U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-28-2009, 07:19 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,430 posts, read 7,784,068 times
Reputation: 1680

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
My dad died when he was 86. He was full of vim and vigor, had his full mind about him. Took walks all the time. He died of an embolism.

Remember, John was no ordinary man. He was banished to Patmos after putting him in a large pot boiling oil failed to do any harm to him.

Are you saying that if Bin Laden was 90 years old and plotting against the United States and carrying out those threats that the U.S. would just chuckle and say: leave the old man alone. What could he possibly do to us? Obviously Domitian thought John was a big enough threat to his empire. And besides, God needed John banished to the isle in 93 A.D. so he could show him Christ coming in the future without interruption.
All of those things could have happened in 66 too...

The views are the same, pretty much, as far as evidence to me.

Both scenarios could have happened.

One of my problems:
It is inferred in scripture that John would live to see Jesus' return. How can you rectify that with a late date and futurism? (John:21 - 23)

I know the Rapture Ready website states that John would see the Revelation, the vision, and then write the book of Revelation.

However, The way the scripture is worded really doesn't support that view IMO
John 21: 17-23
..Jesus said, “Feed my sheep.

I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.” Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, “Follow me!”
Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, “Lord, who is going to betray you?”) When Peter saw him, he asked, “Lord, what about him?”
Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.” Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?”


Luke 9
18 Once when Jesus was praying in private and his disciples were with him...
26 If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels. 27 I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.”

Which is repeated in another two gospels: Matt. 16, Mark 9.

My other problem is that from the disciples point of view can we really say they misunderstood the word quickly? Jesus said that he would come quickly, soon, the kingdom of God is near.. etc. With all these things put together how can you still support a late date?

The only reason to retain that view is to retain futurism... However, John, the beloved, an old man witnessing the return of Christ and writing about it before or after the destruction of Jerusalem makes a lot more sense to me...

So while I lean toward the early date for Revelation to me it is not necessary to know, but given Chapter 1 and 22 of Rev. it was "near" either way... 2000 years is not near.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-28-2009, 10:25 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,295 posts, read 4,958,388 times
Reputation: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Just give me one historian or one church father that will say this: We saw Jesus Christ descend from heaven and land on the earth in a visible, real form.

Just one, sciota. Just one.

How hard is it for you to understand the terminology used here?
Why didn't John or Jesus use eidon, theaomai, theōreō, bleto?

They all mean to see, but these all denote actual sight with the eyes.

But what John and Jesus use has deeper meaning which we find in the root word, and that is to discern, to see with heart and mind, to "understand"

When the events that were predicted happend, then those witnessing it, would "understand" that He came and judged Israel - Rev 18:23

But I highly dounbt you will get it

Take a look at 1 Clement and Hermes, and LOL Eusebius for starters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2009, 06:40 AM
 
17,968 posts, read 11,204,138 times
Reputation: 987
Sciotamicks, in other words, based upon all the lack of evidence, no eye saw Jesus return and come out of Zion and save all Israel. No, not even one person saw this. Yet you use peripheral statements as if they prove they saw Christ when, in fact, they say nothing of the sort.

Please read Romans 9 thru 11 again and take special note of what Paul is trying to show as to why it is that Israel was set aside and all the promises to Israel put on hold UNTIL THE COMPLEMENT OF THE NATIONS IS ENTERING (Rom.11:25). It is a secret the Gospel writers knew nothing about. Even Jesus said He really didn't know the day or the hour of His return, not even the angels but only God knew. So, by all intents and purposes, it looked like His return would be soon, in fact, the secret given to Paul revealed it would not be soon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2009, 06:48 AM
 
17,968 posts, read 11,204,138 times
Reputation: 987
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
Luke 9
18 Once when Jesus was praying in private and his disciples were with him...
26 If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels. 27 I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.”

Which is repeated in another two gospels: Matt. 16, Mark 9.
It does not state, "some who are standing her will not taste death before they see Me return with the holy angels on clouds."



Quote:
My other problem is that from the disciples point of view can we really say they misunderstood the word quickly? Jesus said that he would come quickly, soon, the kingdom of God is near.. etc. With all these things put together how can you still support a late date?
They didn't know about the secret given to Paul years later that Israel would be set aside and all the promises put on hold until the complement of the nations enters.

Quote:
The only reason to retain that view is to retain futurism... However, John, the beloved, an old man witnessing the return of Christ and writing about it before or after the destruction of Jerusalem makes a lot more sense to me...

