How We Can Tell If We Possess The Agape of God

[Phoneman-777]

““Then he (the ruler of bold face [Dan 8]) will make a firm covenant with the many (the Jews) for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”” (Daniel 9:27)

If this 70th week was fulfilled from 27 A.D-34 A.D., can you point out what these events were? (you may have some trouble because Jesus spoke of them as future events during the Olivet discourse).

At the Olivet Discourse, half of the 70th Week had already elapsed, and only the other half and the AOD remained future. Here's how:

• 70th Week began in 27 A.D. - the 483 years expired with Jesus baptized as "Messiah the Prince" in Jordan
• For the next seven years, Jesus began to "confirm the Covenant with many" aka "New Covenant Salvation", the blood of which Jesus Himself would be shed, "not for Himself" but "for many for the remission of sins" - first in Person for 3 1/2 years, then through His disciples who "heard Him" (Hebrews 2:3 KJV).
• In the midst of the 70th Week, Jesus was "cut off" at Calvary, and caused the "sacrifice and oblations to cease" to be significant in the sight of God, which is why He tore the veil in half from top to bottom.
• Jesus told the disciples to preach only to the "lost sheep" of Israel, because the 70 Weeks which dealt with "your people and your holy city" (the Jews and Jerusalem) had not yet been fulfilled - but once Jesus finished confirming the New Covenant of Salvation with Daniel's people....and the final national, official rejection of Him was ratified with the shedding of Stephen's blood by their own hands, the 70 Weeks expired and the Gospel could then go to the Gentiles, beginning with Paul's encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus.

What about "the people of the Prince that shall come and destroy the city and the sanctuary"?

• We can either interpret the "people" as the "Roman Army" of Prince Titus which came and destroyed the city with a "flood" of destruction....OR....they are the "Jews" who rejected their Messiah the Prince, and compelled God to withdraw His hand of protection, which left Jerusalem without hope against their enemies.
• NO WHERE mentioned in Daniel's prophecy is some mythological "future one-man Antichrist".
• Daniel says the "little horn" Antichrist is a "kingdom" according to the eschatological symbolism.
• John says the first "beast" - the "Antichrist" - is a system, according to the eschatological symbolism.

Please set aside your Jesuit Futurist ideas and make a thorough investigation of Protestant Historicism, especially where my church picked up where the Reformers left off. The fact that Protestant Historicism was the only eschatological game in town until just about 100 years ago warrant such investigation - but to claim that God kept secret His plan from Christianity all along, only to hand it down to the Pope for safe keeping dissemination is simply insane.

 

[Phoneman-777]

had a week of peace. now mr. works salvation is back.....

I heard "closet OSAS man" is still here...

 

[Phoneman-777]

you still ain't learned, huh. interesting.
ever heard of Proverbs 17:1? or 26:15?

but those are distractions from the thing you urgently need to address:
what do 'you intend to' endure in, and how do 'you intend to' do so?

You still arguing the wicked in Matthew 24:12 KJV can partake of agape so you can keep them o keep them out of the Lake of Fire?

Universalism is a lie, so please...quit trying to deliver the wicked from the fate they have chosen.

 

[posthuman]

You still arguing the wicked in Matthew 24:12 KJV can partake of agape so you can keep them o keep them out of the Lake of Fire?

Universalism is a lie, so please...quit trying to deliver the wicked from the fate they have chosen.

um, everyone knows that i am decidedly not a universalist.
so you're making yourself look pretty dumb.

but regarding Matthew 24, what do "you intend to" endure in, and how do "you intend to" do so?

 

[posthuman]

I heard "closet OSAS man" is still here...

why do you hate Deuteronomy 31:6 so much?

 

[Phoneman-777]

I've already pointed out that a 24-period is only 1 of 4 ways to translate it. If you must insist on using Strong's (which, by the way, isn't the most authoritative lexicon), here is James Strong's translation of the word:View attachment 228812
See? It can mean a period, a while, or years. It just depends on how the biblical authors describe it. I have provided those passages in post# 414. Why are you ignoring the Scriptures?

A matter of hours?... How do you know that?

