Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 345678910111213141516 LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 234

Thread: 2 Thess. 2:11

  1. #196
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,490

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Please read my post #179 to understand my views on the wrath.

    I see you also believe in the early church rapture which is unscriptural. For a start, in 2 Th 2, Paul did not reveal who the Restrainer is. But sadly, a lot of people have spuriously concluded that it is the Holy Spirit, but how can it be given Jesus Christ' assurance here:

    John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

    You claimed the Holy Spirit will be removed for 3.5 years? Sorry, but in my book, when Jesus says something is FOREVER I believe it. Secondly, please join others and explain why Paul explicitly said that (a) the resurrection and the rapture will occur at the Last/7th trump call (b) Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds..."
    You claim Jesus says the Holy spirit will reside on *EARTH* forever but that is not his claim.

    note the Highlighted portion

    ] that he may abide with you for ever

    Jesus didn't claim the HS will reside on the Earth forever (which is your claim) and is actually unscriptual.

    He said the HS will always reside with the Church which means if we are raptured the HS comes with us to Heaven or vice versa if the HS gets taken to heaven we go with him.

    Also God made this Clear in Genesis.

    And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.


    God makes it clear his spirit will not remain with Man because he is *Flesh* but those who are raptured are no longer flesh .


    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Paul explicitly said that (a) the resurrection and the rapture will occur at the Last/7th trump call-
    Paul never claimed this.

    1.Please show in the bible where the Last trump is called the 7th.

    2 Please show in the bible where the 7th trump is called the Last.

    The fact that you are conflating these two passages has no historical or scriptural backing-

    Paul did not receive Johns Vision nor was he speaking about the book of Rev (which had not been written) when he used the word Last(referring to a trumpet).

  2. #197
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2,915
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDivineWatermark View Post
    I've addressed this point is some of my past posts (sorry I don't have the time right now), but three or four things I'd point you toward, for starters:

    --Numbers 10... telling about the various different sounds (of trumpets) for different purposes [here, even separate to the shofar] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage...10&version=KJV

    --how Paul himself (outside of 'rapture' contexts) used the word "trumpet" elsewhere: "8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?"

    --the concept that we ('the Church which is His body') are "ambassadors" here ('OUR citizenship is in heaven' Phil3:19 versus 20-21; whereas to Israel pertains "the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom [their Acts 1:6 Q]"/aka 'the kingdom of the heavens [on the earth]'/aka 'the wedding FEAST/SUPPER' upon Christ's "RETURN" to the earth [Luke 12:36-37,38,40 "when he will RETURN FROM the wedding..." ... THEN the meal!])...

    --that the 7th [judgment] Trumpet in Revelation is part of a SET of Trumpets (the 2W's are resurrected/ascend up into heaven surrounding the 6th Trumpet [events]/2nd Woe [end of their 1260-day ministry, plus 3.5 days 'their dead bodies...in the street of the great city']; the Seals preceding the Trumpets, the Vials following them; I see "mid-trib" placed at the "5th Trumpet/1st Woe" and the 2W's are raised at the "6th Trumpet [events]/2nd Woe" which I see the 7th Trumpet/3rd Woe at about 3/4 of the way through the 7 years... so still a ways to go even before the ones who are beheaded during the 2nd half are resurrected, Rev20:4)

    -- [I had one other point, but am forgetting it at the moment. I need to head out to some work for awhile, too]




    [edit: remember, John speaks with one of the elders in Rev7:13-14... he is not one of them]
    Looks like your really in a hurry because your argument is all the place. I make the same error when my mind is elsewhere also Perhaps, you'll clarify when you have an opportunity? I really enjoy your arguments because it's always insightful.

  3. #198
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,490

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    We know that Revelation is not chronologically arranged. Mid-point rapture also doesn't fit as you alluded.
    once more there is no we-

    This Denial of Revelation being Chronologically arranged is central to the Post-trib postion.

    No other position requires as much cutting and moving around of the book as your eschatological system.

    Because the book makes no sense if you do not do this (making it hard for any other position to argue with post-trib since you all have your own personal private interpretations)


    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    One the cases for the nonchronological arrangement of Revelation can be found in the conversation between John and one of the 24 elders:
    Rev 7:14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
    As early as in Chapter 7 above, we learn that the rapture has already occurred
    Sorry no the Elder says these are those *Coming* http://biblehub.com/text/revelation/7-14.htm

    Notice the word *Coming* http://biblehub.com/grammar/v-ppm_p-nmp.htm

    Its present Participle Passive-

    Meaning in Rev 7 this is an ongoing event not something that happened in a split second (like the rapture)



    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    So if we try to follow the story from one chapter to the next, we will end up with a mix-match and convoluted theory of when it happens (which is already happening, I'm afraid).
    i believe the opposite i believe if we chop it up and mix -match it to support a eschatological systtem (such as post-trib) is where we can go really wrong- Since there is no true doctrine each one of you peronally decides what goes where as you see fit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    If we take it chapter-by-chapter, the logic then would suggest that the tumultuous 3.5 years of the AC and the GT are still ahead given the death of the 2W's in chp. 11.
    Correct making post-trib false- Which is why you must argue for the right to chop up the book as you see fit to make sense of your doctrine.


    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    We must, therefore, allow explicit clues given in scripture, such as the *last trump* and "we that are alive and remain" to guide us. No one denies that the last is associated with the resurrection and rapture.
    Correct no one denies these things happen at the *LAST TRUMPET*


    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    No one denies that the 7th is associated with the resurrection and rapture
    I deny this Please show me in Rev 11:15-19

    Where the rapture and a Ressurection are mentioned?


    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    If this is unsatisfactory, then let someone please explain why Paul said: "then we that are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds..?". I want someone to please tell me it's all in my head, and that Paul was not alluding to the end of the GT?
    Paul straight up mentions the GT 2 verses later in 1 Thes 5:2

    You always make this arguement that Alive and remain means they survived the GT

    But as i pointed out over and over again this passage is about the Gathering of the Church.

