Does anyone want to compare Old Testament Prophecy to Revelation?

[quietthinker]

You read the Bible as containing a plan on God's part to "solve the sin problem". Why is that? I read the Bible as an operation by God to descend from Heaven and spiritually advance in a plan to retake planetary territory from Lucifer. The doctrine of forgiveness comes up, and while forgiveness does not solve the fall of Satan, it is required for believers if they will be saved at the end of time.

I don't see the last judgement as a "solution to the sin problem", what is your justification for looking at it that way? After the last judgement Satan and demons will be "cast into a lake of fire or pit; destroyed". Individual people will either be saved, and live in Heaven, or lost to some other fate (eternal death, Hell).

You're going to get a final republican trail at the second coming on the last day of astronomical time, and you'll be either executed or pardoned. That's not a moral solution to the sin problem, that's cosmology.

Sin is the problem. It started with Lucifer and he attracted a goodly amount of angels into his orbit. It has further spread its malignant tentacles to the inhabitants of Earth. It requires a solution.....and how does God solve it?
Does God use force? ie, does he violate the free choice he has given his creatures by violence? It appears most believe so. Personally I do not think God uses violence to solve; primarily because violence doesn't solve, it births more violence.
God uses self sacrifice. This is the nature of God. We can see this in Jesus.

I see God's solution to the sin problem as out loving the opposition. Loving takes longer but ultimately it ensures sin will not raise its ugly head ever again in the Universe.
Sin has in itself the seeds of its own destruction. It's very nature is to implode. Satan and all his adherents will eventually self destruct.

 

[Truth7t7]

So you think Sodom will be destroyed again (and no other city) at the Coming? You once again disprove the concept of a global slaughter invented by Amill which is fully unscriptural. Even a prooftext of Amill proves the idea to be false. Keep using it. It only shows how Amill does not understand scripture.

2 Peter 3:10-13KJV
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

 

[Zao is life]

Because he does but Rev 2 and 19 tell us the rule over the nations takes place AFTER the Coming, which proves mortals remain alive after that Coming.

It does not prove that mortals remain alive after the 2nd coming of Christ.

Jesus told those who follow Him and lose all to follow Him that they will reign with Him, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. No one who was not in Christ when He returns will be found among that group of Gentiles+Jews-in-Christ (the 144,000, which are a multitude from among many nations, tribes and tongues, as in Revelation 7).

THE PROMISES TO THOSE WHO OVERCOME:-

Are not all the same:

He who overcomes will be given to eat of the Tree of Life, and will be given the right to eat of the hidden manna (Revelation 2:7, 17),

but only he who overcomes AND keeps His works TO THE END will be given power over the nations (Revelation 2:10-11, 26).

10 Do not at all fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the Devil will cast some of you into prison, so that you may be tried. And you will have tribulation ten days. Be faithful to death, and I will give you the crown of life.
11 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt by the second death.

In Revelation 20 only those who refused the mark of the beast and were beheaded are promised they will reign with Christ and that the 2nd death will have no power over them - i.e those who kept His works TO THE END, overcoming even when they were tried.

No promise of reigning over anyone else to all the rest who did not do the test (but died in Christ without having been tested - those who will nevertheless rise again from the dead on the day of the resurrection/rapture of the saints, but died in Christ without having ever been tested).

Resurrected saints who had never been tested are going to be tested at the close of the thousand years after Satan is released again, just like Adam was when Satan was released, before Adam died the first death.

Only Christ is immortal. Only Christ has eternal life in Himself. Scripture says so. Our eternal life is IN Christ, and our resurrected immortality will likewise be IN Christ, who alone is immortal, who alone has life in Himself.

Adam died the first death when he believed the lie that he would not die. Adam's death is passed to all men who are born sons of Adam.

There is a 2nd death. The 2nd death can only come to those who are already living forever, like Adam was; and only Christ has the keys of death and hades.

John 15: 5-6 I am the Vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, the same brings forth much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered. And they gather and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

Sorry but unless you do the test and pass, you are not reigning with Christ over anyone. The one who did the test will reign over you - over the twelve tribes of Israel. Those who did the test will reign over the rest. They will not reign over 'mortals'. There will be no mortals for them to reign over.

 

[Zao is life]

You read the Bible as containing a plan on God's part to "solve the sin problem". Why is that? I read the Bible as an operation by God to descend from Heaven and spiritually advance in a plan to retake planetary territory from Lucifer.

The doctrine of forgiveness comes up, and while forgiveness does not solve the fall of Satan, it is required for believers if they will be saved at the end of time.

The only reason why Satan "gained territory" is because of the fall of Adam, which brought about the sin problem, leading to Adam's death.

Your post above is tantamount to seeking to nullify the sacrifice of Christ, the reason why Christ humbled Himself in order to take on human flesh, why He bore the sins of many, died and rose again from the dead.

