpectedly as a thief, as He referenced in verse 43 and as other scriptures talk about in reference to His coming. That is not what happened in 70 AD. The destruction of Jerusalem and the temple was not something that unbelievers had no idea was coming until it happened. Maybe some thought God would deliver them despite the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem and despite all signs pointing to its imminent destruction, but certainly some understood what was about to happen, so it can't be described as having come totally unexpectedly and suddenly as a thief.
You just don't get it. What is Jesus described as doing when He is revealed? Taking vengeance on unbelievers. How can you think that can't relate to Revelation 6:9-11 where it has the souls of dead believers asking how long it would be until their blood was avenged? How can you think that Christ's future second coming won't accomplish the vengeance that Paul told the Thessalonians they would have? It will. Your thoughts are so focused on the past, that you have no understanding of God's plans for the future at all.
You’re treating all of Matthew 24:36–25:46 as though its primary purpose is to provide additional descriptive details about the nature and scope of the coming of the Son of Man. But that is not how these passages function.
The comparisons and parables from Matthew 24:36–25:13 are primarily exhortational. The repeated emphasis is:
- “Stay awake” (24:42)
- “Be ready” (24:44)
- “Keep watch” (25:13)
Likewise, the parable of the talents is primarily about faithful stewardship and accountability during the master’s absence. Its focus is not on the geographical scope of the coming, the destruction of unbelievers worldwide, or the end of the physical universe. The lesson is that servants are expected to be faithful with what has been entrusted to them.
Even the Sheep and Goats passage is chiefly concerned with the basis of judgment—how people treated “the least of these.” The emphasis is on mercy, compassion, and ethical conduct toward others. It is not primarily a discourse on the timing, geography, or mechanics of the judgment itself.
So when you say, “none of this happened in 70 AD because there was no judgment of all people, not everyone was taken or left, not all unbelievers were killed, etc.,” you’re assuming that these comparisons and parables are intended to answer those questions. But that’s the very point that needs to be demonstrated, not assumed.
Most of these passages are exhortations to readiness, faithfulness, stewardship, and mercy. They are not primarily concerned with defining the extent of the judgment or providing a detailed prophetic chronology. Therefore, appealing to them as proof that Matthew 24 cannot refer to the events surrounding Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70 simply begs the question. Before those conclusions can be drawn, you must first establish that these passages are intended as descriptive predictions of a global end-of-world event rather than exhortational illustrations built around the coming being discussed.
So again, if you want to discuss exhortations for how believers are to live, I’ll put more weight on the parables. If you want to discuss what events the disciples generation would live through, I’ll put more weight on vs 1-34.
I think you’re reading more into the analogies than Jesus actually states.
First, “no one knows the day or hour” does not mean “no one can know that the event is near.” In the very same discourse Jesus gives signs and tells His disciples:
- “when you see all these things, know that it is near, at the doors” (Matt. 24:33).
Second, the Noah comparison does not say that every individual on earth was equally unaware. The emphasis is that people were carrying on with ordinary life—eating, drinking, marrying—until judgment overtook them. The point is suddenness and unpreparedness, not the impossibility of prior warnings.
Likewise, in the first century there was abundant warning. Jesus predicted Jerusalem’s destruction. Christians were told what signs to watch for and were instructed to flee when they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies. Yet many Jews still believed God would protect the city and Temple. Historical sources show widespread expectations of divine deliverance rather than destruction. When the catastrophe came, it overtook those who rejected the warnings, unexpectedly.
Third, your argument actually creates a tension within Matthew 24 itself. On the one hand, you argue that Jesus’ coming must be completely unforeseeable. On the other hand, Jesus spends much of the chapter giving signs by which His disciples could recognize that the event was near. The text itself distinguishes between knowing the event is approaching and knowing the precise day and hour. In other words, not knowing the day or hour does not contradict knowing the general timeframe.
Finally, the thief analogy doesn’t require that no one has been warned. A homeowner may know thieves exist, may know a theft is possible, and may even know the season of danger. The point is that he does not know the precise time. That is exactly how the analogy functions in Matthew 24:43.
So the question is not whether warnings existed before AD 70—they clearly did. The question is whether the generation that experienced those events knew the precise day and hour. Neither Jesus’ disciples nor Jerusalem’s inhabitants knew the exact day and hour the judgment would arrive. Therefore, simply pointing out that believers recognized signs and fled does not disprove the AD 70 interpretation; it actually reflects the distinction Jesus himself makes between recognizing the approach of an event and knowing its exact timing.
No one knew the exact day nor hour of the temples destruction, while they did know the general time frame - this generation will not pass away.