    First the Dead are gathered. (which according to your doctrine includes those who died during the GT(weren't delivered? )

    Then those who are alive and *Remain* are gathered.

    The sum total of the group is the all the Church living and dead.

    The Sum total of the group is all Christians.

    1.I gather the blue grapes first.

    2.Then all the other grapes that fell and remain.

    The second part doesn't imply that the grapes went thru the GT- (Just that another group was gathered first)

  4. #199
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,490

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    I believe there is a difference between the wrath of God on the wicked and the man of sin using deception on the wicked so they won't realize the wrath is from God and repent. The AC will probably explain away what is happening as some phenomena that are unconnected to God.
    But the difference is that God is not just going to whisk us off the earth because of it. Remember that as children of light, the man of sin cannot deceive us and the wrath of God won't harm us?
    Sorry this is just your denial of What the bible says, It says Jesus shall come from Heaven and deliver us from the Wrath to come. Your opinion above doesn't change the fact that the bible says this, IF you define being delivered as remaining on Earth while everyone around you gets murdered but you receive divine protection (so be it) but to claim the rapture isn't going to happen because you don't think so is very flimsy.

    Hebrews 9:28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.

  5. #200
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,490

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    No, the 70th Week ends with the broken covenant, which may refer to the death of Christ.
    Incorrect the 70 weeks end with this being fulfilled Seventy weeks[c] are decreed about your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place.

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    This 70th Week is thus completed in only half its normal time--in a half week. This is only my guess.
    I know its a guess but that would mean the Angel was wrong when he told Daniel that 70 weeks are decreed unto his people not 69.5

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    What I'm not saying, however, is that the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem and the temple actually was the terminal point of the 70 Weeks! My argument is only that the 70 AD event happens *after* the 70 Weeks, following not long after the event that actually completes the 70th week--the death of Messiah. And as Jesus said, it would be his generation that sees this "abomination that causes desolation." In other words, following his death that very generation would see the desolation of Jerusalem by the Romans, and the destruction of the temple.
    Once more this is the prophesy mentioned in Daniel 9:26, your doctrine basically claimed that Daniel 9:27 was fullfilled before Daniel 9:26



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Yes, the 70 AD event *followed* the completion of the 70 Weeks. What actually completed the 70 Weeks was the appearance and death of Christ, which did indeed complete redemption in a legal sense. The history of redemption was not complete, but *legal redemption* was indeed complete. This had to do with the earthly work of Messiah in redeeming Israel.
    Incorrect the events in 70 AD where a fulfillment of Daniel 9:26

    And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing. And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its[f] end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed.

    When the City and the Sanctuary were destroyed and Jerusalem became a *DESOLATION* and there were wars of Course.




    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Jesus was the Anointed One who appeared in Jerusalem! That appearance by the Messiah certainly did seal up prophecy that had anticipated this event!
    Incorrect Read Revelation 19:10.

    Jesus first coming did not fulfill all the Prophesy and Visions. Nor did it bring to pass what is stated in Daniel 9:24 concerning the fullfiment of the 70 weeks.




    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    No, I don't claim Week 69 and Week 70 are the same Week, obviously. But I do think vs. 27 constitutes a restatement of vs. 26, yes. Such restatements are very common in the Scriptures. They are memory devices, as well as means of emphasizing something important. Beyond this, they add important details, when necessary.
    Exactly you eliminate one of the Weeks by claiming it a restatement. While claiming that Verse 27(the death of Jesus) happens 30-40 years before Daniel 7:26(the destruction of the City and the Sanctuary).

    Notice how the angel says after 62 weeks not after 70 weeks or on week 70.

    62+7=69 simple math


    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    My point is that the *Revelation itself* does not mention a *7 Year Tribulation.* You and many others have added that! For example, the Revelation itself does not tell you to add two periods of 3.5 years! If it did so this would be a legitimate doctrine, spelled out in Scriptures. But it does not. On the contrary, only a 3.5 year period is referred to.You are merely justifying the addition of words to the Revelation! You would do much better to say exactly what Scriptures say, rather than to justify the addition of words that aren't there in any manner, shape, or form. Not only so, but you derive your justification from a highly contested interpretation of a very controversial passage in Dan 9. This does not make for acceptable doctrine. But there are zero mentions of a *7 year perid!* There is nothing that tells us to add 2 periods together to get 7 years! And so, you are definitely *adding* to the words of the Revelation! You would do better not to add a 7 years period where none is mentioned!
    Once more as i stated one does not need Daniel 9 to get 7 years in the book of Rev

    All you have to do is not Conclude that all those periods mention in Rev 11-13 speak about the same period of Time.

    If you believe any of those periods are different then you can easily get a 7 year period or Longer.



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    The simple solution is the better one. If, without complication, many of these things would refer to the same period, then that should be assumed--not a scenario that depends upon adding words and years to the passage.
    Your argument is basically that your assumption is better then mine-

    Either way if you Assume that the periods are the same you have at least 3.5 years.

    If you assume any of the periods are different times you have a period of time of at least 7 years(without the need to add anything to the book)

    Neither assumption can be proven correct-(hense why we are assuming)

    But to claim my assumption is adding to the text is false.

    One can easily derive a 7 year period from the context of the Book of Rev alone.

  6. #201
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2,915
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus View Post
    You claim Jesus says the Holy spirit will reside on *EARTH* forever but that is not his claim.

    note the Highlighted portion

    ] that he may abide with you for ever

    Jesus didn't claim the HS will reside on the Earth forever (which is your claim) and is actually unscriptual.

    He said the HS will always reside with the Church which means if we are raptured the HS comes with us to Heaven or vice versa if the HS gets taken to heaven we go with him.

    Also God made this Clear in Genesis.

    And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.


