Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I see nothing in your references that offers a time frame, btw, I don't need to "protect" my POV, it stands well on its own. Remember, when you point a finger at someone else there are always three pointing back at you.
Obviously you haven't bothered to read my post #55, where I show that since Jesus came, those 'cut off' are ones who refuse to believe in Him.Circumcision made one a physical Jew and a physical member of Israel. If not circumcised on the eighth day, they were cut off and remained gentiles.
Cut off in the OT happened as a result of not being circumcised. This means since Jesus abolished circumcision, there are no biblical Jews or Israel today apart from the Church and Christ.Obviously you haven't bothered to read my post #55, where I show that since Jesus came, those 'cut off' are ones who refuse to believe in Him.
Paul is unequivocal; physical circumcision now counts for nothing. Galatians 5:2-4
Circumcision made one a physical Jew and a physical member of Israel. If not circumcised on the eighth day, they were cut off and remained gentiles.
That is okay, but your understanding of who the people are that fulfils the prophecies cannot be found in the scriptures either. So from that perspective, the Bible does not support your theories either. It is just your opinion.
Perhaps you should also consider your finger pointing wisdom as well.
Now have a good day now.
This is OT history and fact.Well, if that's what you want to believe, more power to you.
I ask Him and He answers and that is how I know Him, and there are a lot of other things that few know of, so I know I a min the right place. To put it as Paul put it,
Php 3:7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
Php 3:8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
Php 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
Php 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
there is no ten question of the bible to enter in to heaven, and there are many to whom can quote it in 5 different languages to whom He will say, I never knew you".
You are the one telling the story now.
The reference to a brothel was with respect to where I lived and if the waves get up the asset for the reason for the popularity of that areas could soon be washed away.
The watershed I was referring to was out western Queensland near Eulo to highlight that the ranges separating river systems in that region are not very high, if you know what I mean.
Except I'm not saying that Christ is not coming again. All I'm saying is that people who point to those particular signs in Matt 24 as "his return is now!" signs, miss the obvious: Christ himself tells us that these signs will be "but the beginning of birthpangs", rather than signs of his imminent arrival, and that these signs are, biblically and historically, proven to be a regulars in the interadvental period. That makes any such 'sounding the warning' of his impending return at any second based on these particular signs dishonest. These signs were present when the Disciples were alive, they were present in the Dark Ages, and the time of the Reformation, and they are present now. The only honest thing we can, biblically, say about these signs is that, just as labor pains, they grow in intensity and frequency. But even then it is impossible to announce Christ's coming within the next 'little bit' with any certainty, as we have no idea how bad these birth pangs are going to get.2 Peter 3:3-4
What do you think my "understanding" is and stop playing games, if have a theory to enlighten us all with, o benevolent one, just spit it out.
I'm telling the story? Hardly. And...I wonder if you realise your second sentence doesn't make sense...at all. As in, I see the individual words, but together they don't actually make a sensible sentence.
And honestly, if you're going to use words like brothel and watershed to describe land features, you need to be absolutely sure the person you're talking to already knows those phrases in reference to what you're talking about or the specific areas in question. Because otherwise people are just going to think you're slightly odd and come away from a conversation with you confused.
Except I'm not saying that Christ is not coming again. All I'm saying is that people who point to those particular signs in Matt 24 as "his return is now!" signs, miss the obvious: Christ himself tells us that these signs will be "but the beginning of birthpangs", rather than signs of his imminent arrival, and that these signs are, biblically and historically, proven to be a regulars in the interadvental period. That makes any such 'sounding the warning' of his impending return at any second based on these particular signs dishonest. These signs were present when the Disciples were alive, they were present in the Dark Ages, and the time of the Reformation, and they are present now. The only honest thing we can, biblically, say about these signs is that, just as labor pains, they grow in intensity and frequency. But even then it is impossible to announce Christ's coming within the next 'little bit' with any certainty, as we have no idea how bad these birth pangs are going to get.
That the beast and the false prophet, i.e. the little horn, will be captured first by Christ and thrown into the lake of fire towards the end of the next age.
So be it Naomi25. I am sorry that you do not have the ability to understand what is written.
I will ask the question again in simple English. Where do you live in Australia? A general locality, i.e. the central coast of NSW,
will sufficer to provide an understanding.
The most important sign is that the "fig tree" budded in May of 1948, it leafed out in 1967 with the Six Day War and the regaining of Jerusalem and the fruit will come when the nation of Israel finally accepts that Jesus is their Messiah ("in the end, all Israel will be saved"). Zechariah 12:10 tells of that time.
At the end of WWII, there were just a handful of Jewish believers in Jesus. Before the Nazis, there were probably 250,000 Jewish-Christians spread throughout Europe and they were almost ALL lost in the Holocaust. Satan hates the Jews, he hates Christians and he REALLY hates Jewish believers in Jesus, it seems. Just a handful survived to make aliyah to Israel. Belief in Jesus is now flourishing in Israel--there are at least 250,000 believers there today. They have even been promised their own seats in the Knesset, as they have formed their own political group.
I'm not sure you can accuse my lack of understanding on my ability to read what you've written. I ask you, what about this sentence makes sense:
"The reference to a brothel was with respect to where I lived (of course, I should understand immediately an area of Australia being called a brothel) and if the waves get up (okay, if the waves "get up"...I might assume is a reference to the rising sea levels? But it's not really the most clear way to state it) the asset for the reason for ("the asset for the reason for"...this string of words do not make a sensible sentence...they have no meaning beyond the individual words themself. In other words...you are speaking the English very badly) the popularity of that areas could soon be washed away. (again, I'm assuming you're speaking of rising sea levels and the many beach front houses. Again...not sure what that has to do with brothels or why you'd link that term to a conversation about where you live.)"
Where do I live? I don't know, man, I'm not sure I want to tell you...you might decide to give my home area a funky name like slaughterhouse, or moonbase or something like that.
So would it be safe to say your pov is post-millennium? Do you consider the "next age" and the millennium to be the same thing?
It's interesting, don't you think, that this is supposed to be "the most important sign"...but...when we look at the actual passage, it does't actually say Israel. It doesn't actually give us any infomation on whether Israel will be 'reborn', or if and when it is, that is to be the "terminal" generation. All that stuff....that is assumptions placed upon the text because of an understanding already held via doctrinal beliefs.
If we do a biblical search through scripture, we find that the "fig tree" does not, in fact, always refer to the physical nation of Israel. Quite often it is a symbol of prosperity or lack there of...often in conjunction with Israel, but often not one and the same. Thus we see scripture giving blessings in terms of 'growing fig trees and eating of them' or of having them 'burned up or laid waste to'. So, automatically assuming that the fig tree MUST refer to Israel is erroneous.
“From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. -Matthew 24:32–35
The problem with assuming the fig tree must be Israel is Lukes version of this passage:
And he told them a parable: “Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. As soon as they come out in leaf, you see for yourselves and know that the summer is already near. So also, when you see these things taking place, you know that the kingdom of God is near. Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all has taken place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. -Luke 21:29–33
There is also a problem with assuming this passage means the formation of national Israel is the terminal generation sign, is that it simply doesn't say that. It says "all these things", but the previous passages in the Olivet Discourse does not in any way, shape or form mention Israel being remade into a nation, or there being a timeframe around that event. The only timeframe indicator in this passage is "generation", which causes much debate. But despite Dispensationalists arguing staunchly in opposition for it, they have yet to be able to make 'generation' mean anything but what generation means.
Basically...what it comes down to is this: this "most important sign" is based on nothing more than assumptions of what is simply not found in the text.