Jesus' Warning - Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 21

[JesusReigns]

(Denver;11814)
I'm afraid it is you who doesn't have the grasp on the Greek word for age, aion. The world never ends, in fact. A new heaven and a new earth come, but the world doesn't end. Surely, as a scholar of the Bible, you should know this:Revelation 21:1And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.That verse in itself contains the obvious answer to your question. The end of the age comes when the first heaven and the first earth spoken of in this verse pass away. That's the obvious end of the age.Hey if you want to be blind to the Parable of the Fig Tree then go right ahead. However, when my Lord says to learn it, I will learn it. You again show that you're not very familiar with Scripture. Matthew 24 and Mark 13 take place after Luke 21. It's quite clear from Scripture in Luke 21 that he is in the temple whereas Mark 13 and Matthew 24 find our Savior on the Mt. of Olives. If two chapters say learn it and one merely uses slightly different phraseology...Mark 13:28-29Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near: So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.I've read Josephus and give me a break if you think that this little old tin horn general was the tribulation that Christ spoke about.Mark 13:19For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.The number of WWIcasualties, both military and civilian, was about 40 million — more than 19 million deaths and 21 million wounded. Common WWII estimates put the numbers at 72 million.Father is not a liar.WWI and WWII eclipse 70 AD by thousands of times and this is still not the tribulation. The sad thing is, the tribulation will be brought on by people who don't know how to read what is right there in front of them.If we went by this silly little "you" meaning those only in front of Jesus, we apparently don't have to do much of anything Jesus said.
Denver: When did I say that the world would end--I said the exact opposite. But an age did end. It was the age connected to the physical temple and the dead rituals that took place there. This is the meaning of Peter's words "The end of ALL things is AT HAND" (1 Peter 4:7). Jesus predicted the time of this end when He told the Scribes, Pharisees, hyprocrites “Behold, YOUR house is left unto YOU desolate” (Matt. 23). John had earlier asked them “who warned YOU to flee from the wrath about to come?” (Matt. 3:7). There was wrath coming upon THAT generation. It came in AD 66-70 during a time of unparalleled brutality, torture, and distress!Silly word "you?" Are you kidding me? Those "silly" second person personal pronouns are the KEY to properly understanding the Olivet Discourse. If you want to refuse to acknowledge them and their significance that is YOUR right, but you will never understand this passage until you acknowledge who the participants are and who the direct recipients of Jesus’ words are. When did Jesus say that the great tribulation would be such as had never been or ever would be because of the number of dead? That is your interpretation. It is the NATURE of that tribulation that made it unique in all of history. It was the vengeance of God against a nation He called out from among other nations–a nation that continually disobeyed Him, committed adultery against Him, and persecuted and killed those sent to them from God. Worst of all, it was a nation who put to death their own Messiah! Luke states “these are the days of vengeance that ALL things which are written may be fulfilled” (21:22). In AD 70 God avenged those who cried out under the altar in Revelation 6 through the Roman armies. The body count was so great (hundreds of thousands) that the bodies were piled up and left to putrify. Different wicked sects of Jews fought among themselves inside the city and great atrocities were committed within the temple. So great was the famine, that mothers ate their own children! The wars reached beyond the walls of Jerusalem. May Christians were slaughtered mercilessly. If God had not intervened and brought an end to it all “no flesh” would have survived!Why do you look to the future for that which Jesus clearly said was to happen in THAT generation to THOSE Jews and in THAT land? Another “silly” word in Matthew 24 is THEN. To what does it refer? It was during the time that His disciples standing right there with Him and other Christians of that day heard of wars and rumors of wars. At the time (THEN) THEY will deliver YOU (My disciples standing right here with Me now) up to TRIBULATION and kill YOU . . . .” At this same time (pre-AD 70) THEN many false prophets will rise up and deceive many . . . .” His disciples are told that THEY will see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet. When THEY saw it, THEN they were to flee. And THEN false prophets would come to THEM. THEY were not to listen. Jesus told THEM beforehand so that THEY would be prepared when all these things took place in THEIR lifetimes. That is the context of this passage. Those “silly” YOUs are extremely important. Why do you trivialize them?JesusReigns

 

[HammerStone]

Denver: When did I say that the world would end--I said the exact opposite.
I'm addressing your quote here:
First of all, the disciples asked about the end of the age (aion) and not the end of the world (kosmos)!

