Not a future seeing Jesus coming guy

[HealthyShape]

You dissed "the Lego"

Nothing personal :) Until one steps on one piece on the floor bare foot.

 

[HealthyShape]

When Jesus ascended the two men standing by told the disciples that Jesus would return again to that same place - the Mount of Olives.

They did not tell the disciples that Jesus would return again to the same place. They said He will return in the same way. That was my point in the previous post.

“Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”
Acts 1:11 NIV

I think you are subconsciously reading your preconceived views into it.

 

[Douggg]

I think we are running in circles :) You repeat your views and I repeat that these views are not the New Testament eschatology...

Christian eschatology is the study of the end times. It is not limited to what is written in the New Testament. But also includes what is written in the Old Testament.

You are mislabeling Christian eschatology as New Testament eshcatology in order to disregard the time of the end events in the Old Testament that prove the preterist view incorrect.

 

[HealthyShape]

Christian eschatology is the study of the end times. It is not limited to what is written in the New Testament. But also includes what is written in the Old Testament.

You are mislabeling Christian eschatology as New Testament eshcatology in order to disregard the time of the end events in the Old Testament that prove the preterist view incorrect.

My opinion is that without the New Testament explanation you have no way of knowing what of the Old Testament applies to Christian view of the last days and in what way. It is all your wild guessing.

Again, you are just sticking pieces together like a Lego project, without any certainty if the result is correct. You have no way of knowing what is for what time, what is literal, what is symbolic and if symbolic, then of what. You are not inspired.

 

[claninja]

No I wouldn't argue that since there is something better from the NT to argue with, meaning Revelation 22:1.

Let me show some of my reasoning.

Zechariah 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.


This verse is a contradiction if verse 9 is literally true when the following verse below is true at the time. It matters zero how one might interpret 2 Thessalonians 2:4.

2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.


No way when you add 2 Thessalonians 2:4 do you then end up with---in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one. Therefore, Zechariah 14:9 has to be meaning once 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is no longer true.

Zechariah 14:8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.


And that this is clearly meaning when Zechariah 14:9 is meaning. And that Revelation 22:1 that I brought up is not meaning when 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is meaning. It is meaning after 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is no longer true. As to John 7:37-39, that is valid all throughout the NT church era. Which could mean it's valid all the way up to His return in the end of this age, or that it's only valid all the way up until 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is initially true. Either way Zechariah 14:8 is not meaning during the NT church era since it is involving Zechariah 14:9 and that verse 9 can't be fulfilled until after 2 Thessalonians 2:4 has been fulfilled in it's entirety first.

I don’t think I would agree with that logic for two reasons.

First, Zechariah 12:10 is said to be fulfilled at the crucifixion in John 19:37. While Revelation 1:7 alludes to the same verse, John 19 presents the actual fulfillment. By analogy, Zechariah 14:8 (“living waters”) seems to find its fulfillment in the outpouring of the Spirit described in John 7:38–39, while Revelation 22 reuses that imagery typologically in the new creation. We don’t want to cherry pick echoes, as you said before.

Second, Zechariah 12–14 forms one unified oracle, characterized by many “on that day” statements. The New Testament already applies some of those to the crucifixion (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Therefore, it’s problematic for your position if you claim that every “on that day” must refer to the same, still future, eschatological moment.

 

[Douggg]

My opinion is that without the New Testament explanation you have no way of knowing what of the Old Testament applies to Christian view of the last days and in what way. It is all your wild guessing.

Correct understanding of the end times comes from God.

God spoke through the prophets in the Old Testament about what will take place in the end times.

This table I made is not a guess, but a list of the 15 time of the end time frame of events in the bible.



This table is how those time of the end times fit together.

 

[HealthyShape]

Correct understanding of the end times comes from God.

God spoke through the prophets in the Old Testament about what will take place in the end times.

But without the New Testament revelation you have no way of knowing what those prophecies meant. You just cherry pick what is literal and what is not. Like for example Jerusalem or Israel have to be literal, but horses or swords must not - just because you say so.

This table I made is not a guess, but a list of the 15 time of the end time frame of events in the bible.
This table is how those time of the end times fit together.

More Legos. I am beginning to suspect you are just looking for an opportunity to post them. You know I am not interested in them.

 

[claninja]

Actually claninja Acts 1: 11 & 12 refer to this Mount of Olives and the Lord returning there.

"Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing into heaven? This same Jesus who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven."

Then they returned to Jerusalem from the Mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem. a Sabbath day`s journey.` (Acts 1: 11 & 12)

possible, but my point was that no NT passage alludes to Zechariah 14 and then states something along the lines of “and this fulfilled the words of Zechariah”. So any interpretation is subjective, and most likely biased by eschatological framework

 

[Davidpt]

I don’t think I would agree with that logic for two reasons.

First, Zechariah 12:10 is said to be fulfilled at the crucifixion in John 19:37. While Revelation 1:7 alludes to the same verse, John 19 presents the actual fulfillment. By analogy, Zechariah 14:8 (“living waters”) seems to find its fulfillment in the outpouring of the Spirit described in John 7:38–39, while Revelation 22 reuses that imagery typologically in the new creation. We don’t want to cherry pick echoes, as you said before.

