The Covering Dynamic

[marks]

You don't interpret Matthew 24:31 according to the exact words written there, you interpret it according to your understanding of OT prophecies. Right?

No, I do go by the exact words. Where is it you find I don't?

The parallel passages confirm the meaning. That's what makes them parallel, as they say the same things.

Much love!

 

[marks]

The fact of the matter is that not all prophecies are just spelled out for us in a straightforward way. So, please stop acting as if that is the case.

I just accept the wording that they say. I feel like there is a great deal of detail and specificity.

And btw . . . sorry for so many short posts. There is so much material to cover in yours and others posts, sometimes I can just best address one short point at time.

But I want to carefully read all you've written, so, maybe I'm just asking for your patience.



Much love!

 

[marks]

I was already aware of that. I'm not even saying it was wrong for them to do that as if I'm saying they translated something wrongly there. No, I'm just saying that it annoys me personally since his name was not Elias, but was Elijah. It's just a personal preference to see him being referenced as Elijah instead of Elias.

I point it out because it's indicative of the KJV translation. Of all of them I've studied, this is the one that "feels" the most like the Greek.

Much love!

 

[Timtofly]

These are things that no other pre-trib in the world believes, so I'm not going to waste time just addressing the beliefs you have all to yourself.

You mean you don't want to view Scripture any other way but your own. You don't have a monopoly on Bible interpretation. No one does, so don't even go there. If you don't want to discuss Scripture, that is your choice.

 

[rwb]

Yes, there seems to be a lot of debate over what the Day of the LORD encompasses. Isn't the Day of the Lord a day of darkness? Something not to be desired?

Isaiah 13:9 KJV
Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

Jeremiah 46:10 KJV
For this is the day of the Lord GOD of hosts, a day of vengeance, that he may avenge him of his adversaries: and the sword shall devour, and it shall be satiate and made drunk with their blood: for the Lord GOD of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country by the river Euphrates.

Amos 5:18-20 KJV
18) Woe unto you that desire the day of the LORD! to what end is it for you? the day of the LORD is darkness, and not light.
19) As if a man did flee from a lion, and a bear met him; or went into the house, and leaned his hand on the wall, and a serpent bit him.
20) Shall not the day of the LORD be darkness, and not light? even very dark, and no brightness in it?

Much love!

The final Day of the Lord that Christ ushered in will indeed be a day of darkness for all who shall suffer His wrath to come on that Day. In that final Day of the Lord all that is left upon the face of the earth will be utterly destroyed by the fires of God's wrath, and after His wrath is over and all made new again there shall be a new heaven and new earth, with the holy city new Jerusalem coming down from God out of heaven. There will be no more time given this earth, because this earth will have passed away.

Revelation 21:1-5 (KJV) And 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. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Matthew 24:30-31 KJV
30) And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
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 25:31-32 KJV
31) When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32) And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

They see Him coming, and He sends His angels to gather the chosen.

He sits on His throne, and all the nations are gathered. Are you saying this is actually one gathering, without the intervening "sitting on His throne"?

Can you explain what difference this makes? If the chosen, which would represent the sheep, are first gathered and then the goats are gathered, what difference does it make? Either way, they are both brought before the throne at the same time and then are separated at the same time.

In one gathering identified as "the chosen", the other, "the nations", this speak to you the same people?

What? I truly cannot understand some of the things you say at all. No, not all of them are chosen. It's only the sheep who are the ones who are chosen. They obviously are believers since they inherit "eternal life" in "the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world".

What would His Jewish audience think He meant when He spoke of the "chosen", and the "nations"?

It really doesn't matter what they may have thought. It matters what Jesus knew. Jesus often said things that His audience did not understand at the time. For example, I don't doubt for a second that when Jesus gave His Olivet Discourse that the disciples, at the time, assumed that His coming at the end of the age would coincide with the destruction of the temple buildings standing at that time. But, that was obviously not the case.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You mean you don't want to view Scripture any other way but your own.

What does this even mean? Obviously, I have my own beliefs and there are many others who have the same beliefs as I do. But, I view other beliefs as well. What I was saying is that I don't believe it's worth taking a lot of my time refuting something that only one person believes. What is the point of that?

You don't have a monopoly on Bible interpretation.

I didn't say that I did. You're getting upset about something you are only imagining rather than anything that is actually true.

No one does, so don't even go there.

I didn't go there and don't plan to go there. You've gotten yourself all riled up for nothing. You have once again misunderstood something that was said to you. You do that all the time. I wish I knew why that is the case.

If you don't want to discuss Scripture, that is your choice.

LOL. What evidence have you seen to suggest that I don't want to discuss scripture? Is it the many times I've discussed scripture in the past that gives you that impression? Of course I want to discuss scripture, but if part of my goal is to refute false doctrine then I'd rather spend more time refuting false doctrine that more than one person believes in. I feel that is a better way to spend my time.

 

[marks]

What are you talking about exactly? What is the sequence that you're seeing there?

Just the same as given, Jesus comes in power and glory, sends the angels to gather the chosen, takes His throne, and the nations are gathered and judged.