Silly word "you?" Are you kidding me? Those "silly" second person personal pronouns are the KEY to properly understanding the Olivet Discourse. If you want to refuse to acknowledge them and their significance that is YOUR right, but you will never understand this passage until you acknowledge who the participants are and who the direct recipients of Jesus’ words are.
I'm not one for insults, but you have a serious problem with understanding the context of anything including my own posts of which I am the authority on because I wrote them. Obviously, I'm not referring to the word "you" as being silly. I'm referring to this nonsense that if you is used, it doesn't apply to anyone but those standing there. This is where the context comes in. Jesus was talking about the end of the age.Simply because you say it's the end of the age does not make it so.I will show you the real tribulationNotice the CONTEXT.)Revelation 14:18-20And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe. And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God. And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.Titus did nothing of the sorts. This is the wrath of God at the end of the age upon those who fail to read his Word and fail to know him.
The body count was so great (hundreds of thousands) that the bodies were piled up and left to putrify. Different wicked sects of Jews fought among themselves inside the city and great atrocities were committed within the temple. So great was the famine, that mothers ate their own children! The wars reached beyond the walls of Jerusalem. May Christians were slaughtered mercilessly. If God had not intervened and brought an end to it all “no flesh” would have survived!
So you're comfortable saying a little Roman general marching into Jerusalem in 70 AD would have brought an end to all flesh across the world? I'm sorry but this is absurd!
Another “silly” word in Matthew 24 is THEN. To what does it refer? It was during the time that His disciples standing right there with Him and other Christians of that day heard of wars and rumors of wars. At the time (THEN) THEY will deliver YOU (My disciples standing right here with Me now) up to TRIBULATION and kill YOU . . . .” At this same time (pre-AD 70) THEN many false prophets will rise up and deceive many . . . .” His disciples are told that THEY will see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet. When THEY saw it, THEN they were to flee. And THEN false prophets would come to THEM. THEY were not to listen. Jesus told THEM beforehand so that THEY would be prepared when all these things took place in THEIR lifetimes. That is the context of this passage. Those “silly” YOUs are extremely important. Why do you trivialize them?
And people have been killed in Christ's name ever since.If you don't understand the Parable of the Fig Tree, like Christ told us all to do, you'll never understand prophecy about the return of Christ which is the obvious ultimate subject of this chapter.This certainly could not have had anything to do with Christ's death on the cross and his resurrection because he prophesied of it and told you exactly when it would happen:Matthew 24:36But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.John 2:19Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

 

[Christina]

So jesusreigns you are a Preterism"Preterism" is the systematized opinion that all the prophetic events of the eschaton, short of the Second Advent itself, have already been fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D. 70. The preterist rejects sound eschatology, Not only is preterism untenable, but it is unwise as well. Preterism undermines the encompassing nature of Scriptural prophecy, spiritualizes/allegorizes Scriptural passages. Preterism as a system is untenable, indefensible, and should be rejected . Although I believe it has some right element such as no pre-trib. rapture It is in fact a false teaching. And should be avoided as other false teachings. this teaching not only fails to take in the all of Gods plan but can not be supported without throwing out/and or changing a good portion of Word of God. To make it fit into the scenrio rather than the other way around.

 

[JesusReigns]

