The Rapture

[MHz]

Where are you getting this little tale from? It sounds like you've been reading Gnostic "Gospels"

Nope, same Bible I always read. It also makes me wonder how a little mystery like this can go unsolved by the same people who think they can solve what bigger ones like 'day of the lord' means. That study can eat up 100 pages easily and the Beloved Disciple is about 10 pages to cover all the information. Getting it down to 10 lines probably won't be very convincing but let's start small in case you lose interest quickly.

I'm not even going to post many verses and the topic involves a lot of verses.

John the Apostle could not have written the Gospel of John as he and two other Apostles saw two events with Jesus and those events are only covered the other three Gospels so that part alone would leave the author unknown even though it is easy to show it was written by a Disciple of John the Baptist that did not become an Apostle like the named one did.

Joh:1:35-40:
Again the next day after John stood,
and two of his disciples;
And looking upon Jesus as he walked,
he saith,
Behold the Lamb of God!
And the two disciples heard him speak,
and they followed Jesus.
Then Jesus turned,
and saw them following,
and saith unto them,
What seek ye?
They said unto him,
Rabbi,
(which is to say,
being interpreted,
Master,)
where dwellest thou?
He saith unto them,
Come and see.
They came and saw where he dwelt,
and abode with him that day:
for it was about the tenth hour.
One of the two which heard John speak,
and followed him,
was Andrew,
Simon Peter's brother.


Joh:21:24:
This is the disciple which testifieth of these things,
and wrote these things:
and we know that his testimony is true.
Joh:21:25:
And there are also many other things which Jesus did,
the which,
if they should be written every one,
I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.
Amen.

The Beloved Disciple is noted as being at the cross when no Apostles were there as they had run away at the arrest. The words said told her to look after his mother and that waqs for life rather than a few days.

Joh:19:26:
When Jesus therefore saw his mother,
and the disciple standing by,
whom he loved,
he saith unto his mother,
Woman,
behold thy son!

Lu:24:10:
It was Mary Magdalene,
and Joanna,
and Mary the mother of James,
and other women that were with them,
which told these things unto the apostles.

This shows that Mary knew all in inner teaching that only the Apostles were taught.

Lu:10:38-42:
Now it came to pass,
as they went,
that he entered into a certain village:
and a certain woman named Martha received him into her house.
And she had a sister called Mary,
which also sat at Jesus' feet,
and heard his word.
But Martha was cumbered about much serving,
and came to him,
and said,
Lord,
dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone?
bid her therefore that she help me.
And Jesus answered and said unto her,
Martha,
Martha,
thou art careful and troubled about many things:
But one thing is needful:
and Mary hath chosen that good part,
which shall not be taken away from her.

This is a letter from Peter to the Beloved Disciple and it acknowledges that she was with Jesus before he was. The 2nd reference from those 3 epistles mention a woman who is gathering many 'children' to God. 1Jo:1:1-3:
That which was from the beginning,
which we have heard,
which we have seen with our eyes,
which we have looked upon,
and our hands have handled,
of the Word of life;
(For the life was manifested,
and we have seen it,
and bear witness,
and shew unto you that eternal life,
which was with the Father,
and was manifested unto us
That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you,
that ye also may have fellowship with us:
and truly our fellowship is with the Father,
and with his Son Jesus Christ.2Jo:1:1:
The elder unto the elect lady and her children,
whom I love in the truth;
and not I only,
but also all they that have known the truth;

2Jo:1:13:
The children of thy elect sister greet thee.
Amen.

Perhaps you would like to comment on why every reference to 'John' in the Gospel of John is a reference to John thae Baptist.

Elizabeth was a daughter of Aaron, her cousin Mary who became the mother of Jesus is also a daughter of Aaron and they have just about am much authority as a male Priest from the temple. It is quite possible that Mary of Bethany was also a daughter of Aaron.

Joh:11:5:
Now Jesus loved Martha,
and her sister,
and Lazarus.

That should get us started. Since I am correct it would seem that anybody believing otherwise would be guilty of being what you accused me of being, right?

 

[PlainWord]

Good luck with getting people to address audience relevance PL.

I know. They take each passage and ignore who it was written to or addressed to and instead apply it to themselves and our times. Sad. It would be like me saying, "Hey Locutus buddy, in the near future I'm coming over to take you to the big hockey game" then I don't show up for 2,000 years and take your great, great X50 grand child to the game. This assumes they are still playing hockey 2,000 years from now.

