If no Rapture - then what ?

[zhavoney]

The key to that verse is the word "show." It isn't the study which brings approval, rather the study demonstrates the approval when it leads to sound doctrine.

Since they are integrated and inseparable, what is the point? Blood would be useless with out veins to carry it and a body to feed. Without the study to show your self approved to God. You wouldn't know who, what and where God is and How to contact Him to get what you need.
Matthew 7
7 "Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Since they are integrated and inseparable, what is the point? Blood would be useless with out veins to carry it and a body to feed. Without the study to show your self approved to God. You wouldn't know who, what and where God is and How to contact Him to get what you need.
Matthew 7
7 "Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

Hogwash! Or possibly even worse, a prevarication! You obviously haven't really given this much thought. If it were necessary to be able to study the word of God to know Him or how to contact Him, no illiterate person could be saved. Or perhaps you believe that someone with serious brain damage and that is incapable of reading more than a few words, if any, or has no real reading comprehension, or very little ability to understand doctrine, is automatically consigned to the flames of hell. I've known such people that have heard and believed the gospel, have almost no understanding of sound doctrine, yet have demonstrated the fruit of the Holy Spirit and even at times divine biblical wisdom, without ever having read any wisdom literature.

 

[zhavoney]

Hogwash! Or possibly even worse, a prevarication! You obviously haven't really given this much thought. If it were necessary to be able to study the word of God to know Him or how to contact Him, no illiterate person could be saved. Or perhaps you believe that someone with serious brain damage and that is incapable of reading more than a few words, if any, or has no real reading comprehension, or very little ability to understand doctrine, is automatically consigned to the flames of hell. I've known such people that have heard and believed the gospel, have almost no understanding of sound doctrine, yet have demonstrated the fruit of the Holy Spirit and even at times divine biblical wisdom, without ever having read any wisdom literature.

May the Lord open your eyes and bless you with understanding and knowledge.

Proverbs 1
7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, But fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Proverbs 9
10 "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, And the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.
Isaiah 11
2 The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him, The Spirit of wisdom and understanding, The Spirit of counsel and might, The Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord.

 

[Wormwood]

The disscussion here between you and Michael is easy enough.

You're obviously an Amillennialist, throwing away the events of Christ's still future "thousand years" reign of Revelation 20, which are written in many Old Testament Scriptures also; I quoted one of them to you, a section from Zech.14, but of course... you REFUSED to respond to it, and immediately... tried to change the subject. By that you've given us enough proof that with parts of God's Word that strongly conflict with the 'doctrine of men' you choose to follow, you simply DISREGARD that part of God's Holy Writ.

The very Hebrews 11 Scripture in the NT declares God's Promises to Abraham involving inheritance of the promised land...

Heb 11:8-10
8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.
9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:
10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.
(KJV)

Heb 11:13
13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
(KJV)

God's Promise to Abraham about the land was NOT about a fulfillment in this present world, but in the world to come. That's why this Hebrews 11:13 verse says clearly they all died in faith, "not having received the promises"! Instead, they saw them afar off, and by Faith believed God would accomplish them like He said. And because of that they KNEW they were but "strangers and pilgrims on the earth", meaning in this present world, while waiting for the world to come under Christ Jesus.

Heb 11:16
16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for He hath prepared for them a city.
(KJV)

That "city" is shown in the Ezekiel 40 through 48 chapters, with the very last phrase of Ezekiel 48 declaring, "The LORD is there". In the Ezekiel 47 chapter, the LITERAL layout of all the 12 tribes of ISRAEL in the land of Promise is written, even their borders being defined.


It's THAT Biblical Scripture evidence above that refutes... your crazy arguments that none knew about those Promises prior to the 1800's.

And here's another easy Scripture evidence that refutes your arguments...

Matt 19:28
28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
(KJV)


Jesus said that above to His Apostles.

Rev 21:10-12
10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
(KJV)

Those are NEW TESTAMENT evidences of God's future fulfillment of His Promises to Abraham and to the SEED of Israel in that future world to come!

So did NOT Apostle John understand what Christ was showing him there?

Did Ezekiel not know?

Did NONE of the early Church understand what they were reading with those Scriptures???

To say the early Church was not aware is like some huge blanket generalization that you can NEVER live up to.

You will have... to... eat CROW, like I said.

Im not disregarding any part of the Scripture. Rather, I see these promises being fulfilled in the Church. If you recall, the Church is "true Israel" and Gentiles are grafted into Israel and are Abraham's seed. You are the one trying to make the flesh more significant than the faith. Hence, we are part of the 12 tribes, a kingdom of priests and a holy nation belonging to God. (according to Peter)

Moreover, I am not dismissing Zechariah or any part of the Bible. However, you act as if Zechariah says, "This will happen during the millennial reign of Christ after the temple is rebuilt and after a secret rapture when God exalts the national Jews over the entire earth." The text says no such thing. You are inserting these promises into a specific time period for a specific nationality. The early church did not understand the OT promises as still having all of their focus on national Israel.

I'm still waiting for that source that proves otherwise.