(Denver;11827)
I'm addressing your quote here:I'm not one for insults, but you have a serious problem with understanding the context of anything including my own posts of which I am the authority on because I wrote them. Obviously, I'm not referring to the word "you" as being silly. I'm referring to this nonsense that if you is used, it doesn't apply to anyone but those standing there. This is where the context comes in. Jesus was talking about the end of the age.Simply because you say it's the end of the age does not make it so.I will show you the real tribulationNotice the CONTEXT.)Revelation 14:18-20And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe. And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God. And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.Titus did nothing of the sorts. This is the wrath of God at the end of the age upon those who fail to read his Word and fail to know him.So you're comfortable saying a little Roman general marching into Jerusalem in 70 AD would have brought an end to all flesh across the world? I'm sorry but this is absurd!And people have been killed in Christ's name ever since.If you don't understand the Parable of the Fig Tree, like Christ told us all to do, you'll never understand prophecy about the return of Christ which is the obvious ultimate subject of this chapter.This certainly could not have had anything to do with Christ's death on the cross and his resurrection because he prophesied of it and told you exactly when it would happen:Matthew 24:36But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.John 2:19Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
Denver: Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. I did not state that I believe there will be an end of the world--just that the disciples did not ask about any such thing. They asked about the end of the age. There is no end of the world. I did not say this was the end of the age--Jesus did!About the "silly" YOUs. They are personal pronouns that can either indicate direct address or generalities. If someone says to no one in particular, "You should not handle poisonous snakes unless you are an expert," he means everyone everywhere and throughout all time. If, however, someone is speaking directly to another person or a group of people in the presence of some poisonous snakes and says, "You should not handle these poisonous snakes because you are not experts," he means those particular people and snakes at that particular place and time. Surely, you can see the difference.The same is true of Matthew 24. When Jesus spoke these words to His disciples right there with Him, He was not referring to wars in general but specific wars and rumors of wars that THEY would hear about in THEIR lifetimes. When He spoke directly to THEM about persecution and being killed and hated, He was speaking about specific people of THAT time who would commit those acts against THEM (see Matthew 10). Yes, there are always wars and rumors of wars, but they are not THOSE wars and rumors of wars. Yes, Christians have always been and will continue to be persecuted and hated and killed for their faith, but they are not those Jesus had specifically in mind in Matthew 24. Paul covered general persecution in his letter to Timothy: "Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution." This applies to all Christians throughout time! One is specific about specific people and events (Matthew 24) and the other is about all Christians in general regardless of time.Clearly, Jesus said to those particularly disciples at that particular time that THEY themselves would see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet! (Mat. 24:15). Is that not what Jesus plainly said? According to your understanding of the YOUs in this passage, all Christians everywhere and during all generations should see this abomination! But that is not what you mean, is it? You accuse me of restricting the YOUs to those disciples there with Jesus--a very normal and usual way of understanding this passage--yet, you and other futurists seek to restrict the YOUs to OUR generation--a very abnormal and unusual way of understanding this passage.You are using the YOUs of Matthew 24 in the same way you accuse me of using them only you apply them to THIS generation rather than to THAT generation. Again, there are events in time that involve only certain people and places. Certainly, you understand that. There will never be another WW1 or WW2. Those involved specific people and specific battles and specific events. There were wars before them and there have been wars since them, but they themselves were never repeated. When Jesus told His disciples about wars and rumors of wars, He had specific wars in mind. When He told them that THEY would be persecuted, hated, and killed, He had a specific time frame in mind that involved THEM and THEIR generation alone! When He told THEM, that THEY would see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet, He meant that THEY would see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet with their own eyes in their lifetimes! How much clearer could Jesus have been? We stumble over the obvious only because we do not like what it says!This whole issue for futurists comes down to this selfish pronouncment--what about us? What about us? If Jesus didn't mean to include you in an event, then so be it. You and your generation are no more special than any other. If Jesus chose that generation in which to return, what is that to us? We did not live during the plagues of Egypt, the parting of the Red Sea and the giving of the Law. We did not witness the fall of the walls of Jericho. We did not live to see the birth of Jesus and to hear His words of life spoken from His own lips, and to see His marvelous miracles. Those times were not for us! Yet we learn from them and we sense the wonders of them through the written word which was recorded for all of us throughout all time.As for Titus--he was involved with Jerusalem. There were many other wars going on during this time conducted by others that resulted in many deaths. Jesus said concerning That time, "And unless those days were shortened, NO flesh would be saved, but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened" (Mat. 24:22). I believe Him. As for the "real tribulation" in Revelation 14, that, too, is restricted by a clear time statement that futurists refuse to acknowledge. This entire revelation is introduced with these words that must not be overlooked: "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants things which must SHORTLY take place" (1:1). The events of Revelation 14 fall within that time frame. They took place SHORTLY from the time John received the revelation! Note also verse 3: "for the time is NEAR!" In case we didn't quite get the time frame in these verses, it is repeated in Revelation 22:6--"'These words are faithful and TRUE.' And God of the holy prophets sent His angel to show His servants the things which must SHORTLY take place. 'Behold, I am COMING QUICKLY!'" (verse 7).It is you who does not understand the parable of the fig tree. You are reading something into these words that is not there. THEY were to learn the parable of the fig tree, not we! And it is a fig tree and nothing more. There is no justification for taking this as a reference to modern-day Israel (which, by the way, is not the Israel of the OT but is a creation of the UN). Notice again, that Luke adds "and all the trees!" How much clearer could Jesus have been? Just as THEY knew that summer was near when THEY observed the fig tree (just a fig tree) and ALL the trees, so THEY were to observe and recognize the signs of His coming in THAT generation. This is what the text plainly says. Yet, people, because of their preconceived theological persuasion, refuse to accept it. No, Jesus did not know the day or the hour--no man did. But He knew the time frame and He told His disciples there with Him the time frame--THIS generation! Will you not accept Jesus' clear words?JesusReigns

 

[JesusReigns]

(kriss;11839)
So jesusreigns you are a Preterism"Preterism" is the systematized opinion that all the prophetic events of the eschaton, short of the Second Advent itself, have already been fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D. 70. The preterist rejects sound eschatology, Not only is preterism untenable, but it is unwise as well. Preterism undermines the encompassing nature of Scriptural prophecy, spiritualizes/allegorizes Scriptural passages. Preterism as a system is untenable, indefensible, and should be rejected . Although I believe it has some right element such as no pre-trib. rapture It is in fact a false teaching. And should be avoided as other false teachings. this teaching not only fails to take in the all of Gods plan but can not be supported without throwing out/and or changing a good portion of Word of God. To make it fit into the scenrio rather than the other way around.
Are you silencing me? Where is your scriptural support for your accusation of false teaching? Preterism is untenable? How? Preterism rejects "sound" eschatology? How? It is not preterism that changes God's Word to fit its system--it is the futurist who refuses to accept ALL the time references in the Scriptures that confine certain events to certain times. Jesus LITERALLY said "this generation" yet futurists twist it to me another generation.Jesus said He was coming back to some of those standing there with Him--yet futurists twist this to me something else (Mat. 16:28).Jesus told Caiaphas that he would see His COMING, but futurists ignore this and do not take Jesus' words LITERAllY. (Mat. 26:64).Jesus told His disciples, whom He sent out to the lost sheep of Israel, that THEY would not finish going through the cities of Israel before He CAME (Mat. 10:23). Futurists have no "tenable" answer for why they do not take this LITERALLY.kriss: Could you come up with some arguments that are your own rather than copying them from others (e.g. material from Michael D. Macon, 1997)? How do you know what he says is correct? Have you studied the issues yourself or are you relying on the words others because you like what they say?It seems that it is only futurists, especially dispensationalists, who can pick and choose what is literal and what is not!JesusReigns

 

[HammerStone]

