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.
There are the "end times" that we've been in since Jesus departed and then there are the End Times that will immediately precede his return. He said that in those End Times the signs would increase in frequency and intensity like labor pains. At no time in the past 2000 years would the signs of the End Times been anywhere near as clear or prevalent as they are today. This doesn't mean that I anticipate any particular timetable, simply that I and many, many other discerning Christians can see what is happening. The Bible gives the clues precisely so discerning Christians will be able to recognize what is happening.
I might add: I would cheerfully acknowledge that the alternative Christianities are more appealing in worldly terms. Christianity would be a much easier sell if it actually taught that everyone will be saved, God is endlessly tolerant and non-judgmental, "All You Need is Love" (or at least tolerance), and sin is a primitive human concept with no eternal consequences.
Even I would find this more appealing if I didn't have enough background in the religion to recognize that it simply isn't what Christianity has ever been understood to be. It requires a wholesale rejection of the OT, ignoring vast swaths of the NT, reinventing Jesus, and pretty much standing 2000 years of Christian doctrine and tradition on its head. It is no more traditional Christianity than Islam or Scientology is traditional Christianity. It is Christianity in name only, in the same way the Ascended Master Jesus of some New Age communities is Jesus in name only. Indeed, the alternative Christianities have far more in common with the New Age movement than with traditional Christianity.
It's very curious to me that those who promote these alternative Christianities insist on calling them Christian. I believe this fits squarely into the point of my original post: It's a deception. It undermines Christianity from within and deceives its followers into thinking they are following Christ.
Curiously enough, what is taking place - destructive to traditional Christianity as it may be - only strengthens my conviction that traditional "hardline" Christianity is the Truth. If what is taking weren't taking place exactly as the Bible predicts, my convictions might be weaker. This is the obvious reason for the biblical warnings - so Christians will recognize what is happening when it happens.
Which brings us back to the point of my original post: How is it possible that even many Christians don't recognize what is happening right in front of their faces and even in their own lives? I can only attribute it to supernatural deception.
Why was Jesus so emphatically clear that his message would divide families, that his followers would be hated and persecuted? Why is the Bible so emphatically clear that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Why is it that the alternative Christianities are so world-friendly they aren't even challenging to atheists? If you can't connect the dots, you are really, really deluded.
Personally I do not care what interpretation people use. Mine is just more of an academic interest . I find it ironic and humorous that the people who claim to be literalists are the ones most likely to skip right over the indisputable plain and simple words of when it will happen, to try and make the extremely vivid and purposely creative imagery literal . I am stuck on the nearness part because that is part of the instructions the writer gave before going into the Jewish apocalyptic imagery . Your version makes the letter meaningless to the very people it was given to .
By your view, here is a sample of the conversations believers of the 100AD period had with God when they got to Heaven:
“ Why did you not come for us when you promised , God? We were suffering, we received your word that you would come soon for us, that the time was near , and that we only had to endure a short period , but you never came . I have endured 30 years after that, and died , and you never came “
“ You silly ninnies ! When I said soon, I meant by my timescale . One day is as a thousand years to me . Although now, thinking about it, maybe I should have used timescales you understood so you wouldn’t get confused . Sorry, my bad “
There are a number of ways to interpret the letter . If people choose to ignore the words of the prologue and epilogue as to when it applies to , that’s their right . The entire Bible is done this way , which is why there are thousands of different sects . It’s also why the futurist view become more popular after the Protestant Reformation, with the rise of literacy among common people and Bibles becoming more widespread via the printing press , when it became every man for himself on reading the Bible and readers with no understanding at all of Jewish history , writing, or apocalyptic imagery began to accept the futurist view more . They were divorced from any scholarly understanding of Judaism and it’s history .
'Soon' does not always mean 'soon'. The word translated as 'soon' in Revelation 1:2 is the Greek words ἐν τάχει/en tachei - 'in quickness'. It can be translated either as 'soon or shortly' or as 'quickly.'