Your false claim above tramples the Son of God and His sacrifice underfoot.

What is your motive for this thread? Because the above post makes it appear like you have an agenda.

I don't see the last judgement as a "solution to the sin problem", what is your justification for looking at it that way? After the last judgement Satan and demons will be "cast into a lake of fire or pit; destroyed". Individual people will either be saved, and live in Heaven, or lost to some other fate (eternal death, Hell).

You're going to get a final republican trail at the second coming on the last day of astronomical time, and you'll be either executed or pardoned. That's not a moral solution to the sin problem, that's cosmology.

Another one.

Must be the last days. There is a massive war against the gospel of God going on.

 

[laBonhomme]

The only reason why Satan "gained territory" is because of the fall of Adam, which brought about the sin problem, leading to Adam's death.

Your post above is tantamount to seeking to nullify the sacrifice of Christ, the reason why Christ humbled Himself in order to take on human flesh, why He bore the sins of many, died and rose again from the dead.

Your false claim above tramples the Son of God and His sacrifice underfoot.

What is your motive for this thread? Because the above post makes it appear like you have an agenda.

Another one.

Must be the last days. There is a massive war against the gospel of God going on.

You read too much Carl Gustav Jung. Adam's fall isn't the only reason Satan has territory. Remember that other angels fell with him. God would have been grieved and Satan would have been at odds with him even if human beings hadn't fallen.

 

[ewq1938]

It does not prove that mortals remain alive after the 2nd coming of Christ.

It does:

Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite (Aorist tense verb with PRESENT tense meaning) the nations: and he shall rule (FUTURE tense verb) them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth (PRESENT tense verb) the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

https://www.blueletterbible. org/kjv/rev/19/15/t_conc_1186015

https://biblehub .com/interlinear/revelation/19-15.htm

(remove the spaces before .com and .org in the two links)


Here rule/poimaino is in the FUTURE tense meaning it will happen at some point AFTER the second coming and battle of Armageddon while treadeth/pateo is written in the PRESENT tense meaning it is happening during this second coming. The treading and smiting are happening at Armageddon but not the ruling which proves mortals will be alive after Armageddon is over. This proves the Premill position because indeed there is a future rule of people who were not slain during the second coming that Christ and his saints will rule over.


Amillennialism wouldn't even exist if the first person to teach it bothered to check the verb tenses in Revelation 19.


A second witness to this:

Rev 2:25 But that which ye have already hold fast till I come.

That is the second coming. Everything we read of next comes after the second coming:

Rev 2:26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:

After "the end" comes, there is given power over the nations to those that are overcomers. They will be given power over the mortal unsaved nations after Christ has returned not before it.

 

[Zao is life]

It does:

Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite (Aorist tense verb with PRESENT tense meaning) the nations: and he shall rule (FUTURE tense verb) them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth (PRESENT tense verb) the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

https://www.blueletterbible. org/kjv/rev/19/15/t_conc_1186015

https://biblehub .com/interlinear/revelation/19-15.htm

(remove the spaces before .com and .org in the two links)


Here rule/poimaino is in the FUTURE tense meaning it will happen at some point AFTER the second coming and battle of Armageddon while treadeth/pateo is written in the PRESENT tense meaning it is happening during this second coming. The treading and smiting are happening at Armageddon but not the ruling which proves mortals will be alive after Armageddon is over. This proves the Premill position because indeed there is a future rule of people who were not slain during the second coming that Christ and his saints will rule over.


Amillennialism wouldn't even exist if the first person to teach it bothered to check the verb tenses in Revelation 19.


A second witness to this:

Rev 2:25 But that which ye have already hold fast till I come.

That is the second coming. Everything we read of next comes after the second coming:

Rev 2:26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:

After "the end" comes, there is given power over the nations to those that are overcomers. They will be given power over the mortal unsaved nations after Christ has returned not before it.

I don't believe you read what I posted.

Whether now or after the resurrection, our immortality is in Christ, who alone is immortal, who alone has eternal life in Himself, who alone has the keys of death and hades.

"You will not surely die" implies that man (the creature's) eternal life is in himself and when Adam believed it, he died. Adam's death was the first death, and it spread to all mankind, because all sinned. Christ is the last Adam. His resurrection IS the resurrection and the life (He said "I am the resurrection and the life"). The 2nd death of any individual cannot come before that one has been resurrected from Adam's death.

I said those nations being ruled over refer to resurrected saints who will be ruled over by those who had been tested by trial and had kept His works to the end. The twelve tribes of Israel that Jesus promised His apostles would rule over in the regeneration = the nations being ruled over = resurrected saints.

