Why Daniel's 70th Week does NOT support Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism

[Nehemiah6]

You follow catholic teachings on end times!

There's no need to make FALSE ACCUSATIONS. I have simply posted the relevant Scriptures, but since you are the one who is locked into a false method of interpretation, you are unable to grasp the truth. So for the edification of all, kindly show us which Catholic sources I consulted. The Jesuits will be tickled pink!

At the same time, unless you can show us all how the Second Coming of Christ has already been accomplished (even though this world is an evil mess) you should honestly and readily admit that you have been deceived, and it is now time to wake up. It takes courage to fess up.

 

[Nebuchadnezzer]

There's no need to make FALSE ACCUSATIONS. I have simply posted the relevant Scriptures, but since you are the one who is locked into a false method of interpretation, you are unable to grasp the truth. So for the edification of all, kindly show us which Catholic sources I consulted. The Jesuits will be tickled pink!

At the same time, unless you can show us all how the Second Coming of Christ has already been accomplished (even though this world is an evil mess) you should honestly and readily admit that you have been deceived, and it is now time to wake up. It takes courage to fess up.

I am not declaring that the Second Coming of Christ happened already. You too are also making false accusations.

Here is your reference.
https://bereanbeacon.org/the-catholic-origins-of-protestant-eschatology/

 

[Jackson123]

Biblical prophesy is not a crystal ball that can be used to predict future events. Prophesy is written in such a way that for it to be understood correctly it must be matched correctly to the witness of the historical record.

Now there is a difference between prophesy and promise. Jesus promises that he is coming soon, and so yes believers should believe and trust in this. But what this looks like or how this unfolds can not be foretold.

Prophesy can only be correctly understood after it has been fulfilled. It is difficult enough to understand prophesy after it has been fulfilled. For example Jonah's three days in the belly of the fish before being brought back to life was a foreshadow of Jesus's three days in the belly of the earth before being brought back to life.

Most people cannot see this even now after it has been fulfilled. And I wager no one could have ever foretold the events of Jesus's death and Resurrection from knowing the Book of Jonah. No opne could predict the details of the NT by knowing the OT.

Likewise no one could have foretold of water baptism from the events of the parting of the Red Sea. Only after the fact can we look back and understand the full meaning and foreshadowing of the parting of the red sea.

The Book of Jonah (OT) and the Gospel of Matthew (NT) serve as witnesses to each other. Only together can one get the whole picture and understanding.

Biblical prophesy and the historical record work in the same way. Only together as witness and testimony to one another can one get the whole picture and understanding of biblical prophesy.

Therefore, I believe that the futurist approach is rooted in speculation and is not to be trusted.

So,you believe some of the book of revelation and Daniel not happen yet but you don't want to interprate what is it, you wait till it happen than you able to tell what it

 

[Nebuchadnezzer]

So,you believe some of the book of revelation and Daniel not happen yet but you don't want to interprate what is it, you wait till it happen than you able to tell what it

for example rev 20, the thousand years, sounds to be literal to me. but here is an example of we just dont know until it happens. hopefully when it happens we will remember the words of rev 20 and the light bulb will go on in our heads and we will say, "ah, I see now". but until then i dont really take a position. i trust that jesus will see me through, and that is what is important.

 

[Jackson123]

for example rev 20, the thousand years, sounds to be literal to me. but here is an example of we just dont know until it happens. hopefully when it happens we will remember the words of rev 20 and the light bulb will go on in our heads and we will say, "ah, I see now". but until then i dont really take a position. i trust that jesus will see me through, and that is what is important.

Ok brother, that mean you believe some book on the Bible tell what happen in the future or futurist, but you don't want to interprate till it happen.
In other word nothing wrong with futurist,
To my knowledge
Futurist believe some story in revelation an Daniel will happen in the future.

 

[Nebuchadnezzer]

Ok brother, that mean you believe some book on the Bible tell what happen in the future or futurist, but you don't want to interprate till it happen.
In other word nothing wrong with futurist,
To my knowledge
Futurist believe some story in revelation an Daniel will happen in the future.

I am not saying I do not want to predict.
I am saying I cannot predict, or at least predict correctly.
and the (futurists) cannot predict correctly either.

Why?

Rev 16:18 is another example to explain why one cannot foretell.

Rev 16:18 - And there were flashes of lightning, rumblings,[c] peals of thunder, and a great earthquake such as there had never been since man was on the earth, so great was that earthquake.

