Understanding Parable and Allegory in God's Word

farouk · Nov 4, 2019

Naomi25 said:
It did apply to myself; I used to be a Dispensationalist. But the Spirit bought me great discomfort on that doctrine and pushed me to look for it in scripture. It wasn't there...as you know. However, the more I read, studied and prayed about it, I found Pre-Millennialism wasn't there either.
The fact that you, apparently, can't even engage in a decent conversation about the topic with a sister in Christ, speaks more to you than me, I'd wager.
Could I be wrong? Sure...and surprising or not, I'm completely open to that notion. God might not be done leading me. However, I'm not going to persuaded by arrogant men who have more time for their own opinions than for another humble searcher.
If you want to disagree with me biblically, then do so as I present my case. If you are just going to start out a conversation with "I'm right and you're SO wrong I laugh at the length of your pathetic case"...then I have to shake my head at the irony of everything you said above. Look in a mirror, huh?

You're really very rude for a Christian, did you know that?
But, no...it's not hot air. Is it hot air to claim that the Pentateuch needs to be read as history and not poetry? Is it hot air to suggest it's important to read Daniel as apocalyptic rather than a psalm? Is it hot air to say that the epistles need to be read as letters rather than prophecy?
Of course its not, and anyone who's been through Primary school has been taught that. Genre matters. If you ever tried to hand in poetry for what was supposed to be a book report...you would have failed. And so, suggesting that approaching each bible book as the genre it was written, is ONLY hot air if you failed English.
And I didn't accuse you of HIDING anything.

But Early Church Fathers...those are cool, you trust them to be right. Except when you don't...which seems to be a matrix that only you can figure out. Oh...and based on the fact that they were Pre-Mill AND needed to be championing it at all time. Poor Justin...he just HAD to say there were other valid views, didn't he? Now he's out.

I'm sorry...you think Christ is NOT reigning now? You think I didn't "back it up" with scripture? Then...what about all the scripture? Is it cool to ignore scripture?

that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, -Ephesians 1:20–22

I'm sorry, but how does this imply Christ's reign is only in the future? Where does it say "will put all things under his feet"? It doesn't, it says "he put"...present tense. 'When he raised him from the dead'...that's not future, that was 2000 years ago. "This age and the age to come"...also present tense, just ongoing into the next one...

Please tell me HOW the above verse teaches only a FUTURE reign of Christ?

who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him. -1 Peter 3:22

"IS at"...not 'will be at'. "Having BEEN subjected to him"....not 'will be subjected to him. Again, please tell me HOW this teaches only a future reign?

Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, -Philippians 2:9

"God HAS highly exalted him"...not 'God will highly exult him'. "Bestowed on him"...not 'will bestow'.
HOW does this teach only a future reign?

Except, Matt 25:31-34 isn't talking about reigning...its talking about judgement. And yes, that IS future. But sitting in judgement is not the same as the verses that TELL us outright that Christ IS ruling and reigning now.
Again, Matt 26:28-29 is not speaking of reigning, just of being reunited with his bride. Which is the messianic banquet. Still not talking about ruling NOW, and still doesn't contradict the verses I gave above.
Luke 22:29-30...nope...still not speaking of his current reign (or not reign). It's speaking of the the future age, eternity, when we shall receive our rewards in the presence of Christ. YOu will note, however, that Christ says that he will give us our rewards, just as the Father 'assigned to him a Kingdom'. Not "will assign". Again, not proof that Christ is NOT reigning now.
1 Cor 15:50...now you're starting to list verses that outright support my view! This tells us ONLY that the corruptible cannot inherit the Kingdom. Two clear points here: one, Christ can totally reign over this Kingdom, as he was the firstfruits to receive the incorruptible body...plus, you know, he's Christ. Plus, the verse says INHERIT. This would only be a problem if the Kingdom that Christ reigns over is to end before his second coming. The fact is, we know that 'his Kingdom will last forever'. In other words, all this verse is saying is; we gotta get the upgrade before the Kingdom is fully consummated. Before we get heaven...paradise on earth, we must pass through death or the return of Christ. Again...sorry, this verse does NOT contradict the verses that tells us Christ reigns NOW.
Psalm 2...ah...you do know that this was written BEFORE Christ came, died and was resurrected, yeah? Therefore any 'future reign' it speaks of...would be future...of course. You can't use this to try and prove what future. For the OT prophets, future was future. They saw all comings as one. They did not have the special revelation that let them know Christ would have 2 comings. Sorry.
Rev 5:10...this is not even talking about Christ! Its speaking of his Church being 'kings and priests'...which is interesting, really, as there are other verses that can prove that this is happening now (1 Pet 2:9). But still....NOT about Christ and his ruling status.
Rev 11:14-18...nice verse, but still not what you need. Remember in the Lord's prayer how we pray "your Kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven"? This is what this verse is about...the moment when Christ's will is done everywhere; heaven, earth, in all hearts and minds. This does NOT say he is not currently ruling, just that there is a time coming when heaven is bought to earth in a way it is not currently.\

Now...again. You've made some fairly hefty and rude accusation at me. And while my sarcasm always leaps to the fore when that happens, I am trying my darndest to stick solely to the argument at hand. And the argument is this: I have several verses that OUTRIGHT tell us that Christ rules now. You appear to only have verses that you BELIEVE tells us that it is yet future. None of them, I'm sorry, contradicts or casts doubts on the verses that speak to it outright.