 

[zhavoney]

Im not disregarding any part of the Scripture. Rather, I see these promises being fulfilled in the Church. If you recall, the Church is "true Israel" and Gentiles are grafted into Israel and are Abraham's seed. You are the one trying to make the flesh more significant than the faith. Hence, we are part of the 12 tribes, a kingdom of priests and a holy nation belonging to God. (according to Peter)

Moreover, I am not dismissing Zechariah or any part of the Bible. However, you act as if Zechariah says, "This will happen during the millennial reign of Christ after the temple is rebuilt and after a secret rapture when God exalts the national Jews over the entire earth." The text says no such thing. You are inserting these promises into a specific time period for a specific nationality. The early church did not understand the OT promises as still having all of their focus on national Israel.

I'm still waiting for that source that proves otherwise.

You are absolutely correct. The early Church knew that God's People were those who were waiting for Christ and those who would likewise follow Christ after He came.

 

[veteran]

Im not disregarding any part of the Scripture. Rather, I see these promises being fulfilled in the Church. If you recall, the Church is "true Israel" and Gentiles are grafted into Israel and are Abraham's seed. You are the one trying to make the flesh more significant than the faith. Hence, we are part of the 12 tribes, a kingdom of priests and a holy nation belonging to God. (according to Peter)

Moreover, I am not dismissing Zechariah or any part of the Bible. However, you act as if Zechariah says, "This will happen during the millennial reign of Christ after the temple is rebuilt and after a secret rapture when God exalts the national Jews over the entire earth." The text says no such thing. You are inserting these promises into a specific time period for a specific nationality. The early church did not understand the OT promises as still having all of their focus on national Israel.

I'm still waiting for that source that proves otherwise.

There's no way to misinterpret the events of Zech.14 as being about Christ's return and His future reign on earth over the wicked. Even the establishing of The River of the Waters of Life are mentioned, as also about the day of His return that no one knows.

Not only that, but those of the armies that come upon Jerusalem for the end, Zech.14 reveals those remaining of that army coming up to Jerusalem to worship Him from year to year.

The ONLY way to miss any of that is by DENIAL, just like your doctrine does with denying the future events of Christ's "thousand years" reign of Rev.20.

Furthermore, I am not on the Pre-Trib secret Rapture doctrine that John Darby, et al began in 1830's Great Britain. Those you are listening to obviously bypass the fact that the early 1st century Christian Church was dominantly Premillennial and Post-tribulational.

 

[michaelvpardo]

May the Lord open your eyes and bless you with understanding and knowledge.

Proverbs 1
7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, But fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Proverbs 9
10 "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, And the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.
Isaiah 11
2 The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him, The Spirit of wisdom and understanding, The Spirit of counsel and might, The Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord.

He did 17 years ago, but you can know Him as well. Just confess to Him your inability to save yourself and entrust your soul to Him, believing that the blood of Christ is sufficient payment for all of your sin. If you believe that He is LORD = God, and that He has risen from the dead, He will give you His Spirit for the asking as well as some wisdom and understanding.

 

[Wormwood]

There's no way to misinterpret the events of Zech.14 as being about Christ's return and His future reign on earth over the wicked. Even the establishing of The River of the Waters of Life are mentioned, as also about the day of His return that no one knows.

Not only that, but those of the armies that come upon Jerusalem for the end, Zech.14 reveals those remaining of that army coming up to Jerusalem to worship Him from year to year.

The ONLY way to miss any of that is by DENIAL, just like your doctrine does with denying the future events of Christ's "thousand years" reign of Rev.20.

Furthermore, I am not on the Pre-Trib secret Rapture doctrine that John Darby, et al began in 1830's Great Britain. Those you are listening to obviously bypass the fact that the early 1st century Christian Church was dominantly Premillennial and Post-tribulational.

It would help me, veteran, to know what you believe if you would actually explain yourself and your views rather than claiming those who disagree with you are blind, in denial, or are old wineskins...etc. If you would like to explain, Id be happy to listen.

Your final claim is a bit of a misnomer. The early church primarily held the view that is known as "historic premillennialism." They did not have any concept of a "great tribulation" that Darby made popular in his dispensational views. Rather, most early Christians understood that they were enduring the tribulation. In fact, historic premillennialism is almost exactly the same as modern amillennialism except that most of them viewed the millennium as a literal 1,000 year period whereas amillennialists view it as a symbolic number. This is really inconsequential in my mind. But what is significant is how we view God's working with mankind, especially as it relates to the Church and national Israel. Nobody is "denying" anything. I'm clinging to what the church has pretty much always believed (except I think its more likely that the 1000 years is figurative).