Second, Zechariah 12–14 forms one unified oracle, characterized by many “on that day” statements. The New Testament already applies some of those to the crucifixion (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Therefore, it’s problematic for your position if you claim that every “on that day” must refer to the same, still future, eschatological moment.

Since Zechariah 14:8 is obviously meaning during Zechariah 14:9, you then need to provide a reasonable answer that one could maybe agree with, in regards to one of the points I raised. Meaning the following.

2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.


When this is being fulfilled, regardless what it looks like when being fulfilled, regardless when it is fulfilled, how is it reasonable that then equals this at the time---And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one(Zechariah 14:9 )?

Since there can only be one Lord when Zechariah 14:9 is meaning, should we then take that to mean the one meant in 2 Thessalonians 2:4?


Where I come from contradictions do not equal truth. Maybe where others come from contradictions equal truth. Clearly, 2 Thessalonians 2:4 contradicts Zechariah 14:9 if both are true at the same time.

 

[Douggg]

But without the New Testament revelation you have no way of knowing what those prophecies meant. You just cherry pick what is literal and what is not. Like for example Jerusalem or Israel have to be literal, but horses or swords must not - just because you say so.

The time frames of the 15 time of the end passages are literal.

Jerusalem and Israel are literal. The 70 weeks of Daniel 9 have been determined on Daniel's people the Jews and Jerusalem.

More Legos. I am beginning to suspect you are just looking for an opportunity to post them. You know I am not interested in them.

I know that you are not interested in understanding the end times prophecies that God gave in the Old Testament. The Gog/Magog attack on Israel will happen soon.

 

[Davidpt]

I don’t think I would agree with that logic for two reasons.

First, Zechariah 12:10 is said to be fulfilled at the crucifixion in John 19:37. While Revelation 1:7 alludes to the same verse, John 19 presents the actual fulfillment. By analogy, Zechariah 14:8 (“living waters”) seems to find its fulfillment in the outpouring of the Spirit described in John 7:38–39, while Revelation 22 reuses that imagery typologically in the new creation. We don’t want to cherry pick echoes, as you said before.

Second, Zechariah 12–14 forms one unified oracle, characterized by many “on that day” statements. The New Testament already applies some of those to the crucifixion (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Therefore, it’s problematic for your position if you claim that every “on that day” must refer to the same, still future, eschatological moment.

If you have the living waters in Zechariah 14:8 meaning the Holy Spirit, you do realize that you have to apply the Holy Spirit to this part as well, right? half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea. IOW, the 'them' meant is obviously meaning these same living waters. And if these living waters are meaning the Holy Spirit, we are then left to understand the text like such---half of the Holy Spirit toward the former sea, and half of the Holy Spirit toward the hinder sea.

And that makes sense of the text exactly how? As if the Holy Spirit can be divided in half.

 

[claninja]

Since Zechariah 14:8 is obviously meaning during Zechariah 14:9, you then need to provide a reasonable answer that one could maybe agree with, in regards to one of the points I raised. Meaning the following.

2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.


When this is being fulfilled, regardless what it looks like when being fulfilled, regardless when it is fulfilled, how is it reasonable that then equals this at the time---And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one(Zechariah 14:9 )?

Since there can only be one Lord when Zechariah 14:9 is meaning, should we then take that to mean the one meant in 2 Thessalonians 2:4?


Where I come from contradictions do not equal truth. Maybe where others come from contradictions equal truth. Clearly, 2 Thessalonians 2:4 contradicts Zechariah 14:9 if both are true at the same time.

Again, Zechariah 12-14 is one long oracle with multiple “on that day” prophecies throughout it.

Some of those “on that day” prophecies are about the crucifixion (Zechariah 12:10, 13:7).

So, Is it your position that every single “on that day” prophecy throughout Zechariah 12-14 should be fulfilled in the literal exact same 24 hour window?

 

[claninja]

If you have the living waters in Zechariah 14:8 meaning the Holy Spirit, you do realize that you have to apply the Holy Spirit to this part as well, right? half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea. IOW, the 'them' meant is obviously meaning these same living waters. And if these living waters are meaning the Holy Spirit, we are then left to understand the text like such---half of the Holy Spirit toward the former sea, and half of the Holy Spirit toward the hinder sea.

And that makes sense of the text exactly how? As if the Holy Spirit can be divided in half.

You seem to be applying literalism to an apocalyptic text. Why would the living waters be symbolic for the spirit but the flow of these living waters to the east and west seas be literal?

 

[Brakelite]

My opinion is that without the New Testament explanation you have no way of knowing what of the Old Testament applies to Christian view of the last days and in what way. It is all your wild guessing.

Again, you are just sticking pieces together like a Lego project, without any certainty if the result is correct. You have no way of knowing what is for what time, what is literal, what is symbolic and if symbolic, then of what. You are not inspired.

With the above being your current conclusion, then I suggest you are listening to the wrong people.

