The Rapture

[KJV1611]

I forgot that your version does not say "make a covenant....I was assuming. I'm sorry about that KJV1611 Daniel 9:27 (CJB)

[SUP]27 [/SUP]He will make a strong covenant with leaders for one week [of years]. For half of the week he will put a stop to the sacrifice and the grain offering. On the wing of detestable things the desolator will come and continue until the already decreed destruction is poured out on the desolator.”

So which version should we go with, the bible that you quoted from also says that Jesus had an origin... he is not eternal. Or should we go with the KJV?

Micah 5:2Christian Standard Bible (CSB)

2 Bethlehem Ephrathah,
you are small among the clans of Judah;
one will come from you
to be ruler over Israel for me.
His origin[a] is from antiquity,
from ancient times.

 

[Denadii]

Jesus inherited the entire earth when he died... all of this is his and mine too.

Jesus laid His life down, Then He picked it up again. Just like He said.

John 10:15
just as the Father knows me, and I know the Father — and I lay down my life on behalf of the sheep.


John 10:17
“This is why the Father loves me: because I lay down my life — in order to take it up again!

 

[Denadii]

So which version should we go with, the bible that you quoted from also says that Jesus had an origin... he is not eternal. Or should we go with the KJV?

Micah 5:2Christian Standard Bible (CSB)

2 Bethlehem Ephrathah,
you are small among the clans of Judah;
one will come from you
to be ruler over Israel for me.
His origin[a] is from antiquity,
from ancient times.

I use several different versions...Majority rules, though that is not always the right way, its usually the best.

 

[KJV1611]

I use several different versions...Majority rules, though that is not always the right way, its usually the best.

Sort of like there are many false Christs but ONLY ONE Christ. Isn't it ironic that the analogy fits our discussion lol. ONE bible protrays Jesus in Daniel 9:27 and ALL the other bibles present Antichrist. When I see a mistake like Jesus had an origin, that bible goes in the trash can so to speak.

 

[KJV1611]

I use several different versions...Majority rules, though that is not always the right way, its usually the best.

You've heard of the vine of Christ I'm sure. Did you know there's another vine? That's why the KJV differs from the other translations, it comes from a different vine.

Deuteronomy 32:31-33 KJV
For their rock is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves being judges.
[32] For their vine is of the vine of Sodom, and of the fields of Gomorrah: their grapes are grapes of gall, their clusters are bitter:
[33] Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps.

 

[Denadii]

Sort of like there are many false Christs but ONLY ONE Christ. Isn't it ironic that the analogy fits our discussion lol. ONE bible protrays Jesus in Daniel 9:27 and ALL the other bibles present Antichrist. When I see a mistake like Jesus had an origin, that bible goes in the trash can so to speak.

LOL It is a good analogy. The KJV, which is the one I assume you use?. is still one of the best.

 

[valiant]

The world wasn't any worse before he was 'bound' in the Old Testament. So your argument falls flat on its face. How are muslims and hindus deceived if satan is bound from deceiving the nations?

In the OT the world was practically unevangelised and converted Gentiles were few. He was bound by Jesus. THEN the Gospel reached out to the world. Or had you not noticed?

By his minions.

LOL you are clearly in contempt of anyone who doesn't agree with you. And you are so wrong. Study the Bible and not Scofield.

 

[valiant]

AAARGH NOO PLAINWORD what will I do with you.
The earth is not Israel, the earth is earth, wrap your mind around that.

EARTH IS EARTH ok? What universe am I in

What then do you make of Rom 1.8?

 

[shrume]

No doubt, the God presented in the KJV is not the same God as the other translations.

Translation: "I'm sticking with the KJV because it supports what I believe."

 

[heartofdavid]

"they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the Lord thy God"

Need I say more? Listen, it seems to me that the core issue here in this rapture topic is ISRAEL. People don't know when the rapture will take place because they cannot notice that God will again deal with Israel once the times of the gentiles are fulfilled (THE RAPTURE) the church is removed and a new dispensation begins. It don't matter if you don't like the word dispensation, its in the bible and what it means is that things'll change.