Sorry for the whole Canadian-hockey stereotype good buddy.

 

[MHz]

We have hockey??? I really should get out more.

 

[Endoscopy]

I keep saying, it's all about audience integrity. Here are some examples of my futurists friend losing audience integrity:

...looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ...

Q: Who was to have the "blessed hope" of seeing the God and Christ appear, Titus or people thousands of years into the future?

...and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels...

Q: Which "troubled" people were to get rest, the Church of the Thessalonians in the first century or some future troubled Church that Paul didn't write to?

Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him.

Q: Who also sees Him, the Roman solders who pierced Him or their descendants thousands of year later working in a pizza shop in Italy having had nothing to do with killing Christ?

And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him.

Q: Which tribes mourn, the Tribes of Israel who didn't realize they had missed their Messiah or would it be Cherokee and Sioux Indians or Aborigines perhaps who until recently didn't know anything about Jesus?

Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!” [SUP]64 [/SUP]Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

Q: Who was to see Christ coming on the clouds of heaven, the Sanhedrin who challenged and arrested Him or some future generation thousands of years later who had nothing to do with it?

Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city, [SUP]35 [/SUP]that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.

Q: Who were sent prophets? Who murdered them? Who is to be held accountable for all the righteous blood shed on the earth, the scribes and Pharisees of Jesus' day or some future people thousands of years into the future who had nothing to do with killing prophets?

And in her was found the blood of prophets and saints, and of all who were slain on the earth.”

Q: Is the above from Rev 1 by8 connected in any way with the previous passage from Mt 23 or will there be a future city guilty of killing future prophets and saints? If you answer "future" then where was the warning for the first century murders of saints and prophets?

Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.

Q: Which generation would "all these things" come upon, the one Jesus was speaking to, or some future generation thousands of years later?

See! Your house is left to you desolate; [SUP]39 [/SUP]for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’ ”

Q: What house is to be left desolate? Who shall see Him no more, the scribes and Pharisees, or some future generation thousands of years later not mentioned in the passage?

Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.

Q: Jesus seems to repeat His statement from Mt 23 in Mt 24. Can we assume He is speaking to and about the same generation?

Then Jesus answered and said, “O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I bear with you?

Q: Which generation was faithless and perverse?

Do any of these passages even hint at some future, unrelated generation thousands of years later?

I say again, AUDIENCE INTEGRITY. Understand what was happening back then and what happened in 70 AD to the unbelieving, faithless and wicked nation of Israel.

You love to twist the Word of God. You take selected verses out of context. Context is extremely important to the meaning of the verses. Then you have the audacity to claim AUDIENCE INTEGRITY! Hang your head in shame!

 

[Endoscopy]

Nope, same Bible I always read. It also makes me wonder how a little mystery like this can go unsolved by the same people who think they can solve what bigger ones like 'day of the lord' means. That study can eat up 100 pages easily and the Beloved Disciple is about 10 pages to cover all the information. Getting it down to 10 lines probably won't be very convincing but let's start small in case you lose interest quickly.

I'm not even going to post many verses and the topic involves a lot of verses.

John the Apostle could not have written the Gospel of John as he and two other Apostles saw two events with Jesus and those events are only covered the other three Gospels so that part alone would leave the author unknown even though it is easy to show it was written by a Disciple of John the Baptist that did not become an Apostle like the named one did.

Joh:1:35-40:
Again the next day after John stood,
and two of his disciples;
And looking upon Jesus as he walked,
he saith,
Behold the Lamb of God!
And the two disciples heard him speak,
and they followed Jesus.
Then Jesus turned,
and saw them following,
and saith unto them,
What seek ye?
They said unto him,
Rabbi,
(which is to say,
being interpreted,
Master,)
where dwellest thou?
He saith unto them,
Come and see.
They came and saw where he dwelt,
and abode with him that day:
for it was about the tenth hour.
One of the two which heard John speak,
and followed him,
was Andrew,
Simon Peter's brother.


Joh:21:24:
This is the disciple which testifieth of these things,
and wrote these things:
and we know that his testimony is true.
Joh:21:25:
And there are also many other things which Jesus did,
the which,
if they should be written every one,
I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.
Amen.

The Beloved Disciple is noted as being at the cross when no Apostles were there as they had run away at the arrest. The words said told her to look after his mother and that waqs for life rather than a few days.