Those who rebel after Satan is released again at the close of the thousand years are those who will experience the second death. Only those who had gone through trial and had overcome and kept His works to the end are promised to rule over the nations, and that the 2nd death will have no authority over them. What about the billions who over the last two millennia died in Christ who had never faced any test by the fire of tribulation?

 

[ewq1938]

I said those nations being ruled over refer to resurrected saints who will be ruled over by those who had been tested by trial and had kept His works to the end. The twelve tribes of Israel that Jesus promised His apostles would rule over in the regeneration = the nations being ruled over = resurrected saints.

The context of Rev 2 that I posted is about overcomers who will rule over others, who in context are not overcomers. It will be saved Christians ruling over unsaved people. This happens after the second coming according to that passage. Rev 19 also confirms a rule over the nations at the same timeframe using a future tense verb showing the rule takes place AFTER Armageddon. All of Amill avoid and sidestep these facts and the future tense verbs involved.

Two choices are here:

1. continue to believe in the doctrine currently held no matter what
2. accept what scripture says will happen

 

[No Pre-TB]

Sin is the problem. It started with Lucifer

Eh? Christ or the King of Babylon?

 

[quietthinker]

Eh? Christ or the King of Babylon?

what are you asking NP-T?

 

[No Pre-TB]

what are you asking NP-T?

Is Christ the Lucifer or is the King of Babylon?

 

[quietthinker]

Is Christ the Lucifer or is the King of Babylon?

why would you ask this?

 

[No Pre-TB]

why would you ask this?

You said sin started with Lucifer. Are you saying Christ sinned as he has the Lucifer or are you saying the King of Babylon was first to sin? I’m trying to understand your meaning

 

[Zao is life]

The context of Rev 2 that I posted is about overcomers who will rule over others, who in context are not overcomers. It will be saved Christians ruling over unsaved people.

In the Revelation we read that the one who overcomes will be given to eat of the Tree of Life, and will be given the right to eat of the hidden manna (Revelation 2:7, 17),

but only those who overcome AND keep His works TO THE END are also said to be given power over the nations (Revelation 2:10-11, 26).

The promises to those who overcome are not all the same. Here are the pertinent scriptures:-

"And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb, and because of the word of their testimony. And they did not love their soul to the death." -- Revelation 12:11

"Be faithful to death, and I will give you the crown of life. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt by the second death." -- Revelation 2:10-11.

"Do not at all fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the Devil will cast some of you into prison, so that you may be tried. And you will have tribulation ten days. Be faithful to death, and I will give you the crown of life. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt by the second death. -- Revelation 2:10-11

In Revelation 20, those who refused the mark of the beast and were beheaded are promised they will reign with Christ a thousand years, AND the 2nd death will have no power over them - i.e those who kept His works TO THE END, overcoming even when they were tried.

No promise of reigning over anyone else to all the rest who did not do the test (but died in Christ without having been tested, i.e all the rest of those who will rise again from the dead on the day of the resurrection/rapture of the saints.

So you see survivors of the Day of Christ in scripture. I don't see it:

".. at the revealing of the Lord Jesus from Heaven with the angels of His power, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God and who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power." -- 2 Thessalonans 1:8.

"If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,

The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascends up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receives the mark of his name." -- Revelation 14:9-11.

"And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." -- Revelation 13:8.

"And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh." -- Revelation 19:21: "Slain" = apokteínō = killed.

They will not live again until the thousand years are finished.

"I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the Word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast nor his image, nor had received his mark on their foreheads, nor in their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. The second death has no authority over these, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with Him a thousand years.

But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished." -- Revelation 20:4, 6 & 5.

In the millennium, resurrected saints who had died in Christ without being tested by not loving their lives to the death will be ruled over by those who kept His works to the end, who did not love their lives to the death - they will rule over "the twelve tribes of Israel".

At the close of the thousand years many of those who will be ruled over, like Adam in the Garden of Eden, believing that their immortality/eternal life is in themselves rather than in Christ who alone is immortal and who alone has eternal life in Himself, and believing the Satanic lie "You will not surely die", will be deceived by Satan, like Adam was, and like Adam in the Garden of Eden, seek to make themselves like the Most High ("You will be like God"), and so will join the Gog-Magog final rebellion.

They are not mortals. There are no mortals going into the millennium. You see survivors of the Day of Christ in scripture. I don't see it.​

 

[ewq1938]

They are not mortals. There are no mortals going into the millennium. You see survivors of the Day of Christ in scripture. I don't see it.​

The two passages speak of them, plus Rev 20 has the actual rule happening and afterward we see a huge amount of people deceived by satan who previously were the same people all the quoted passages referred to.