I think 1 Corinthians 10.32 is profoundly thought-provoking as to the three entities in the world...

How are you doing, @Naomi25 ? good to see you.

Naomi25 · Nov 5, 2019

farouk said:
I think 1 Corinthians 10.32 is profoundly thought-provoking as to the three entities in the world...

How are you doing, @Naomi25 ? good to see you.

Hi farouk, yes, I'm good thanks! How about yourself?
I think 1 Cor 10:32 is good as well, although I see it pointing to 'unsaved' Gentiles and Jews...for all who was part of those two groups but are now in Christ, must, by definition, be part of the church, where Christ has broken down the wall of separation; we are now one people in Christ.
The concern I have with Dispensationalists, is that they portray the bible as having a separate 'plan' for Israel. The problem with that is the only 'future' mention about Israel...and that is the nation state of unbelievers, is talked about in Romans 9-11. In these chapters we see that God may very well choose to bring unbelieving Israel back to Christ, but Paul is clear; it will be by grafting them back onto the tree. The tree where all Christians are one in Christ. That means that every Jewish person...even in the future, who comes to Christ, will be part of the Church; the body of Christ.
In my view; this is not enough information to build a whole doctrine around Israel's glorious and separate future from the Church.

farouk · Nov 5, 2019

Naomi25 said:
Hi farouk, yes, I'm good thanks! How about yourself?
I think 1 Cor 10:32 is good as well, although I see it pointing to 'unsaved' Gentiles and Jews...for all who was part of those two groups but are now in Christ, must, by definition, be part of the church, where Christ has broken down the wall of separation; we are now one people in Christ.
The concern I have with Dispensationalists, is that they portray the bible as having a separate 'plan' for Israel. The problem with that is the only 'future' mention about Israel...and that is the nation state of unbelievers, is talked about in Romans 9-11. In these chapters we see that God may very well choose to bring unbelieving Israel back to Christ, but Paul is clear; it will be by grafting them back onto the tree. The tree where all Christians are one in Christ. That means that every Jewish person...even in the future, who comes to Christ, will be part of the Church; the body of Christ.
In my view; this is not enough information to build a whole doctrine around Israel's glorious and separate future from the Church.

Romans 9 does not say that the church existed prior to Pentecost.

(I have a lot to be thankful for....)

bbyrd009 · Nov 5, 2019

Davy said:
I see no problem with how Apostle Paul explained it...

i guess most ppl read Paul to their destruction though, huh

Davy said:
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

man, are you prolly not going to like the way i interpret that lol; flesh thinking cant, and those relying on blood (under the law, almost everything requires blood) can't, surely. I desire mercy, not sacrifice

Davy said:
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Let the dead bury the dead, eh? So maybe i am the last trumpet for someone today, who knows

53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

We have a perfectly acceptable idiom for "put on" that imo might be applied here, Davy, fwiw...this is the "allegory" thread i think right

54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
KJV

boy, and only God knows when that will happen in someone, huh. Man, i love the Bible!

Davy said:
Those of the "resurrection of life" will go through both changes at Christ's return.

the one that you cannot Quote, not anywhere, Davy. No offense ok but imo your desires and expectations are showing bro

Davy said:
At the end of the Rev.20 "thousand years", when the books are opened, only those whose names are found in the book of life will go through the 2nd change then, and be saved unto Christ. The mention of a 1st resurrection unto Christ automatically implies at least one more later.

am i some noob, attending a lecture here Davy? I like lectures, and often attend them ok, dont get me wrong bro; but of my own accord, ok? I wish (pray) the best for you, and i hope you have a good day bro

bbyrd009 · Nov 5, 2019

Naomi25 said:
Wait...you CAN engage in decent, civil conversation WHEN its something you deem worthy and correct?
My goodness...how...decent of you. And not at all manipulative or narcissistic.
Well, since you've so decisively put me in my place, including all that spankingly honest bible exegesis where you most certainly did NOT read into it or wedge gaps in all over, I suppose I'll take my chit-chat elsewhere. I'm sure I can be abused somewhere else just as well.

why leave, when you are doing such good stuff right here?

Davy · Nov 5, 2019

Naomi25 said:
You responded, yes. Satisfactorily...nope. Suggesting a bunch of verses that speak of the next age means Christ is NOT ruling now, doesn't actually do much for your argument. It tells us that Christ reigns THEN as well as NOW, but should that surprise us?
Look...unless you can, in some way, provide reasonable doubt as to why those verses cannot be taken at face value, I'm just going to assume the above; that Christ reigns now, and forever. Because that's what my bible says.

I've been over a lot of Scripture that I've posted that proves Christ's reign begins at His 2nd coming. I don't know which verses you refer to.

