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.
I am curious ... do you all even HEAR YOURSELVES as you rant and rave amongst each other? That's a real question -- I'm not being sarcastic or mean, really.
I guess I am just flabbergasted that you really don't know how you ... um ... sound (I'm trying to put it nicely here) to people who ... um ... don't believe exactly the same "stuff" you believe?
I am curious ... do you all even HEAR YOURSELVES as you rant and rave amongst each other? That's a real question -- I'm not being sarcastic or mean, really.
I guess I am just flabbergasted that you really don't know how you ... um ... sound (I'm trying to put it nicely here) to people who ... um ... don't believe exactly the same "stuff" you believe?
Is there some reason you won't answer my question regarding whether you are a believer in Christ Jesus or not?
Because it is none of your business and will drive you crazy that you can't pigeonhole and then dismiss me
Quote:
Those instructions, assuming you are referring to the letters to the seven churches pertain to the entire church-age and not just to those particular seven churches to whom John wrote.
It's written in the Bible that a thousand years to God is but a day. So yes, God has a different perspective on time.
God no doubt has a different perspective on time, but that doesn't alter the fact that when God speaks to Christians of things to happen and gives timescales of when it will happen, it makes no sense to claim God is referring to time in a different manner than the readers of the letter would understand.
BTW, the RCC agrees with the interpretation I give, that it was written to and applied to the early Christians, with some aspects being applicable to all Christians of every age.
Because it is none of your business and will drive you crazy that you can't pigeonhole me
God no doubt has a different perspective on time, but that doesn't alter the fact that when God speaks of things to happen and gives timescales of when it will happen, it makes no sense to claim God is referring to time in a different manner than the readers of the letter would understand.
BTW, the RCC agrees with the interpretation I give, that it was written to and applied to the early Christians, with some aspects being applicable to all Christians of every age.
If you were a believer you wouldn't have any problem with saying so, and so I'll take your refusal to answer as a 'no.' You aren't a believer but are a skeptic challenging the veracity and reliability of the Bible, including Revelation.
It makes perfect sense to assure Christians of whatever century how it all will work out in the end.
If you were a believer you wouldn't have any problem with saying so, and so I'll take your refusal to answer as a 'no.' You aren't a believer but are a skeptic challenging the veracity and reliability of the Bible, including Revelation.
It makes perfect sense to assure Christians of whatever century how it all will work out in the end.
You are free to guess as you wish . It won't change my points any either way. It is hardly discrediting the Bible to point out that the futurist method is in error . As I said, the RCC and a lot of other sects agree with my reading. The futurist reading is not mainstream , more of the Hal Lindsey brand of reading Revelation.
You are free to guess as you wish . It won't change my points any either way. It is hardly discrediting the Bible to point out that the futurist method is in error . As I said, the RCC and a lot of other sects agree with my reading. The futurist reading is not mainstream , more of the Hal Lindsey brand of reading Revelation.
I can think of no reason why a believer in Jesus Christ wouldn't want to acknowledge it.
What the RCC teaches is not my concern. The futurist view of Revelation is correct because if the events of the Tribulation had taken place in John's day the Tribulation would have ended with the physical and bodily return of Jesus who puts a stop to the Tribulation, followed by the judgment of the Nations in Matthew 25:32-45 which is to take place in the valley of Jehoshaphat according to Joel 3:2. And that would have been followed by the establishment of the Millennial kingdom on the earth which in turn would have been followed by the new heavens and new earth of Revelation chapter 21.
None of that has happened as of yet but is still in the future.
I can think of no reason why a believer in Jesus Christ wouldn't want to acknowledge it.
What the RCC teaches is not my concern. The futurist view of Revelation is correct because if the events of the Tribulation had taken place in John's day the Tribulation would have ended with the physical and bodily return of Jesus who puts a stop to the Tribulation, followed by the judgment of the Nations in Matthew 25:32-45 which is to take place in the valley of Jehoshaphat according to Joel 3:2. And that would have been followed by the establishment of the Millennial kingdom on the earth which in turn would have been followed by the new heavens and new earth of Revelation chapter 21.
None of that has happened as of yet but is still in the future.
Only if it’s all taken to be as literal as possible, which the vivid imagery suggests it’s not . And only if one ignores the injunctions at the beginning and ending of the letter that it will happen soon, and the admonition to not seal up with words of this prophecy are ignored . As opposed to Daniel, who was specifically told TO seal up the words of his prophecy as a future event . John is told to NOT seal up the words of the prophecy, because the time of their fulfillment is near . Anyone positing a futurist view has to ignore these simple and clear words that exist outside of the imagery of Revelation and are written as clear instructions on how to deal with the letter .
If it’s all taken to be as literal as possible . And only if one ignores the injunctions at the beginning and ending of the letter that it will happen soon, and the admonition to not seal up with words of this prophecy are ignored . As opposed to Daniel, who was specifically told TO seal up the words as a future event . John is told to NOT seal up the words of the prophecy, because the time of their fulfillment is near . Anyone positing a futurist view has to ignore these simple and clear words that exist outside of the imagery of Revelation and are written as clear instructions on how to deal with the letter .
It is to be taken literally. Futurists do not ignore those things. I've already told you that God regards time differently than man. It wasn't for Daniel to write about the things he was told to seal up just as Paul was not to reveal what he saw in his vision of heaven. John on the other hand was to write about what he saw. That in no way implies that the Tribulation was to happen in his day.
And if by some chance you are a believer but deny a physical and bodily return of Jesus to the earth, then I don't know what to tell you. But I hold to the futurist view of Revelation for the reasons that futurists have for holding that view. And yes, Jesus will return physically to the earth, he will judge the nations as per Matthew chapter 25, and he will establish his Millennial kingdom on the earth. Those things are still future.
Christianity is part of the problem. They say they follow but lead everyone astray.
“One heart and one way is what I will give them so they will revere me always for their own good and the good of their children after them” saith the LORD.
It is to be taken literally. Futurists do not ignore those things. I've already told you that God regards time differently than man. It wasn't for Daniel to write about the things he was told to seal up just as Paul was not to reveal what he saw in his vision of heaven. John on the other hand was to write about what he saw. That in no way implies that the Tribulation was to happen in his day.
And if by some chance you are a believer but deny a physical and bodily return of Jesus to the earth, then I don't know what to tell you. But I hold to the futurist view of Revelation for the reasons that futurists have for holding that view. And yes, Jesus will return physically to the earth, he will judge the nations as per Matthew chapter 25, and he will establish his Millennial kingdom on the earth. Those things are still future.
OK, so your stance is that the letter saying that it was to all happen soon and shortly , and that the time was near, in no way implies that it was to happen in the lifespan of the Christians the letter was written to . Okey dokey .
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.
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.