So while I lean toward the early date for Revelation to me it is not necessary to know, but given Chapter 1 and 22 of Rev. it was "near" either way... 2000 years is not near.
Revelation was writen with John carried in spirit INTO THE FUTURE DAY OF THE LORD. So, from that vantage point of being in THAT FUTURE DAY, what was to occur quicky and be near was as to that future day John was carried into.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2009, 07:23 AM
 
187 posts, read 249,683 times
Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Revelation was writen with John carried in spirit INTO THE FUTURE DAY OF THE LORD. So, from that vantage point of being in THAT FUTURE DAY, what was to occur quicky and be near was as to that future day John was carried into.
I'll agree with that statement. Now...Is there anything in the text itself that might say something along the lines of...

Daniel 12:4 But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end

Because it does say...

Revelation 22:10 Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand.

Also...Is there anywhere in the whole of scripture that ever uses the term "at hand" to mean thousands of years?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2009, 08:57 AM
 
17,968 posts, read 11,204,138 times
Reputation: 987
Quote:
Originally Posted by psychohmike View Post
I'll agree with that statement. Now...Is there anything in the text itself that might say something along the lines of...

Daniel 12:4 But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end

Because it does say...

Revelation 22:10 Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand.

Also...Is there anywhere in the whole of scripture that ever uses the term "at hand" to mean thousands of years?

Rev 22:10 And he is saying to me, "You should not be sealing the sayings of the prophecy of this scroll, for the era is near."

In view of the impending judgments the ear was near. Yet we have the secret to deal with, that due to Israel being set aside God is not at peace with mankind and at this current time is not reckoning their offenses to them:
Rom 11:15 For if their casting away is the conciliation of the world, what will the taking back be if not life from among the dead?

So the judments of the era being near was postponed during their casting away and until the complement of the nations enters. Once the complement of the nations enters (Rom.11:25) then God will withdraw His ambassadors (us) and hostilities will break out from on high.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2009, 10:08 AM
 
187 posts, read 249,683 times
Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Rev 22:10 And he is saying to me, "You should not be sealing the sayings of the prophecy of this scroll, for the era is near."

In view of the impending judgments the ear was near. Yet we have the secret to deal with, that due to Israel being set aside God is not at peace with mankind and at this current time is not reckoning their offenses to them:
Rom 11:15 For if their casting away is the conciliation of the world, what will the taking back be if not life from among the dead?

So the judments of the era being near was postponed during their casting away and until the complement of the nations enters. Once the complement of the nations enters (Rom.11:25) then God will withdraw His ambassadors (us) and hostilities will break out from on high.
So in other words..."No...There is nowhere in the Bible that 'at hand' is ever used to mean a long period of time."

Also...It is my understanding that Revelation was written a number of years after Romans. So even if there was a secret to deal with...A number of years later the fulfillment of Revelation was near...At hand.

And the sad part is...You only enigmatically interpret terms like soon, near and at hand when it negatively effects your view of eschatology.

mike
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2009, 10:57 AM
 
17,968 posts, read 11,204,138 times
Reputation: 987
Jon 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

Was Nineveh overthrown? Is forty days 2,000 years? Or was this prophetic statement subbordinate to God's hidden intention that Nineveh not be overthrown?

Likewise, the era was near in John's day but God's hidden intention was that it be put on hold for thousands of years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2009, 11:04 AM
 
187 posts, read 249,683 times
Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Jon 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

Was Nineveh overthrown? Is forty days 2,000 years? Or was this prophetic statement subbordinate to God's hidden intention that Nineveh not be overthrown?

Likewise, the era was near in John's day but God's hidden intention was that it be put on hold for thousands of years.
Great point my friend...You see...Nineveh repented...Therefore judgment was delayed.

Jerusalem didn't...Therefore it's judgment came swiftly...As the text said it would.

Thank you for adding more credibility to preterism.

Eusebius-->
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2009, 11:27 AM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,430 posts, read 7,784,068 times
Reputation: 1680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
It does not state, "some who are standing her will not taste death before they see Me return with the holy angels on clouds."
No it doesn't say that. BUT he was speaking to Peter about the manner of death he would have yet John is to remain until... some event happens... what then do you suggest is the event the Peter dies before and John after?



Quote:
They didn't know about the secret given to Paul years later that Israel would be set aside and all the promises put on hold until the complement of the nations enters.
Yet the gospels state:
Mark 4:22 "For nothing is hidden, except to be revealed; nor has anything been secret, but that it would come to light. (Luke 8 & 12, Matt. 10)
So where do you get this information that Paul knew something that the disciples did not?


Quote:
Revelation was writen with John carried in spirit INTO THE FUTURE DAY OF THE LORD. So, from that vantage point of being in THAT FUTURE DAY, what was to occur quicky and be near was as to that future day John was carried into.
Revelation was written specifically for: which said: “Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea.” (1:11)

Do those names of churches mean anything to us now?

Revelation is about the past, present, and future:
“Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. (1:19)

John and the churches future not 2000 years future!

Soon, quickly.. write to specific churches... the book was meant to be read by the churches that would be affected by this event... not 2000 years later..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top