Your condescension for my posting is really bordering on annoying at this point. Yet again you either enjoy playing games or you demonstrate a complete lack of ability to properly interpret my posts when I am telling you what is going on about my own posts. You're talking to an English major, I almost guarantee I know more about our language than you do so I really don't need your lessons on the language.It may surprise you that "you" can be used in a general sense.Matthew 5:13Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.Following your logic, God's not talking to us here...
No, Jesus did not know the day or the hour--no man did. But He knew the time frame and He told His disciples there with Him the time frame--THIS generation! Will you not accept Jesus' clear words?
Once I saw you repeated the same stuff once again, I skipped over the rest. It's of no real interest to me. Jesus said tribulation unlike any other. I'd say common sense would say that tens of millions dieing is far different from hundreds of thousands.As I illustrated above. Jesus knew the hour because it was by his allowance only that he was taken. He had previously preached that he'd rise on the third day. Clearly, if you read this, Matthew 24 is refering to a different time, the end of the age, where Christ returns.

 

[JesusReigns]

(Denver;11854)
Your condescension for my posting is really bordering on annoying at this point. Yet again you either enjoy playing games or you demonstrate a complete lack of ability to properly interpret my posts when I am telling you what is going on about my own posts. You're talking to an English major, I almost guarantee I know more about our language than you do so I really don't need your lessons on the language.It may surprise you that "you" can be used in a general sense.Matthew 5:13Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.Following your logic, God's not talking to us here...Once I saw you repeated the same stuff once again, I skipped over the rest. It's of no real interest to me. Jesus said tribulation unlike any other. I'd say common sense would say that tens of millions dieing is far different from hundreds of thousands.As I illustrated above. Jesus knew the hour because it was by his allowance only that he was taken. He had previously preached that he'd rise on the third day. Clearly, if you read this, Matthew 24 is refering to a different time, the end of the age, where Christ returns.
Hello fellow English major! I am also a seminary graduate (magna cum laude)--and have continued studying the languages since graduating! I don't normally bring that up but since you did-- I am condescending?If you had continued reading my post, you would have known that I do understand that YOU can be used in a general sense. Can be! But when it is used in the context of someone speaking directly to someone (e.g. Matthew 24) about things that are going to happen to them, it is not used in a general sense but a restrictive and direct sense. Again, where did Jesus say that the number of dead was the qualifying factor in making it the worst time in all of history? He didn't! It was the nature of it that made it the worst--not the body count!You do not understand logic. Of course Matthew 5:13 has broad applications! And, of course, Jesus is speaking to all Christians in Matthew 5:13! Jesus is not speaking of any restrictive historical events; He is speaking in general terms. He did not mention wars and rumors of wars and then say, "at the time, you will be the salt of the earth!" There is no time restriction in Matthew 5:13. Can you not see the difference between the general applications of this passage and the specific time-restrictive nature of Matthew 24?Since you brought up your great qualifications as an English major, perhaps you can justify your misspelled words (e.g. dieing [dying]; refering [referring]). Maybe they are typos! You don't know me and my educational background. I have read many posts full of sentence fragments, misplaced modifiers, and dangling participles. I never say anything about that because it is not that significant. As long as I can understand what a poster is attempting to say, the grammar is not important. These boards are not restricted to English majors! However, when someone proudly boasts of his educational qualifications and claims to be an expert, he makes himself fair game for criticism. I rarely, if ever, bring up my education. Even though I have studied Greek and Hebrew (seven years of formal education), I do not consider myself a scholar or an expert. I still have much to learn.All I want to do is look at a passage of Scripture and consider it within its context and with proper attention to audience relevance. I endeavor to answer these questions: whom was it written to; why was it written; what was going on in the lives of those who first heard it; what did the words mean to them, etc.? Are these not sound hermeneutical principles and correct exegetical practices? Isn't this what we all seek to do? Why do you find fault when I simply take the words Jesus spoke at face value?JesusReigns

 

[jodycour]

Sounds like too many Majors for Me!

 

[n2thelight]

JRSince you seem to think that Matt 24 has already happened let me give a few verses and you tell me whenMatthew 24:14 "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."Being that all of the Gospels had yet to be written how could this have taken place?Matthew 24:30 "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."Or this?Matthew 24:31 "And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."Matthew 24:37 "But as the days of Noe were so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."Please tell me when this happened,and why is he not still here,and why are we still in flesh bodies?Matthew 24:42 "Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come."So Im I right in assuming that you are no longer watching for His return?And my last question,according to you Christ has already came.so!is He coming back,if so when?Please give scripture.

 

[Wakka]

And the fact that we are all still on earth, and not in heaven, or in hell.