    God makes it clear his spirit will not remain with Man.
    Indeed the Paraclete stays with the righteous forever. There is NOTHING in my remarks that suggest I was referring to the earth. Since you made that inference on your own, you must accept you are wrong and quoted me out of context.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus View Post
    Paul never claimed this.

    1.Please show in the bible where the Last trump is called the 7th.

    2 Please show in the bible where the 7th trump is called the Last.

    The fact that you are conflating these two passages has no historical or scriptural backing-
    1. Fortunately, TheBeginner wrote an excellent exegesis on the subject to show irrefutable proof that the Last Trump is indeed the 7th. I save it, so allow me to look for it and repost it.
    2. I am not "conflating" anything. Although the passages are separate, yet they point to the same conclusion on the rapture. Obviously, a conclusion you are uncomfortable with and therefore squirm from as it pokes holes into your own doctrine.
    3. I see you have no answer to Paul's statement about the "alive and remain"?

  7. #202
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2,915
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus View Post
    Sorry this is just your denial of What the bible says, It says Jesus shall come from Heaven and deliver us from the Wrath to come. Your opinion above doesn't change the fact that the bible says this, IF you define being delivered as remaining on Earth while everyone around you gets murdered but you receive divine protection (so be it) but to claim the rapture isn't going to happen because you don't think so is very flimsy.

    Hebrews 9:28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
    Brother, I think you're being confused by your understanding of *deliverance* here. I am simply pointing out your error in interpreting a clear text incorrectly.

    It is amazing to note that many Christians even at this time still do not understand God's idea of saving the righteous. If Jesus Christ' plan is to supposedly whisk the church off, the earth just so that no one is hurt in GT, I wonder then why the same Jesus would allow his Apostles who laboured for his church to die in tragic circumstances? Surely, he would have protected them so they so would die peacefully when their commissions were over?

    Your reference to Heb 9:28 is another example of you using an unrelated scripture to shore up your weak case.

  8. #203
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,490

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Brother, I think you're being confused by your understanding of *deliverance* here. I am simply pointing out your error in interpreting a clear text incorrectly.
    Not confused its just clear to me that we understand Deliverance differently.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    It is amazing to note that many Christians even at this time still do not understand God's idea of saving the righteous. If Jesus Christ' plan is to supposedly whisk the church off, the earth just so that no one is hurt in GT, I wonder then why the same Jesus would allow his Apostles who laboured for his church to die in tragic circumstances? Surely, he would have protected them so they so would die peacefully when their commissions were over?
    Your reference to Heb 9:28 is another example of you using an unrelated scripture to shore up your weak case.
    Sorry are you trying to claim

    Tragic Circumstances = the GT?

    Because these are not the same thing.

    God didn't allow his Apostles to be killed in the GT-

    So your point is moot.

  9. #204
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,490

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Indeed the Paraclete stays with the righteous forever. There is NOTHING in my remarks that suggest I was referring to the earth. Since you made that inference on your own, you must accept you are wrong and quoted me out of context.
    Actually your remark clearly shows you are refering to the HS being removed from the Earth since Daniel567 explained the exact same thing i did.

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel567 View Post
    The Divine Restrainer -- the Holy Spirit -- is "taken out of the way" -- which means that His controlling presence from the earth is removed for 3 1/2 years. Since the Holy Spirit indwells the Church, it follows that the Church is also "taken out of the way".
    Your argument is that Jesus says the HS will never leave us-

    Which is the point.

    1.We are claiming the HS leave the Earth.(Which is Scriptural)

    2.Not that the HS leaves us.(which is unscriptural)

    Your clearly trying too address point two which me nor Daniel 567 claimed nor any pre-tribber claims

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    You claimed the Holy Spirit will be removed for 3.5 years? Sorry, but in my book, when Jesus says something is FOREVER I believe it.
    Once more He claimed the HS will be removed from the Earth for 3.5 years. Jesus never said the HS will remain on *Earth* forever.






    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    1. Fortunately, TheBeginner wrote an excellent exegesis on the subject to show irrefutable proof that the Last Trump is indeed the 7th. I save it, so allow me to look for it and repost it.
    He posted it in a blog.

    But still i'm not asking for his Post-

    Because its easily refuted i've done so mutiple times the fact he doesn't want to address the problems with his positions doesn't mean its *irrefutable*.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    I am not "conflating" anything. Although the passages are separate, yet they point to the same conclusion on the rapture. Obviously, a conclusion you are uncomfortable with and therefore squirm from as it pokes holes into your own doctrine.
    Once more i don't even need to poke Holes in it even under this Premise it still fails to prove the position of Post-trib (in any way) since the GT happens 2 Chapters after (Rev 13).

    If i accept the premise that the 7th trumpet is the Rapture-

    Then i will just claim Rev 12:5 is the rapture since it happens -AT or after the 7th trumpet chronologically.

    This point only proves post-trib -in a system where you believe the book of Rev is not chronological and that the events mentioned in Rev 12(after the 7th trumpet is blown) are completely unrelated.- Which is my point Post-trib only makes sense under these conditions witch allow each of you to have your own private interpretations.

    You can believe Rev 11:15-19, 19:11-21, and Rev 20:4 happen simultaneously(which is your claim here).

    You can claim Rev 12 doesn't actually happen after the 7th trumpet is blown but now John recounts the events surrounding Jesus birth in some strange flashback ect.

    My point is this argument(The last trumpet and 7th trumpet are the same) just ties -the Rapture to the Ressurection of the 2W-

    You still have to prove the times of the testimony of the 2W is the same period of time as the reign of the beast and all 3.5 year periods in Rev 11-13 all speak of the same time for this to even begin to resemble proof for the post-trib position.

    Which as i stated before is the Mid-Trib position(those who believe the Rapture happens at the Mid-Point)

    IOW under this Premise

    The 7th trumpet is the rapture-

    The Mid-tribbers believes there is another 3.5 year period after the 2W are killed (time of the beast) meaning the 7th trumpet rapture is *Mid-Trib*.