In genesis, the purpose of the flood was to wipe out humanity. Jesus is not “specifically pointing that out”. That’s literally just the story of the flood. What Jesus specifically points out is that they were eating, drinking, marrying, etc… when the flood took them away unaware.
It is the main point. Matthew 24:36-25:13 is an exhortation to “watch and stay awake, for you do not know the day or hour”.
So I understand you correctly, are you arguing that unbelievers in Judea knew the exact day and hour the temple was to be destroyed, prior to its destruction?
I’m not talking about “avenging”. I’m talking about being granted relief from persecution.
Your argument doesn’t address Paul’s statement that the Thessalonians would be granted relief from persecution AT the revealing of Christ.
Your appeal to revelation 6 doesn’t address that Paul told the Thessalonians they would receive relief from persecution AT the revealing of Christ. Are the souls in revelation 6 , who were told to rest, still being persecuted by their oppressors?
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
Are we reading the same text? This is what I'm reading...
Matthew 24:38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.
Jesus specifically points out that "the flood came and took them all away". Why would you deny this? And He immediately followed that up by saying " so also will the coming of the Son of Man be", implying that, just as all unbelievers were killed by the flood in Noah's day, all unbelievers will be killed at the coming of the Son of Man. As other scriptures like 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 confirm.
I said I agree that is the main point, but it's not the only point.
You do not understand me correctly. I am arguing that what Jesus indicated by saying it would be like the coming of a thief is that unbelievers in particular would have no idea at all that it was coming until it actually happened. But, that was not the case in 70 AD. There were plenty of signs that even unbelievers could recognize ahead of time that the destruction of Jerusalem was coming. It did not catch them completely off guard once it happened, which does not fit the description of His coming being compared to the coming of a thief in the night.
Right. You're talking about something different than what the text actually talks about. It refers specifically to Jesus taking vengeance. We see in Revelation 6:9-11 a description of physically dead believers asking how long it would be until their blood was avenged. So, the vengeance did not take place before they died as a way of providing relief from persecution. It comes later when Jesus comes to take vengeance on all unbelievers. He will take vengeance by destroying living unbelievers at that time, but also will cast all unbelievers from all time into the eternal fire for eternal punishment at that time (Matthew 25:31-46).
The relief would come in the form of vengeance, which did not have to occur before they died, as Revelation 6:9-11 shows. That's your assumption, but Revelation 6:9-11 shows that those who are physically dead will finally receive justice and have their blood avenged in the future when Jesus returns.
You just don't get it. I'm not sure that you want to get it. I'm not going to go round and round on this. You either get it or you don't. As of now, you don't.
Earburner
Well-Known Member
I would that ALL should read Rev. 6:9-11 from the KJV, and then understand what exactly the "white robe" is that all did receive LONG AFTER their mortal death.
9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.
Q1. Is not the White Robe symbolic of the Holy Spirit of God?
Ans. Indeed He is! After the death and resurrection of our Lord and Savior, the Holy Spirit is the very vehicle of the Gift of eternal life, of which we have NOW for those who are Born again. 1 John 5:13.
Q2. When do converted Christians RECEIVE the Gift of the Holy Spirit? BEFORE mortal death, or AFTER?
Ans. Before mortal death.
Q3. Do you see a problem here, as to who and when the people under the altar were?
Ans. They are NOT believers in the risen Christ who died under the NC, but rather they are all those who were of faith and had died under the OC.
Now you can know who the symbolic 144,000 really are. Rev. 7:1-8.
9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.
Q1. Is not the White Robe symbolic of the Holy Spirit of God?
Ans. Indeed He is! After the death and resurrection of our Lord and Savior, the Holy Spirit is the very vehicle of the Gift of eternal life, of which we have NOW for those who are Born again. 1 John 5:13.
Q2. When do converted Christians RECEIVE the Gift of the Holy Spirit? BEFORE mortal death, or AFTER?
Ans. Before mortal death.
Q3. Do you see a problem here, as to who and when the people under the altar were?
Ans. They are NOT believers in the risen Christ who died under the NC, but rather they are all those who were of faith and had died under the OC.
Now you can know who the symbolic 144,000 really are. Rev. 7:1-8.
Last edited:
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
I see a problem with your view. If the white robes represent the receiving of the gift of the Holy Spirit, then Old Testament saints would have received the permanent gift of the Holy Spirit on the day when Jesus died, which is when He told the thief on the cross that he would be with Him in paradise. You seem to be suggesting that you believe that the timing of the fifth seal coincides with the timing of Christ's death on the cross. Is that correct?
Similar threads