 

[Christina]

N2read about his believe here 1st posthttp://www.christianityboard.com/warning-p...12499#post12499

 

[JesusReigns]

(n2thelight;11730)
JesusReignsHere is a study that will help you out,not only you but all who choose to read it.How to Enjoy the Bible E. W. Bullinger 1916PART I INTRODUCTORYA revelation in writing must necessarily be given in "words." The separate words, therefore, in which it is given must have the same importance and authority as the revelation as a whole. If we accept the Bible as a revelation from God, and receive it as inspired by God, we cannot separate the words of which that inspired revelation is made up, or admit the assertion "that the Bible contains the Word of God, but is not the Word of God." The position conveyed by such an expression is both illogical and impossible. As we design this work for those who accept the Scriptures as the Word of God, we do not propose to offer any arguments in proof of its inspiration. The Bible is its own best proof of its inspiration. It claims to be "the Word of God"; and if it be not what it claims to be, then it is not only not a "good book," but is unworthy of our further attention. We cannot understand the position of those who assert and believe that many of its parts are myths and forgeries, while at the same time they continue to write commentaries upon it, and accept their emoluments and dignities for preaching or lecturing about it. If we were told and believed that a bank-note in our possession is a forgery, we certainly should take no further interest in it, beyond mourning the loss which we had sustained. Our action would thus be consistent with our belief. We write, therefore, for those who, receiving the claims of the Scriptures as being the Word of God, desire to study it so as to understand it and enjoy it. When this claim is admitted, and a course of study is undertaken in this spirit, we shall be at once overwhelmed with proofs as to its truth; and on almost every page find abundant confirmation of our faith. The Bible simply claims to be the Word of God. It does not attempt to establish its claim, or seek to prove it. It merely assumes it and asserts it. It is for us to believe it or to leave it. Hence we do not now attempt to prove or establish that claim; but, believing it, our aim is to seek to understand what God has thus written for our learning. Nor do we attempt to explain the phenomena connected with Inspiration. We have no theories to offer, or suggestions to make, respecting it. We have the Divine explanation in Acts 3:18, where we read: "Those things which God before had showed by the mouth of all his prophets...he hath so fulfilled."The particular "things" referred to here are "that Christ should suffer"; but the assertion is comprehensive and includes all other things "showed" by God. Note, that it was God who, before, had showed them. It was the same God who had fulfilled them. The "mouth" was the mouth of "all His prophets," but they were not the prophets' words. They were the words of God. Hence, concerning other words, it is written: "This Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost, by the mouth of David, spake before concerning Judas" (Acts 1:16).It was David's "mouth," and David's pen, David's vocal organs, and David's hand; but they were not David's words. They were the words "which the Holy Ghost spake before concerning Judas." David knew nothing about Judas, David could not possibly have spoken anything about Judas. David's "mouth" spake concerning Ahithophel; but they were the words "which the Holy Ghost spake concerning Judas." David was "a prophet": and, being a prophet, he "spake as he was moved by the Holy Ghost" (2 Peter 1:21). Hence, in Psalm 16, he spake concerning the resurrection of the Lord Jesus (Acts 2:30,31). In the same way he "spake before concerning Judas." In like manner, in the Book of Exodus Moses wrote about the Tabernacle, but he himself did not and could not know what "the Holy Ghost signified" (Heb 9:8). Here, then, we have all that God condescends to tell us about the phenomena of inspiration. This is the Divine explanation of it; and this is all that can be known about it. It is not for us to explain this explanation, but to receive it and believe it; and there leave it. It is enough for us that God speaks to us; and that He says "Thus saith Jehovah." We do not question the fact; we believe it; and only seek to understand it. We desire to be in the position of those Thessalonian saints who, in this, "were ensamples to all that believe," and to whom it was written: "For this cause thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the Word of God, which effectually worketh in you that believe" (1 Thess 2:13). The Word of God is thus for those "that believe." The "Word" as a whole; and the "words" of which it is made up. They cannot be separated. It is Jeremiah who says (Jer 15:16): "THY WORDS were found,* and I did eat them; And THY WORD was unto me the joy and rejoicing of my heart: For I am called by Thy name, O Jehovah Elohim of hosts." * )camaf (matza'), to discover. Genesis 2:20. Here referring to the historic fact (2 Kings 22:8; 2 Chron 34:14,15) of the finding the book of the Law by Hilkiah in the reign of Josiah. Here again, it is those who are called by Jehovah's name who feed upon His "words," and rejoice in His "Word." The same distinction is made in the New Testament by the Lord Jesus in John 17: "I have given unto them the WORDS which thou gavest me" (v 8) "I have given them thy WORD" (v 14)Those who are referred to in the word "them" are described seven times over, as having been "given" to Christ by the Father.