Ug. This is not something I wanted to get into in depth, because its a big conversation. I'll see if I can keep it fairly succinct.
In the OT, we see that the 'Kingdom of God' was, in fact, Israel and God was their "King", who allowed them to inhabit his land. (Isaiah 43:15, 44:6 , Exodus 19:5-6, Psalm 114:1-2, Ezekiel 36:5). But, as we know, Israel eventually wanted a human King (1 Sam 8:7), but these kings were only ruling on behalf of God (2 Chron 9:8). We see David saying: “And of all my sons, (for the LORD hath given me many sons,) he hath chosen Solomon my son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of the LORD over Israel.” 1 Chron 28:5. In other words, God had selected and allowed David and Solomon to rule over his Kingdom.
When we continue on through the OT, and we come to Israel's dark days and evil kings, we see this:
“…and thou, profane wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Remove the diadem, and take off the crown: this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high. I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.” Ezekiel 21:25-27
....

I showed you Genesis 49:10 which goes with Ezekiel 21 about Christ inheriting David's throne.

Gen 49:10
10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.
KJV

"Shiloh" is put there as a title for Christ Jesus. The royal sceptre will not depart from Judah until Jesus (Shiloh) comes, and unto Him shall the gathering of the people be, which is a pointer to Jesus' 2nd coming. The diadem in Ezekiel 21 is about the same matter. God said He would overturn it three times, and then no more until Jesus comes Who's right it is. The promise to David that there would always be one of his seed to sit upon his throne for all generations is the same matter.

What you (and most) have been wrongly taught about it is that since Zedekiah in Jeremiah's day David's throne has no longer been on earth. That of course contradicts those Scriptures in question, because their subject matter is that it is an 'earthly' throne that's to last through all generations until Jesus comes, and then it will go to Him, which is about the promise that He is to inherit it per Luke 1. Matthew 25:31-32 reveals He does not take that throne until His 2nd coming, not His 1st coming. His 1st coming was to die on the cross, His 2nd coming is to rule:

Zech 9:9-10
9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from river even to the ends of the earth.
KJV

Verse 9 above is about Jesus' 1st coming to die on the cross. Verse 10 is about Jesus' 2nd coming to reign. That's what that idea of his dominion being from sea to sea, etc., is about. Your theory pushes that reign backwards after His 1st coming, but before His 2nd coming. God's Word does not show that.

You're still missing the point that 1 Cor 15 makes plainly. Christ "'must reign' until he has put ALL enemies under his feet. The last enemy is death."
Death is defeated AT his return. Which means he is currently reigning, subjecting all those powers and authorities and rulers to himself. In other words: Christ is even now bending those he has already defeated to his will. And AT his return, the final enemy will also be made to yell 'uncle'. As I've said before, all the verses you have provided speak of Christ's ongoing reign, of the expectation that final victory and consummation will be at his return. The problem with these verses is that they don't speak to his current status, and certainly don't contradict that he is, or could be, reigning right now as well. The thing about an 'eternal kingdom', is that is can go for a long time, especially when we have verses that speak of Christ reigning in "this age and the one to come". That sort of implies, or outright screams, that his reigning happens now, as well as then.

I'm not the one missing the point. Actually our Lord Jesus defeated death for us on His cross (Hebrews 2:14). His death on the cross sealed it. But the devil and death are not yet destroyed, obviously. One must study God's Word to know when He promised that destruction would happen.

In Revelation 19:20 we are shown the beast and false prophet are destroyed, but not the dragon (Satan). In Revelation 20 we are shown Christ and His elect reigning over the nations and the devil is still not yet destroyed during that whole thousand years period. Only at the end of that thousand years is the devil and the wicked destroyed, in final death and hell are cast into the lake of fire. The reason why death is NOT destroyed yet right at Christ's 2nd coming is because like I showed you, the "second death" is still pending for the unsaved after Jesus' return.

Zech 14:16-17
16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.

17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
KJV

That Zechariah 14 Chapter starts off about Christ's return on the "day of the Lord". Then millennium events are shown, like the Mount of Olives being split, and the river of the waters of life flowing then (Zechariah 14:4-8). The above verses of those left who came against Jerusalem is about those of the armies that will come up against Jerusalem on the last day of this present world, on the "day of the Lord" when our Lord Jesus returns. There will... still be the unsaved with us after Jesus' 2nd coming. That is what that shows. So do these following Scriptures...

Rev 22:14-15
14 Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
KJV

Those events actually belong to the thousand years timing of Rev.20. Those outside the gates of the city are the unsaved wicked, those of the "resurrection of damnation". They are not destroyed yet at Christ's 2nd coming. They will still be here throughout Christ's thousand years reign with His elect recorded in Revelation 20.