Some interpreters understand ἐν τάχει in Revelation 1:1 to mean not nearness in time but that when the events described in Revelation begin to occur they will unfold rapidly. Charles C. Ryrie takes this position in his book titled 'Revelation,' which is part of 'Everyman's Bible Commentary. Ryrie writes;
The words translated ''shortly'' (en tachei) mean that when the time for judgment comes there will be no delay in its execution (see Luke 18:8 and other occurrences of this of this phrase in Acts 12:7; 22:18; 25:4; Rom. 16:20; Rev. 22:6-7). The time of fulfillment may seem distant, but, when it starts, the events will transpire rapidly.
John F. Walvoord, a former president of Dallas Theological Seminary and one of the world's foremost interpreters of biblical prophecy, takes that same position. In his commentary on Revelation in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, New Testament, An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty, he comments regarding Rev. 1:1;
The word 'soon'' (en tachei; cf. 2:16; 22:7, 12, 20) means that the action will be sudden when it comes, not necessarily that it will occur immediately. Once the end-time events begin, they will occur in rapid succession (cf. Luke 18:8; Acts 12:7; 22:18; 25:4; Rom. 16:20).
Dr. Alan F. Johnson, Professor of Bible and Theology at Wheaton Collage, did the commentary on Revelation in The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 12. He notes that;
''What must soon take place'' implies that the revelation concerns events that are future (cf. Dan 2:28-29, 45; Mark 13:7; Rev 4:1, 22:6). But in what sense can we understand that the events will arise ''soon'' (en tachei)? From the preterist point of view (the events are seen to be imminent to the time of the author; cf. Introduction), the sense is plain: all will ''soon'' take place---i.e., in John's day. Others translate en tachei as 'quickly'' (grammatically this is acceptable) and understand the author to describe events that will rapidly run their course once they begin. However, it is better to translate en tachei as ''soon'' in the light of the words ''the time is near'' in v.3 (cf. 22:10).
Yet, if we adopt this sense, it is not necessary to follow the preterist interpretation of the book. In eschatology and apocalyptic, the future is always viewed as imminent without the necessity of intervening time (cf. Luke 18:8). That en tachei does not preclude delay or intervening events is evident from the Book of Revelation itself. In chapter 6 we hear the cry of the martyred saints: ''How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you . . .avenge our blood?'' They are told to ''wait a little longer'' (vv.10-11). Therefore, ''soonness'' means imminency in eschatological terms. The church in every age has always lived with the expectancy of the consummation of all things in its day. Imminency describes an event possible any day, impossible no day. If this sense is followed, we are neigher forced to accept a ''mistaken apocalyptic'' view as Schweitzer advocated nor a preterist interpretation (Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus [New York: Macmillan, 1968]).
And so, again, there simply is no reason to take the word ''soon'' as meaning that the events of Revelation referred to events in John's day. And if, in accordance with the oldest church tradition, Revelation was written in the 90's then the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD. 70 cannot be in view in Revelation since John is referring to events which have not taken place as of the time of writing.
I'm not spending any more time on this. The preterist view makes no sense and the 'nearness' language need not be taken as referring to events occurring in or shortly after John's day as has been shown in the quotes I provided above. If you insist on maintaining a preterist view of Revelation that's your choice. But to do so denies a literal fulfillment of Jesus' return to set up a literal kingdom on the earth as well as a denial of a literal and physical resurrection of the dead since those are events which immediately follow the Tribulation which according to preterism happened long ago.
I hold to the futurist view of Revelation for the reasons I have given. I am now done with this.
I know I said that I wasn't going any further in this discussion, but you really don't know what the hell you're talking about. You have your head stuck in the wrong dispensation and know nothing about the present dispensation of the church. Christians do not have to be grafted into and adopted into Israel. That's not what Paul was saying in his Olive tree analogy in Romans 11:17-24.
Instead, the way that Gentiles and Jews become one is when both receive Christ as Savior. The Holy Spirit places both believing Jews and believing Gentiles into one body. It has nothing at all to do with having to adopt the ways of Judaism.