    Only by claiming that the time of the 2W coincides with the time of the beast (mentioned 2 chaps after) can one arrive at the doctrine of Post-trib.

    In which case Rev 12 is problematic and must be moved -

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    I see you have no answer to Paul's statement about the "alive and remain"?
    Once more i have adressed this statment so many times its silly.

    And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who remain, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.

    The Word *Remain*- is not defined as survived GT.

    re·main
    rəˈmān/Submit
    verb
    continue to exist, especially after other similar or related people or things have ceased to exist(OR BEEN CAUGHT UP TO MEET THE LORD).


    "a cloister is all that remains of the monastery"
    synonyms: continue to exist, endure, last, abide, carry on, persist, stay, stay around, prevail, survive, live on More
    stay in the place that one has been occupying.
    "her husband remained at the beach condo"
    synonyms: stay, stay behind, stay put, wait, wait around, be left, hang on; informalhang around
    "he remained in the hospital"
    continue to possess a particular quality or fulfill a particular role.


    We *Remain* to Be on Earth after the Dead have been removed right before we are also caught up.

    Any idea that Remain means *survive GT* is not inherent in the text.

    How many different ways must i address this?

  10. #205

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus View Post
    Incorrect the 70 weeks end with this being fulfilled Seventy weeks[c] are decreed about your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place.
    Those things were fulfilled in the atonement of Christ, in the earthly work of Christ in dying on the cross and being raised up for our justification. That means that Christ's earthly coming and death was indeed accomplished in the 70th Week, ending the 70 Weeks prophecy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    I know its a guess but that would mean the Angel was wrong when he told Daniel that 70 weeks are decreed unto his people not 69.5
    If I say I'm coming over to your house on the 7th day after Xmas, that doesn't mean I have to wait a full 7th day before I come over. The 7th day involves any part of the day, and not necessarily the whole day. The same thing with Daniel's 70th week. It doesn't have to be a full week to be the 70th Week. Any part of the week is still the 70th Week!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Once more this is the prophesy mentioned in Daniel 9:26, your doctrine basically claimed that Daniel 9:27 was fullfilled before Daniel 9:26
    After 7 weeks there was to be 62 more weeks. And *after* the 62 weeks there would be a 70th Week. In that week the Anointed One would be "cut off." There would be a covenant made in the 70th Week, but the animal sacrifices would be disqualified after Messiah was "cut off." The destruction of the "city and the sanctuary" was described in vs. 27 as the "abomination that causes desolation." It is not an easy prophecy to interpret, and I don't claim to have it "set in concrete." My only point here is that the 70th Week had to be fulfilled immediately after the 69th Week, indicating that it could *not* have been separated from the 69 Weeks and fulfilled in the time of Antichrist, as so many are saying!

    And so, without a basis for a Week-long Tribulation, Pretribulationists base the idea of a 7 Week Tribulation on a false interpretation of Dan 9. And there is *nothing whatsoever* in the book of Revelation that speaks of a *7 Year Period!*

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Incorrect the events in 70 AD where a fulfillment of Daniel 9:26
    We could argue all day about this, but that wasn't the point. The point is, This prophecy cannot provide a basis for a 7 Year Tribulation. This was fulfilled in the time of Jesus. And the only major act of desolation following the death of Christ was the 70 AD desolation of the temple and Jerusalem. This was *not* the Antichristian Tribulation, contrary to popular eschatological claims.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing. And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its[f] end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed.

    When the City and the Sanctuary were destroyed and Jerusalem became a *DESOLATION* and there were wars of Course.


    Incorrect Read Revelation 19:10.

    Jesus first coming did not fulfill all the Prophesy and Visions. Nor did it bring to pass what is stated in Daniel 9:24 concerning the fullfiment of the 70 weeks.
    The prophecy in Dan 9 does not require the fulfillment of all prophecy. Not even Rev 19 would do that, since there is more prophecy to be fulfilled after that. This prophecy to be fulfilled has to do with *all* the work that Christ did in his earthly ministry, including his cross and resurrection. That completed the legal process of human redemption.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Exactly you eliminate one of the Weeks by claiming it a restatement. While claiming that Verse 27(the death of Jesus) happens 30-40 years before Daniel 7:26(the destruction of the City and the Sanctuary).
    Yes, vs 27 restates vs 26, but not in the way you suppose. Again, this is not the point. If you time 70 Weeks of years from the decree of Artaxerxes the 70th Week lapsed in the time of Jesus. That was the 70th Week. The destruction, or desolation, of the city and the sanctuary took place in that generation, but not immediately following the 70 Weeks, nor is it included in the 70 Weeks. Jesus explained it perfectly well in Luke 21. In fact when describing these things Jesus referred back to Dan 9 for confirmation of what he meant. Clearly, Jesus spoke in Luke 21 of the desolation of Jerusalem and its sanctuary, and about a dispersion of the Jews that *began* at that time. This was the "beginning of sorrows." The Great Distress that was begun at that time has lasted throughout the entire NT age. And so, none of this could've been fulfilled in the time of Antichrist. The time of Antichrist is documented in Dan 7--not in Dan 9!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Notice how the angel says after 62 weeks not after 70 weeks or on week 70.

    62+7=69 simple math

    Once more as i stated one does not need Daniel 9 to get 7 years in the book of Rev
    Then your problem is that the book of Revelation does not mention a 7 year tribulation at all. And so we shouldn't add in one to the book of Revelation, which we are prohibited from doing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    All you have to do is not Conclude that all those periods mention in Rev 11-13 speak about the same period of Time.
    No, no matter what you refuse to conclude you still can't say a "7 year tribulation" is mentioned in the book of Revelation. You are getting that by adding two periods together. And nothing in the book of Revelation says you should do that. Nothing logically demands it either. It makes perfect sense to agree with what the Revelation explicitly says, that the tribulation period is 3.5 years. It is actually the Reign of Antichrist, not even called the Tribulation Period. It is based on Dan 7, where the same period of time is expressly stated as "time, times and half a time."