Davy · Nov 5, 2019

bbyrd009 said:
i guess most ppl read Paul to their destruction though, huh

man, are you prolly not going to like the way i interpret that lol; flesh thinking cant, and those relying on blood (under the law, almost everything requires blood) can't, surely. I desire mercy, not sacrifice
Let the dead bury the dead, eh? So maybe i am the last trumpet for someone today, who knows
We have a perfectly acceptable idiom for "put on" that imo might be applied here, Davy, fwiw...this is the "allegory" thread i think right
boy, and only God knows when that will happen in someone, huh. Man, i love the Bible!

the one that you cannot Quote, not anywhere, Davy. No offense ok but imo your desires and expectations are showing bro
am i some noob, attending a lecture here Davy? I like lectures, and often attend them ok, dont get me wrong bro; but of my own accord, ok? I wish (pray) the best for you, and i hope you have a good day bro

I have to laugh, sorry, because there's no way to take you seriously.

Davy · Nov 5, 2019

Naomi25 said:
You're still missing the "my Kingdom is not of this earth" part.
Seriously; look up the verses that speak of "The Kingdom of God". All the times Jesus warned those who struggled to 'enter' it. All the parables he compared it too. It was never meant to be a 'literal Kingdom'. You enter it by faith; redemption through grace. It grows and spreads with the gospel, not with invasions and territories being taken. It changes the world through preaching, not military might.
The Kingdom has always been the Church on the earth. The only 'Literal' we can or should expect, is in the next Age, where the new heavens and earth and all people within it, declare the glory of God with one voice.

I'm not missing what our Lord Jesus said about His Kingdom not being of this present world. The Greek for "world" in John 18:36 is 'kosmos', meaning an orderly arrangement, not the earth. His Kingdom will... be established literally upon this earth at His 2nd coming, for that is what Zechariah 14 and many other OT Scriptures show. Even Acts 1 reveals His 'literal' return to this earth. The heavenly dimension is going to be opened up right here, on earth. That's what you've missed from Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15. So there's still a lot yet to happen on this earth involving His future Kingdom. But as I said, which you mocked by saying I missed the point, is that today Christ's Kingdom is manifested only in Spirit via our spirit by Faith, which is basically what you've said. A Church building is just materials of this world, not of The Spirit, so let's not use grass and wood as the Kingdom established through believers today. I know what Paul said in Ephesians 2 about the foundation, and I've never... ever... disagreed with that. So don't go putting false words in my mouth to try to prove men's leaven ideas not written in God's Word, as if Jesus were ruling over the nations right now, which is man's lie.

If the Kingdom of God is entered through faith and spread via preaching of the Gospel, then when the bible speaks of believers becoming 'alive in Christ', then we most certainly are a part of the Kingdom. Now.
However, you seem to be incapable of seeing that Christ's Kingdom has no end. That's clearly biblical, right? Now, if the bible teaches that through faith, through spiritual regeneration, we are part of the Kingdom NOW, how do we explain the fact that there IS coming an end? Do we say that has to be the end of one Kingdom and the beginning of another; which is what you seem to favor. The problem with that is, its not biblical. Jesus' Kingdom HAS no end. Therefore, all we can say is that the Kingdom comes in two phases, just as Christ himself will. In THIS AGE, the Kingdom is made up of believers, spiritually new in Christ, as Christ himself rules and reigns. After the defeat of the last enemy at his return, the Kingdom moves into a new phase, THE AGE TO COME, where we physically inherit the Kingdom with our new, imperishable bodies.

There you go again with your bad habit of trying to put words in other people's mouths.

Where did I ever say Christ's Kingdom has an end? Why would you even think such ignorance ideas? Is that your way of trying to use a pry bar to discredit, by trying to pry open my mouth and squeeze your own words in?

If you cannot understand that Christ's Kingdom is more than just Faith and promises, then you show you don't understand a whole... lot of God's Holy Writ. Did you miss what Apostle Paul taught in Galatians 3 about those of Faith inheriting with faithful Abraham, and have become the children of Abraham? I'll bet you 'kingdom now' folks really don't like that connection of Christ's Church to Abraham at all, and probably steer clear of the Gal.3 and Rom.4 Chapters. You see, you really do... still believe in Dispensationalism, because Darby et al taught a separation between Israel as a kingdom and the Church at Jesus' return. That's why they don't like that Galatians 3 linking Christ's Church to Abraham's inheritance, which is Israel's inheritance. They have trouble with Ephesians 2:11-13 too, which is about Gentiles inheriting the promises and covenants with Israel, which is why Paul used the title of "commonwealth of Israel" there.

So sure, I may be a nasty Amillennialist, but at least I can remain faithful to scripture. In my view, Christ's Kingdom has no end...just as the bible teaches.

Belay all that pumping yourself up, you definitely have not been all that faithful to Scripture, as I've already shown several times already. And you don't even know what you're talking about with that 'no end' idea.

Luke 1:33
33 And He shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of His kingdom there shall be no end.
KJV

Notice how His reign over the house of Jacob (i.e., Israel) is linked to His kingdom having no end. Is He reigning over the house of Jacob today???

Well, that's not entirely faithful to scripture either. Christ tells the disciples he saw Satan 'fall like lightning' as they went out and preached the gospel of the coming of the Kingdom. He also said that he 'bound the strong man' in order to plunder his house. Satan is the 'strong man' of this world, and yet Christ clearly says he has been bound so that Christ may call and keep his own.