Key Question: are the flashes of lightning to be interpreted literally or metaphorically?

Answer: We don't know. We don't know until after fulfillment happens.

Why?

Because there is a biblical case for the lightning to be literal lightning (Exodus 9:23)

BUT ALSO

Because there is a biblical case for the lightning to be metaphorical lightning for war (Ezekiel 21:9-10)

So how do you properly interpret Rev 16:18? By guessing? WRONG!!!
Answer: One cannot predict or foretell if the lightning in Rev 16:18 is literal or metaphorical. One has to wait for fulfillment to happen first, then and only then can they match all the clues to the historical record and conclude if these flashes of lightning are literal or metaphorical lightning (for war).

Understand to logic?

 

[Jackson123]

I am not saying I do not want to predict.
I am saying I cannot predict, or at least predict correctly.
and the (futurists) cannot predict correctly either.

Why?

Rev 16:18 is another example to explain why one cannot foretell.

Rev 16:18 - And there were flashes of lightning, rumblings,[c] peals of thunder, and a great earthquake such as there had never been since man was on the earth, so great was that earthquake.

Key Question: are the flashes of lightning to be interpreted literally or metaphorically?

Answer: We don't know. We don't know until after fulfillment happens.

Why?

Because there is a biblical case for the lightning to be literal lightning (Exodus 9:23)

BUT ALSO

Because there is a biblical case for the lightning to be metaphorical lightning for war (Ezekiel 21:9-10)

So how do you properly interpret Rev 16:18? By guessing? WRONG!!!
Answer: One cannot predict or foretell if the lightning in Rev 16:18 is literal or metaphorical. One has to wait for fulfillment to happen first, then and only then can they match all the clues to the historical record and conclude if these flashes of lightning are literal or metaphorical lightning (for war).

Understand to logic?

So you believe some book on the Bible is futurist or tell about future, but you believe no body able to understand till it happen, am I correct?

 

[Scribe]

For instance, it it claimed that the "future Antichrist dude" is going to sit in a rebuilt "temple of God", but they fail to take into account that Paul refers to the church over and over as the "temple" (Gr. "Naos"). Furthermore, it is unbelievably naive to think that God would refer to a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem as His temple...would God really inspire Paul to use "temple of God" to refer to a building

God inspired Matthew to say it ...Matthew 21:12 And Jesus entered into the temple of God, and did cast forth all those selling and
buying in the temple, and the tables of the money-changers (if you are thinking, only because it was before the cross, remember Matthew is writing after the cross. Using this phrase did not mean Matthew was suggesting that the temple was not replaced by the Cross. Your logic is flawed your case does not stand.)

Acts 8:38 enter with them into the temple, walking and springing, and praising God (the first church being the temple of God were meeting in the temple that we know was nothing more than a convenient meeting place for 3000 new converts, but nevertheless they still referred to it as the temple..)

Luke 24:53 (Luke traveled with Paul and ends his book with)... and were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God.

So yes! Since Paul was referring to prophecies of Daniel he meant exactly the temple standing when he was writing not knowing that it would be destroyed in 70AD he was nevertheless interpreting the prophecies of Daniel as referring to the only temple of God that the people who read it would understand. They all knew he was talking about the Jewish Temple. If he meant the believers body he would have made that clear, by saying something in the immediate context like, you are the temple of God and then everyone would get that, but not saying that the more natural interpretation is that he is interpreting Daniels prophesy as that Man of Sin standing in the Holy Place in the temple, which of course would require that it be rebuilt.

We read commentaries from a few hundred years ago that state a belief in a restoration of the nation of Israel and a rebuilt temple. Those authors were mocked by those that said God had replaced Israel with the church and there will be no restoration of the nation. They don't say that anymore. Soon that temple will be rebuilt and the mockers will say it means nothing and then the Man of Sin will be revealed and still they will say it is all something other than what Paul was talking about.

For me this one is not that difficult to decide. The Mark is a mystery but it will probably be pretty much exactly what it says as well. A literal physical brand, official seal.

 

[Scribe]

In the early 16th century, the "Protestant Reformation" was sweeping all across Europe. The Reformers were teaching a prophetic interpretation called "Protestant Historicism"

At that time protestants were accused of not being orthodox because this whole message about being saved by faith alone was a recent interpretation.
Of course we know better, it was in the scriptures all along.