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    If you believe any of those periods are different then you can easily get a 7 year period or Longer.
    The trouble is, the book of Revelation does not explicitly say any of those time periods are different, nor is it a logical requirement. The logical assumption, given the lack of direction, is that the 3.5 years is a single period, referencing Dan 7 and its single mention of a 3.5 year period.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Your argument is basically that your assumption is better then mine-

    Either way if you Assume that the periods are the same you have at least 3.5 years.

    If you assume any of the periods are different times you have a period of time of at least 7 years(without the need to add anything to the book)

    Neither assumption can be proven correct-(hense why we are assuming)

    But to claim my assumption is adding to the text is false.

    One can easily derive a 7 year period from the context of the Book of Rev alone.
    You can get anything you want. But my view is not based on an assumption, but upon explicit reference. The book of Revelation repeatedly mentions a 3.5 year period--not a 7 year period. And it is clearly a reference to Dan 7, where the same period is mentioned--not 2 periods of 3.5 years each, but a single period of 3.5 years.

    You are *adding to the text!* But it is your conscience--not mine!

  11. #206
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,490

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Those things were fulfilled in the atonement of Christ, in the earthly work of Christ in dying on the cross and being raised up for our justification. That means that Christ's earthly coming and death was indeed accomplished in the 70th Week, ending the 70 Weeks prophecy.
    Once more the Prophesy was Concerning what the Jewish people would do(and there city) not -Christ-.

    Daniel 9:Seventy weeks[c] are decreed about your people

    The 70 weeks were to be accomplished by the People not by the Christ.



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    If I say I'm coming over to your house on the 7th day after Xmas, that doesn't mean I have to wait a full 7th day before I come over. The 7th day involves any part of the day, and not necessarily the whole day.
    Correct but i would not expect you on the 8th- The passage says after 69 weeks will the Messiah be cut off this means these events happen on the 69th week.


    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    The same thing with Daniel's 70th week. It doesn't have to be a full week to be the 70th Week. Any part of the week is still the 70th Week!
    This argument is impossible because you argue both events at the same time, people who hold to you position seem unable to identify the fact that the Daniel 9:26 was completely fullfilled in the first century with no necessary additions from Daniel 9:27 and most arguments about Jesus fullfilling Daniel 9:27 are usually extremely weak which is why you try to blend them together(since Daniel 9:26 was clearly fulfilled just as written).



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    After 7 weeks there was to be 62 more weeks. And *after* the 62 weeks there would be a 70th Week.
    No brother after 12 O'Clock from 12:01-12:59 is still considered after. Just like after 7 and 62 weeks means these events happen on week 69.

    The best example of this is the passage itself concerning the 7 weeks itself.

    After 7 weeks begins 62 weeks

    After 7 weeks doesn't include the first of the 62 weeks.

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    In that week the Anointed One would be "cut off." There would be a covenant made in the 70th Week, but the animal sacrifices would be disqualified after Messiah was "cut off." The destruction of the "city and the sanctuary" was described in vs. 27 as the "abomination that causes desolation." It is not an easy prophecy to interpret, and I don't claim to have it "set in concrete." My only point here is that the 70th Week had to be fulfilled immediately after the 69th Week, indicating that it could *not* have been separated from the 69 Weeks and fulfilled in the time of Antichrist, as so many are saying!
    Actually no brother- Because the Weeks have to do With the *City* also. If the City is destroyed at the end of Week 69, you must also have a city to complete week 70. Notice how the time only is counted after the City after *Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem* The city is built.

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    And so, without a basis for a Week-long Tribulation, Pretribulationists base the idea of a 7 Week Tribulation on a false interpretation of Dan 9. And there is *nothing whatsoever* in the book of Revelation that speaks of a *7 Year Period!*
    Correct but mutiple periods of 3.5 years are mentioned.




    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    We could argue all day about this, but that wasn't the point. The point is, This prophecy cannot provide a basis for a 7 Year Tribulation. This was fulfilled in the time of Jesus. And the only major act of desolation following the death of Christ was the 70 AD desolation of the temple and Jerusalem. This was *not* the Antichristian Tribulation, contrary to popular eschatological claims.
    Your right we could argue this all day. But my only point is only under a system such as yours can the belief that the 7th trumpet is the rapture support a post-trib viewpoint.








    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Yes, vs 27 restates vs 26, but not in the way you suppose. Again, this is not the point. If you time 70 Weeks of years from the decree of Artaxerxes the 70th Week lapsed in the time of Jesus. That was the 70th Week. The destruction, or desolation, of the city and the sanctuary took place in that generation, but not immediately following the 70 Weeks, nor is it included in the 70 Weeks. Jesus explained it perfectly well in Luke 21. In fact when describing these things Jesus referred back to Dan 9 for confirmation of what he meant. Clearly, Jesus spoke in Luke 21 of the desolation of Jerusalem and its sanctuary, and about a dispersion of the Jews that *began* at that time. This was the "beginning of sorrows." The Great Distress that was begun at that time has lasted throughout the entire NT age. And so, none of this could've been fulfilled in the time of Antichrist. The time of Antichrist is documented in Dan 7--not in Dan 9!
    We disagree obviously.



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Then your problem is that the book of Revelation does not mention a 7 year tribulation at all. And so we shouldn't add in one to the book of Revelation, which we are prohibited from doing.
    No one is adding that i know of.





    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    No, no matter what you refuse to conclude you still can't say a "7 year tribulation" is mentioned in the book of Revelation. You are getting that by adding two periods together. And nothing in the book of Revelation says you should do that. Nothing logically demands it either. It makes perfect sense to agree with what the Revelation explicitly says, that the tribulation period is 3.5 years. It is actually the Reign of Antichrist, not even called the Tribulation Period. It is based on Dan 7, where the same period of time is expressly stated as "time, times and half a time."
    Nothing stops us from adding those two periods together either-




    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    The trouble is, the book of Revelation does not explicitly say any of those time periods are different, nor is it a logical requirement. The logical assumption, given the lack of direction, is that the 3.5 years is a single period, referencing Dan 7 and its single mention of a 3.5 year period.
    Or that the two time periods which are described differently and mention different events are not the same(since nothing in the passage tells us to conclude these time periods are the same) nor are the explicitly stated as being the same.