Well yes I was faithful to Scripture, just not faithful to your leaven doctrines from men. Jesus saw Satan fall as lightning LONG AGO when Satan first rebelled against God in coveting His throne. That was in a time before Adam and Eve, not this present world. He said that when His Apostles were amazed because of the power given them to cast out devils. The idea of binding the strong man was about showing Who He is, God The Son with Power over the devil too! It doesn't mean He bound Satan at His 1st coming. Don't you remember what I showed you that Peter said after Christ's death and resurrection? --

1 Peter 5:8
8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
KJV

Of course you never responded to that verse! You instead are too busy making up stories from the leaven of men you've latched onto, liking saying that Satan has been bound at Christ's 1st coming when Apostle Peter clearly showed he hasn't.

Covered this in a previous post. But: please read Rev 20 and point out to me where it tells us Satan is bound from everything...

No, you never did cover the 1 Peter 5:8 verse. It contradicts what you tried to prove about the strong man.

Well, right back at ya. In point of fact, I'd have to say the most 'out of context' award goes to you. You dismiss the verses that tell us Christ reigns now, and instead try and prove your theory with verses that point to the future without dismissing or explaining how the verses that say NOW need to be dismissed in favor of them. Faithful bible interpretation would have to lead us to conclude, on ALL the passages, that Christ reigns now AND in the future. Which makes total sense, as his Kingdom is forever.

All you do is push the ideas from men's leaven you've learned. You show unfamiliarity with many Bible Scriptures I've posted, since you never responded to them, and but instead drew up slanders to post instead.

VictoryinJesus · Nov 5, 2019

Naomi25 said:
You're still missing the "my Kingdom is not of this earth" part.
Seriously; look up the verses that speak of "The Kingdom of God". All the times Jesus warned those who struggled to 'enter' it. All the parables he compared it too. It was never meant to be a 'literal Kingdom'. You enter it by faith; redemption through grace. It grows and spreads with the gospel, not with invasions and territories being taken. It changes the world through preaching, not military might.
The Kingdom has always been the Church on the earth. The only 'Literal' we can or should expect, is in the next Age, where the new heavens and earth and all people within it, declare the glory of God with one voice.

so much good there Naomi25... why go then to ‘Literal’ in “all the people within it, declare the glory of God with one voice.” Zephaniah 3:9 For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent.
A pure language...Spirit. Ephesians 6:18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit(of one consent), and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;

Romans 12:9-16 Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good. [10] Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another; [11] Not slothful in (The Father’s)business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord; [12] Rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer; [13] Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality. [14] Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not. [15] Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep. [16] Be of the same mind (of one consent)one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.

Davy · Nov 5, 2019

Naomi25 said:
Apocalyptic genre is not a "formula", its simply telling us how the book was written and therefore how it must be read.
....

It's man's formula, as it includes men's tethers on God's Word. We don't need a 'genre' formula devised by men to tell us how to study prophecy in God's Word. God gives us the right formula. We only need to study God's Word with discipline by The Holy Spirit, asking His help. God opens up His Word to those that ask Him directly, and for those that discipline theirselves His way in it. See, it doesn't take some formula by man to know that the river in Revelation 22:1 will be a literal river on earth in Christ's future Kingdom, simply because that River was once upon this earth before, as shown in Genesis 2. But folks on men's 'genre' formulas instead reject that river being literal, but instead want to make it just a symbolic metaphor, turning a wonderful and beautiful future event to occur on this earth into monster mash. So don't try to push your 'how it must be read' ideas here, they don't work obviously.

The reason only Christ could open the seals is because he was the only one found worthy 'in heaven, or upon the earth or under it'. This means that it is because of Christ's obedience and sacrifice on the cross that makes him worthy; that is why John sees a sacrificed lamb when he looks.

Yeah, and? You think I don't know why Jesus was worthy? You think His being part of The Godhead might have something to do with that too? Who else could die on the cross to forgive our sins?

This image is not telling us that that we can 'only understand the book' through the Spirit, or Christ. Yes, of course we rely on the Holy Spirits work....

There's no private interpretation like Peter said (2 Peter 1:20). What is revealed to us comes by The Holy Spirit, just as God's Word was written by The Holy Spirit. If you think you can understand it without... The Holy Spirit as Guide, then you are misleading yourself, and missing a lot of clarity in His Word, as showing us all things is His job, like Jesus told His (John 14:26). The reason for so much error with those who think... they can understand God's Word without The Holy Spirit is why there are so many leaven doctrines of men in today's Churches. Many of them don't ask God, and so they don't have ears to hear.

Oh, it 'has to be from some outside doctrine of men'? Didn't you just admit above that Revelation is not chronological? Except when YOU say it has to be, apparently.

I certainly did not agree with your views on Revelation. Your idea of what chronological means obviously does not mean the same thing it does to me. The Seals are chronological, just as the Trumpets are, and the Vials all are. Jesus returns on the latter part of the 6th Seal, on the 7th Trumpet, and on the 7th Vial. Can you figure that chronology out? I'm not going to do it for you, since you are so haughty.