Now I am done and you will of course continue your rant.
Thats what I mean, you cant be honest with yourself because you have no integrity, you cant even admit what you do and what you worship. You dont know why you are pagan, you wont admit you practice paganism, you cant say what year Christians converted to paganism because you cant even admit you are a pagan..
Hebrews 8
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
You arent Israel and you arent a Jew, you are just a disgusting replacement theorist who thinks he has replaced God's chosen.
You arent a Jew, you arent Israel, and you wont even admit what the covenant states because you lack the integrity to admit your own truth.
Do you know what a real man is?
A man is an individual who has the integeity to admit the facts of what he is, what he does.
You are obviously ashamed of what you do, but instead of adressing it, you act like reality doesnt exist.
'Soon' does not always mean 'soon'. The word translated as 'soon' in Revelation 1:2 is the Greek words ἐν τάχει/en tachei - 'in quickness'. It can be translated either as 'soon or shortly' or as 'quickly.'
Some interpreters understand ἐν τάχει in Revelation 1:1 to mean not nearness in time but that when the events described in Revelation begin to occur they will unfold rapidly. Charles C. Ryrie takes this position in his book titled 'Revelation,' which is part of 'Everyman's Bible Commentary. Ryrie writes;
The words translated ''shortly'' (en tachei) mean that when the time for judgment comes there will be no delay in its execution (see Luke 18:8 and other occurrences of this of this phrase in Acts 12:7; 22:18; 25:4; Rom. 16:20; Rev. 22:6-7). The time of fulfillment may seem distant, but, when it starts, the events will transpire rapidly.
John F. Walvoord, a former president of Dallas Theological Seminary and one of the world's foremost interpreters of biblical prophecy, takes that same position. In his commentary on Revelation in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, New Testament, An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty, he comments regarding Rev. 1:1;
The word 'soon'' (en tachei; cf. 2:16; 22:7, 12, 20) means that the action will be sudden when it comes, not necessarily that it will occur immediately. Once the end-time events begin, they will occur in rapid succession (cf. Luke 18:8; Acts 12:7; 22:18; 25:4; Rom. 16:20).
Dr. Alan F. Johnson, Professor of Bible and Theology at Wheaton Collage, did the commentary on Revelation in The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 12. He notes that;
''What must soon take place'' implies that the revelation concerns events that are future (cf. Dan 2:28-29, 45; Mark 13:7; Rev 4:1, 22:6). But in what sense can we understand that the events will arise ''soon'' (en tachei)? From the preterist point of view (the events are seen to be imminent to the time of the author; cf. Introduction), the sense is plain: all will ''soon'' take place---i.e., in John's day. Others translate en tachei as 'quickly'' (grammatically this is acceptable) and understand the author to describe events that will rapidly run their course once they begin. However, it is better to translate en tachei as ''soon'' in the light of the words ''the time is near'' in v.3 (cf. 22:10).
Yet, if we adopt this sense, it is not necessary to follow the preterist interpretation of the book. In eschatology and apocalyptic, the future is always viewed as imminent without the necessity of intervening time (cf. Luke 18:8). That en tachei does not preclude delay or intervening events is evident from the Book of Revelation itself. In chapter 6 we hear the cry of the martyred saints: ''How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you . . .avenge our blood?'' They are told to ''wait a little longer'' (vv.10-11). Therefore, ''soonness'' means imminency in eschatological terms. The church in every age has always lived with the expectancy of the consummation of all things in its day. Imminency describes an event possible any day, impossible no day. If this sense is followed, we are neigher forced to accept a ''mistaken apocalyptic'' view as Schweitzer advocated nor a preterist interpretation (Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus [New York: Macmillan, 1968]).
And so, again, there simply is no reason to take the word ''soon'' as meaning that the events of Revelation referred to events in John's day. And if, in accordance with the oldest church tradition, Revelation was written in the 90's then the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD. 70 cannot be in view in Revelation since John is referring to events which have not taken place as of the time of writing.