So because they don't know that the tribulation is primarily about the Israel, they think the church has to go through it. They read about the Lord coming down to the Mount of Olives in Zechariah 14 and I dunno what yall do, do you say the Jews He helps escape there are just american christians and the Mount of Olives is the grand canyon? How do you explain Zechariah 14 if you hold to replacement theology? I wanna see yall 'splain it away!

Bingo,the core of end times.
The bride,the groom,and Naomi.

The minisrty and person of Jesus.

The last miracle is the first miracle.

Where and what was the first miracle?

What was the setting?

who were the players?

 

[heartofdavid]

Translation: "I'm sticking with the KJV because it supports what I believe."

KJV is probably the best

If you check them all against the rec'd text greek,it is the most accurate.

 

[Denadii]

Translation: "I'm sticking with the KJV because it supports what I believe."

One could look at it this way. The Word is like a gem. The KJV is one facet of the gem. The NIV is another, the CJB is another, the ESV another and so on. Put them all together and you get a pretty good picture. The way most folks look at it, is not much different than racism, or sexism. My version is right and all the others are wrong! Rot! A man is better than a woman...Only in part A woman is also better than a man. Explain that one. LOL Its a true thing. Look at them properly One completes the other. One version completes the other. One race completes the other and so on.

 

[shrume]

KJV is probably the best

If you check them all against the rec'd text greek,it is the most accurate.

Do you realize that MANY Greek manuscripts have been discovered that are older that those the KJV was translated from?

This is why newer translations differ in many areas from the KJV.

 

[Issachar92]

Is it not common knowledge that there are 2 Israels, 2 Jerusalems, 2 heavens, 2 earths and 2 of just about everything in the bible?

Why is the disp. view always assuming EARTHLY every time Israel or Jerusalem is mentioned? Earthly Jerusalem was only a shadow of the heavenly Jerusalem.... it was used to teach us about heavenly Jerusalem. MOST of what you guys reference about Israel and Jerusalem isspeaking of spiritual Israel and heavenly Jerusalem.

Do you guys still sacrifice lambs lol.... Just kidding.

Because when its talking about the heavenly Jerusalem it specifically mentions it.
Btw: New Jerusalem is a LITERAL place. Its not symbolic of the church or any of that non sense.
Why would John describe to us in the Holy Ghost DETAILED stones and measurements of a city that isnt even real? This is where allegorizing gets you.

 

[heartofdavid]

Do you realize that MANY Greek manuscripts have been discovered that are older that those the KJV was translated from?

This is why newer translations differ in many areas from the KJV.

I use JP Greens intelinear.
I believe it is the best.

Here is why:

from the preface.......

In fact the Received Text was so widely and so completelyaccepted in all countries, and in all the denominations exceptthe Roman Catholic, that Wescott and Hort felt compelled toinvent a mythical council of church fathers, who supposedly metand fixed the text as we now know it. Such a council is unknownto history, and being totally demonstrable by evidence, it mustbe considered a myth proposed in order to deceive. Truly God in His mercy did not leave His people to gropeafter the true New Testament text.......First, many trustworthycopies were produced by faithful scribes. Secondly, these wereread, used, and recopied by true believers when those originalcopies were worn out. Thirdly, untrustworthy copies (such as theVaticanus and the Sinaiticus) were laid aside, not copied,consigned to oblivion. Today there are more than 5,00 manuscriptsand lectionaries in Greek as witness to the New Testament text.And 95% of them witness to the Received Text readings. Partly due to the fact that ancient manuscripts containingthe Received Text were worn out by use, while the Alexandriantextbase manuscripts were preserved by the dry conditions inEgypt, some have sought to discredit the Received Text becausethey say it is not ancient. But now that manuscript portions fromthe second century are being unearthed, it is found that many ofthe readings of the Received Text which had been taggedscornfully as 'late readings' by nearly unanimous consent of the'textual scientists' are appearing in these ancient manuscripts.Reading which were before called 'late' and 'spurious' have beenfound in these early-date manuscripts. For example, the Chester-Beatty Papyri contained 65 readings which had before beenrejected from the versions of the critics. And Papyrus Bodmer II,of the second century, actually was found to contain 13% of allthe so-called late readings of the critic-despised Majority Text.