The interpretations of eschatology (just like soteriology) had not been thoroughly dealt with for a thousand years, studying the scripture on these subjects and applying proper hermeneutics to discover authorial intent that neither the catholics nor the protestants had really gotten around to, does not make the interpretations discovered unorthodox or not authentic, or not correct interpretation anymore than the message about being born again which was not taught for a thousand years was unorthodox or not authorial intent.

The protestant historicism was not good hermeneteutics so it was reexamined and found wanting.

Just because these interpretations of pre tribulation premillennial rapture became popular at the beginning of the 20th century does not mean they are automatically wrong. If so you would have to use that argument to reject protestant doctrines concerning salvation that were not popular before the 1400s.

If you appeal to the scriptures as to where the doctrine always abided, so do those who interpret pre tribulation premillennial interpretations. They do not appeal to Darby or to Jesuits but to Paul.

That being said the fact that the very earliest Church writers were premillennial futurists (howbeit I did NOT say pretribulationist) has been well documented and only the unlearned or dishonest question that. However to back up my claim that the early church writers (often called church fathers) were majority premillenial and futurist and held to an interpretation of eschatology as promising an end time second coming of Christ and a 1000 year literal reign on earth I present the following from a book I am reading on this subject.

The Bible is very clear that our Lord Jesus Christ will return to reign on the earth as King of kings and Lord of lords. The Early Church looked forward to His return to establish His kingdom and to reign in Jerusalem as the heir of David’s throne. They took literally Jesus’ promise that the twelve apostles would sit on twelve thrones judging and ruling the twelve tribes of a restored Israel (Matthew 19: 28).

The Thessalonian believers who “turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven” (1 Thess. 1: 9-10), could identify with the new song of Revelation 5: 9-10 which celebrated not only redemption by the blood of the Lamb but also coronation by Christ, as kings and priests who “will [in the future] reign on the earth.”

Through the first century many suffered persecution, but they believed that “if we endure, we will also reign with him” (2 Tim. 2: 12). The picture of Christ’s ultimate victory in the Book of Revelation added the assurance of a thousand years of millennial reign before the last judgment and the coming of the new heavens and new earth prophesied by Isaiah (65: 17; 66: 22).

From Asia Minor, then, premillennial concepts quickly spread.
They are reflected in the writings of Papias (60-130),
Justin Martyr (100-165),
Irenaeus (130-202),
Tertullian (160-230), and others.
Justin Martyr expected the literal fulfillment of Isaiah 65: 18-24.
Irenaeus took Isaiah 11 and 65 literally and protested against those who spiritualized these passages.
Tertullian looked for a promised Kingdom on earth after the resurrection.

The Church as a whole ... considering belief in an earthly Millennium “an unquestioned article of orthodoxy,” or right doctrine, built on Old Testament prophecies but confirmed by and dependent on the New Testament.

Until the middle of the second century most Christians held to the hope that Christ would return and they would reign with Him for a thousand years.

As time went on, the hope of some grew cold. Yet many in the Early Church still emphasized Christ’s millennial reign on earth. They were sometimes called “chiliasts,” from the Greek chilioi, “thousand.” Methodius of Olympus (d. 311) taught a Millennium on earth celebrating a fulfillment of the Feast of Tabernacles. Apollinarius of Laodicea (310-90) thought, however, that during the Millennium believers would need to keep the Law. A few others in the third and fourth centuries, such as Commodianus, Victorinus, and Lactantius, held to some sort of Millennium on earth. Then concern over Christology turned attention away from the future hope. Origen (ca. 185-ca. 254), influenced by Greek philosophy and the Jewish philosopher Philo, popularized an allegorical method that led to spiritualizing the future Kingdom and interpreting it to be the present Church Age. Consequently, he denied that there will be any future millennial age or millennial kingdom. Dionysius of Alexandria (200-265) also denied a literal millennial kingdom, and Eusebius of Caesarea (260-339) interpreted all prophecies in a mystical or symbolic way.

After Emperor Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire, a change began to take place. The pastors and superintendents of the churches no longer took the role of servant leaders. Instead, they followed the pattern of the Roman Empire. When the capital of the empire was moved from Rome to Constantinople, this left a vacuum in Rome, and the bishop of Rome stepped into the gap to take political leadership and made his seat a throne. Many bishops then began to look at their churches as power bases. The attention was soon on earthly power and authority rather than on the blessed hope of the Church. As a result, amillennialism arose as a denial of any future kingdom of God on earth. Jerome (347-420), who translated the Bible into Latin, called a literal Millennium a Jewish idea, spiritualized the Book of Revelation, and identified the Church Age with the Millennium.