Joh:19:26:
When Jesus therefore saw his mother,
and the disciple standing by,
whom he loved,
he saith unto his mother,
Woman,
behold thy son!

Lu:24:10:
It was Mary Magdalene,
and Joanna,
and Mary the mother of James,
and other women that were with them,
which told these things unto the apostles.

This shows that Mary knew all in inner teaching that only the Apostles were taught.

Lu:10:38-42:
Now it came to pass,
as they went,
that he entered into a certain village:
and a certain woman named Martha received him into her house.
And she had a sister called Mary,
which also sat at Jesus' feet,
and heard his word.
But Martha was cumbered about much serving,
and came to him,
and said,
Lord,
dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone?
bid her therefore that she help me.
And Jesus answered and said unto her,
Martha,
Martha,
thou art careful and troubled about many things:
But one thing is needful:
and Mary hath chosen that good part,
which shall not be taken away from her.

This is a letter from Peter to the Beloved Disciple and it acknowledges that she was with Jesus before he was. The 2nd reference from those 3 epistles mention a woman who is gathering many 'children' to God. 1Jo:1:1-3:
That which was from the beginning,
which we have heard,
which we have seen with our eyes,
which we have looked upon,
and our hands have handled,
of the Word of life;
(For the life was manifested,
and we have seen it,
and bear witness,
and shew unto you that eternal life,
which was with the Father,
and was manifested unto us
That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you,
that ye also may have fellowship with us:
and truly our fellowship is with the Father,
and with his Son Jesus Christ.2Jo:1:1:
The elder unto the elect lady and her children,
whom I love in the truth;
and not I only,
but also all they that have known the truth;

2Jo:1:13:
The children of thy elect sister greet thee.
Amen.

Perhaps you would like to comment on why every reference to 'John' in the Gospel of John is a reference to John thae Baptist.

Elizabeth was a daughter of Aaron, her cousin Mary who became the mother of Jesus is also a daughter of Aaron and they have just about am much authority as a male Priest from the temple. It is quite possible that Mary of Bethany was also a daughter of Aaron.

Joh:11:5:
Now Jesus loved Martha,
and her sister,
and Lazarus.

That should get us started. Since I am correct it would seem that anybody believing otherwise would be guilty of being what you accused me of being, right?

Megahertz you are ludicrous! Each author of the Gospels didn't have to see and hear everything. I guess you think they didn't discuss these things with each other. Thus filling in gaps they didn't witness. Luke for example wasn't a disciple but wrote what he was told by the disciples. He acted as a historian.

 

[Endoscopy]

Stupid 5 minute rule.
John the Baptist was killed during the early part of Jesus ministry.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

^ Indeed, beheaded.

 

[PlainWord]

You love to twist the Word of God. You take selected verses out of context. Context is extremely important to the meaning of the verses. Then you have the audacity to claim AUDIENCE INTEGRITY! Hang your head in shame!

My context is spot on perfect. Do any of these passages contain any language that would suggest thousands of years would pass before these things take place or do they suggest nearness (in their day, first century)?

 

[Locutus]

My context is spot on perfect. Do any of these passages contain any language that would suggest thousands of years would pass before these things take place or do they suggest nearness (in their day, first century)?

The guy did not even have decency to address the context and audience relevance of even one of your posts PL.

 

[PlainWord]

The guy did not even have decency to address the context and audience relevance of even one of your posts PL.

Because he can't. Let's challenge him to cite one of the passages I quoted and show us where a multi-thousand year gap is taught. He can't, just as those who try to explain how Dan 9 has a huge gap between week 69 and 70 can't. One isn't taught so they invent it. It's like there was no history for thousands of years.

These people would have us believe the clock stopped at Messiah, jumped over the events of 70 AD with the desolation and prince to come, then resumed with another prince to come and some future desolation by fire. It's plain ignorance of history and allowing one's personal beliefs cloud their judgment. Oh, and they wipe out the cross and bring back animal sacrifices too. Suddenly, Christ's blood lost its power and needs to be replaced by the blood of bulls and rams again. Can you even imagine the uproar at the UN if Israel ever starting slaughtering baby lambs again? The world wouldn't stand for it for one minute.