* * See verses, 2, 6, 9, 11, 12, 24. These had "received" the words; these had "known surely"; these had "believed" (v 8). It is for such as these we now write, who receive, believe, read, and desire to feed upon the "words" of God; that the "word" of God may become "a joy, and the rejoicing" of the heart (Jer 15:16, RV). True, this joy within will be tempered by trouble without. Jeremiah prefaces the statement, quoted above, with the words immediately preceding it in verse 15: "For Thy sake I have suffered rebuke."** hp@afr:xe (cherpah), reproach; and so nearly always rendered. And the Lord Jesus after saying (John 17:14): "I have given them Thy WORD."immediately adds, "And the world hath hated them."Those who thus feed upon and rejoice in God's Word will soon realize their isolated position; but, in spite of the "reproach" and "hatred" of the world, there will always be the "joy and rejoicing" of the heart. It was so on another occasion when the neglected Word of God was brought forth, "AND EZRA OPENED THE BOOK,"the people were assured that "the joy of the LORD was their strength" (Neh 8:5,10,12,17). And we are told: "So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading" (v 8).It must be the same with us if that "Word" and those "words" are to be the cause of our joy and rejoicing. And this is our object in writing now. We do not write for casual readers, or for those who read a daily portion of the Word merely as the performance of a duty and as a matter of form, but for those who "search the Scriptures," and who seek, in them, for Him of whom the Scriptures testify (John 5:39). Such a one was the eunuch who went up to Jerusalem from Ethiopia in Acts 8,. He sought the Saviour, but he did not find Him in Jerusalem. He found "religion" there, and plenty of it; but he did not find that Blessed One; for He had been rejected, "crucified, and slain." So the eunuch was returning, and was still seeking for the Living Word in the Written Word; "and, sitting in his chariot, read Isaiah the prophet." Being directed by the Divine Angel-messenger, Philip "ran thither to him and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah, and said UNDERSTANDEST THOU WHAT THOU READEST?And he said: "How can I except some man should guide me? "And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him" (Acts 8:27-31).Philip's question (v 30) implies (in the Greek) a doubt on Philip's part as to whether the eunuch did really understand. And the eunuch's reply (v 31) implies a negative answer. It begins with the word "for," which is not translated either in the AV or RV. If we supply the ellipsis of the negative which is so clearly implied we can then translate the word gar (gar), for; thus; "[No]: for how should I be able unless some one should guide me."Of course, the Holy Spirit Himself is THE guide and teacher of His own Word. But sometimes, as in this case, He sends a messenger, and uses human instruments and agencies. The word to guide is odhgew (hodegeo), to lead or guide in the way.* It is this guidance which the ordinary reader stands in need of to-day; and never more than to-day, when so many would-be guides are "blind leaders of the blind." On all hands there are so many attractions to draw readers out of "the way" altogether; and so many "good" books and "helps" to lead them astray. * From odoV (hodos), a way; and hgeomai (hegeomai), to lead. It occurs only in Matthew 15:14; Luke 6:39; John 16:13; Acts 8:31 and Revelation 7:17. It is used both in its literal or proper sense (Exo 13:17, 32:34; Num 24:8; Deut 1:33); and in a Tropical sense (Psa 5:8, 23:3, 25:5,9, 77:20, etc.). We cannot pretend to be a Philip, or to have his special commission. But, without assuming to teach others on such an important subject we may at least tell them what lines of study we have ourselves found helpful; and what principles we have found useful in our own searchings of God's Word. But these will be useless unless we are first prepared to unlearn. If any think they know all, or that they have exhausted the Divine Word; or that what they set out to learn is only to be in addition to what they already know, instead of sometimes in substitution for it, then we shall be of little service to them: and they need not follow us any further. When we come to ask ourselves, and say, "Where did I learn this?" "How did I get this?" "Who taught me this?" it is astonishing to find how much we have imbibed from man, and from tradition; and not directly and for ourselves, from the Word of God. All that we have learned from our youth up must be tested and proved by the Word of God. Where we find it is true we must learn it over again, from God. And where it will not stand the test of His Word we must be not only content, but thankful to give it up; and receive Divine revelation in the place of man's imagination. With these introductory remarks we shall proceed to divide what we may call our essential and fundamental principles of Bible study into two parts: First, those connected with THE "WORD" as a whole; and Second: those connected with THE "WORDS" of which the Word is composed.http://philologos.org/__eb-htetb/1intro.htm
n2thelight: What was it that I was to learn from the above because I am in agreement with it. Especially--"All that we have learned from our youth up must be tested and proved by the Word of God. Where we find it is true we must learn it over again, from God. And where it will not stand the test of His Word we must be not only content, but thankful to give it up; and receive Divine revelation in the place of man's imagination."That has been my question here. Are we willing to lay it all on the line and give up anything, no matter how long held or how precious or how ooey-gooey it makes us feel, for the truth of God's Word? JesusReigns