Augustine, bishop of Hippo in North Africa from 396 to 430, influenced by Tyconius (d. 400) and using a figurative rather than a literal approach, contended that the Millennium began with the first coming of Christ and that each baptism is a “first resurrection”— where the soul is raised from spiritual death and reigns with Christ in spiritual life; he considered each baptism a continuation of the Millennium. Much of the amillennial system of today is already described in his City of God (Books 20 through 22). He took the thousand years as a figure of perfection, ten cubed, and considered it the fullness of whatever time there will be. Like many of the so-called church fathers of that period, he was more influenced by the pagan Greek philosophy of Plato (427-347 B.C.) than by the Bible. He emphasized the church as the kingdom of God, considering those on thrones (Rev. 20: 4) to be the present rulers of the Catholic Church, which he designated as the camp of the people of God (Rev. 20: 9). He took the binding of Satan (Rev. 20: 2-3) to mean that Satan is not allowed to exercise his full powers during the present age. He made the church take the place of the Roman Empire, with the church supreme over the world. Soon, however, the only kingdom many were concerned about was whatever kingdom they could build for themselves using the people as their servants. The application to our day is obvious. GOD’S KINGDOM By the fifth century the kingdom of God and the visible hierarchical church were identified with each other, with the church giving out the judgments. As a result, the future Kingdom and the final judgments were no longer emphasized. Then in the latter part of the Middle Ages, the Roman church believed it was building the eternal city of God here on earth. Most closed their eyes to the evil that was rampant. Few gave any evidence of believing that God has a plan or that He will establish the future

Horton, Stanley M.. Our Destiny: Biblical Teachings on the Last Things (Kindle Locations 2801-2818). Logion Press. Kindle Edition.

So in conclusion premillennial futurist have the very first church writers to choose from (before a Jesuit existed) if they wanted to appeal to historical figures in church history, but the objective is to determine what the scriptures actually mean and the premellinnial view of a literal 1000 year reign has the authority of sola scriptura overwhelmingly sound hermeneutics and should be the solid hope of every new testament saint who may claim it as their inheritance.

(therefore your case for Jesuit source and a too recent exegesis is invalid and does not stand)

 

[Nebuchadnezzer]

So you believe some book on the Bible is futurist or tell about future, but you believe no body able to understand till it happen, am I correct?

Yes some prophesy is speaking to our future, some is speaking to our past, and some is speaking to our present time. This means God's Word is living. Therefore, each and every generation of christian believer can see that God is actively alive in his Word. They can see God is still in control.

To recognize prophesy fulfillment is to recognize God's glory. He along holds and knows the future.

I believe to attempt to foretell prophesy is an attempt to take God's glory.

One then might say, "I am not impressed, for I already knew it was going to unfold this way! [brag]"

Proverbs 27:1
Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring.

 

[Jackson123]

Yes some prophesy is speaking to our future, some is speaking to our past, and some is speaking to our present time. This means God's Word is living. Therefore, each and every generation of christian believer can see that God is actively alive in his Word. They can see God is still in control.

To recognize prophesy fulfillment is to recognize God's glory. He along holds and knows the future.

I believe to attempt to foretell prophesy is an attempt to take God's glory.

One then might say, "I am not impressed, for I already knew it was going to unfold this way! [brag]"

Proverbs 27:1
Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring.

So,you afraid to interprate the prophecy because you believe it as a boast, am I correct?
But people read the Bible and believe it, for example bible say Jesus will come back one day, not to boast

but to comfort other, will you agree?

 

[Phoneman-777]

God inspired Matthew to say it ...Matthew 21:12 And Jesus entered into the temple of God, and did cast forth all those selling and
buying in the temple, and the tables of the money-changers (if you are thinking, only because it was before the cross, remember Matthew is writing after the cross. Using this phrase did not mean Matthew was suggesting that the temple was not replaced by the Cross. Your logic is flawed your case does not stand.)

Acts 8:38 enter with them into the temple, walking and springing, and praising God (the first church being the temple of God were meeting in the temple that we know was nothing more than a convenient meeting place for 3000 new converts, but nevertheless they still referred to it as the temple..)

Luke 24:53 (Luke traveled with Paul and ends his book with)... and were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God.