“Then the flood came upon the earth for forty days, and the water increased and lifted up the ark, so that it rose above the earth.” (Genesis 7:17)​

Symbolism?...yes the Bible uses symbolic language sometimes. Subjectively...absolutely not. What symbol have I introduced apart from Scripture? The Bible's usage of the "day of the Lord" describes a period of time (provided in post# 414). If you are only reading the one verse you are quoting, then yes it may seem to be just one 24-hour day.


The claim that I am using symbolism can only be true if the word "ἡμέρα" never means anything other than a 24-hour day.
Examples of ἡμέρα (Strong's G2250) meaning something other than a 24-hour day:

““And having received it in their turn, our fathers brought it in with Joshua upon dispossessing the nations whom God drove out before our fathers, until the time of David.” (Acts 7:45)​

““Then you are not the Egyptian who some time ago stirred up a revolt and led the four thousand men of the Assassins out into the wilderness?”” (Acts 21:38)​

““At that time they made a calf and brought a sacrifice to the idol, and were rejoicing in the works of their hands.” (Acts 7:41)

“And it happened at that time that she fell sick and died; and when they had washed her body, they laid it in an upper room.” (Acts 9:37)

So...
The day of the Lord is a period of time yet the future. Jesus describes some of the events that the OT prophets wrote about concerning this day (ἡμέρα). The salvation he speaks of in Matt 24 is the deliverance of Israel from those events and they have nothing to do with your position on the soteriological debate.

And I've shown you that there's only one literal way to translate G2250 - 24 hours, and only "figuratively" as a period by the context. And, what establishes the context? Peter's Flood comparison, which was literal and which depicted literal destruction in literal time.

Peter compared the Flood to the soon coming destruction of the Earth by fire, and Jesus said His coming would be as it was in the days of Noah. It did not take "years" for the Flood to "take them all away" and it will not take years for the Fire to "take them all away".

What context of 2 Peter 3 demands we must interpret "day" as "period"? Absolutely none...therefore, the only reason you do so is because you don't, your Jesuit Futurist idea crumbles. Is that how we are to approach Scripture hermeneutically?

Do you really think people survived more than a day with the deluge and the fountains of the great deep bursting forth and the tectonic upheaval that accompanied it? Even if you refuse to accept a day, it certainly did not take "7 years" to accomplish this. Therefore, there is no 7 year tribulation of anything.

BTW, how long does it take to destroy mankind "at the brightness of His coming"?

 

[Phoneman-777]

um, everyone knows that i am decidedly not a universalist.
so you're making yourself look pretty dumb.

but regarding Matthew 24, what do "you intend to" endure in, and how do "you intend to" do so?

Then why do you fight so hard to keep what you erroneously claim are the "wicked" of Matthew 24:12 out of the Lake of Fire?

 

[Phoneman-777]

why do you hate Deuteronomy 31:6 so much?

Since our "agape" for God and the brethren is known by our keeping the Ten Commandments (1 John 5:2-3 KJV) but all you do is argue that OSAS folks may impenitently break them, this begs the question for you...why do you hate God and the brethren so much?

 

[posthuman]

Since our "agape" for God and the brethren is known by our keeping the Ten Commandments (1 John 5:2-3 KJV) but all you do is argue that OSAS folks may impenitently break them, this begs the question for you...why do you hate God and the brethren so much?

That's not even close to being accurate, and it's just personal attacks.

So regarding the actual topic, Matthew 24, what do you intend to endure in, and how?

 

[Ogom]

Since our "agape" for God and the brethren is known by our keeping the Ten Commandments (1 John 5:2-3 KJV)

Deuteronomy 31:6


"After being rescued from Egypt’s tyranny and Pharaoh’s slavery - and having been baptised into Moses (i.e. separated unto God as His peculiar nation), the Israelites were led for many years through their wilderness walk, learning the lesson that all God’s children must learn if they are to reach maturity, with a faith that trusts His word, and obeys His command."


Source: https://dailyverse.knowing-jesus.com/deuteronomy-31-6


4 ....they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.


5 But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.


6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent ....


11 ....for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.


12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

 

[Diakonos]

And I've shown you that there's only one literal way to translate G2250 - 24 hours, and only "figuratively" as a period by the context. And, what establishes the context? Peter's Flood comparison, which was literal and which depicted literal destruction in literal time.