Keith Hunt - Preface to Green's Interlinear #1 - Page One​

 

[Issachar92]

This is an extremely contentious idea, based I suspect on one passage of scripture, Romans 11.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

The idea that the Jews somehow have a special dispensation that cuts out Jesus is, well, what do you think?

Simplicity of the gospel? Mess of the Bible? Really?

Acts 4:12
Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

That was Peter talking to the religious leaders of Jewry.

1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God: .

Tell me how do you interpret Zechariah 14:4ff? How does that fit the spanish church? you tell me.

 

[Denadii]

I use JP Greens intelinear.
I believe it is the best.

Here is why:

from the preface.......

In fact the Received Text was so widely and so completelyaccepted in all countries, and in all the denominations exceptthe Roman Catholic, that Wescott and Hort felt compelled toinvent a mythical council of church fathers, who supposedly metand fixed the text as we now know it. Such a council is unknownto history, and being totally demonstrable by evidence, it mustbe considered a myth proposed in order to deceive. Truly God in His mercy did not leave His people to gropeafter the true New Testament text.......First, many trustworthycopies were produced by faithful scribes. Secondly, these wereread, used, and recopied by true believers when those originalcopies were worn out. Thirdly, untrustworthy copies (such as theVaticanus and the Sinaiticus) were laid aside, not copied,consigned to oblivion. Today there are more than 5,00 manuscriptsand lectionaries in Greek as witness to the New Testament text.And 95% of them witness to the Received Text readings. Partly due to the fact that ancient manuscripts containingthe Received Text were worn out by use, while the Alexandriantextbase manuscripts were preserved by the dry conditions inEgypt, some have sought to discredit the Received Text becausethey say it is not ancient. But now that manuscript portions fromthe second century are being unearthed, it is found that many ofthe readings of the Received Text which had been taggedscornfully as 'late readings' by nearly unanimous consent of the'textual scientists' are appearing in these ancient manuscripts.Reading which were before called 'late' and 'spurious' have beenfound in these early-date manuscripts. For example, the Chester-Beatty Papyri contained 65 readings which had before beenrejected from the versions of the critics. And Papyrus Bodmer II,of the second century, actually was found to contain 13% of allthe so-called late readings of the critic-despised Majority Text.



Keith Hunt - Preface to Green's Interlinear #1 - Page One​

I'm afraid you would have to give me more to convince me...That type of reference based on popularity is meaningless. It's akin to saying "Eat manure! Fifty billion flies just can't be wrong"

What makes it better? Why is is so popular? Can you provide something that is not emotion based?

I'm not knocking your opinion. Not at all. I just want something that's proof.

 

[heartofdavid]

1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God: .

Tell me how do you interpret Zechariah 14:4ff? How does that fit the spanish church? you tell me.

Apparently the Jews come in the same way as gentiles,through the blood and acceptance of Jesus as Lord,savior and messiah.

2 Messages,one savior.

To the Jew he is the promised messiah

To the gentile he is the gracious savior that has also extended salvation the the gentile.

That is how we all end up together in the end.
One family.

Again,the book of Ruth.

 

[heartofdavid]

I'm afraid you would have to give me more to convince me...That type of reference based on popularity is meaningless. It's akin to saying "Eat manure! Fifty billion flies just can't be wrong"

What makes it better? Why is is so popular? Can you provide something that is not emotion based?

I'm not knocking your opinion. Not at all. I just want something that's proof.

Click the link. You are doing what you say you don't

The Alexandrian text was rejected by most as were several others. It is explained in the link.

To come away with "it just the most popular" is far from the truth.

No emotion to any of it. ...and I have no idea where you got that from

 

[J7]

Jesus laid His life down, Then He picked it up again. Just like He said.

John 10:15
just as the Father knows me, and I know the Father — and I lay down my life on behalf of the sheep.


John 10:17
“This is why the Father loves me: because I lay down my life — in order to take it up again!

26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing.

Oh well that is clear as mud then. The Jews must be right when they said Jesus did not rise from the dead, if we believe you. Why are you putting an antiChrist interpretation on Daniel? Or are you even aware that you are batting for the AntiChrist?