Some of these posts make me sad that people want to get so angered by these issues and make this about who knows the Lord and who does not.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Yesterday morning, while reading Exodus chapter 14 as part of my fellowship time with the Lord, He showed me something that I'd missed at least a dozen times, and I wanted to mention it for two reasons. First, as an example of how preconceptions and false teachings can blind us to what the scripture plainly says.
I was reading from the new King James version of the scripture and for the first time, I understood that verses 19 through 24 were teaching that the Angel of the Lord moved the pillar of cloud that Israel was following from before them to behind them, apparently as darkness was falling, and that the pillar of cloud obscured the camp of Israel from the Pharaoh and his army, while at the same time appeared to the camp of Israel as the pillar of fire (which normally guided them by night) and now prevented them from going back to engage the Egyptians. Normally the pillar appeared as dark cloud during the day and as fire by night, but in this instance it appeared as both, even providing light for Israel to march down into the dead sea and between the piled up waters upon their left and right.
I had a copy of the JPS Tanaach handy, so I took a look at the passage to see if it read the same way, and was a little disappointed that the same meaning wasn't clear, so I made a mental note to do some more checking later and at home, but didn't have time to get to it prior to going to bed.
I woke up at 3:30 AM, an hour before my alarm goes off, thinking about the verses and with other verses from scripture coming to mind which seemed related. My mind was racing with so much information that I got up early, drove to work, and used some bible study software that I keep there to examine the passage from some other translations, including a literal translation with Strong's definitions, the American Standard, the Jerusalem Bible, and the living translation. I found some variation, but the living Bible gave the verse in the manner that I understood it, and the literal version also came up with the same explicit language. Now, this understanding is obviously not new or particularly profound, but the reason that I hadn't seen it before, was embarrassingly simple. Since my youth, I had seen the movie called "the Ten Commandments" quite a few times and the image of Yul Brenner as Pharaoh, being forced to stop his chariot by the flames of the pillar of fire stuck pretty firmly in my head. Cecil B. Demille's false interpretation of the passage gave me a preconception that blinded my eyes to what was plainly written. Images have power.
The second reason that I bring this up has a little to do with the topic of this discussion.
Among the verses that started flooding my brain starting at 3:30Am this morning were: "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet," "The glory of the Lord shall be their rear guard", and "Then the fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom became full of darkness." There was actually quite a bit more bouncing around in my head, but it was so much that I started getting a headache and had to endeavor to not think about these verses until I had opportunity to start organizing my thoughts either on paper or electronically. While driving I couldn't help at least trying to sort some things out about those verses from Exodus chapter 14, such as the spiritual implication of the physical manifestation of the pillar of cloud and of flame in the context of the passage. A little earlier in the same passage, in verse 14, Moses tells the congregation of Israel that "The Lord will fight for you" and in verses 17 and 18 the Lord explains Himself that He would harden the hearts of Pharaoh and of the Egyptians so that they would pursue Israel, but that the Egyptians would know that He is the Lord when He had defeated them, or "gained honor" "over Pharaoh , his chariots, and his horsemen."
Now, verse 24 tells us that the Lord "looked down from the cloud of fire upon the array of Egyptians" which tells us that the Lord was present in the pillar of cloud/fire. The Egyptians, hardened in their unbelief, looked toward the glory of the Lord, but were only able to see the dark cloud in the midst of the darkness of the night. The glory of God was hidden from their eyes. For the congregation of Israel, the ones that had to walk down into the dry bed of the red sea with the waters piled up on either side, an act of faith even if motivated by fear, the gloom of night was illuminated for them by the flame that surrounded the glory of the Lord, even providing light for their feet through the darkness. Did the psalmist who wrote "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet" make the connection that the living word of God was present in the pillar of fire that lead Israel through the wilderness? He may not have, but we certainly can, seeing that it was the Lord who made the promise to deliver Israel from destruction while overthrowing His enemies, and did just that.
In placing Himself with His pillar of cloud and of fire, between Israel and the Egyptian army, the Lord took up the military position of "rear guard." In other words, He not only protected the congregation as they walked down into the midst of the red sea, but He also took the responsibility of the "clean up" of the enemies of Israel. A "rear guard" not only gives some protection to a "troop movement" away from the scene of a battle, but also clears out the stragglers and enemy units that survived the battle. In the case of the Red sea crossing, the "rear guard" fought the entire battle on Israel's behalf, destroying the Egyptian army in the process. The glory of the Lord was literally the rear guard for the tribes of Israel as they crossed the red sea. Searching for "rear guard" I found a few more relevant passages. Isaiah chapter 52 addresses the redeemed of the Lord:
10 The Lord has made bare His holy arm In the eyes of all the nations; And all the ends of the earth shall see The salvation of our God. 11 Depart! Depart! Go out from there, Touch no unclean thing; Go out from the midst of her, Be clean, You who bear the vessels of the Lord. 12 For you shall not go out with haste, Nor go by flight; For the Lord will go before you,
And the God of Israel will be your rear guard.