 

[Christina]

So you think that means follow another mans doctrine what it means is we must stop listening to men and listen to God all you have done is trade one mans teaching for another's.Let me ask you something do you realize this doctrine of yours is from the exact same false doctrine as the Rapture theory? Do you know what happened to the church of Thess. In thess lthey thought Christ had already returned, the church was a combination of Jews and gentiles and had been deluded into believing that the second coming had already come and their being caught up was imminent. In llThess. Paul corrects them telling them not to let any man deceive them that the second coming will not occur till after the rebelling and the son of perdition the man of lawlessness comes(coming of antichrist) Now you can argue all you like that Satan has always been here. But then you have to Ignore Rev. and half the bible to do so. You are following the same doctrine as the Thess in l Thess claiming that Christ has already come yes that's the same doctrine the rapture people follow the one Paul says was in ERROR untill you can get past the false doctrine of lThess. the same mistake they fell for you are going to continue to be mislead. YOU ARE FOLLOWING THE SAME LIE YOU DID WHEN YOU BELIEVED RAPTURE BOTH DOCTRINES ARE FALSE BOTH COME FROM SAME LIEwhether you believe lie #1. Christ has already returnedor lie #2. our gathering to lord is imminent (before the last trump)they are but different parts of the same Errors

 

[JesusReigns]

(n2thelight;12506)
JRSince you seem to think that Matt 24 has already happened let me give a few verses and you tell me whenMatthew 24:14 "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."Being that all of the Gospels had yet to be written how could this have taken place?Matthew 24:30 "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."Or this?Matthew 24:31 "And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."Matthew 24:37 "But as the days of Noe were so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."Please tell me when this happened,and why is he not still here,and why are we still in flesh bodies?Matthew 24:42 "Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come."So Im I right in assuming that you are no longer watching for His return?And my last question,according to you Christ has already came.so!is He coming back,if so when?Please give scripture.
n2thelight: I will gladly respond to your questions and then I would like you to kindly respond to mine.Matthew 24:14--where does it say here, n2thelight, that all the WRITTEN Gospels (i.e. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) were be preached? Notice that it says "the gospel of THE KINGDOM" not the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John!What was the gospel of the kingdom? First of all, the kingdom was already in that day AT HAND was it not? And was not the kingdom which Jesus preached a kingdom "not of this world?" For clarification and the time frame for the fulfillment, consider Paul's words in Romans 1:8--"First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the WHOLE world." Clearly, the gospel they believe was known THEN throughout the whole world.Colossian 1:6, 23--Paul thanks God for the Colossians and their faith in the truth of the gospel which had come to them, "as it has also in ALL THE WORLD" (verse 6). Again, their faith in the gospel was already in their day known "in ALL the world." Paul exhorts them to continue in this faith "not moved from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to EVERY creature under heaven" (verse 23). Nowhere did Jesus ever imply that the gospel of the kingdom was to be preached to everyone everywhere throughout all of time as some contend. And again, it was not the written words of the GOSPELS that were to be preached but the "gospel of the kingdom." These are two very different things.Matthew 24:30, 31--First of all, we must acknowledge the small word "then." When is then? It is after His disciples right there with Him themselves were to see the abomination of desolation (verse 15). It is after the tribulation of THOSE days (see verse 9). It is the tribulation which was to involve THOSE disciples--when THEY were to be killed and THEY were to be hated by all nations. That is the time frame--AD 66-70. THEN the SIGN of the Son of Man in heaven would appear. The tribes certainly mourned when they saw the sign of His coming--the destruction of their city and temple! This was His coming in power and glory--often associated with the presence of the "clouds of heaven." The OT covenantal system with its types and shadows and impotent Judaic rules and regulations was no more. It was during this time that ALL the nations of the earth were blessed in fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham. All of faith, both Jew and Gentile, were His people. No longer would worship take place in a physical city and in a building made with hands (see John 4 and the Samaritan woman). The angels with trumpet sound gathered all the elect of God--they were changed in the twinkling of an eye and caught up, both living and dead (1 Thes. 4) and met the Lord in the air.Paul spoke of this time with great anticipation, expecting to be personally involved in it! When he says WE who are alive, he means himself and his fellow first-century saints. All of this coincides with the trumpet events of Revelation (also restricted to THAT time frame by the opening and closing verses!--SHORTLY and NEAR). Why is Jesus to be here, n2thelight? This is not the heavenly country desired by Abraham and all those of faith (Heb. 11). They longed for a BETTER, a HEAVENLY COUNTRY. Why? Because that is where Jesus is--in His kingdom NOT of this world. Jesus came again to show the way--to take those first-century saints with Him to the Father as He promised in John 14. They were to follow Him AFTERWARD. He is NOT coming back yet a third time--(although He is always with us). We go to Him since He has now made the way! I think a lot of confusion comes from a desire to have a kingdom of this earth. But Jesus clearly said that His kingdom is not of this world and flesh and blood cannot inherit it. Why do we long for Abraham that for which he himself never longed (See Hebrews 11)? Those of faith of the OT saw the promises afar off and sought a heavenly country not a physical country!We remain in these physical bodies until they die--but yet we live! That is the impact of the words--if we die, yet we live; if we live, we never die! Death has been destroyed! Corruption puts on incorruption and mortality puts on immortality. We are raised something DIFFERENT from what we were sown (See 1 Corinthians 15). Is that to say that our physical bodies are evil? No! But they are not heavenly and were never meant to be. We must get over our love affair with them. We must get over feeling that we are denying the resurrection if we deny a physical resurrection at death.You are correct. I do not look for the coming of My Lord. When I shed this outer shell, I will go to Him. WE were not told to watch--His disciples right there with Him and those of that century were to watch. Look again at the contexts of Matthew 24 and 25. We are not the primary recipients of Jesus' words and were never meant to be. THEY were to watch because He was coming for TO and FOR THEM!JesusReigns(NOW)

 

[Christina]