The term "Day" in "Day of the Lord" is figurative (from our perspective). The context reveals that:

“But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.” (2 Peter 3:8–10)​

It's called "the Day of the Lord" because it is His day, not ours. It's a day according to God's experience; It's not a day like the days on our calendar (it is a unique day because it not measured like our days).
The "Day of the Lord" was already defined before Peter referenced it. His audience already knew about the day of the Lord because it is was prophesied all over the Old Testament (examples in post# 414).

What context of 2 Peter 3 demands we must interpret "day" as "period"? Absolutely none...therefore, the only reason you do so is because you don't, your Jesuit Futurist idea crumbles. Is that how we are to approach Scripture hermeneutically?

Hermetically, we're supposed to take the whole Bible into account (Acts 20:27; 17:11). Look at how Peter prefaced this passage:

"I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder,
that you should remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets".
​

This "Day" is something you have little understanding of if you ignore what the prophets wrote about it.
I'm going to recommend Jesus' counsel on this subject: "Let the reader understand".

P.S. again, the flood was gradual, not happening within a 24-hour day:
"through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water" (it was a period of 40 days)

 

[Phoneman-777]

The term "Day" in "Day of the Lord" is figurative (from our perspective). The context reveals that:

“But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.” (2 Peter 3:8–10)​

It's called "the Day of the Lord" because it is His day, not ours. It's a day according to God's experience; It's not a day like the days on our calendar (it is a unique day because it not measured like our days).
The "Day of the Lord" was already defined before Peter referenced it. His audience already knew about the day of the Lord because it is was prophesied all over the Old Testament (examples in post# 414).

Hermetically, we're supposed to take the whole Bible into account (Acts 20:27; 17:11). Look at how Peter prefaced this passage:

"I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder,
that you should remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets".
​

This "Day" is something you have little understanding of if you ignore what the prophets wrote about it.
I'm going to recommend Jesus' counsel on this subject: "Let the reader understand".

P.S. again, the flood was gradual, not happening within a 24-hour day:
"through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water" (it was a period of 40 days)

Have you studied into Creationism? The unspeakable destructive forces unleashed during the Deluge, which can be seen today, is mindboggling. There is no way anyone survived for more than a few hours when "the Flood came and took them all away". One inspired writer says parents strapped children to large, powerful beasts because they knew those beasts would seek the highest elevation to escape the rising waters...but to no avail.

If Peter takes the time to compare the past judgment of water to the future judgment of fire, and if Jesus says His coming will be as it was during that time of past judgment, we must accept that. To interpret "day" as "years", as you do, when context and Messianic promises exclude such and interpretation leaves it simply what it is: a self-serving, violation of hermeneutics.

Jesus went up straightway the day of His departure, and His return is to be as such - abrupt and by surprise, right or wrong?

 

[posthuman]

Have you studied into Creationism? The unspeakable destructive forces unleashed during the Deluge, which can be seen today, is mindboggling. There is no way anyone survived for more than a few hours when "the Flood came and took them all away". One inspired writer says parents strapped children to large, powerful beasts because they knew those beasts would seek the highest elevation to escape the rising waters...but to no avail.

If Peter takes the time to compare the past judgment of water to the future judgment of fire, and if Jesus says His coming will be as it was during that time of past judgment, we must accept that. To interpret "day" as "years", as you do, when context and Messianic promises exclude such and interpretation leaves it simply what it is: a self-serving, violation of hermeneutics.

Jesus went up straightway the day of His departure, and His return is to be as such - abrupt and by surprise, right or wrong?

Hmm interesting.

But regarding Matthew 24, what do you intend to endure in, and how?

Seems like hardly anything else matters if you are going hell for failing to endure, so, pretty important question for you to dodge for weeks like you have??

 

[Diakonos]

One inspired writer says parents strapped children to large, powerful beasts because they knew those beasts would seek the highest elevation to escape the rising waters...but to no avail.

Can we please keep the conversation Biblical? These kinds of claims are not testable because it lies outside the scope of Biblical knowledge. It doesn't contribute anything valuable to the discussion. This is the "Biblical discussion forum". You have merely ignored the Scripture I have presented and restated what you already said (with unbiblical details); you have not displayed Biblical or hermeneutical discipline.