This passage was addressed to those who were taken into captivity and speaks of the redemption of Jerusalem and the comforting of His people.
The actual phrase "the glory of the Lord shall be your rear guard" is found in chapter 58 of Isaiah in the passage which is sometimes subtitled "true religion" and describes "the fast" which is pleasing to the Lord: Then your light shall break forth like the morning, Your healing shall spring forth speedily, And your righteousness shall go before you; The glory of the Lord shall be your rear guard. 9 Then you shall call, and the Lord will answer; You shall cry, and He will say, ‘Here I am.’ Isaiah 58:8-9 This passage continues to describe those who put these things into practice as the repentant who will rebuild from the ruins after God's judgment is accomplished: 11 The Lord will guide you continually, And satisfy your soul in drought, And strengthen your bones; You shall be like a watered garden, And like a spring of water, whose waters do not fail. 12 Those from among you Shall build the old waste places; You shall raise up the foundations of many generations; And you shall be called the Repairer of the Breach, The Restorer of Streets to Dwell In. Isaiah 58:11-12.
Since I had my Bible library software opened up, I looked up Isaiah 58:8 in the literal translation with strong's concordance reference numbers and was interested to find that the word (s) translated as rear guard in the New King James version (qabats(?)) is more literally translated as gather or take up, something like the Hebrew version of the Greek word from which we get the English word "rapture." This literal translation reads : Then will break as the dawn your light, and your healing quickly will spring up. And will go before you your righteousness. The glory of Yahweh will gather you. The passage appears to be about the gathering of the Lord's people after God's judgment has been poured out, but I'm sure that there will be at least a few scholars here who will disagree with the idea.
I also mentioned the verse from revelation about one of the bowl judgments: 10 Then the fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom became full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues because of the pain. 11 They blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and did not repent of their deeds. Revelation 16:10-11
You'll notice that I've underlined part of the verse, because with this judgment the kingdom of the beast becomes full of darkness. This judgment falls on the beast's kingdom, which is to say that it falls upon those who receive His mark and become his servants. The implication is that the bowl judgment does not affect the kingdom of God, or the saints who have remained faithful. So what's going on here? Those who reject God in the person of His Son can only see darkness coming upon them, but the servants of Christ, like those Israelites seeing the pillar of fire as they escaped the Egyptians, see the glory of God revealed in the judgment against the beast and his kingdom. The scripture tells us that God is glorified in the judgment, but is it by those unbelievers who curse Him for the plagues they are forced to endure? Or is it by His saints who witness His judgment upon those who reject Him and praise Him for the grace that He shows His own?
As you can see, a very small and seemingly insignificant illumination of a single passage, or a meaning hidden by preconception, false doctrine, or even poor translation, can alter the perception of many passages which follow it (and even of some that precede it.) I'll never be able to read a verse that mentions "dark clouds," "pillar of fire," "glory of the Lord," or even "darkness and light" again without seeing some subtle change in my understanding.

 

[Wormwood]

Michael,

I'm glad to hear of your excitement about the Word and they way you ponder it in you heart and mind both day and night. I agree that there is a strong correlation between the judgments in Revelation and the judgments in Exodus. Is that reference in Exodus a foreshadowing of the rapture? Possibly. But the question to explore is did the Holy Spirit illumine you to a divinely inspired interpretation of that text. This is where I think we need to be careful. Yes, I think the Spirit can bring texts to our minds and clarity of thought. But did the Holy Spirit tell you that is the fuller realization of that passage? Well, I think to claim that means that every believer who disagrees with you is in obvious error because if the Spirit told you that was the right way to see it than to disagree is to reject the truth given by the Spirit of God. Again, you may very well be right in your understanding there. I just think we presume too much if we think our interpretation is given by God and therefore equates to God's interpretation.

 

[zhavoney]

He did 17 years ago, but you can know Him as well. Just confess to Him your inability to save yourself and entrust your soul to Him, believing that the blood of Christ is sufficient payment for all of your sin. If you believe that He is LORD = God, and that He has risen from the dead, He will give you His Spirit for the asking as well as some wisdom and understanding.

Yes I know then the Spirit leads you into the wilderness to fast and pray for forty days and forty nights. Been there and done that. Keeping it real with our supreme example in following the true leaders path.


Ephesians 5
1 Therefore be imitators of God as dear children.

 

[veteran]

It would help me, veteran, to know what you believe if you would actually explain yourself and your views rather than claiming those who disagree with you are blind, in denial, or are old wineskins...etc. If you would like to explain, Id be happy to listen.

If you stay in God's Word then you'll know what I've been saying. I don't need to explain Christ's parable of the new wine and old bottles again. I think you well understood the first time.

Your final claim is a bit of a misnomer. The early church primarily held the view that is known as "historic premillennialism." They did not have any concept of a "great tribulation" that Darby made popular in his dispensational views. Rather, most early Christians understood that they were enduring the tribulation. In fact, historic premillennialism is almost exactly the same as modern amillennialism except that most of them viewed the millennium as a literal 1,000 year period whereas amillennialists view it as a symbolic number. This is really inconsequential in my mind. But what is significant is how we view God's working with mankind, especially as it relates to the Church and national Israel. Nobody is "denying" anything. I'm clinging to what the church has pretty much always believed (except I think its more likely that the 1000 years is figurative).

So now you want to push the falsehood that those of the early Church couldn't read Jesus' Own Words of warning concerning the time of tribulation per Matthew 24?

Matt 24:21
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
(KJV)

Just where was that idea first written in God's Word anyway? In the Book of Daniel.

Then out your own mouth you reverse your 'own' explanations of your "historic premilennialism" as being the same thing as "modern amilennialism"!? I'm suprised you can recognize the difference between daytime and nightime, since that's how different the meaning of those two terms are.