 

[Ahwatukee]

Because he can't. Let's challenge him to cite one of the passages I quoted and show us where a multi-thousand year gap is taught. He can't, just as those who try to explain how Dan 9 has a huge gap between week 69 and 70 can't. One isn't taught so they invent it. It's like there was no history for thousands of years. These people would have us believe the clock stopped at Messiah, jumped over the events of 70 AD with the desolation and prince to come, then resumed with another prince to come and some future desolation by fire.

It's not a specific passage that states that there will be a 2000 year gap, but is about simple scriptural deduction. Jesus quoted Dan.9:27 as still being a future event saying, "when you see standing in the holy place the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet." Daniel spoke that prophecy approximately 600 years prior to Jesus quoting him. Therefore, you already have a gap of over 600 years from the time that Daniel spoke it to the time that Jesus quoted him. Therefore, why do you have a problem with there being a gap when there is an obvious and provable 600 year gap between the two already?

Furthermore, from the time that Jesus quoted Daniel to the destruction of the temple thirty something years later, we have no fulfillment of Dan.9:27 of the ruler/antichrist making a seven year covenant, no abomination being set up in the middle and no Israel fleeing out into the wilderness to that place prepared for her by God. In addition, at the end of that 1260 days (3 1/2 years) is when Jesus returns to the earth to end the age and establish his literal millennial kingdom. And prior to that, we would have had to have seen the fulfillment of the wrath of God via the seals, trumpets and bowl judgments, as well as the plagues of the two witnesses. Yet we have no fulfillment of any of these either.

At the end of the sixty nine sevens, the Messiah was cut off/crucified. At that time, God paused that last seven years to be fulfilled in conjunction with the Lord's return to the earth to end the age and began building his church, which is still in the process of being built. Once the church has been completed, the Lord will descend and gather the church taking us back to the Father's house as promised (John 14:1-3). Once the church has been gathered, then that ruler, the antichrist will establish his seven year covenant with Israel. At that time God will be picking up right where he left off in fulfillment of that last seven years with Israel, complete with temple, sacrifices and offerings. This has nothing to do with the church, but the fulfillment of the seventy sevens that were decreed upon Israel. We are still saved by grace through faith in the shed blood of Christ, but regarding Israel, God has some unfinished prophecy with them.

It's plain ignorance of history and allowing one's personal beliefs cloud their judgment. Oh, and they wipe out the cross and bring back animal sacrifices too. Suddenly, Christ's blood lost its power and needs to be replaced by the blood of bulls and rams again.

It's not plain ignorance, but these are the deeper truths of God's word revealed through the Spirit, which you obviously don't understand. The events of Revelation is literally going to have to take place before your very eyes before you will let go of the false teachings that you have adopted and believe what God's word says. God's fulfillment of the decree of seventy sevens does not "wipe out the cross" but is specific to the fulfillment of prophecy to Israel and has nothing to do with the church.

Can you even imagine the uproar at the UN if Israel ever starting slaughtering baby lambs again? The world wouldn't stand for it for one minute.

Regarding the above, you are thinking in terms of the current world of political correctness and are not understanding that, it is the revealing of the antichrist that will make it possible for Israel to build their temple and begin sacrificing again. He will be in control of the UN and the rest of the world. After all, he is going to be proclaiming himself to be God and will have the counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders performed by the false prophet to back up his claim.

 

[Nehemiah6]

These people would have us believe the clock stopped at Messiah, jumped over the events of 70 AD with the desolation and prince to come, then resumed with another prince to come and some future desolation by fire.

It does not require a rocket scientist to conclude that because there is such a thing as "the Church Age" (or the Age of Grace or the Period of Gospel Preaching or whatever you wish to call it) that the 70th week of Daniel is yet future.

If all had been fulfilled around 70 AD (as the deluded Preterists imagine) then we should logically and chronologically already be living in the period pertaining to the New Heavens and the New Earth. Which means that there would be absolute righteousness on earth and all evildoers along with Satan and his evil spirits confined to the Lake of Fire.

So are you prepared to make such a preposterous claim, or should you not abandon your Preterist delusions and arrive at a sober assessment of when future prophecies will be fulfilled?

 

[Locutus]

It does not require a rocket scientist to conclude that because there is such a thing as "the Church Age" (or the Age of Grace or the Period of Gospel Preaching or whatever you wish to call it) that the 70th week of Daniel is yet future.

Darby wasn't a rocket scientist, but a dumb dispensationalist that created a doctrine of contradictions out of thin air.