Matthew 24:15 is explicit that what Daniel wrote about will happen (a very specific future event).
Do you even know what the Abomination of Desolation is going to be?

I know what the AOD is.

Then go ahead; tell me what it will be since you know...

...still waiting for your insight

Peter takes the time to compare the past judgment of water to the future judgment of fire

Peter was comparing the time of the flood and the Day of the Lord (the clause "in which" means Peter then described one detail of that day in his mention of the fiery judgment.) The total elimination of the universe takes place within the day but does not commandeer the whole day. He does not compare the whole day to the flood, but only part (since there is no other day like it - Jer 30:11; Joel 2:2). It is not described as the only event. The prophets fill us in on what happens before that. If you ignore what the prophets wrote about this day and make the assumption that the entire day consists of this one detail that Peter mentioned, you will misunderstand. I hope you are reading the references I share. They are where I derive my position. It is vital that we pay attention to all that the prophets have written.

"let the reader understand" concerning the events Jesus is mentioning (Matt 24)
"you should remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets" concerning Peter's mention of "the Day of the Lord" (2 Pet 3)
​

Maybe this will help...What do you suppose the purpose of verse 8 is in the passage (2 Pet 3:1-13)? It contextually explains that the (timespan of a) day is figurative.

Jesus went up straightway the day of His departure, and His return is to be as such - abrupt and by surprise, right or wrong?

Jesus' ascension was not abrupt, but the Day of the Lord will be. As for rapture/harpazo/teleportation/departure type events, Enoch (Gen 5:23), the twelve (John 6:21), and Phillip's experience (Acts 9:39) was a sudden departure. But Elijah (2 Kings 2:11) and Jesus' departure (Acts 1:9-11) were gradual enough to be watched. I don't know if the disciples were surprised (depends on how well they listened to what Jesus taught them), but they sure were amazed, no doubt.

 

[Phoneman-777]

Can we please keep the conversation Biblical? These kinds of claims are not testable because it lies outside the scope of Biblical knowledge. It doesn't contribute anything valuable to the discussion. This is the "Biblical discussion forum". You have merely ignored the Scripture I have presented and restated what you already said (with unbiblical details); you have not displayed Biblical or hermeneutical discipline.



...still waiting for your insight


Peter was comparing the time of the flood and the Day of the Lord (the clause "in which" means Peter then described one detail of that day in his mention of the fiery judgment.) The total elimination of the universe takes place within the day but does not commandeer the whole day. He does not compare the whole day to the flood, but only part (since there is no other day like it - Jer 30:11; Joel 2:2). It is not described as the only event. The prophets fill us in on what happens before that. If you ignore what the prophets wrote about this day and make the assumption that the entire day consists of this one detail that Peter mentioned, you will misunderstand. I hope you are reading the references I share. They are where I derive my position. It is vital that we pay attention to all that the prophets have written.

"let the reader understand" concerning the events Jesus is mentioning (Matt 24)
"you should remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets" concerning Peter's mention of "the Day of the Lord" (2 Pet 3)
​

Maybe this will help...What do you suppose the purpose of verse 8 is in the passage (2 Pet 3:1-13)? It contextually explains that the (timespan of a) day is figurative.

Jesus' ascension was not abrupt, but the Day of the Lord will be. As for rapture/harpazo/teleportation/departure type events, Enoch (Gen 5:23), the twelve (John 6:21), and Phillip's experience (Acts 9:39) was a sudden departure. But Elijah (2 Kings 2:11) and Jesus' departure (Acts 1:9-11) were gradual enough to be watched. I don't know if the disciples were surprised (depends on how well they listened to what Jesus taught them), but they sure were amazed, no doubt.

You say the "day" in 2 Peter 3:10 KJV should be interpreted as "years". Here's why that is hermeneutically inconsistent:

1. No multiple "thief in the night" events - once Jesus comes as a thief, everyone will know to the second when He will return 7 years later or 3 1/2 years later or according to whatever other brand of Jesuit Futurist nonsense to which one subscribes. Therefore, the "day of the Lord" and the "coming of Jesus" -- both of which come "as a thief in the night" -- refer to the same event.