The same thing is given in Joel 3,

Joel 3:1-2 KJV
1) For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,
2) I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land.

To bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem is their way of saying to restore them from captivity back to where they were before, that being their promised land.

If we start discussing Zechariah 14 then we might end up spending a ton of time just on that and will probably never get around to discussing anything else. Is that what you want? Just let me know. There are things written in Zechariah 14 that seem impossible to reconcile with other scripture if it's all meant to be understood literally and as all occurring after Christ returns.

I see it as a parallel passage. Part of the topic of Jesus coming in power and glory. Here is the same time described by Zechariah in his prophecy. I don't see anything myself that doesn't harmonize with the other passages.

Zechariah 14:3-4 KJV
3) Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4) And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

This is Jesus' return to earth, and part of the description of Him rescuing His brothers, the Jews.

In my post-trib, Amillennialist view Jesus descends from heaven "immediately after the tribulation of those days" (Matt 24:29-31), the dead in Christ are resurrected, we're all changed (1 Cor 15:51-52) and we are all caught up to meet Him in the air. He then proceeds to destroy all of His enemies (all unbelievers) on the earth (Matt 24:35-39, 2 Thess 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-12, Rev 19:17-18, Rev 20:9).

OK, I understand. But there isn't a transformation in Matthew, just that they are gathered. And there is nothing about those in Christ meeting Him in air, Matthew says not a word about that. I only say this to make the point that both of us are drawing from what we see as parallel passages, so I don't think we should restrict the discussion to a single passage, except for the purpose of being sure we understand what that passage does and doesn't say. But to understand the fullness, we need a wider net, I think.

This doesn't leave any mortals on the earth to populate an earthly millennial kingdom. So, I believe the next thing to occur is that dead unbelievers are resurrected and then the judgment occurs. According to Revelation 20:11, the judgment does not occur in heaven or on earth.

Revelation 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.

So, where does it occur? We're not told. It could be on the new earth or it could be in some location that we are not currently aware of.

This is another place where I hold to the exact wording, "after the thousand years". And the great white throne judgment is of the dead. Those who believe in Christ shall never die. I hold to all these things.

And just before that passage we're told of those who were resurrected to life. Then, after that, "I saw the dead . . .". Not trying to sound silly, but the dead does not include the living.

Much love!

 

[marks]

The prophetic words of Zechariah are either already fulfilled when Christ came to earth a man, and will be finished when Christ returns on the last day of this age when the seventh angel sounds that time given this earth shall be no longer. Why are you still looking for Christ to come to the earth, when Scripture tells us Christ has already come in His day/age/time/era?

Here's one reason,

Job 19:23-27 KJV
23) Oh that my words were now written! oh that they were printed in a book!
24) That they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock for ever!
25) For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:
26) And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:
27) Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.

Much love!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No. I just prefer more literal translations, particularly in these sorts of discussions. I myself like the King James, based on many years of comparisons to numerous other translations and manuscripts. But I'm not King James only, I use lots of interlinears, I refer to several different translations.

But when you compare this passage in the NIV to the Greek text, or to other more literal translations, there are some difference which I think change the sense of the passage.

I completely disagree, but it's not worth the time to talk about this issue any further.

I like NASB, HCSB, LITV, Young's, EMTV, and of course KJV. These are my favorites. I think the NLT (2nd edition, not the 1st) is a good "thought for thought" translation, or "dynamic equivalancy". But as a stand-alone, it loses a lot, and should be read alongside a literal version.

That is why I read both the KJV and NIV. But, I also look at other translations and use Hebrew and Greek resources as well to help determine the true meaning of the original text.

Please try not to read into my words more that what I'm actually saying. I'm just saying, if you are quoting from the NIV, it's not going to show all the information a more literal and less interpretive translation will show. And that passage from Matthew is a good example.

I'm not seeing that as a good example of this at all, but, regardless, I will quote the KJV just for you when I quote scripture in response to your posts. I believe the KJV fully supports my beliefs, so I have no problem with that.

 

[rwb]

Here's one reason,

Job 19:23-27 KJV
23) Oh that my words were now written! oh that they were printed in a book!
24) That they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock for ever!
25) For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:
26) And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:
27) Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.

Much love!

Jobs words came to pass with the first advent of Christ coming to earth a man. Our Redeemer stood upon the earth during His Day/age/time/era. And because Job understood his Redeemer lives, he had no fear of death or the grave, he knew when his Redeemer finally came he too would see Him in his flesh, because death and the grave could not hold him forever.

Acts 2:17 (KJV) And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

Hebrews 1:1-2 (KJV) God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

2 Peter 3:3 (KJV) Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

 

[marks]

Is this saying anything different than what it's saying in the NIV translation? No, not at all. In each translation, Jesus is saying that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come. There's a reason why Jesus said "if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.". He knew that peope like you would have trouble accepting that. But, we should always accept what Jesus teach

Matthew 17:10-12 KJV
10) And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
11) And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
12) But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

Jesus makes two statements here, one is that Elijah shall come first and restore all things, the other that Elijah has come, and they didn't know him, and did to him what they wanted. That is, they killed him.

So Elijah shall come, and already has come.