Let's make it easier, the early Church of the 1st century A.D. believed in the coming of a false one (Antichrist) and a great time of trial upon the Church, and that Christ would come to end that trial, and then begin His thousand years reign.

Then later, some men within the Church, especially associated with the sort at the school at Alexadria, Egypt, started the idea that the thousand years of Rev.20 was symbolic only. What you don't realize with how unsubtantiated your argument is, is that for Amilennialism to have been an early doctrine of the Church like you claim, THEY would HAVE HAD to ALSO recognize the time of tribulation in contrast to the time of Christ's second coming! That's why it's easy to know your argument here is a load of malarchey.

Some of these posts make me sad that people want to get so angered by these issues and make this about who knows the Lord and who does not.

What saddens me is all the historical Revisionism that is happening within the seminary schools which disagree with the early position of the Church and God's written Word about Christ's coming to gather His Church with ending the reign of the wicked one (Antichrist), and then begin the thousand years reign with His elect, as written.

The problem with those associated with the Alexandria school is how they came under the influence of Gnosticism and pagans, since that area was rife with those philosophies. Those against Christ's future thousand years reign of Rev.20 would primarily be of that association. Christ must reign until all enemies be made His footstool like Apostle Paul said, and that's what the future "thousand years" of Rev.20 is about.

Would you explain the Zechariah 14 Scripture I pointed you to, and tell us how that is not about the timing for after Christ's return?

 

[michaelvpardo]

Yes I know then the Spirit leads you into the wilderness to fast and pray for forty days and forty nights. Been there and done that. Keeping it real with our supreme example in following the true leaders path.


Ephesians 5
1 Therefore be imitators of God as dear children.

Good for you. He doesn't actually lead everyone into the wilderness to fast and pray for forty days and forty nights; He did this with Jesus to demonstrate the Lord's faithfulness as compared to Israel's unfaithfulness during their wandering in the wilderness at the time of the exodus. We can understand this from the scripture quoted by Jesus in response to Satan; He quoted from the books of the law and specifically from passages that dealt with the way God dealt with Israel's rebellion in the wilderness. Moses told Pharaoh that the Lord called Israel His son and to let him go to worship Him in the wilderness. Israel was tested in the wilderness and failed the test, only two of the adults other than Moses, Joshua and Caleb, genuinely believed that the tribes could enter Canaan and defeat the "giants in the land." They were the only ones of faith in God's promises to defeat the enemies of Israel and the only ones of their generation to survive the 40 years in the wilderness and enter into Canaan. Jesus demonstrated through His trial of hunger and thirst and wandering, that He indeed is worthy to be called both the Son of God and the Son of promise. Every son of God is tested, but not necessarily in the same way as Jesus, as He has equality with God, being begotten by His Spirit. We are sons by adoption, having received His Spirit in the new birth. That's a huge difference in that the Lord was without sin, while we were born sinners from the womb.
BTW, thank you for your previous prayer. The Lord's been extremely gracious to me in the things that He's shown me, but He did show me a good bit more after that posting, so it would seem that He answered your prayer as well.

 

[veteran]

Good for you. He doesn't actually lead everyone into the wilderness to fast and pray for forty days and forty nights; He did this with Jesus to demonstrate the Lord's faithfulness as compared to Israel's unfaithfulness during their wandering in the wilderness at the time of the exodus. We can understand this from the scripture quoted by Jesus in response to Satan; He quoted from the books of the law and specifically from passages that dealt with the way God dealt with Israel's rebellion in the wilderness. Moses told Pharaoh that the Lord called Israel His son and to let him go to worship Him in the wilderness. Israel was tested in the wilderness and failed the test, only two of the adults other than Moses, Joshua and Caleb, genuinely believed that the tribes could enter Canaan and defeat the "giants in the land." They were the only ones of faith in God's promises to defeat the enemies of Israel and the only ones of their generation to survive the 40 years in the wilderness and enter into Canaan. Jesus demonstrated through His trial of hunger and thirst and wandering, that He indeed is worthy to be called both the Son of God and the Son of promise. Every son of God is tested, but not necessarily in the same way as Jesus, as He has equality with God, being begotten by His Spirit. We are sons by adoption, having received His Spirit in the new birth. That's a huge difference in that the Lord was without sin, while we were born sinners from the womb.
BTW, thank you for your previous prayer. The Lord's been extremely gracious to me in the things that He's shown me, but He did show me a good bit more after that posting, so it would seem that He answered your prayer as well.

The way you relate that title "son of God" makes me wonder, do you believe Jesus of Nazareth is God The Saviour? or just a man born in the flesh and not God having come in the flesh?

 

[michaelvpardo]

The way you relate that title "son of God" makes me wonder, do you believe Jesus of Nazareth is God The Saviour? or just a man born in the flesh and not God having come in the flesh?