Paul spoke of this time with great anticipation, expecting to be personally involved in it! When he says WE who are alive, he means himself and his fellow first-century saints. All of this coincides with the trumpet events of Revelation (also restricted to THAT time frame by the opening and closing verses!--SHORTLY and NEAR). you are just plain wrong Paul corrected them in ll Thess. You are completley misinterpting the scripture just as the raptureist do. 1Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, 2not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come. 3Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for (that day will not come) until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness[a] is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God. 5Don't you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things?concering What? THE COMING OF THE LORDa REPORT SAID TO HAVE COME FOR US. NOT THAT IT DID COME FROM THEMSAYING THAT THE LORDs DAY HAS COME (this is his coming) IT WILL NOT COME TILL AFTER the man of sin,the rebellionWHAT IS THIS REBELLION? HE WILL EXALT HIMSELF ABOVE ALL OVER EVERYTHING He sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God WHEN DID THIS EVER HAPPEN

 

[JesusReigns]

(kriss;12814)
Paul spoke of this time with great anticipation, expecting to be personally involved in it! When he says WE who are alive, he means himself and his fellow first-century saints. All of this coincides with the trumpet events of Revelation (also restricted to THAT time frame by the opening and closing verses!--SHORTLY and NEAR). you are just plain wrong Paul corrected them in ll Thess. You are completley misinterpting the scripture just as the raptureist do. 1Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, 2not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come. 3Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for (that day will not come) until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness[a] is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God. 5Don't you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things?concering What? THE COMING OF THE LORDa REPORT SAID TO HAVE COME FOR US. NOT THAT IT DID COME FROM THEMSAYING THAT THE LORDs DAY HAS COME (this is his coming) IT WILL NOT COME TILL AFTER the man of sin,the rebellionWHAT IS THIS REBELLION? HE WILL EXALT HIMSELF ABOVE ALL OVER EVERYTHING He sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God WHEN DID THIS EVER HAPPEN
kriss: How could they have thought that the Lord had already come except that THEY had been expecting it to happen in THEIR lifetimes? Paul, by correcting them and telling the Thessalonians that Christ had not yet come, nowhere says that His coming was then not to happen for nearly two thousand years and counting! Paul still expected it in THEIR lifetimes--he was merely saying that it had not yet happened but it was ABOUT to! Why did the Thessalonians so easily believe that false report--because THEY were anticipating Jesus' soon return to THEM! They expected a return whose nature made it possible for them to think it had already occurred. Paul did not correct that concept--only the timing. Notice that Paul didn't say "don't let anyone deceive you for that day is not to come until many, many years from now!" You are assuming that the man of sin has not yet come and, therefore, wrongly teach that Jesus has not yet come. First of all, what temple would Paul have had in mind? Some future temple or the one then in existence? I think that the latter is much more reasonable. It is the temple his readers would have thought of also. In addition, Paul speaks of the mystery of lawlessness being already at work in that time! He gives no indication that he is thinking of some antichrist many years into the future!The entire context of this passage (1-12) deals with the parousia. Whom is Paul concerned about being deceived? His first-century readers! He had written to them previously about these matters. Paul reminds his original readers that THEY know who NOW restrains the man of sin. The man of sin and the restrainer are contemporaneous. We may never know with exactness their identities, but we can know the time frame of their existence--pre-AD 70!JesusReigns

 

[Christina]

You are giving nothing but speculation if you study the history at the time you will see a group (the name escapes me at the moment) infiltrated the Thessalonians with this doctrine it was never taught by Paul. Are we ignore the rest of scripture on your speculations. No one know the hour or the day yet you claim it already happened. You claim to know what near means based on what. Your concusions? We are specifically told not to believe this doctrine of Christ already coming yet you continue to deny Gods word for your own then question why we call your doctrine false

 

[JesusReigns]

(kriss;12820)
You are giving nothing but speculation if you study the history at the time you will see a group (the name escapes me at the moment) infiltrated the Thessalonians with this doctrine it was never taught by Paul. Are we ignore the rest of scripture on your speculations. No one know the hour or the day yet you claim it already happened. You claim to know what near means based on what. Your concusions? We are specifically told not to believe this doctrine of Christ already coming yet you continue to deny Gods word for your own then question why we call your doctrine false
I only know the day and the hour because it is behind us! Jesus did not know the day or the hour, but He knew the time frame--THIS generation.kriss, will you please deal with Scriptures. I question your calling a doctrine false when it is NOT my doctrine but God's doctrine! I merely gave you the very words of Jesus, yet you do not deal with them. Jesus said those words in the verses I gave you--not I. Why don't you question why He said "There are some standing HERE who will not taste death till THEY see the Son of Man COMING in His kingdom" (Mat. 16:28). Did I say that? No! Jesus said that. Your problem is with Him and not with me, my friend! He also told His original disciples in Matthew 10:23--"YOU will not have gone through the cities of Israel BEFORE the Son of Man COMES." Again, these are NOT my words--they are Jesus' words. Do you have a problem with His words? I give these same verses because you continually ignore them and make accusations against me when all I am doing is quoting JESUS! What did Jesus clearly mean?JesusReigns

 

[Christina]

It is not Gods doctrine He warned us against it even a child could see thishttp://www.companionbiblecondensed.com/NT/...hessalonian.pdf

 

[JesusReigns]

(kriss;12825)
It is not Gods doctrine He warned us against it even a child could see thishttp://www.companionbiblecondensed.com/NT/...hessalonian.pdf
More statements without content. Will you prove your statements with Scripture?JesusReigns