Of course Daniels 70 week is over, it came when Jerusalem was surrounded by armies, the very time that the abomination of desolation was present.

Luke 21:20 But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near.

Luke 21:21 “Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst of the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter the city;


Mat 24:15 Therefore when you see the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),

Mat 24:16 then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains.

Adam Clarke's commentary:


The abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel - This abomination of desolation, St. Luke, ( Luke 21:20, Luke 21:21, refers to the Roman army; and this abomination standing in the holy place is the Roman army besieging Jerusalem; this, our Lord says, is what was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, in the ninth and eleventh chapters of his prophecy; and so let every one who reads these prophecies understand them; and in reference to this very event they are understood by the rabbins.

The Roman army is called an abomination, for its ensigns and images, which were so to the Jews. Josephus says, (War, b. vi. chap. 6), the Romans brought their ensigns into the temple, and placed them over against the eastern gate, and sacrificed to them there.

The Roman army is therefore fitly called the abomination, and the abomination which maketh desolate, as it was to desolate and lay waste Jerusalem; and this army besieging Jerusalem is called by St. Mark, Mark 13:14, standing where it ought not, that is, as in the text here, the holy place; as not only the city, but a considerable compass of ground about it, was deemed holy, and consequently no profane persons should stand on it
.


Luke and Matthew are dealing with the same event - this is how audience relevance and context works.

 

[PlainWord]

AHW, hey good buddy, how have you been? Long time, no direct communicado.

It's not a specific passage that states that there will be a 2000 year gap, but is about simple scriptural deduction.

That's right, there is no gap found or taught in Dan 9. No, spiritual deduction is not needed when the text is clear. "70 weeks (of 7 years) were determined. This is 490 years. It is not 483 years + 2,000 years + 7 years.

Jesus quoted Dan.9:27 as still being a future event saying, "when you see standing in the holy place the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet." ?

Correct, Jesus quotes Daniel's "Abomination of Desolation" as a future event to Him, not to us. What is an "abomination that causeth desolation? Was there a detestable foreigner "prince" who stood on the temple mount (and caused the utter desolation of Jerusalem in 70 AD), an event future to Christ? Why look past the next desolation of Jerusalem caused by an abominable person just 40 years after Christ said it to some future abomination potentially 2,000 years later? Why wouldn't Christ address the more immediate desolation since those He was speaking to might actually still be alive when it was to happen?

Daniel spoke that prophecy approximately 600 years prior to Jesus quoting him. Therefore, you already have a gap of over 600 years from the time that Daniel spoke it to the time that Jesus quoted him. Therefore, why do you have a problem with there being a gap when there is an obvious and provable 600 year gap between the two already

Actually it was exactly 483 years from when the command went forth to when Christ began His ministry. In the middle of the 70th week, He was cut off at the Cross ending the 70 weeks at week 69.5. This is why Christ mentions the below in Lk 19:

For days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment around you, surround you and close you in on every side, [SUP]44 [/SUP]and level you, and your children within you, to the ground; and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not know the time of your visitation.”

Jerusalem was to be leveled and made desolate because they didn't know the time of Christ's visitation. They should have known because Daniel told them. You see Christ spent a lot of time telling His disciples about the pending destruction of the temple and their holy city. Rather than recognizing this, you jump to some future destruction and desolation assuming Christ totally ignores the more immediate one.

This is how Josephus concludes his description of the desolation of Jerusalem in 70 AD:

1. AND thus was Jerusalem taken, in the second year of the reign of Vespasian, on the eighth day of the month Gorpeius [Elul]. It had been taken five times before, though this was the second time of its desolation; for Shishak, the king of Egypt, and after him Antiochus, and after him Pompey, and after them Sosius and Herod, took the city, but still preserved it; but before all these, the king of Babylon conquered it, and made it desolate, one thousand four hundred and sixty-eight years and six months after it was built. But he who first built it. Was a potent man among the Canaanites, and is in our own tongue called [Melchisedek], the Righteous King, for such he really was; on which account he was [there] the first priest of God, and first built a temple [there], and called the city Jerusalem, which was formerly called Salem. However, David, the king of the Jews, ejected the Canaanites, and set-tied his own people therein. It was demolished entirely by the Babylonians, four hundred and seventy-seven years and six months after him. And from king David, who was the first of the Jews who reigned therein, to this destruction under Titus, were one thousand one hundred and seventy-nine years; but from its first building, till this last destruction, were two thousand one hundred and seventy-seven years; yet hath not its great antiquity, nor its vast riches, nor the diffusion of its nation over all the habitable earth, nor the greatness of the veneration paid to it on a religious account, been sufficient to preserve it from being destroyed. And thus ended the siege of Jerusalem.