I'm not sure that I should dignify your question with a response. I've written over 280 posts on this board alone, most of which magnify and praise Jesus Christ as the only begotten son of God. I preach the gospel to everyone who denies what the scripture says, including you. Do you have dementia or are you being deliberately dense? Once more, for your sake, If you acknowledge your sinful nature to Him and call upon Him to save you from your sin, entering the covenant of His blood by submitting to Him as Lord, Jesus Christ will give you His Spirit as a free gift. This was His promise to all who the Father called to believe upon His Son. Once you are sealed with His Spirit, the guarantor of our inheritance in Him, you can rest from your works of righteousness and be justified and sanctified in His, from which there is no falling away. I know that you haven't believed Him yet or you wouldn't be suggesting that someone could loose their salvation. Come to Him while there is still time, while it is still called the day. Know Him and be known by Him, which is salvation. AMEN.

 

[veteran]

I'm not sure that I should dignify your question with a response. I've written over 280 posts on this board alone, most of which magnify and praise Jesus Christ as the only begotten son of God. I preach the gospel to everyone who denies what the scripture says, including you. Do you have dementia or are you being deliberately dense? Once more, for your sake, If you acknowledge your sinful nature to Him and call upon Him to save you from your sin, entering the covenant of His blood by submitting to Him as Lord, Jesus Christ will give you His Spirit as a free gift. This was His promise to all who the Father called to believe upon His Son. Once you are sealed with His Spirit, the guarantor of our inheritance in Him, you can rest from your works of righteousness and be justified and sanctified in His, from which there is no falling away. I know that you haven't believed Him yet or you wouldn't be suggesting that someone could loose their salvation. Come to Him while there is still time, while it is still called the day. Know Him and be known by Him, which is salvation. AMEN.

Does that mean you don't believe... Jesus of Nazareth was God having come in the flesh?

 

[Wormwood]

If you stay in God's Word then you'll know what I've been saying. I don't need to explain Christ's parable of the new wine and old bottles again. I think you well understood the first time.

Yes, lets stay in God's word shall we. I'm sure the way you interpreted the wineskins in reference to my hermeneutical skills was exactly the application Jesus had in mind.

So now you want to push the falsehood that those of the early Church couldn't read Jesus' Own Words of warning concerning the time of tribulation per Matthew 24?

Matt 24:21
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
(KJV)

No, but I'd like to prevent against the falsehood that Jesus was speaking about the "Great 7 year Tribulation" you have in mind. Why don't you add the context to your quote?

“Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath.” (Matthew 24:20, ESV)

Now either Jesus wants us to pray that the "Great 7 Year Tribulation" occurs somehow in a way that no Saturdays occur during those 7 years, or he is not at all referencing what you are putting in his mouth. So lets stick with the Bible here and not "man's doctrines."

Let's make it easier, the early Church of the 1st century A.D. believed in the coming of a false one (Antichrist) and a great time of trial upon the Church, and that Christ would come to end that trial, and then begin His thousand years reign.

You make it sound like the first century church had an official teaching on the matter. Actually we see both being taught in the first century. A little bit of simple research should make this plain to you. In any event, lets correct some of your false assumptions. 1) Many Amillennialists believe in the coming of an Antichrist. 2) Amillennialists believe that the "tribulation" we are in will become more severe before the end and Christ will come to end that trial.

So, like I said very clearly, there is very little difference between historic premillennialism and amillinnialism, but one is whether the 1,000 years is literal or not.

Then later, some men within the Church, especially associated with the sort at the school at Alexadria, Egypt, started the idea that the thousand years of Rev.20 was symbolic only. What you don't realize with how unsubtantiated your argument is, is that for Amilennialism to have been an early doctrine of the Church like you claim, THEY would HAVE HAD to ALSO recognize the time of tribulation in contrast to the time of Christ's second coming! That's why it's easy to know your argument here is a load of malarchey

Yes, so much later that we have this doctrine fully established and entirely embraced by the entire church in the 300s AD. Historically, for the first two centuries of Christianity, both views were in existance. In any event, I have no idea what you are saying when you say,
"for Amilennialism to have been an early doctrine of the Church like you claim, THEY would HAVE HAD to ALSO recognize the time of tribulation in contrast to the time of Christ's second coming! That's why it's easy to know your argument here is a load of malarchey."
I THINK what you are saying is that a specific period of tribulation was understood by the early church as marking the end times, but Amillennialism does not designate a specific period(i.e. 7 years) but see it as the age of the church. Again, Amillennialism existed in the 1st and 2nd centuries. Look it up.

What saddens me is all the historical Revisionism that is happening within the seminary schools which disagree with the early position of the Church and God's written Word about Christ's coming to gather His Church with ending the reign of the wicked one (Antichrist), and then begin the thousand years reign with His elect, as written.

So who is the one revising history here? Amillennialism existed in the first two centuries and was officially embraced by the church in the days of Augustine. I think you need to read some history books on the matter or help me by citing these historical references that prove otherwise. History is not based on your personal tirades, so just claiming that people are revising history doesn't make it so. Prove your assertions or stop making them.
Also, you clearly know nothing of Seminary. You think all seminary schools are amillennial? You have no idea what you are talking about. I would encourage you to not make such broad sweeping assertions that are so obviously false and ignorant that it becomes very plain that you are willing to say anything that comes to your mind in order to try to make your case...regardless of whether there is a shred of truth behind it or not.