 

[quietthinker]

You said sin started with Lucifer. Are you saying Christ sinned as he has the Lucifer or are you saying the King of Babylon was first to sin? I’m trying to understand your meaning

I'm saying Lucifer is the father of sin.
The King of Babylon/ Tyre is Lucifer aka Satan. This is evident from both Ezekiel 28 and the later chapters of Revelation

 

[Davy]

Just out of social curiosity, I'm interested in asking your personal opinions on a subject that I've never heard anyone at all go into. There are a number of denominations and pastors local to me and on broadcast channels who have a good tight package, they run the Old Testament prophecy series over and over, and they have a series of Major Prophet based proofs that Jesus was the promised Messiah. The more evangelical the church, the more they engage in pulpit discourse on Revelation, which is also prophetic, but different from that of Isaiah for example, because in Isaiah Jesus had not yet come, and in Revelation He had already ascended. Just metaphysically, because the two revelatory experiences have to be different, comparing an Old Testament scribe to a New Testament evangelist who had met Him face to face to specifically John the Revelator, who saw Him in prophetic vision after HIs assentation, I can't imagine that a real spiritual difference didn't exist in prophetic experience before and after the Incarnation.

If someone theologically inclined understands that difference, I bet a lot of real hot point axes of debate would be squared up considerably. One that I can think of is of is the tribulation, another is the rapture, another is the seven last plagues. The mark of the beast seems like it would benefit from a rational lining up of human understandings vis the divine before and after the Life of Christ on Earth.

Finally, how do think that prophetic knowledge is qualitatively different from apostolic knowledge? How can you tell, do you get a different prayerful sense from the written gospels than you do from the epistles of the apostles and the Old Testament seers, or what?

Sorry, but I have to say it. What you have written is more in line with men's philosophy than aligned with Bible Scripture. It is wrong to look at those events using that philosophical method, as it will only lead to confusion.

Did you ever read the Book of Jude where Enoch, the 7th from the man Adam was quoted about Jesus' future 2nd coming with ten thousands of His saints? How did Enoch already know about that, since Jesus was not even born yet back then? And how could Moses speak of a Prophet (Jesus Christ) in Deuteronomy 18 that would be sent to the children of Israel that they will hearken to? And how could Jesus be referred to in Genesis 49 under the symbolic title of "Shiloh" when Jacob was giving prophecy to his 12 sons for the last days?

It sounds like you need to actually read... The Bible for yourself, instead of listening to commentaries about The Bible.

 

[laBonhomme]

Sorry, but I have to say it. What you have written is more in line with men's philosophy than aligned with Bible Scripture. It is wrong to look at those events using that philosophical method, as it will only lead to confusion.

Did you ever read the Book of Jude where Enoch, the 7th from the man Adam was quoted about Jesus' future 2nd coming with ten thousands of His saints? How did Enoch already know about that, since Jesus was not even born yet back then? And how could Moses speak of a Prophet (Jesus Christ) in Deuteronomy 18 that would be sent to the children of Israel that they will hearken to? And how could Jesus be referred to in Genesis 49 under the symbolic title of "Shiloh" when Jacob was giving prophecy to his 12 sons for the last days?

It sounds like you need to actually read... The Bible for yourself, instead of listening to commentaries about The Bible.

Enoch knows what he knows because he was translated, meaning taken into Heaven without seeing death.

Do you have a job, high school diploma, or service record? I just wondered, I don't sit around all day listening to Bible commentaries on YouTube and quoting men. If I did want to quote a chap, I'd cite him in a footnote anyway.

 

[Davy]

Enoch knows what he knows because he was translated, meaning taken into Heaven without seeing death.

That wrongly assumes that Enoch wrote the Book of Enoch while in Heaven after he was taken up, which of course is not true. Jude was quoting from the Book of Enoch, which you obviously do not realize.

Do you have a job, high school diploma, or service record? I just wondered, I don't sit around all day listening to Bible commentaries on YouTube and quoting men. If I did want to quote a chap, I'd cite him in a footnote anyway.

I have no respect for those who push men's philosophy, nor should any child of God that listens to His Word instead.

 

[laBonhomme]

That wrongly assumes that Enoch wrote the Book of Enoch while in Heaven after he was taken up, which of course is not true. Jude was quoting from the Book of Enoch, which you obviously do not realize.


I have no respect for those who push men's philosophy, nor should any child of God that listens to His Word instead.

You're wrongly assuming that I was referencing "The Book of Enoch" just because I know Enoch's name. I'd lower myself to the gutter standards of everyone else on the forum and mock you for knowing that the thing even exists, but I live in the world too and I've heard of it myself.

You guys are strange. I mean it's nice that you're all really careful to just quote texts and verses, but somehow, I just can't help but think that mixing scripture reference with absolutely anything and everything else that's also online, simply because you are online, and the bulletin board is also online causes a few too many non sequitur statements around the text boxes.

What is it with everyone else, I can compose a paragraph that contains a complete original idea, everyone else seems to just throw up a verse and then start making personal comments on the basis of them.