2. Paul says "sudden destruction" would accompany Jesus when He comes as a thief (1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 KJV), so should we interpret "sudden" as "a long period of years"?

3. Jesus said His coming would be as it was in the days of Noah - did it take God years to destroy the Earth or just a few hours?

4. Jesus said His coming would be as in the days of Lot - did it take God years to destroy the cities or did He say the same day Lot went out it reigned fire and brimstone and destroyed them?


Again, 2 Peter 3:10 KJV destroys the idea of Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism if we interpret the verse consistently with the rest of Scripture.

 

[Dino246]

There is no way anyone survived for more than a few hours when "the Flood came and took them all away". One inspired writer says parents strapped children to large, powerful beasts because they knew those beasts would seek the highest elevation to escape the rising waters...but to no avail.

Which "inspired writer", and with what was this alleged writer "inspired"? The story certainly isn't in Scripture, so what other source(s) do you consider "inspired"?

 

[Phoneman-777]

Hmm interesting.

But regarding Matthew 24, what do you intend to endure in, and how?

Seems like hardly anything else matters if you are going hell for failing to endure, so, pretty important question for you to dodge for weeks like you have??

Listen, I'm sure you're a nice guy, but far from a reasonable Bible student, because you're trying to turn the entire theological world upside down with your ridiculous notion that the wicked can partake of "agape" love.

Matthew 24:12 KJV uses "agape" to describe the love of the "many" which grows cold and leaves them in an even worse spiritual condition than the merely "lukewarm" Laodicean Christians who, if they remain impenitent, will be put away from the presence of Jesus in the end - and the only reason you're trying to make these "many" the "wicked" is because allowing them to be the saints they are would force you to give up your belief in the false doctrine of OSAS and go where the truth leads.

Therefore, until you admit that "agapao" describes eating a McDonald's happy meal of love which comes in biodegradable containers, while "agape" describes a royal feast of love which comes from God above, your inability to discern the truth that the "many" are saints makes any attempt to reason with you about what it is they must endure pointless.My suggestion is give up your rebellion to Jesus and the devil will be hard on your heels, as is the case with every sincere Christian who chooses to "live Godly".

 

[Phoneman-777]

Which "inspired writer", and with what was this alleged writer "inspired"? The story certainly isn't in Scripture, so what other source(s) do you consider "inspired"?

Let's be clear...I only present the Bible as my basis for truth -- all else is speculation, which we are all free to do, right?

I was talking to someone who insists the word "day" in 2 Peter 3:10 KJV means "years" because the text says in that day the "heavens shall pass away with a great noise and the elements shall melt with fervent heat" and I made the point there won't be seven more minutes of tribulation on Earth let alone 7 years of it.

He cannot allow the "day" to mean a literal "24 hour day" which destroys the idea of a subsequent 7 year tribulation, so he's willing to ignore the rest of Scripture and even the context established by the preceding verses which describe a destruction of all humanity that was likely complete in the same day it began.

 

[posthuman]

Listen, I'm sure you're a nice guy, but far from a reasonable Bible student, because you're trying to turn the entire theological world upside down with your ridiculous notion that the wicked can partake of "agape" love.

Matthew 24:12 KJV uses "agape" to describe the love of the "many" which grows cold and leaves them in an even worse spiritual condition than the merely "lukewarm" Laodicean Christians who, if they remain impenitent, will be put away from the presence of Jesus in the end - and the only reason you're trying to make these "many" the "wicked" is because allowing them to be the saints they are would force you to give up your belief in the false doctrine of OSAS and go where the truth leads.

Therefore, until you admit that "agapao" describes eating a McDonald's happy meal of love which comes in biodegradable containers, while "agape" describes a royal feast of love which comes from God above, your inability to discern the truth that the "many" are saints makes any attempt to reason with you about what it is they must endure pointless.My suggestion is give up your rebellion to Jesus and the devil will be hard on your heels, as is the case with every sincere Christian who chooses to "live Godly".

so.. um..

regarding Matthew 24, what do "you intend to" endure in, and how?

 

[posthuman]

I only present the Bible as my basis for truth

ok so Biblically speaking what do "you intend to" endure in, and how? ((see Matthew 24))

have you ever read Hebrews?