I'm not spending any more time on this. The preterist view makes no sense and the 'nearness' language need not be taken as referring to events occurring in or shortly after John's day as has been shown in the quotes I provided above. If you insist on maintaining a preterist view of Revelation that's your choice. But to do so denies a literal fulfillment of Jesus' return to set up a literal kingdom on the earth as well as a denial of a literal and physical resurrection of the dead since those are events which immediately follow the Tribulation which according to preterism happened long ago.
I hold to the futurist view of Revelation for the reasons I have given. I am now done with this.
At the end of all your posts, and all your quotes of others, the basic fact is that you are left having to decide that all the words soon, shortly, near, at hand, etc , do not somehow mean what they actually say. You must ignore them to arrive at your chosen interpretation. You are welcome to it, it is just humorous to see folks jump over the obviously clear words to get to the interpretation they wish to believe in. Admirable interpretational gymnastics just for the required effort to do so, at least
There are the "end times" that we've been in since Jesus departed and then there are the End Times that will immediately precede his return. He said that in those End Times the signs would increase in frequency and intensity like labor pains. At no time in the past 2000 years would the signs of the End Times been anywhere near as clear or prevalent as they are today. This doesn't mean that I anticipate any particular timetable, simply that I and many, many other discerning Christians can see what is happening. The Bible gives the clues precisely so discerning Christians will be able to recognize what is happening.
I might add: I would cheerfully acknowledge that the alternative Christianities are more appealing in worldly terms. Christianity would be a much easier sell if it actually taught that everyone will be saved, God is endlessly tolerant and non-judgmental, "All You Need is Love" (or at least tolerance), and sin is a primitive human concept with no eternal consequences.
Even I would find this more appealing if I didn't have enough background in the religion to recognize that it simply isn't what Christianity has ever been understood to be. It requires a wholesale rejection of the OT, ignoring vast swaths of the NT, reinventing Jesus, and pretty much standing 2000 years of Christian doctrine and tradition on its head. It is no more traditional Christianity than Islam or Scientology is traditional Christianity. It is Christianity in name only, in the same way the Ascended Master Jesus of some New Age communities is Jesus in name only. Indeed, the alternative Christianities have far more in common with the New Age movement than with traditional Christianity.
It's very curious to me that those who promote these alternative Christianities insist on calling them Christian. I believe this fits squarely into the point of my original post: It's a deception. It undermines Christianity from within and deceives its followers into thinking they are following Christ.
Curiously enough, what is taking place - destructive to traditional Christianity as it may be - only strengthens my conviction that traditional "hardline" Christianity is the Truth. If what is taking weren't taking place exactly as the Bible predicts, my convictions might be weaker. This is the obvious reason for the biblical warnings - so Christians will recognize what is happening when it happens.
Which brings us back to the point of my original post: How is it possible that even many Christians don't recognize what is happening right in front of their faces and even in their own lives? I can only attribute it to supernatural deception.
Why was Jesus so emphatically clear that his message would divide families, that his followers would be hated and persecuted? Why is the Bible so emphatically clear that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Why is it that the alternative Christianities are so world-friendly they aren't even challenging to atheists? If you can't connect the dots, you are really, really deluded.
Irkle my brother, you are the one accepting a wrathful vengeful War God as the God revealed and demonstrated on the Cross by Jesus as God incarnate. To be honest, I can't think of a persona LESS representative of a wrathful vengeful War God than Jesus Christ in the flesh!!!!
I cannot imagine that anyone seeing or experiencing Jesus during His life would have in any way whatsoever associated Him with a wrathful vengeful War God! In fact, that probably explains His rejection considering the dominant belief about God was of a wrathful vengeful War God. That makes me wonder why YOU consider yourself and the mainstream dogma Christian!!!
"vengeful War God" i see just as zeitgeist, reflecting dominant consciousness of this World and working on improving World's consciousness by introducing positive changes, e.g. laws of Moses.
Thats what I mean, you cant be honest with yourself because you have no integrity, you cant even admit what you do and what you worship. You dont know why you are pagan, you wont admit you practice paganism, you cant say what year Christians converted to paganism because you cant even admit you are a pagan..