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    You can get anything you want.
    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    But my view is not based on an assumption, but upon explicit reference. The book of Revelation repeatedly mentions a 3.5 year period--not a 7 year period. And it is clearly a reference to Dan 7, where the same period is mentioned--not 2 periods of 3.5 years each, but a single period of 3.5 years. You are *adding to the text!* But it is your conscience--not mine!
    Not sure what you mean once more the text list these time periods as separate. The text does not say explicitly that these time periods are the same also you clearly admitted your view was an assumption

    So please stop with this false accusation-

    No one is adding anything to the text if we choose to interpret the passage with Daniel 9 we have the same right you do concerning your use of Daniel 7.

  12. #207
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2,915
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesusl[I
    ovesus;3392084]once more there is no we-

    This Denial of Revelation being Chronologically arranged is central to the Post-trib postion.

    No other position requires as much cutting and moving around of the book as your eschatological system.

    Because the book makes no sense if you do not do this (making it hard for any other position to argue with post-trib since you all have your own personal private interpretations)
    The facts are there (I cited just one example). You are uncomfortable because you are being challenged to defend a doctrine you know is indefensible. Any private interpretation of scripture is a departure from its true meaning into a man's formulated doctrine. That is never my focus.


    Sorry no the Elder says these are those *Coming* http://biblehub.com/text/revelation/7-14.htm

    Notice the word *Coming* http://biblehub.com/grammar/v-ppm_p-nmp.htm

    Its present Participle Passive-

    Meaning in Rev 7 this is an ongoing event not something that happened in a split second (like the rapture)
    Just read KJV version.


    i believe the opposite i believe if we chop it up and mix -match it to support a eschatological systtem (such as post-trib) is where we can go really wrong- Since there is no true doctrine each one of you peronally decides what goes where as you see fit.
    A very interesting insight indeed because your doctrine is built on very shifty sand. Post trib is about the only logical expression of the resurrection and rapture that actually correlates with scripture.

    Correct making post-trib false- Which is why you must argue for the right to chop up the book as you see fit to make sense of your doctrine.
    No serious scholar argues that Revelation follows a chronological order. I think you stand alone if you believe it does.


    I deny this Please show me in Rev 11:15-19. Where the rapture and a Ressurection are mentioned?
    1. I will send the exegesis showing that the last trump is synonymous with the 7th.
    2. 1 Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
    3. Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

    The above is Paul's account of the rapture which is preceded by the resurrection of the dead. The two are intrinsically linked - one cannot happen without the other.



    Paul straight up mentions the GT 2 verses later in 1 Thes 5:2

    You always make this arguement that Alive and remain means they survived the GT

    But as i pointed out over and over again this passage is about the Gathering of the Church.

    First the Dead are gathered. (which according to your doctrine includes those who died during the GT(weren't delivered? )

    Then those who are alive and *Remain* are gathered.

    The sum total of the group is the all the Church living and dead.

    The Sum total of the group is all Christians.

    1.I gather the blue grapes first.

    2.Then all the other grapes that fell and remain.

    The second part doesn't imply that the grapes went thru the GT- (Just that another group was gathered first)
    I really wish you study the scriptures with due diligence, it will stop you making so much false and contradictory declarations.

    1. You hold the view that the church will be raptured early so it won't be around when the GT occurs, yet you argue that the "alive and remain" is the GATHERING of the church, which is true. But why would Paul use that expression to describe the survivors of the church at that time? It's obviously a conundrum for you because it doesn't fit your theory.
    2. Secondly, the gathering in verse 17 is the living who follow the dead that has already risen.
    3. You have this tendency to say what is not found anywhere in my post. There is zero reference to the dead in my explanation of the *alive and remain*! Paul didn't say the alive and the dead and I didn't either, so I fail to understand why you introduced the dead into the subject?

  13. #208
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,490

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    The facts are there (I cited just one example). You are uncomfortable because you are being challenged to defend a doctrine you know is indefensible. Any private interpretation of scripture is a departure from its true meaning into a man's formulated doctrine. That is never my focus.Just read KJV version.
    Not uncomfortable at all, i used to hold to the same view about you regarding Rev 7 (mainly because i use the KJV)

    So you example doesn't really hold water i'm afraid- Once more these people are *Coming* out of the GT-

    Meaning your need once more for Revelations to not be chronological (so post-trib works) is not really supported by this example(but if you have anymore i will be happy to clear them up).


    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    A very interesting insight indeed because your doctrine is built on very shifty sand. Post trib is about the only logical expression of the resurrection and rapture that actually correlates with scripture.
    So you claim but i don't see the proof of this- Personally post-trib is a mess i mean have you ever heard of Amil? Thats all a result of post-trib doctrine having so many holes.

    Honestly if you don't believe me i can send you a list of different viewpoints that range from individiual post-tribbers because each of them personally decide what to move and shift personally.

    A great example of this is the Creation of Amil(post-trib) that believes Rev 21 happens before Rev 20.

    Or Martys form of Post-trib which Claims that Rev 19 was already fullfilled and just the 7th trumpet and GWT are future events.

    The fact is being given permission to cut up the book and rearrange it in order that makes it "clearer" doesn't seem to have helped those in the post-trib camp over the century's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    No serious scholar argues that Revelation follows a chronological order. I think you stand alone if you believe it does.
    Do you really want me to send you a list of scholars?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    1. I will send the exegesis showing that the last trump is synonymous with the 7th.
    I don't require Exegesis- Once more all i ask is that you show me in Rev 11:15-19 where a Rapture and Ressurection is mentioned in Conjunction with the trumpet being blown. If you can't i will not add it to support your personal eschatological system(Rev 22:18).