You see, Jerusalem was desolated twice before, once by Babylon, once by Titus. The Titus desolation was the immediate one coming in Christ's day. This is the one in focus. You skip it to some future desolation not even foretold. This defies all logic and reason.

I want you to please focus on something else Josephus said:

nor the diffusion of its nation over all the habitable earth

He is discussing the scattering of the survivors of this War all over the earth. You know, Jesus says exactly the same thing in Lk 21:

[SUP]24 [/SUP]And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations.

Did not the Jews in Jerusalem fall by the sword and were taken away captive (by Titus) in 70 AD and from there scattered everywhere?

 

[Ahwatukee]

Correct, Jesus quotes Daniel's "Abomination of Desolation" as a future event to Him, not to us.

I knew it was a mistake to take you off ignore. You still have no idea what you are talking about. You and those who believe as you do, are just going to have to find out when these events begin to take place right before your very eyes.

You're apart of the problem of false teachings in these last days.

 

[tanakh]

My context is spot on perfect. Do any of these passages contain any language that would suggest thousands of years would pass before these things take place or do they suggest nearness (in their day, first century)?

It doesn't take much to realize that the first century Christians were not expecting a 2000 year gap. The NT is full of examples where the writers believed the last days were already there in their generation. John went even further by stating that it was the last hour. Those who believe in this gap should seriously ask themselves what the first readers of Revelation thought it was all about because if most of it is only relevant to us in the 21st Century it follows that the book would have been incomprehensible to everyone for the previous 2000 years, which would lead us to wonder why it was given to the seven churches in the first place. In Daniel he is told to seal up the Prophecy until the time of the end. In Revelation we see Christ opening a scroll with seven seals. None of the contents mention another temple, Nuclear Weapons, Microchips or any of the other things people speculate about. The answers to our questions are found where the early church found them. In the OT

 

[Endoscopy]

My context is spot on perfect. Do any of these passages contain any language that would suggest thousands of years would pass before these things take place or do they suggest nearness (in their day, first century)?

By putting verses in context means not using a single verse but verses before and after it as well. Using single verses like you did anything can be "proved". That is why each verse needs to be used in context and to its place in the Bible. Each book of the Bible is written for a specific purpose. All verses on a topic in the Bible also need to be considered. That goes into consideration as well. This is why a book of systematic theology is helpful. All verses on a topic are listed there under that topic. Thus you can research them and make up your own mind if you agree with the author of the book about their meaning as a whole.

 

[Endoscopy]

What's your point? You think God has only one title? You think we are the only race of beings? You think he doesn't have other names that these beings can pronounce as of some we can not? Your whole thesis is to discredit. Not to give me a lesson of God's names and titles. Try saying God's name in English without vowels. How's that work out for you? You think the rest of the human race doesn't know God because we all pronounce his name differently? Here's one for you, Jesus' name in Hebrew means "God Saves". This is Joshua in our tongue. Not Yeshua like the Jews who want to discredit him call him. This is actually pronounced Zsashua in Old and I mean Very Old Hebrew. Much like Zsa Zsa Gabor's name is pronounced.

But besides all of this God knows what's in your heart and knows who you are praying to in the spirit. So why all of the Lagalism from you? Oh that's right, to discredit a being whom you say is not one of God's Angels or to say I am Lying.
Wait until after May friend and then what are you going to try when and if this comes to pass?

You are ignoring that YHWH means I am. That is what God calls himself. Other names are what people give Him. In fact one of the words is one used by Jews when the YHWH is come across in the scripture. They feel they are not worthy to say the name of God so they substitute Adonai for it.

 

[Endoscopy]

I know. They take each passage and ignore who it was written to or addressed to and instead apply it to themselves and our times. Sad. It would be like me saying, "Hey Locutus buddy, in the near future I'm coming over to take you to the big hockey game" then I don't show up for 2,000 years and take your great, great X50 grand child to the game. This assumes they are still playing hockey 2,000 years from now.

Sorry for the whole Canadian-hockey stereotype good buddy.