So yes! Since Paul was referring to prophecies of Daniel he meant exactly the temple standing when he was writing not knowing that it would be destroyed in 70AD he was nevertheless interpreting the prophecies of Daniel as referring to the only temple of God that the people who read it would understand. They all knew he was talking about the Jewish Temple. If he meant the believers body he would have made that clear, by saying something in the immediate context like, you are the temple of God and then everyone would get that, but not saying that the more natural interpretation is that he is interpreting Daniels prophesy as that Man of Sin standing in the Holy Place in the temple, which of course would require that it be rebuilt.

We read commentaries from a few hundred years ago that state a belief in a restoration of the nation of Israel and a rebuilt temple. Those authors were mocked by those that said God had replaced Israel with the church and there will be no restoration of the nation. They don't say that anymore. Soon that temple will be rebuilt and the mockers will say it means nothing and then the Man of Sin will be revealed and still they will say it is all something other than what Paul was talking about.

For me this one is not that difficult to decide. The Mark is a mystery but it will probably be pretty much exactly what it says as well. A literal physical brand, official seal.

Hi brother! I hear they're banning people left and right on the chat for not conforming to consensus views LOL Anyway, please listen closely:

Jesus was righteously indignant when He said to them, "Do NOT make MY FATHER'S HOUSE a den of thieves." But, just before the Jews murdered Him, remember what He said about that same building? "Therefore YOUR HOUSE is left unto you desolate."

When Jesus was crucified, God's Spirit tore the veil from top to bottom and left the temple, leaving it desolate and it forever ceased to be the "temple of God". Jesus got Himself a new temple, the church, and is why over and over and over, the New Testament writers refer to the church as the temple of God.

The Jews to this day hate Jesus and have never repented for murdering Him or embraced Him as the Messiah, so they can built the most exquisite building they want and sacrifice all the lambs they want, but as long as it's devoid of God's Spirit, it will never be the "temple of God" - just the most elaborate BBQ joint in Earth's history.

 

[GaryA]

Okay - why don't you start a new thread and "lay it all out"...

@Phoneman-777

I hope you know that I was being serious and not sarcastic (or whatever).

I am interested in seeing your perspective on that...

 

[Scribe]

Hi brother! I hear they're banning people left and right on the chat for not conforming to consensus views LOL Anyway, please listen closely:

Jesus was righteously indignant when He said to them, "Do NOT make MY FATHER'S HOUSE a den of thieves." But, just before the Jews murdered Him, remember what He said about that same building? "Therefore YOUR HOUSE is left unto you desolate."

When Jesus was crucified, God's Spirit tore the veil from top to bottom and left the temple, leaving it desolate and it forever ceased to be the "temple of God". Jesus got Himself a new temple, the church, and is why over and over and over, the New Testament writers refer to the church as the temple of God.

The Jews to this day hate Jesus and have never repented for murdering Him or embraced Him as the Messiah, so they can built the most exquisite building they want and sacrifice all the lambs they want, but as long as it's devoid of God's Spirit, it will never be the "temple of God" - just the most elaborate BBQ joint in Earth's history.

It is not in prophesy because God is going to ordain Moses Law again. It is in prophesy because God knew they were going to do it before they did it. The abomination of desolation is a Man Standing in the Holy Place and demanding to worshiped as God. Just because the word desolate is used in different contexts in the bible does not give one the right to force an application to this prophesy that does not fit. Seems like ones conscious would bother them if they attempted to do so. I am sticking with the most natural and literal fulfillment on this one. I will quote the scripture verbatim and go with the literal fulfillment without allegorization. An end time prophesy yet to be fulfilled not an always present reality or something that happened in the 1st Century or since that time that went past us without anyone understanding.

 

[Nebuchadnezzer]

So,you afraid to interprate the prophecy because you believe it as a boast, am I correct?
But people read the Bible and believe it, for example bible say Jesus will come back one day, not to boast

but to comfort other, will you agree?

There is a BIG difference between:
1) believing that Jesus will come back,
and
2) creating a detailed, but false narrative on how it will unfold

These detailed narratives on how the end times will unfold are bunk.
OR do you not even question there veracity?

 

[Jackson123]

There is a BIG difference between:
1) believing that Jesus will come back,
and
2) creating a detailed, but false narrative on how it will unfold

These detailed narratives on how the end times will unfold are bunk.
OR do you not even question there veracity?

So you believe Jesus will come in the future or you are futurist, but you don't believe when some people say in detail how He come, am I correct?

Is that because you believe people that say how Jesus come against the Bible?

 

[Jackson123]

About prophecy.