 

[Moontan13]

But this is not the teaching of the New Testament. And that is your problem which you can not deal with. You ignore it...

The NT does not mention this prophecy at all, like if it had nothing to do with the last days. Or, like if it added nothing to the New Testament eschatology.

Prayer and study and Prayer and study is the only response to things we don't understand. Some people can hold two or more conflicting ideas without feeling it necessary to make a decision, especially when a decision doesn't make a difference in what we do. Escatology is interesting, but I want to be better at witnessing, and hope the return of Christ allows for more souls to be saved.

 

[HealthyShape]

With the above being your current conclusion, then I suggest you are listening to the wrong people.

You mean the New Testament authors? Jews did not read the prophecy in the way Christians began to interpret them.

It is a known fact. Jews read it mostly literally (similarly to today's futurists), while Christians frequently (not always) spiritually/metaphorically.

 

[HealthyShape]

Prayer and study and Prayer and study is the only response to things we don't understand. Some people can hold two or more conflicting ideas without feeling it necessary to make a decision, especially when a decision doesn't make a difference in what we do. Escatology is interesting, but I want to be better at witnessing, and hope the return of Christ allows for more souls to be saved.

Yes, eschatology is not something that should change our daily life. We can die today and who will care what was our view of the rapture or of the 1,000 years.

What matters is our deeds, not views. How we behave towards our close ones or even online.

 

[HealthyShape]

The time frames of the 15 time of the end passages are literal.

Jerusalem and Israel are literal. The 70 weeks of Daniel 9 have been determined on Daniel's people the Jews and Jerusalem.

70 weeks ended in the 1st century AD. Not in 2025 AD.

1. 70 weeks (490 years) was left for Israel and for the city since the decree to rebuild Jerusalem (457/458 BCE, Artaxerxes' decree to Ezra).

2. Then the Messiah was supposed to come (-457+490 = cca 33 AD) and the temple and the city (Jerusalem) to be destroyed ("this generation" = 70 AD).

I know that you are not interested in understanding the end times prophecies that God gave in the Old Testament. The Gog/Magog attack on Israel will happen soon.

Well, they should have a lot of horses, swords and shields prepared, then.

I am not interested in useless charts and tables that are just your personal speculations. I know generally that you are a futurist focused on physical Israel instead of on church. I do not need to read the details of your view again and again when I do not even accept your basic premises.

 

[Davidpt]

You seem to be applying literalism to an apocalyptic text. Why would the living waters be symbolic for the spirit but the flow of these living waters to the east and west seas be literal?

You basically use block logic, right? If yes, is there any reason block logic and step logic can't be used together? In my mind, when it comes to prophecies in general, prophecies make no sense unless there is at least coherent chronology involved.

Take this for instance---and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee(Zechariah 14:5). In my mind this clearly agrees with Revelation 19:11, 14, for one. Which then means that Zechariah 14:8-9 can't precede Revelation 19:11, 14, but must follow it.

Then there is also this in Zechariah 14:5--- And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains--which could possibly be agreeing with this in Revelation 6---Revelation 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:


And could possibly be agreeing with this in Isaiah 2----Isaiah 2:19 And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth.


If I am correct about any and all of these connections, Zechariah 14:8 can't fit John 7:38 in that case since Zechariah 14:8 would be involving an era of time after He has returned in the end of this age, not before He returns. Does that then make the living waters literal? Maybe, maybe not. We could also compare with the following in Ezekiel 47. Would anyone take any of that to be involving John 7:38?

Ezekiel 47:7 Now when I had returned, behold, at the bank of the river were very many trees on the one side and on the other.
8 Then said he unto me, These waters issue out toward the east country, and go down into the desert, and go into the sea: which being brought forth into the sea, the waters shall be healed.
9 And it shall come to pass, that every thing that liveth, which moveth, whithersoever the rivers shall come, shall live: and there shall be a very great multitude of fish, because these waters shall come thither: for they shall be healed; and every thing shall live whither the river cometh.
10 And it shall come to pass, that the fishers shall stand upon it from Engedi even unto Eneglaim; they shall be a place to spread forth nets; their fish shall be according to their kinds, as the fish of the great sea, exceeding many.
11 But the miry places thereof and the marishes thereof shall not be healed; they shall be given to salt.
12 And by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side and on that side, shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth new fruit according to his months, because their waters they issued out of the sanctuary: and the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medicine.


Interestingly enough, for example, verse 12 matches Revelation 22:1-2 to a T. Clearly, the tree of life is meant in verse 12 since it obviously requires a never ending age in order to fulfill this---whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed.

 

[Brakelite]

You mean the New Testament authors? Jews did not read the prophecy in the way Christians began to interpret them.

It is a known fact. Jews read it mostly literally (similarly to today's futurists), while Christians frequently (not always) spiritually/metaphorically.

Mmm. Something else the Jews and today's futurists (not all) have in common. Just as the Jews didn't recognise their Messiah when He came, so also do many today go chasing after the next celebrity speaker and the next false prophet to await the rapture. Both the Jews and the futurists (all of them in one sense or another), are deceived by taking the prophecies too literally.