However, as I've said before, there is an easy way to determine the timing of Rev 20 in conjunction with the rest of the book.

The word for "revelation" in Rev.1:1 means 'to take the cover off, to disclose'. So you cannot just leave the Book of Revelation up on a shelf while going back to previous New Testament Scripture. They have to be weighed together. This I find many not doing, including you.

And that is by looking at the other verses in the NT that speak of Christ's return. 1 Cor 15 tells us that Christ returns and deals death the final blow. And when that happens, he hands the Kingdom over to the Father.

That's not what the 1 Corinthians 15:23-28 Scripture reveals, as I've already shown...

1 Cor 15:24-26
24 Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25 For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet.
26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
KJV

See, you're not even following basic grammar in the above, and you claim you don't need The Holy Spirit to understand God's Word? At least follow grammar then. And grammar requires that you pick up that "when..." phrase in red that serves as a 'condition' for when the 'end' will come and the Kingdom delivered to The Father. Then the 25th verse is a detail on that when condition.

1. The end will come when... He shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
2. He must reign, til He has put all enemies under His feet.
3. Last enemy to be destroyed is death.

The grammar requires that order be followed, not the leaven doctrine you're pushing.

Number 1 is about Christ reigning over ALL His enemies first. That is not happening today. The Revelation 3:9 verse no doubt was given to show just how complete that reign over His enemies will be, and when, because it shows the "synagogue of Satan" being made to bow at the feet of Christ's elect. That has never... happened in today's world, and it will not until Jesus returns.

Number 2 is a repeat of the condition of the phrase in red. We are being told Jesus MUST first reign over ALL His enemies, even the ones today that reject Him, which is yet to happen.

Number 3 follows that reign over His enemies. And we need to keep Revelation 20 in mind with all this, which is giving this SAME order of events as here in 1 Cor.15.

We know from other passages that the Rapture and our new bodies are, yes, AT Christ's return. We also know that AT his return, he sits in judgement of all mankind. So, when we move back to Rev 20 and see that the judgement of mankind AND the defeat of death is AFTER the 1000 years.

Wrong. Jesus defeated death and the devil on His cross (Hebrews 2:14). But death and the devil are yet to be destroyed until the conditions He gave us in His Word... are met. You cannot change those written conditions.

The ONLY way you get around that is if you start adding extra judgement thrones or great big dirty gaps that are NOT in the scripture.
So whose got the dodgy doctrine...really?

I'm not trying to get around anything. I am simply staying with written Scripture, you are not.

As for the idea of judgments, there are many written of in God's Word. But they are not all the same. So your dirty bag of judgments is really just a mocking of God's Great White Throne Judgment when the wicked are cast into the future "lake of fire", as written in Rev.20, and after... Christ's "thousand years" reign with His elect.

The rest of your paragraph is just hot air, so I will not respond to it.

Death is absolutely not defeated when Jesus returns? Except....that's exactly what 1 Cor 15 says. Quite clearly. And the only way you wiggle around that is to insert things into the passage that simply aren't there.

I'll bet you've never understood Isaiah 25:5-9 where Apostle Paul was pulling from about death being swallowed up in victory. It's obvious also that you reject the Revelation 20 Chapter in order to serve your own tradition, just like what the Pharisees did.

Rev 20:6
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
KJV

Rev 20:14
14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
KJV

Strange how your leaven doctrine from men doesn't have room for that "second death" idea revealed by Christ in His Book of Revelation. Are we to think you don't really always listen to Him in all His Word? Yes, without a doubt.
That's what men's leaven doctrines do, they create tethers that limit what God's Word reveals in its simplicity, doing the very same thing that the blind Pharisees did at Jesus' 1st coming.

Also, Rev 20 states that "Death and Hades are thrown into the Lake of Fire". It does not say "the second death and Hades".

You need to back up your words. I just showed you the Revelation 20:14 verse which defined what the "second death" is. And since when is the word 'death' not... about the death that goes into the lake of fire in that verse? It is even defined... by that "second death" phrase there! Have you lost your mind? Don't be silly, the 1st death is death of our flesh bodies. The "second death" is the destruction of what's left into the future "lake of fire" of Rev.20:14 as written. Or don't you recall that there will also be a resurrection for the wicked like Jesus showed in John 5:28-29?

The misunderstanding you are having here is that you're not quite getting WHAT the first or second death is. Nor what the first resurrection is.
The first resurrection, we are told, are those who do not worship the beast. In other words, they stayed true to Christ. We are also told that those who experience the first resurrection will not experience the second death. What is the second death? The Lake of ....

You're adding some things to that Rev.20 Scripture that is not there. When the 1st resurrection happens with Jesus' return, and His elect reign with Him for the "thousand years", that is NOT the FINAL judgment. I know how you guys can't bring yourself to admit there is A THOUSAND YEARS period written there, but that is one of the places where your doctrine from men falls flat!

