Escape the Great Tribulation

[Daniel Israel]

(Unorthodox Christian;24090)
I'm sorry if I'm not precise on the exact scripture. But I do remember scripture. It's like when God said He would not allow Satan to overcome us. The carnal understanding would be that our bodies would not be harmed by Satan, when he meant overcome he meant in Spirit. Mt. Zion is Jesus Christ, Just like the the Rock and the Stone that the builders rejected."Who am I gonna lean on? Where do I go? I go to the Rock of my Salvation, I go to the Stone that the builders rejected. I go to the Mountain, cause the Mountain stands by me!"-The Rock of My Salvation
Unorthodox:Who then are the saints that were beheaded in the prophecy shown to John in Revelation 20:4 - "I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years"? Who also is these saints being prevailed against by the false prophet in the book of Daniel 7:20-25 - "And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows. I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them. Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces. And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time."Verse 25 of this chapter also debunks the whole 150 day tribulation theory thats been circulating around this board as well.

 

[Christina]

(kkboldt;26428)
Hi Kriss,The "Wailing Wall" is not part of the original Temple. Did you know this? The Wailing Wall was built by the Romans from the blocks of the outer wall of the Temple platform. It is a "myth" that the wall that is there now is part of the original temple. Besides, where the wall is, is NOT where the Temple stood. The Al-Aqsa Mosque or "Dome of the Rock" is standing where the Temple once stood.So how can the Wailing Wall be what's left of the Temple?As for the rest of what you write. I'm not sure I follow you.If you mean that certain prophecies have "double meanings" then yes, I agree. However, the OLD Temple complex has nothing to do with the NEW Jerusalem.Because "the temple made with hands" was destroyed.Jesus died on the Cross, then there was a great earthquake and the vale of the Temple was broken in two. The Mercy Seat in the Holy of Holies was broken by God.When Jesus died, "he said "It is Finished."The "future" Temple prophecy cannot be "future". The NEW Jerusalem has nothing to do with the OLD Jerusalem. They are not even in the same place.Jesus said:Matthew 26:61 And said, This [fellow] said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.The Apostle Paul Wrote:1 Cr 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?1 Cr 3:17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which [temple] ye are.2 Cr 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.It is finished. The physical "temple" was destroyed never to be rebuilt again.WE are now the Temple and our hearts are the "holy of holies".The NEW Jerusalem is NOT about the OLD Jerusalem.Kim
yeah Ive heard this sounds like men trying to justify there scriptual stands The fact is they do not know exactly where the temple stood only apporoxamenly and its has changed a couple of times they cant excavate to see and there certainly is not enough evidence to deny Gods word over it. Jews have accepted it as the Wall for almost 60 years so thats good enough for me.

 

[Unorthodox Christian]

Jews have accepted it as the Wall for almost 60 years so thats good enough for me.
That still doesn't mean anything.

 

[Unorthodox Christian]

Kriss the Fallacy in your statement is that although the Jews may think the Same, There are also many Christians, non-catholics, that still believe Jesus Christ was born on the 25th Pagan day of December. Does it make it a Confirmed Date? No. There are also many Jew that believe the Satanic book of the Talmud is greater than the Tanakh itself, does that make a seal of approval? I think not.Al Aqsa is where the Original Temple of Solomon was.

 

[kkboldt]

(Unorthodox Christian;26587)
Kriss the Fallacy in your statement is that although the Jews may think the Same, There are also many Christians, non-catholics, that still believe Jesus Christ was born on the 25th Pagan day of December. Does it make it a Confirmed Date? No. There are also many Jew that believe the Satanic book of the Talmud is greater than the Tanakh itself, does that make a seal of approval? I think not.Al Aqsa is where the Original Temple of Solomon was.
Good points! That's why it is important to study history and archaeology along with the Bible.Kim : )

 

[Jordan]

(Unorthodox Christian;26587)
Kriss the Fallacy in your statement is that although the Jews may think the Same, There are also many Christians, non-catholics, that still believe Jesus Christ was born on the 25th Pagan day of December. Does it make it a Confirmed Date? No. There are also many Jew that believe the Satanic book of the Talmud is greater than the Tanakh itself, does that make a seal of approval? I think not.Al Aqsa is where the Original Temple of Solomon was.
Unorthodox Christian, Kriss, Denver, nor do I believeth that Christ was born on December 25th, but rather Kriss, and Denver believeth that He was conceived on that day. They believe that He was born around September.JagLovest thou in Christ Yahshua, Lord and Saviour of the world.

 

[Unorthodox Christian]

I don't think you get what I'm saying Jag. Kriss said that the Jews believing the Wailing wall is the Temple of Solomon is good enough to believe it. Then it contradicts her doctrine that men's understanding and interpretation mean nothing unless it's divine. The Wailing wall is not the remaining pieces of the Temple of Solomon, AL AQSA is, the Dome of Rock. Look Jag, She said the jews believe the Wall is the remains of the Temple of Solomon. So by her logic if many Christians believe something as a majority is it ok to believe it? That's foolish! I can easily say I know a group of Messianic Jews(not orthodox) that would disagree with her.

 

[Christina]

(kriss;26525)
yeah Ive heard this sounds like men trying to justify there scriptual stands The fact is they do not know exactly where the temple stood only apporoxamenly and its has changed a couple of times they cant excavate to see and there certainly is not enough evidence to deny Gods word over it. Jews have accepted it as the Wall for almost 60 years so thats good enough for me.
You were missing my point I only meant that the desruction of the temple in 70 AD is not the same prochey as the one Christ gave that not one stone would be left upon another I just used the wailing wall as an example then kkposted that the wailing wasnt the temple I said no one knows exactly where the temple was. I should not have made the off handed commit about the Jews but this thread has nothing to do with that KK believes most prochecy have past My stand is that 70 A.D. was a type of whats to come not a fulfilment. So before we get to far off track lets go back to what kkboldt and I were discussing:)