The problem with their assertion is we are supposed to look at the context of who the book was written to and its purpose. Then apply it to ourselves with that understanding taking other sections of scriptures on the topic into account as well. That's where a systematic theology book is valuable. They list all verses on a topic so you can reference them. You can make up your own mind about what it says. When using a topical index it too often doesn't list the topic I want to look up. I have the Kindle version of Burkhart's Systematic Theology. It works very well.

 

[abcdef]

Brother tanakh,

It doesn't take much to realize that the first century Christians were not expecting a 2000 year gap.

Yes, Jesus had told the apostles that Jerusalem would fall and be trampled by the gentiles until the times of the gentiles (ToG's) would fulfilled Lk 21:20. So the apostles knew that there would be a ToG's, but they didn't know how long it would last. It appears that they believed that they might live to see the rapt/resur.

The NT is full of examples where the writers believed the last days were already there in their generation. John went even further by stating that it was the last hour.

John called it the last hour because of the antichrists in the great falling away before Jerusalem was destroyed.

Those who believe in this gap should seriously ask themselves what the first readers of Revelation thought it was all about because if most of it is only relevant to us in the 21st Century it follows that the book would have been incomprehensible to everyone for the previous 2000 years,

This is the problem with both pre-trib and preterism, they both have a gap in prophecy where there actually is no gap.

For preterists, the gap begins at 70 ad and is open ended. Preterists are blind to everything after 70 ad. But prophecies are not all ended in 70 ad. The rapt/resurrection did not take place in 70 ad. It has yet to be.

For pretrib the gap is from approx 33 ad/70ad until the rapt/resur. that is yet to come (depending on who you are talking to).

But the answer is that there is no gap. The statue of Dan 2 shows no gap. The 4th beast nation of Dan 7 shows no gap. The beast city/nation of Rev 17 shows no gap.

But this leads us to the question, why do they say that there is a gap? The answer is, Both are hiding the Roman beast Antichrist nation/kingdom Vatican.

Think about it. Preterists say that everything ended in 70 ad, so the Roman beast cannot be the Vatican/BoR.

And the pre-trib say the same thing in a way. The Roman beast nation cannot be the Vatican/Bor because the Antichrist has not been revealed yet.

But both CHOOSE TO IGNORE the fact that there is no gap in prophecy from 33/70 ad until now, it is all shown as the ToG's.

The ToG's fill in the gap so there really isn't a gap at all.

The Roman Antichrist first is Caesar and the Roman Empire. Then when Rome falls, it is the Roman image beast of the Vatican/Bor that rules over the people of Israel until they are restored to Jerusalem.

This is the ToG's, and the second 3 1/2 times from 70 ad until 1967, completing the 7 times and the toes of the statue in Dan. 2.

which would lead us to wonder why it was given to the seven churches in the first place.

Does it apply exclusively to the 7 congregations? Or is it prophetic for all believers?

In Daniel he is told to seal up the Prophecy until the time of the end.

The time of the end began on Pentecost. Paul said that he was in the last days. It was not known for sure that Rome was the iron legs until after it was revealed at the dest of Jerusalem that Caesar was the Antichrist.

(The Holy Spirit was "taken away" from Jerusalem when the last Christians left the city. The Antichrist was revealed as Caesar. But the Antichrist that is destroyed by the brightness of His coming is not the Caesar of the Roman Empire proper, but the image Caesar that lives after the first Antichrist has died. Sea beast Roman Empire/Earth beast Religious Roman Empire image.)

In Revelation we see Christ opening a scroll with seven seals.

This is the scroll from Daniel 12 that was sealed until the time of the end (last days).

It could not be opened until 3 1/2 times had passed, Babylon until the scattering of 70 ad.. This places the writing of the Rev after the dest of Jerusalem and the scattering of 70 ad.

The scroll tells the story of the 2 witnesses (2 W's). It is the story of Israel (natural branches) from 70 ad, the scattering/Tog's, until the rapt/resur and the end of the planet at the 7th/last trumpet.

None of the contents mention another temple, Nuclear Weapons, Microchips or any of the other things people speculate about.

The temple that is mentioned in the story of the 2W's is the temple of 70 ad. It was judged and found to be, not perfect.

The 2W's mourn until they are restored to Jerusalem. (1967)

The answers to our questions are found where the early church found them. In the OT

Yes, the symbolism is all explained in the OT scriptures. The problems of understanding the Rev come from people choosing to ignore these examples of symbolism explained.