The Doctrine of Millennialism is destroy by Personal Symbolizing of Scripture.

[robert derrick]

So, they will eat the flesh of those who were slain with a literal sword coming out of Christ's mouth, right?

My conclusion is that you're purposely and childishly dishonest.

It's not a matter of ignorance.

I don't do spit balls in class anymore.

 

[Davy]

Gee. You mean Communists are not sincere?

Wow.

How do you meant that above idea, which doesn't make sense? Of course those blinded in the theory of communism sincerely believe that theory. But that has nothing to do with those who originally funded and supported communism from the start, which is the facts I was addressing. And the main point of the fact that wealthy socialists in the Christian West funded that original communist working by Trotsky and Lenin reveals a conspiracy among certainly wealthy, just like Apostle Paul said that the 'love of money' is the root of all evil. And to further support what I was showing, I presented the public work by the Reese Committee lawyer and the evidence of subversive actions by the wealthy Carnegie, Ford, Rockefeller, et al, tax-exempt foundations. And NOTHING has been done about it.

 

[Timtofly]

Yes. It is total destruction. No one survives. I have shown you that and you have avoided that. You have to. There are no survivors to enter your imaginary future millennium.

Since you claim the camp of the saints is found at the Second Coming, then even all the saints are killed in this total destruction of earth? There is no mention of the Second Coming, resurrection, nor rapture in Revelation 20. According to your logic that since Armageddon is not mentioned in 17, 18, or 19 then that is not Armageddon; neither can you claim the Second Coming, rapture, and resurrection will happen in Revelation 20. All we see is a bunch of people marching, then consumed by fire. That is not Armageddon, the Second Coming, a rapture, nor a resurrection.

The dead standing at the GWT is not the end either. It is after creation is no longer around, at least for these dead. There is no mention at all about those alive on the earth when Jesus hands back creation to God. You make stuff up better than those who you accuse of just making stuff up.

Those same kings and list of humans is found in Revelation 6, Revelation 16, Revelation 17, and Revelation 19. So they all are alive and living on earth in each event. But if you refuse to call all four chapters the same event, I would tend to agree. It is context and how those people are described in that context that defines each event. Now you can try to cherry pick the events, according to your Amil view, or you can let Scripture clearly point out the context, even when using symbolism. We know Jesus is the Lamb, so that would be a place to start.

 

[marks]

Were they saved from the water or by the water?

This question?

They were saved from drowning by the boat. They were saved from destruction by obedience. There are a lot of ways you can say this, is there something you are thinking of?

Much love!

 

[Marty fox]

If you're going to ignore my arguments, then we're not having an honest exchange.

I'll try once more: All flesh at Armageddon will be eaten. Scripture is speaking specifically of that one place, where all fowls of the earth are called together to eat at.

Scripture does not say all flesh of all the earth is there, much less all eaten.

It is not Gog and Magog surrounding the beloved camp of the saints on earth, and instantly scorched with fire.

It can't be, because the saints are plainly with the Lord at His return in the air.

The armies at Armageddon cannot possibly be Gog and Magog around the beloved city of God on earth.



If they are not, then you need to show why not, but Scripture does tie Rev 16,17, and 19 together.

For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

That great day of the Lord's return, is welcomed by His enemies gathered at Armageddon.

And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.
These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

They are ten kings allied with the beast to make war with the Lamb at His return. And with Him are His resurrected saints. They will have on hour with the beast at Armageddon, before being slaughtered without mercy.

And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

The returned Lord is now coming down with His resurrected armies of saints to do battle with them, and He will overcome them, because He is Lord of Lords and King of Kings.

That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.

And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

These are them gathered together at Armageddon in one place on earth, with 10 kings allied with the beast, to make war with the Lamb and His resurrected saints with Him, and in one hour they will be overcome, and all of their flesh will be eaten by all the fowls of the earth without quarter.

To say this, is simply by reasoning the Scriptures together, for a full revelation of that battle. To not say it, is more of a refusal, than a reason.