There is no getting around that "thousand years" period, and the fact that Revelation 20:14 shows the execution of the "second death" only happens AFTER... that "thousand years" reign by Christ and His elect. You instead are grossly butchering the Scripture in Rev.20.

bbyrd009 · Nov 5, 2019

Davy said:
I have to laugh, sorry, because there's no way to take you seriously.

ah, Davy, you made my day bro, ty
we ask little kids what should be done in certain cases for a little chuckle too, huh

Davy said:
I've posted that proves

Davy said:
I showed you

wow, you got it really bad huh Davy. I hope you are not a terminal case bro

Davy · Nov 5, 2019

Naomi25 said:
Only the damned go through the 1000 year reign of Christ and then will be judged? And, can you at all prove that from the text? Where is the 1000, or mention of different judgements?

I never said that. Got your pry bar out again I see. The nations that come up against the "camp of saints" in Rev.20:9 are the unsaved. Can you agree with that? So what of those among the nations that do not do that, but instead believe on Jesus? Also, the Rev.20 chapter is emphatic that Jesus and His elect of the 1st resurrection are ruling over all in those nations. Just the fact that Rev.20 reveals the deceived of the nations going up against the "camp of the saints" there is solid evidence that the wicked are yet to be destroyed during that "thousand years", and that Jesus and His elect will have rule over them for that "thousand years". Only at the end of that "thousand years" is when Satan is loosed one final time to deceive, and he leads those against the "camp of the saints", and God rains fire from Heaven down upon those and then they are destroyed. It's all written just as I've laid out here, in that order in Rev.20. So you know the drill, why then do you reject this??? Who has bewitched you away from that order in Rev.20?

In point of fact, the only two mentions of the judgement throne; Matt 25, which discusses the judgement of the living, and Rev 20 which discusses the judgement of all those who are already 'asleep', both of them list judging the just and unjust together.
So, I'd dearly love to know where you pull that gap and distinction from.

That thinking is kind of scattered. In John 5:28-29, our Lord Jesus showed on the day of His coming both... the "resurrection of life" and the "resurrection of damnation" will occur. I showed you about those left of the nations that come up against Jerusalem on the last day of this world, per Zechariah 14. That's enough evidence, along with the goats on the left hand, to show the wicked are still with us after Christ's return. Why do you have such a problem with that Scripture proof? The wicked ARE NOT all destroyed on the day of Christ's return! You need to understand that. I just covered the "second death" that Jesus revealed in Rev.20, and you acted like you understood it then. What's your problem?

Paul may well have been pulling that reference from Isaiah 25, but he was applying it to Christ's return, not after it.
And let me get this straight...you think that AT Christ's return ALL people...both good and evil...are 'changed'. In other words...they receive the bodies that they'll dwell in for eternity, be in heaven or hell.

What don't you understand about the "resurrection of damnation" being a resurrection??? Yes, all peoples still alive on earth at Jesus' 2nd coming are 'changed' to the "spiritual body" too. And I showed you in the Greek of 1 Cor.15 what changes Paul showed are required to have eternal life through Christ Jesus. That was a waste of time I guess, since that was more Scripture I presented that you never responded to. When Jesus returns, that will be the end of this present flesh body manifesting. The resurrection is not a new flesh body, as Paul showed in 1 Cor.15 it is a "spiritual body".

And yet, you still think there will be a 1000 year kingdom in which people are supposed to be able to sin and die?
How on earth does that even work?
And please tell me WHERE in scripture it tells us that after Christ's coming we get a second chance?
Again....just unbiblical ideas made up from assumptions. Not scripture.

Are you searching again with your pry bar, trying to play trip up phrases, just like what the Pharisees did? Where do you get that 'sin and die' thing? I never said that. I said nothing about a second chance either. I have stayed with the Scriptures, you have not, as you reject that "thousand years" of Rev.20. You have just confirmed your hypocrite status.

I don't disagree that AT Christ's return all will be given their new bodies. The problem comes for you when you think that we then, in this state, move on to a time period where people get a second chance and judgement has not happened.
Just as the scriptures tell us that ALL receive a new 'state', they also tell us that they "go into" eternal life or judgment. There is ZERO room in those verses for another time period where this other chance of improving their status is given. It's just NOT there.

I never said anything about being given new flesh bodies at Christ's return. I said a resurrection 'type' body. Paul taught the resurrection is about a "spiritual body". So he was specific. And that's what I agree with, not your idea of a new body, which there's no telling what you believe it is. The problem you have is with thinking the wicked must be destroyed at Christ's return, when God's Word does not teach that. Apostle Paul in Acts 24:15 said it was his hope there will be both a resurrection of the just and the unjust. Do you really think his hope for the unjust was only so they'd be destroyed in the lake of fire? You don't understand God's Plan of Salvation if you think that. And do you really think all souls in this world have had their opportunity to hear The Gospel of Jesus Christ? Maybe you think The Gospel was preached to all the pagan nations like ancient Egypt, Babylon, China, etc., long prior... to Christ's 1st coming??? You sound like a certain Church denomination I was raised in, the joke about one who dies and goes to heaven standing next to Peter, and asks, "what's that big wall there?" And Peter says, "that's for those of the Church of ______ who like to think they're the only ones here."