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    2. 1 Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
    3. Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

    The above is Paul's account of the rapture which is preceded by the resurrection of the dead. The two are intrinsically linked - one cannot happen without the other.
    We agree.


    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    1. You hold the view that the church will be raptured early so it won't be around when the GT occurs
    Correct.


    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    yet you argue that the "alive and remain" is the GATHERING of the church, which is true. But why would Paul use that expression to describe the survivors of the church at that time? It's obviously a conundrum for you because it doesn't fit your theory.
    I don't understand what theory or Conundrum you believe this present for me. I really don't see it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    2. Secondly, the gathering in verse 17 is the living who follow the dead that has already risen.
    Yes.


    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    3. You have this tendency to say what is not found anywhere in my post. There is zero reference to the dead in my explanation of the *alive and remain*! Paul didn't say the alive and the dead and I didn't either, so I fail to understand why you introduced the dead into the subject?
    I'm pretty sure you believe those who died during the GT will be raptured along with the dead in Christ(as a post-tribber) thats all i was saying.

    You believe those who died during the GT are included in *the dead who rise first*.

    Is this an inaccurate representation of your beliefs?

  14. #209

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus View Post
    Once more the Prophesy was Concerning what the Jewish people would do(and there city) not -Christ-.
    That's false. The things the prophecy set out to accomplish were fulfilled in Christ, in particular the legal redemption from sin. And the prophecy clearly mentions that Christ would come after 62 weeks, which followed in turn after 7 weeks. This means that Christ would come after 69 weeks of years. There is therefore no question at all that this has to do with both Christ and with the Jewish People!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Daniel 9:Seventy weeks[c] are decreed about your people

    The 70 weeks were to be accomplished by the People not by the Christ.
    Things were decreed concerning the Jewish People that would be accomplished by Christ.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Correct but i would not expect you on the 8th- The passage says after 69 weeks will the Messiah be cut off this means these events happen on the 69th week.
    No, after the 69th Week is the 70th Week. The things Messiah accomplished and experienced were in the 70th Week.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    This argument is impossible because you argue both events at the same time, people who hold to you position seem unable to identify the fact that the Daniel 9:26 was completely fullfilled in the first century with no necessary additions from Daniel 9:27 and most arguments about Jesus fullfilling Daniel 9:27 are usually extremely weak which is why you try to blend them together(since Daniel 9:26 was clearly fulfilled just as written).
    What is weak? In vs 26 we read that Christ dies and that the city of Jerusalem and the temple is desolated.

    Dan 9.26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.

    And in vs 27 we read the same thing, if we assume the covenant-maker is Christ, although I'm not at all clear it is. If it is Christ he would be viewed as making a covenant with the Jews in the 70th Week, cutting off animal sacrifices in the middle of the Week. This would be when he was crucified, thus terminating temple sacrifices altogether. And then one who commits desolation, apparently the Roman ruler, will present his abominable army in front of the temple and ultimately desolate the temple.

    Dan 9.27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation.

    But I admit there are other possibilities for vs 27. It could be that Christ or the Roman ruler does all these things. Christ could make a covenant, terminate sacrifice, and judge Israel through the Roman desolation of the temple. Or The Roman ruler could make a covenant with the Jews during Jesus' ministry, have Jesus crucified to terminate sacrifice, and then destroy the temple. I just don't know. It doesn't really matter. The point is that these things have to do with a proximity to the 70th Week of a period that began with a decree of Artaxerxes. So the 70th Week had to have been fulfilled in the generation of Jesus.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    No brother after 12 O'Clock from 12:01-12:59 is still considered after. Just like after 7 and 62 weeks means these events happen on week 69.
    I have no clue what you're talking about? After 69 Weeks means *in the 70th Week!*

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    The best example of this is the passage itself concerning the 7 weeks itself.

    After 7 weeks begins 62 weeks

    After 7 weeks doesn't include the first of the 62 weeks.
    I have no clue what you're saying. The 70th Week *follows* after the 69 Weeks!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Actually no brother- Because the Weeks have to do With the *City* also. If the City is destroyed at the end of Week 69, you must also have a city to complete week 70. Notice how the time only is counted after the City after *Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem* The city is built.
    We do not see things the same way at all. I do *not* see the city as desolated after the 69 Weeks! Rather, it is Christ who is *cut off* after 69 Weeks! The reference to the eventual destruction of the city is a judgment upon Israel on behalf of Messiah's death. It is not a placement of this event in parallel with Christ's death. The destruction of the city is here an *insert* to proclaim the ultimate judgment to follow the death of Messiah. And this is explained in vs 27, that the Covenant in the 70th Week precedes the desolation of the temple--the "abomination that causes desolation." So, the desolation of the city and the sanctuary is placed in time *after* the 70th Week and *after* the covenant of the 70th Week. It is the breaking of the covenant in the 70th Week and the termination of animal sacrifice that lead to the ultimate destruction of the temple *following* the 70th Week. The temple cannot have been destroyed *before* the animal sacrifices themselves are annulled, because animal sacrifices offered in the 70th Week *require* a temple.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Correct but mutiple periods of 3.5 years are mentioned.
    Yes, they all refer to a single period of 3.5 years mentioned in Dan 7. Never are any of these periods referred to as a *7 year tribulation!*