And now we see how opposing teachings can read any Scripture differently:

They will destroy their own Babylon on earth, by seeking to destroy the Lord Himself and His armies.

It's the same thing Pharaoh did to the power of Egypt, by first resisting the Lord, and then actually driving down to the dry ground of the Red Sea.

Both efforts are foolishly insane, and suicidal.

For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.

God is a merciful God, and will always allow any man to worship Him, or at least not to attack Him, so that when they do, they sin against their own soul and destroy themselves, though it is not His will that any should perish.

The fear of a king is as the roaring of a lion: whoso provoketh him to anger sinneth against his own soul.

But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.

History shows the evil rulers end up destroying their own power, and even their own people. They end of showing they hate their own people and places to death, rather than be defeated alone.

Nero set fire to Rome, and Hitler ended up hating His on Reich and people to death.

And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.

Snakes eat their own.

Babylon is plainly their own power and city. When they gather together at Armageddon to actually try and fight with the returning Lord of Lords coming down from the air, with all His resurrected armies of saints, they are loving death and hating their own lives, power, and people, with suicidal destruction.

And that does not include all flesh on the earth, but only them at Armageddon.


True. At Armageddon with the 10 gathered kings of the great whore, and their armies of captains, foot soldiers, and slavish retinue. Which is the composition of all armies of man in history.

This will be the greatest one from all over the world.




Disagree of course, for reasons given.

I appreciate your honest efforts, and if you want to respond to my own words, then I'd be glad to see any convincing corrections of them.

Otherwise, I'll just have to keep them as is.

First section
It does separate the army and all flesh thus its all flesh

Second section
Only one of the events mention Armageddon.

Rev 16 (which mentions Armageddon) and the end of rev 17 is the defeat Babylon the great by the beast

Rev 19 (does not mention Armageddon) is the defeat of the beast and the false prophet by Jesus. Two different battles with different combatants and different outcomes thus they are not the same battles

Third section
Armageddon isn't mentioned in rev 19 and either is Babylon the great and its the beast and the kings who destroys Babylon the great not Jesus, but it is for Gods will that the beast does it.

Fourth section
Once again Armageddon isn't mentioned in rev 19

Fifth section
The biblical facts which I posted do prove it how can you not see that?

 

[ewq1938]

Second section
Only one of the events mention Armageddon.

Third section
Rev 19 (does not mention Armageddon)
Armageddon isn't mentioned in rev 19

Fourth section
Once again Armageddon isn't mentioned in rev 19

Nice imaginary list. Repeating the same thing over and over does not make new parts of a list. Number 5 is also invalid.



It doesn't need to be mentioned because they traveled there as per the 6th vial. The battle of Armageddon is described in Rev 19, the battle of the beast and army against God.

 

[robert derrick]

Yes. It is total destruction. No one survives. I have shown you that and you have avoided that. You have to. There are no survivors to enter your imaginary future millennium.

No one survives at Armageddon.

 

[robert derrick]

First section
It does separate the army and all flesh thus its all flesh

Where and how so.

 

[Marty fox]

Where and how so.

18 so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and the mighty, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, great and small.”

 

[ewq1938]

18 so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and the mighty, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, great and small.”

Taking "all people" literally like Marty does would mean Jesus and his army would also be eaten.

The truth is that it's "all people" as in all of the army, from the leaders to the lowly slaves, all of them. Not all people everywhere. That is clearly very bad interpretation driven by severe doctrinal bias.

 

[Marty fox]

Taking "all people" literally like Marty does would mean Jesus and his army would also be eaten.

The truth is that it's "all people" as in all of the army, from the leaders to the lowly slaves, all of them. Not all people everywhere. That is clearly very bad interpretation driven by severe doctrinal bias.