When did I say that Zech 14 cannot be understood in reference to Christ's return? Simply because something is spoken of poetically or symbolically does not mean it is not real. For instance, if I say, "She is a perfect ten and the apple of my eye." We both agree a beautiful woman is being referenced. However, to say she is literally a 10 or an apple is to misunderstand the language. Both people believe the words, "She is a perfect 10 and the apple of my eye" and that these words refer to a woman. But how those words actually describe the woman is up for debate. I believe much of the OT references to the coming of the Lord are speaking of Christ's first or second coming. However, because I believe that a text that speaks of children living to 100 may be figurative does not mean that it ceases to refer to the Lord's coming or the blessings of the redeemed. I don't know how else I can say this so you can understand.

 

[veteran]

No, but I'd like to prevent against the falsehood that Jesus was speaking about the "Great 7 year Tribulation" you have in mind. Why don't you add the context to your quote?

Christ was referencing the Book of Daniel within Matthew 24, and you sound like you deny that. The bold phrases are direct parallels. Christ's quote of the "abomination of desolation" event in Matthew 24:15 from the Book of Daniel also seals this Biblical parallel, particularly the Dan.9:27 subject and related Scripture within Daniel.
Dan 12:1
1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
(KJV)

Matt 24:21
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
(KJV)

Dan 9:27
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
(KJV)

Dan 12:11-13
11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.
13 But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.
(KJV)

Obvious what you are trying to prevent is NOT preventable!

Now either Jesus wants us to pray that the "Great 7 Year Tribulation" occurs somehow in a way that no Saturdays occur during those 7 years, or he is not at all referencing what you are putting in his mouth. So lets stick with the Bible here and not "man's doctrines."

Senseless statement.

You make it sound like the first century church had an official teaching on the matter. Actually we see both being taught in the first century. A little bit of simple research should make this plain to you. In any event, lets correct some of your false assumptions. 1) Many Amillennialists believe in the coming of an Antichrist. 2) Amillennialists believe that the "tribulation" we are in will become more severe before the end and Christ will come to end that trial.

You TRY to make it sound like it was impossible for ANY SERVANT OF CHRIST of the early Christian Church to be able to know these things Christ gave as a warning for the end. I don't have time to read you through the early Church father's writings about their understanding of a coming Antichrist and the end of the world. You can research it for yourself, but don't lie about it like they never had nothing to say on the matter.

So, like I said very clearly, there is very little difference between historic premillennialism and amillinnialism, but one is whether the 1,000 years is literal or not.

I've already shown in my previous post for those interested, just how they are NOT... the same idea. You can repeat a lie all you want, won't make it true. Those who listen to your lie deserve to be deceived along with you.

When did I say that Zech 14 cannot be understood in reference to Christ's return?

Are these not your own words?...

"Moreover, I am not dismissing Zechariah or any part of the Bible. However, you act as if Zechariah says, "This will happen during the millennial reign of Christ after the temple is rebuilt and after a secret rapture when God exalts the national Jews over the entire earth." The text says no such thing."


That statement implies you regard the Zechariah 14 chapter as having nothing to do with the idea of a Millennial reign by Christ Jesus that begins after His second coming and gathering of His Church.

I do not adhere to the 'rapture' ideas of men's doctrines, so no use in trying to cast that "secret rapture" label on me. Christ gathers His Church at His coming, both from Heaven and from the earth as written.

The only thing you're correct about is that the Zech.14 chapter has nothing... to do with the idea of rebuilding of a temple by the orthodox Jews in Jerusalem today. Instead, Christ will build it when He comes (Zech.6:12).

The Zechariah 14 chapter starts off with the subject of the "day of the LORD" when the nations are gathered to suffer God's cup of wrath on the last day of this present world, shown with Christ's second coming to Jerusalem. Starting at Zech.14:9 we are shown Christ (LORD) reigning over all the earth as King. Then at Zech.14:12 forward, the wealth of the nations around Jerusalem will be gathered, and those left of the nations that went up against Jerusalem for the end will... come to worship The King from year to year and be bound to keep the feast of tabernacles...

Zech 14:16-18
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.
18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
(KJV)


That Zech.14 Scripture reveals specifically... the existence of remaining wicked that came against Jerusalem at the end of this world. Also how they will be bound to come up to Jerusalem from year to year to worship Christ The King. And IF... they refuse, there will be no rain on their lands. Egypt as a nation is mentioned specifically... showing the existence of rebellious nations STILL AFTER CHRIST'S SECOND COMING! Those events are a direct parallel to the nations of Revelation 20 that will still exist on earth AFTER Christ's second coming.

But Amillennialism wrongly preaches that when Christ returns, all the wicked are destroyed, and we go immediately into God's Eternity of the new heavens and new earth only with those who accept Him and His Son remaining.

 

[Wormwood]

Senseless statement.

Then you tell me why Jesus said they should pray their flight is not on the Sabbath if he is referring to the 7 year tribulation.