About 4 years ago, I listen youtube about testimony from an Indonesian man, his name is Daud Tony

He was die of car accident, but for some reason he back to life. He say on his testimony, he meet Jesus and Jesus tell him something that will happen in the future. I wasn't not sure if he tell the truth.

This is what I remember what he said

In 2018 Indonesian economy start down and it continue to the end of June 2020

Then it will stay there to 2023.

In 2023 start recovery.

I was doubt and not seriously pay attention
He keep tell that story for 20 years, but not much people believe it.
Last night I google statistic, so far it go to that direction

Quote

Indonesia’s economic growth managed to accelerate modestly in the 2015-2018 period. Now, however, Indonesia will need to face at least two years of economic slowdown (because growth is bound to ease further in 2020

End quote


https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/indonesia/real-gdp-growth

I can't tell if the rest of his prophecy will correct, we wait what happen from now to 2023.

IMF predict in 2021 Indonesian economic will up on 8.2%, let see who correct, Daud Tony or IMF

 

[garee]

A better question is, "Why did every single true Protestant up until only about 100 or so years ago believe that the 1st Beast was the Papacy...that 1798 A.D. would be the end of the 1,260 years Papal reign marked by the "deadly wound"...and that as it was going down, the Second Beast would arise?"

If they all were alive today, there'd by no question as to what nation arose at that time and went on to become the only reigning superpower that speaks with a serpent tongue.

The answer to that is because Christians at that time hadn't yet fallen under any Jesuit spells.

Its all one and the same father of lies named Legion .The first and the last beast rolled into one . The opposing spirit of error that works in the heart of corrupted mankind. The god of this one world government.

What would be the purpose of the geological locations after the kingdoms of this world? Legion is the father of all the kingdoms of this world .He has no horns . Simply the father of lies, a murderer from the beginning. Choosing his spiritual weapon of warfare the letter of the law, death . "Thou shall not surely die, Just look at me and live". Why believe in the unseen (faith) ?

We walk by faith (Christ's in us) the unseen eternal. The commandment is to know no man after the flesh of nations. To include the Son of man, Jesus the prophet and apostle. Our High Priest .

We walk by faith the unseen eternal using the temporal things seen, mixing them we can find the spiritual understanding .(the gospel) No mixing no gospel

2 Corinthians 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the "things" which are not seen are eternal

 

[garee]

So you believe Jesus will come in the future or you are futurist, but you don't believe when some people say in detail how He come, am I correct?

Is that because you believe people that say how Jesus come against the Bible?

He will leave this world like a thief in the night. Christ is here dwelling in believers. Not sure why others are looking for him to come? He will leave on the last day and the door will be shut.

It would seem some murmur. When is his coming?

For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure. Do all things without murmurings and disputings: Philippians 2:13-14

The comforter is here. The moment the Son of man, Jesus disappeared out of sight. He comforted those Just as he does us today. We walk by faith . Not by looking at the temporal corrupted things of this world .

2 Corinthians 7:6-8 King James Version (KJV) Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus; And not by his coming only, but by the consolation wherewith he was comforted in you, when he told us your earnest desire, your mourning, your fervent mind toward me; so that I rejoiced the more.

 

[Mii]

I am not saying I do not want to predict.
I am saying I cannot predict, or at least predict correctly.
and the (futurists) cannot predict correctly either.

Why?

Rev 16:18 is another example to explain why one cannot foretell.

Rev 16:18 - And there were flashes of lightning, rumblings,[c] peals of thunder, and a great earthquake such as there had never been since man was on the earth, so great was that earthquake.

Key Question: are the flashes of lightning to be interpreted literally or metaphorically?

Answer: We don't know. We don't know until after fulfillment happens.

Why?

Because there is a biblical case for the lightning to be literal lightning (Exodus 9:23)

BUT ALSO

Because there is a biblical case for the lightning to be metaphorical lightning for war (Ezekiel 21:9-10)

So how do you properly interpret Rev 16:18? By guessing? WRONG!!!
Answer: One cannot predict or foretell if the lightning in Rev 16:18 is literal or metaphorical. One has to wait for fulfillment to happen first, then and only then can they match all the clues to the historical record and conclude if these flashes of lightning are literal or metaphorical lightning (for war).

Understand to logic?

Excellent perspective. I always presumed it to be literal. There's more to consider with that approach but it does give a pause. I like your mentality toward fulfilled prophecy also as it mirrors mine after a fashion.

This is cool because I have to consistently sift through both literal and figurative throughout scripture and it brings a lot of scripture back to the forefront of my mind so thanks