A key point is that Elijah shall fulfill his ministry, and Jesus acknowledges in this passage that this still has a future fulfillment.

NIV:
10 The disciples asked him, “Why then do the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come first?”
11 Jesus replied, “To be sure, Elijah comes and will restore all things.
12 But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”

NASB
10 And His disciples asked Him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?”
11 And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things;
12 but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wanted. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”

YLT
10 And his disciples questioned him, saying, `Why then do the scribes say that Elijah it behoveth to come first?'
11 And Jesus answering said to them, `Elijah doth indeed come first, and shall restore all things,
12 and I say to you -- Elijah did already come, and they did not know him, but did with him whatever they would, so also the Son of Man is about to suffer by them.'

Each of these shows "will restore" to be future, again, even though John the Baptist is dead at that time.

How do you account for that?

They killed him, and the people were not prepared to receive him. Yet Malachi and Jesus both prophesied the successful completion of his mission. How do you account for that?

Elijah came, and they killed him, so he will be here again, and will prepare a people.
Jesus came, and they killed him, so he will be here again, and will reign over His people.

Much love!

 

[marks]

I will quote the KJV just for you when I quote scripture in response to your posts. I believe the KJV fully supports my beliefs, so I have no problem with that.

I'm not telling you that you need to do that, only pointing to some differences in translation style.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Luke 1:13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. 14 And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth. 15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb. 16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. 17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

And still, they killed Jesus as everyone abandoned Him. The didn't receive Him.

Much love!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, do go by the exact words. Where is it you find I don't?

Just as a reminder, you said this in response to how you interpret Matthew 24:31. That verse says nothing about gathering the people of Israel to the land they were promised, but that is how you interpret it.

You're not going by the exact words there. It's talking about gathering "His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other". No mention of Israel or land there. You infer that rather than going by the exact words. I don't know why you are not willing to acknowledge this.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I'm not telling you that you need to do that, only pointing to some differences in translation style.

Of course I don't need to do that, but I will do it for you out of respect for your preference.

And so that you can see that you're wrong even in your favorite translation. I'm kidding.

 

[marks]

First of all, why did you not quote Matthew 11:11-14 where Jesus explicitly said that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come?

And why did you not highlight where Jesus said in Matthew 17:12 "I say unto you, that Elias is come already"? That should be our starting point. Jesus said Elijah already came and gave no indication that he failed to finish what he came to do. You talk often about taking things for exactly how they are written. How are you doing that here? You're saying"Elijah's ministry is not complete. Where did Jesus say that? The concept of Elijah having to come yet again to finish his job after he already came is not indicated in the text at all.

We're already doing all of that.

I'm highlighting where Jesus said that Elijah was still to come and restore all things, even after he had been killed. That's where Jesus said that. After John's death, Jesus said, Elijah "shall be restoring", Future tense.

Much love!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Matthew 17:10-12 KJV
10) And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
11) And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
12) But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

Jesus makes two statements here, one is that Elijah shall come first and restore all things, the other that Elijah has come, and they didn't know him, and did to him what they wanted. That is, they killed him.

So Elijah shall come, and already has come.

A key point is that Elijah shall fulfill his ministry, and Jesus acknowledges in this passage that this still has a future fulfillment.

NIV:
10 The disciples asked him, “Why then do the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come first?”
11 Jesus replied, “To be sure, Elijah comes and will restore all things.
12 But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”

NASB
10 And His disciples asked Him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?”
11 And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things;
12 but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wanted. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”

YLT
10 And his disciples questioned him, saying, `Why then do the scribes say that Elijah it behoveth to come first?'
11 And Jesus answering said to them, `Elijah doth indeed come first, and shall restore all things,
12 and I say to you -- Elijah did already come, and they did not know him, but did with him whatever they would, so also the Son of Man is about to suffer by them.'

Each of these shows "will restore" to be future, again, even though John the Baptist is dead at that time.

How do you account for that?

They killed him, and the people were not prepared to receive him. Yet Malachi and Jesus both prophesied the successful completion of his mission. How do you account for that?

Elijah came, and they killed him, so he will be here again, and will prepare a people.
Jesus came, and they killed him, so he will be here again, and will reign over His people.

I already addressed all of this in post #151. Why are you acting as if I haven't?

As I said before, Jesus was not giving a new prophecy about the future in Matthew 17:11, but rather was referencing the OT prophecy. So, Elijah was coming from the perspective of the time the prophecy was given. Then Jesus clarified that he had come already in the person of John the Baptist. I've already covered this, so I'm wondering if you're reading everything I'm saying or not.

 

[marks]

Can you please stop the "exactly as written" arguments?

Yes, I'll stop.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Can you explain what difference this makes? If the chosen, which would represent the sheep, are first gathered and then the goats are gathered, what difference does it make? Either way, they are both brought before the throne at the same time and then are separated at the same time.

Consider what you are saying here. The question that's important to me, to me, is, what is the exact wording, and what does that exact wording mean?

But we don't all approach the Bible in the same way, as I said at the beginning. And unless we are all willing to sift through the details with each other, I don't see much usefulness when we are so far apart in our positions.

Much love!