Ah, so you're resting all this on the fact that the 'throne judgement' of Matt 25 and the GWT judgment of Rev 20 HAVE to be different judgements. ....

Obviously so. And you should have recognized that also, instead using that Matt.25 Scripture by itself, as if that was the only Scripture example of events to occur after Christ's return!

You have? Hmmm...how could I have missed them all? Oh, it probably happened while I was staring at the glaring, great hole in the text you insisted upon to make your theory work.
Sorry, all you've shown is your talent in reading what is NOT there.

Then explain the Zechariah 14 existence of those left of the nations that came up against Jerusalem being required to come up to Jerusalem from year to year to worship The King, which is clearly for after Christ's return.

bbyrd009 · Nov 5, 2019

knowledge brings sorrow, indeed

amadeus · Nov 5, 2019

bbyrd009 said:
knowledge brings sorrow, indeed

Is sorrow equal to nothingness?

"And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing." I Cor 13:2

Jay Ross · Nov 5, 2019

Hello

Can I add my two cents worth here?

If I was to judge the above posts of @Davy and @Naomi25 then I would be more comfortable to recommend what Naomi25 has posted than with what Davy has posted.

That does not mean that Naomi25 and I agree on everything, it just means that Naomi25 and I have a lot more in common with respect to our own understanding of the end times and scripture.

I have tried to have a reasoned conversation with Davy, but the invalidating responses of Davy meant that the conversation could not continue.

On the other hand my conversations with Naomi25, where we have disagreed, have ended with us both generally agreeing to simply disagree with what the other has posted.

A lot of what Naomi25 has presented above I basically agree with, except for little tweaks here and there which, in the overall scheme of things, is fairly incidental to the End time story.

On the other hand, Davy's understanding of the timeline for the end time events to occur, I cannot agree with and the discussion becomes like head butting to see who will yield first with the same arguments/invalidations being presented by Davy.

Now both Davy and Naomi25 can hold to their own particular understanding, and we should respect that. For me, I have had to withdraw from having conversations with Davy. But with Naimi25, only occasionally have I felt the need to chip into the conversations she has been having with other, to present my point of view, where her POV may only be slightly different from mine.

Anyway, that is my 2 cents worth

farouk · Nov 5, 2019

VictoryinJesus said:
so much good there Naomi25... why go then to ‘Literal’ in “all the people within it, declare the glory of God with one voice.” Zephaniah 3:9 For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent.
A pure language...Spirit. Ephesians 6:18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit(of one consent), and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;

Romans 12:9-16 Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good. [10] Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another; [11] Not slothful in (The Father’s)business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord; [12] Rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer; [13] Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality. [14] Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not. [15] Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep. [16] Be of the same mind (of one consent)one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.

@VictoryinJesus

What tremendous words!

Zephaniah 3.9 is so memorable!

bbyrd009 · Nov 6, 2019

Davy said:
Christ inheriting David's throne.

You gotta love the part where he gets anointed but then has to avoid Saul for a period of time there huh

So, right after David God anointed, who was actually king over Israel? Did Israel have two kings?

bbyrd009 · Nov 6, 2019

amadeus said:
Is sorrow equal to nothingness?

"And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing." I Cor 13:2

Wow Amadeus, that is deep. My knee-jerk response to your first question was “no,“ but obviously “it is impossible to please God except by faith” has some Conditions huh

bbyrd009 · Nov 6, 2019

Jay Ross said:
Hello

Can I add my two cents worth here?

If I was to judge the above posts of @Davy and @Naomi25 then I would be more comfortable to recommend what Naomi25 has posted than with what Davy has posted.

That does not mean that Naomi25 and I agree on everything, it just means that Naomi25 and I have a lot more in common with respect to our own understanding of the end times and scripture.

I have tried to have a reasoned conversation with Davy, but the invalidating responses of Davy meant that the conversation could not continue.

On the other hand my conversations with Naomi25, where we have disagreed, have ended with us both generally agreeing to simply disagree with what the other has posted.

A lot of what Naomi25 has presented above I basically agree with, except for little tweaks here and there which, in the overall scheme of things, is fairly incidental to the End time story.

On the other hand, Davy's understanding of the timeline for the end time events to occur, I cannot agree with and the discussion becomes like head butting to see who will yield first with the same arguments/invalidations being presented by Davy.

Now both Davy and Naomi25 can hold to their own particular understanding, and we should respect that. For me, I have had to withdraw from having conversations with Davy. But with Naimi25, only occasionally have I felt the need to chip into the conversations she has been having with other, to present my point of view, where her POV may only be slightly different from mine.

Anyway, that is my 2 cents worth

Today is the last day of the rest of your life

Jay Ross · Nov 6, 2019

bbyrd009 said:
Today is the last day of the rest of your life

Really, you have lost me as I do not understand what you are attempting to say.

Understanding Parable and Allegory in God's Word

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Groper

Groper

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Groper

Well-Known Member

Groper

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Groper

Groper

Groper

Well-Known Member

Similar threads