You TRY to make it sound like it was impossible for ANY SERVANT OF CHRIST of the early Christian Church to be able to know these things Christ gave as a warning for the end. I don't have time to read you through the early Church father's writings about their understanding of a coming Antichrist and the end of the world. You can research it for yourself, but don't lie about it like they never had nothing to say on the matter.

This is a non-response. You haven't quoted one source from anywhere, let alone reading through the early Church fathers. When did I say it impossible to know about Christ's warnings for the end? I said I don't believe in a 1,000 year literal reign of Christ but that this number is symbolic (like the 10 days of testing some of the churches would endure as stated earlier in the book...not 10 literal days). I told you that I understand that many in the 1st century church were historic premillennialists. I also said there were many in the 1st and 2nd century that were amillennialists. Clearly there was not one view that everyone agreed on. So lets quit acting like there was one view that everyone believed and it wasn't until hundreds of years later a different view was invented that went against the clear teaching of the Bible.

I've already shown in my previous post for those interested, just how they are NOT... the same idea. You can repeat a lie all you want, won't make it true. Those who listen to your lie deserve to be deceived along with you.

Really, where? Please give me the response number. I keep hearing talk about Zechariah, Antichrist, and so forth. None of this has anything to do with the differences between amillennialism and historic premillennialism.

Are these not your own words?...

"Moreover, I am not dismissing Zechariah or any part of the Bible. However, you act as if Zechariah says, "This will happen during the millennial reign of Christ after the temple is rebuilt and after a secret rapture when God exalts the national Jews over the entire earth." The text says no such thing."

That statement implies you regard the Zechariah 14 chapter as having nothing to do with the idea of a Millennial reign by Christ Jesus that begins after His second coming and gathering of His Church.

Veteran, you have a propensity to cloud everything by your own perception. As I said before....ad nauseum...I don't believe in a literal 1000 year millennial reign. So of course I don't believe Zech 14 is referring to a 1000 year literal millennial reign. I believe it could very well be referring to the 2nd Coming. In my view, the 2nd coming comes AFTER the symbolic 1000 year millennial reign, which is occurring right now! Currently the Gospel is binding Satan by freeing those he has enslaved. Currently people are being raised in Christ and are born again. Currently, believers are overcoming the world and the devil. Currently, saints who have endured in the faith and died in Christ are living and reigning with him. This will not happen one day in the future, but is happening now (in my humble opinion). So yes, I believe Zech 14 is likely a reference to the 2nd Coming, the Day of the Lord, and no, I do not believe it is picturing a 1000 year literal reign of Jesus on the earth. Clear?

As for the wicked being present as Christ reigns in Zech 14. The Messianic prophecies were often envisioned in ways that made sense to the people to whom they were spoken. Will the New Jerusalem have walls? Why would we need walls in heaven if all the wicked are destroyed? Will Jesus wield a sword? How helpful is a sword in an age of guns and bombs? Will the new earth really have a big lake of burning sulfer where we can go and watch the condemned in torment? Or is this lake located on a different planet? Will people really come and beat their swords into plowshares when Jesus comes? But who is carrying swords today and how will that help anything since wars have nothing to do with swords in our age? You see, trying to rigidly make all these words literally accurate leads to all kinds of nonsense. These are images that communicate things like peace, victory, judgement, suffering, triumph and protection in a way that people of a certain era can understand it. Certainly hell is a greater torment than we can imagine. Its pictured as "outer darkness" being chopped "into pieces" burning in fire, and so forth. So how can you have outer darkness and fire? Doesn't fire make light? These are silly questions because the suffering of hell is beyond what we can envision in our natural world..so word pictures are used to help us grasp the kind of torment that will take place. When victory was had over an enemy, they brought their spoils to the conqueror. Will the wicked really bring us their treasures when Jesus returns and pay homage to us, or is this a picture of triumph, victory and vindication for our faith? Does Jesus really have a sword coming out of his mouth when he returns, or was this a picture to a first century person of powerful words that judge. I think the pictures here envision something that we can grasp regarding our future hope, victory and inheritance. But to make them literal swords, fires, walls, or temple worship scenes really takes from the power of what is being portrayed.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Does that mean you don't believe... Jesus of Nazareth was God having come in the flesh?

People with dementia have trouble remembering things, suffer hallucinations, have delusions, and become paranoid. They also are generally unable to recognize the symptoms in themselves.

Jesus of Nazareth, who was actually Joshua, son of Joseph, of the house of David, of the tribe of Judah, was a man of 100% flesh, born of a virgin named Mary (or actually Miriam) in Bethlehem (not Nazareth), and without a natural father, but was begotten by the power of the Holy Spirit. As the Son of God, He is of the same Spirit as God the Father, and in this has complete equality with God, but subjects Himself to His Father, the two still being One (echad). The Holy Spirit is One like Jesus, Who is given to indwell those who have believed the Lord and takes the things of Jesus and gives them to us, so that Jesus may be glorified in and through us, just as He glorified His Father. These three are One, and the really amazing part is that His intent is to make men One in Him (but only those who receive Him by faith.)

By the way, when Peter denied Jesus, the Holy Spirit was not yet given to indwell men. This only happened after the resurrection of our Lord.