My point is that it’s not literal if it was literal like futurist take revelation then it would be all people because it’s says “all people“

The fact is that futurist use literalism only when it’s convenient

 

[ewq1938]

My point is that it’s not literal if it was literal like futurist take revelation then it would be all people because it’s says “all people“

It doesn't say "people" in the Greek manuscripts. It says all, and lists who that is after. It is agreed by all the scholars I know of that it is all of the ones gathered at that location and battle. It is you, not "futurists", that applies it hyper-literally that all mankind is slain.

The fact is that futurist use literalism only when it’s convenient

The fact is that anti-futurists over uses symbolism, and when it is convenient, applies literalism as seen above.

 

[Marty fox]

It doesn't say "people" in the Greek manuscripts. It says all, and lists who that is after. It is agreed by all the scholars I know of that it is all of the ones gathered at that location and battle. It is you, not "futurists", that applies it hyper-literally that all mankind is slain.




The fact is that anti-futurists over uses symbolism, and when it is convenient, applies literalism as seen above.

How can you say as seen above when I stated that it’s not literal?

 

[ewq1938]

How can you say as seen above when I stated that it’s not literal?

When Christ returns, how much of the mortal population do you believe will be slain?

 

[robert derrick]

18 so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and the mighty, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, great and small.”

I must be misunderstanding your point, because there is no separation made here between the flesh of slaves and kings, which are all the same army, and so all the same flesh in the same place, since that is the only flesh mentioned in Rev 19.

They are all part of the same army at the same place to make war with the same One coming down with His armies from the air.

As I've said, before, this is the normal construct of all large ancient armies from kings, generals, soldiers, and salve retinues. The one at Armageddon will be the greatest army ever assembled on earth in ancient manner.

It's the modern mind uneducated in ancient warfare, that does not understand that all ancient armies had their slaves accompany them to battle, as well as free men and women in train to service them. The kings allied with the beast will of course have slaves with them, even as their are still slaves on earth today, just not publicly declared. Those gathered to make war with the Lord Himself seen in the air, won't care much about public sentiment.

So, unless I've missed your meaning, you have no point to make, but only refuse mine. Which is fine by me.

I don't need agreement, but just meaningful rebuttals to respond to. If I'm corrected, than all the better to perfect the teaching.

It's not about who's 'right', but about rightly dividing the truth of Scripture from the errors made about Scripture.

One of the biggest being discarding Scripture as being nothing but symbolic and mythical, simply because we don't like it and don't want to agree with it.

And since I see in another place, that it is all declared symbolic by you, then there really is no point in addressing anything you say, since it's all just fictional and imaginative Marvel Comics to you.

 

[robert derrick]

Second section
Only one of the events mention Armageddon.

Only one of the prophecies of the same Messiah mentions the event of the cross.

If we don't know how Scriptures of the same prophecy is found in different places, in order to reveal the full picture of that same event, then we need to learn how that is the case, before attempting to teach prophecy of Scripture.

Rev 16 (which mentions Armageddon) and the end of rev 17 is the defeat Babylon the great by the beast

Already responded to this.

Third section
Armageddon isn't mentioned in rev 19 and either is Babylon the great and its the beast and the kings who destroys Babylon the great not Jesus, but it is for Gods will that the beast does it.

It was God's will to destroy Pharaoh with his army in the Red Sea, buy putting the suicidal thought of chasing them down onto the dry ground of the Red Sea.

He did the same with Ahab, by sending him a lying spirit, even while having His prophet warn him.

Fifth section
The biblical facts which I posted do prove it how can you not see that?

Since it is officially declared all symbolic to you, then there is no literal point for you to make nor prove, since it's all Marvel Comics anyway.

Now, when you want to treat Scripture as literal truth, then we can talk some more about it.

I've learned the lesson not to argue points with people about their Symbol Man's Bible, as though anything in it is literally true.

 

[robert derrick]

In the Symbol Man's Bible, the second coming of Jesus Christ to this earth is only symbolic, and has nothing to do with real events and people on it.

There is no literal point to make about anything with those that turn Scripture into symbolic 'lessons' only.

The book of Revelation to them, is just one huge Aesop's fable made of many sub-fables.