Hebrews 8
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
You arent Israel and you arent a Jew, you are just a disgusting replacement theorist who thinks he has replaced God's chosen.
You arent a Jew, you arent Israel, and you wont even admit what the covenant states because you lack the integrity to admit your own truth.
Do you know what a real man is?
A man is an individual who has the integeity to admit the facts of what he is, what he does.
You are obviously ashamed of what you do, but instead of adressing it, you act like reality doesnt exist.
At the end of all your posts, and all your quotes of others, the basic fact is that you are left having to decide that all the words soon, shortly, near, at hand, etc , do not somehow mean what they actually say. You must ignore them to arrive at your chosen interpretation. You are welcome to it, it is just humorous to see folks jump over the obviously clear words to get to the interpretation they wish to believe in. Admirable interpretational gymnastics just for the required effort to do so, at least
Nate, I have been where you are looking at things from the preterist perspective - but that perspective limits what God is doing with his own creation
Mat 1:21**And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Mat 1:22**Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
Mat 1:23**Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
We all have different perspectives - and that has to do with our (humanities) essential limited state in our views, our imagination, our selves
When we are discussing the Holy Scruptures there needs to be an awareness that both the prophecy and the Revelation both come from God not from ourselves
The Scriptures were scribed by men, has narratives, fables built into it and all that needs to be understood at a different, much higher level where there are not those natural limitations and boundaries
Mike is not a literalist and does understand the different timing that has been built into the Holy Scriptures, but as humans we all are limited in what we are capable of “receiving” and also communicating as individuals
We are coming together now at the end/latter days and all view things from totally different religious areas by design, and we all bring our different interpretation/translation/view/perspective with us
Isa 55:7**Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
Isa 55:8**For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
Isa 55:9**For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
Isa 55:10**For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:
2Pe 1:20**Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
2Pe 1:21**For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Those who received were not the scribes, the scribes write and are very adept at taking old and new and weaving it into fables, narratives that have kernels of literal truth Or history but are overlaid or clothed with meaning and start religion with its traditions that are past down - father to son (generational)
I can see the dedication and setting aside/circumcision of the Presbyterian, Methodist, JW, Baptist, Pentecostal, Episcopalian, Roman Catholic
and we are to set aside that regional, religious circumcision and strife
Act 2:5**And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
Act 2:6**Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
Act 2:7**And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
Act 2:8**And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
Act 2:9**Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Act 2:10**Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Act 2:11**Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
Act 2:12**And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?
Act 2:13**Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.
Thats what I mean, you cant be honest with yourself because you have no integrity, you cant even admit what you do and what you worship. You dont know why you are pagan, you wont admit you practice paganism, you cant say what year Christians converted to paganism because you cant even admit you are a pagan..
Hebrews 8
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
You arent Israel and you arent a Jew, you are just a disgusting replacement theorist who thinks he has replaced God's chosen.
You arent a Jew, you arent Israel, and you wont even admit what the covenant states because you lack the integrity to admit your own truth.
Do you know what a real man is?
A man is an individual who has the integeity to admit the facts of what he is, what he does.
You are obviously ashamed of what you do, but instead of adressing it, you act like reality doesnt exist.
You have some serious issues.
I have never really figured out if you are a Poe, if you are just messing with people for fun, or if somehow you really believe the stuff you post. If you are just messing with folks here for fun, it is really out of line to launch personal attacks about a posters character as part of the fun.
If you are serious in what you write, you are the one with some serious issues my friend.
I have never really figured out if you are a Poe, if you are just messing with people for fun, or if somehow you really believe the stuff you post. If you are just messing with folks here for fun, it is really out of line to launch personal attacks about a posters character as part of the fun.
If you are serious in what you write, you are the one with some serious issues my friend.
Hanni is doing both I believe - he is trying to provoke people to “wake” them up and get them to “see”
He definitely sees the symbolism inherent in Scripture - and he is obsessed with a certain part/level
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.