It's all all tortoises and hares to them.

It is foolish to argue with tortoises and hares, as though they really matter.

Afterall, who wants to sit around arguing about whether the Dragon is dark or bright red with people, who think that is somehow important?

 

[Marty fox]

When Christ returns, how much of the mortal population do you believe will be slain?

Only one of the prophecies of the same Messiah mentions the event of the cross.

If we don't know how Scriptures of the same prophecy is found in different places, in order to reveal the full picture of that same event, then we need to learn how that is the case, before attempting to teach prophecy of Scripture.


Already responded to this.



It was God's will to destroy Pharaoh with his army in the Red Sea, buy putting the suicidal thought of chasing them down onto the dry ground of the Red Sea.

He did the same with Ahab, by sending him a lying spirit, even while having His prophet warn him.


Since it is officially declared all symbolic to you, then there is no literal point for you to make nor prove, since it's all Marvel Comics anyway.

Now, when you want to treat Scripture as literal truth, then we can talk some more about it.

I've learned the lesson not to argue points with people about their Symbol Man's Bible, as though anything in it is literally true.

So what do you think

Only one of the prophecies of the same Messiah mentions the event of the cross.

If we don't know how Scriptures of the same prophecy is found in different places, in order to reveal the full picture of that same event, then we need to learn how that is the case, before attempting to teach prophecy of Scripture.


Already responded to this.



It was God's will to destroy Pharaoh with his army in the Red Sea, buy putting the suicidal thought of chasing them down onto the dry ground of the Red Sea.

He did the same with Ahab, by sending him a lying spirit, even while having His prophet warn him.


Since it is officially declared all symbolic to you, then there is no literal point for you to make nor prove, since it's all Marvel Comics anyway.

Now, when you want to treat Scripture as literal truth, then we can talk some more about it.

I've learned the lesson not to argue points with people about their Symbol Man's Bible, as though anything in it is literally true.

So what do you think these verses mean?

Revelation 2:16-17
15 Likewise, you also have those who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans. 16 Repent therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.

Was Jesus going to come once here and then only once more finally again? How many times is Jesus coming back with a literal sword out of His mouth to physically kill people? Don’t you see how ridiculous this is?

What does the bible say the sword of Jesus mouth is? It’s His word

 

[ewq1938]

So what do you think

I think you need to answer the question, not avoid it.

When Christ returns, how much of the mortal population do you believe will be slain?

 

[Marty fox]

I must be misunderstanding your point, because there is no separation made here between the flesh of slaves and kings, which are all the same army, and so all the same flesh in the same place, since that is the only flesh mentioned in Rev 19.

They are all part of the same army at the same place to make war with the same One coming down with His armies from the air.

As I've said, before, this is the normal construct of all large ancient armies from kings, generals, soldiers, and salve retinues. The one at Armageddon will be the greatest army ever assembled on earth in ancient manner.

It's the modern mind uneducated in ancient warfare, that does not understand that all ancient armies had their slaves accompany them to battle, as well as free men and women in train to service them. The kings allied with the beast will of course have slaves with them, even as their are still slaves on earth today, just not publicly declared. Those gathered to make war with the Lord Himself seen in the air, won't care much about public sentiment.

So, unless I've missed your meaning, you have no point to make, but only refuse mine. Which is fine by me.

I don't need agreement, but just meaningful rebuttals to respond to. If I'm corrected, than all the better to perfect the teaching.

It's not about who's 'right', but about rightly dividing the truth of Scripture from the errors made about Scripture.

One of the biggest being discarding Scripture as being nothing but symbolic and mythical, simply because we don't like it and don't want to agree with it.

And since I see in another place, that it is all declared symbolic by you, then there really is no point in addressing anything you say, since it's all just fictional and imaginative Marvel Comics to you.

But it’s says all flesh not just the flesh of the army your the one being literal not I

Who ever in the white world stands against Christ will be defeated by the word of Christ