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Your right we could argue this all day. But my only point is only under a system such as yours can the belief that the 7th trumpet is the rapture support a post-trib viewpoint.
    That would be right. The 7th trumpet, I believe, is the last trumpet. That's when the Rapture of the Church takes place, in my belief system.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    We disagree obviously.
    No one is adding that i know of.
    Once again, you are *adding* the idea of a *7 year tribulation.* That is *never* mentioned either in the book of Revelation or in Scripture.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Nothing stops us from adding those two periods together either-
    Yes, what stops you is the prohibition against adding to the words of this revelation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Or that the two time periods which are described differently and mention different events are not the same(since nothing in the passage tells us to conclude these time periods are the same) nor are the explicitly stated as being the same.
    Even if you find each period of 3.5 years describes different things you aren't given license to say they are different periods of time. Nothing in the book says you should do that. Even if the book said there were two different periods of 3.5 years nothing in the book says these periods should be added together to make a single period of 7 years! You are adding to the book!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    Not sure what you mean once more the text list these time periods as separate. The text does not say explicitly that these time periods are the same also you clearly admitted your view was an assumption
    There is a difference between assumptions based on explicit statements and assumptions that are blind and presumptuous. Your claim that two periods of 3.5 years are different and should be joined together, back to back, to form a 7 year tribulation, is an *addition* to the text of Revelation, and therefore is prohibited explicitly by the book itself. Why should I not accuse you if that's what you're doing? The book itself said this practice should be prohibited!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesuslovesus
    So please stop with this false accusation-

    No one is adding anything to the text if we choose to interpret the passage with Daniel 9 we have the same right you do concerning your use of Daniel 7.
    You are not right whatsoever to add to the text of Revelation a 7 year tribulation period. Sorry, you're wrong. You have the right to believe what you will, even if it goes against what Revelation says. But your freedom is not opting for the right choice if you insist on declaring that Revelation teaches a 7 year tribulation.

  15. #210
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,490

    Re: 2 Thess. 2:11

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    That's false. The things the prophecy set out to accomplish were fulfilled in Christ, in particular the legal redemption from sin. And the prophecy clearly mentions that Christ would come after 62 weeks, which followed in turn after 7 weeks. This means that Christ would come after 69 weeks of years. There is therefore no question at all that this has to do with both Christ and with the Jewish People! Things were decreed concerning the Jewish People that would be accomplished by Christ.
    No, after the 69th Week is the 70th Week. The things Messiah accomplished and experienced were in the 70th Week.
    No Christ comes after 69 weeks.

    He doesn't come after 70 weeks.

    I came after 12 O'clock

    Not after 1 O'clock

    Once more this prophesy was concerning the Jewish people and Their City. The angel didn't claim 70 weeks are declared upon the Messiah.



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    What is week? In vs 26 we read that Christ dies and that the city of Jerusalem and the temple is desolated.

    Dan 9.26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.
    Correct

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    And in vs 27 we read the same thing, if we assume the covenant-maker is Christ, although I'm not at all clear it is. If it is Christ he would be viewed as making a covenant with the Jews in the 70th Week, cutting off animal sacrifices in the middle of the Week. This would be when he was crucified, thus terminating temple sacrifices altogether. And then one who commits desolation, apparently the Roman ruler, will present his abominable army in front of the temple and ultimately desolate the temple.
    Dan 9.27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation.

    But I admit there are other possibilities for vs 27. It could be that Christ or the Roman ruler does all these things. Christ could make a covenant, terminate sacrifice, and judge Israel through the Roman desolation of the temple. Or The Roman ruler could make a covenant with the Jews during Jesus' ministry, have Jesus crucified to terminate sacrifice, and then destroy the temple. I just don't know. It doesn't really matter. The point is that these things have to do with a proximity to the 70th Week of a period that began with a decree of Artaxerxes. So the 70th Week had to have been fulfilled in the generation of Jesus.
    We disagree but at least you admit there are other possiblities for vs 27.



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I have no clue what you're talking about? After 69 Weeks means *in the 70th Week!*
    I have no clue what you're saying. The 70th Week *follows* after the 69 Weeks!

    We do not see things the same way at all. I do *not* see the city as desolated after the 69 Weeks! Rather, it is Christ who is *cut off* after 69 Weeks! The reference to the eventual destruction of the city is a judgment upon Israel on behalf of Messiah's death. It is not a placement of this event in parallel with Christ's death. The destruction of the city is here an *insert* to proclaim the ultimate judgment to follow the death of Messiah. And this is explained in vs 27, that the Covenant in the 70th Week precedes the desolation of the temple--the "abomination that causes desolation." So, the desolation of the city and the sanctuary is placed in time *after* the 70th Week and *after* the covenant of the 70th Week. It is the breaking of the covenant in the 70th Week and the termination of animal sacrifice that lead to the ultimate destruction of the temple *following* the 70th Week. The temple cannot have been destroyed *before* the animal sacrifices themselves are annulled, because animal sacrifices offered in the 70th Week *require* a temple.
    Yes clearly we have different views on this- Lets just leave it there.



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Yes, they all refer to a single period of 3.5 years mentioned in Dan 7.
    This is an assumption.



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    That would be right. The 7th trumpet, I believe, is the last trumpet. That's when the Rapture of the Church takes place, in my belief system.
    Yes which is why you are post-trib.



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Once again, you are *adding* the idea of a *7 year tribulation.* That is *never* mentioned either in the book of Revelation or in Scripture.
    We agree on this a 7 year tribulation is not mentioned in the book of Rev.



    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Yes, what stops you is the prohibition against adding to the words of this revelation.
    Pretty sure i didn't add any words..




    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Even if you find each period of 3.5 years describes different things you aren't given license to say they are different periods of time.
    Thats exactly what it does.

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Nothing in the book says you should do that. Even if the book said there were two different periods of 3.5 years nothing in the book says these periods should be added together to make a single period of 7 years! You are adding to the book!
    This logic is not sound- Sounds like your just running your mouth making accusations.




    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    There is a difference between assumptions based on explicit statements and assumptions that are blind and presumptuous. Your claim that two periods of 3.5 years are different and should be joined together, back to back, to form a 7 year tribulation, is an *addition* to the text of Revelation, and therefore is prohibited explicitly by the book itself. Why should I not accuse you if that's what you're doing? The book itself said this practice should be prohibited!
    Please show me what words am i adding to the text? I see two periods of time mentioned and i don't assume the happen simulations (not sure how this is an addition to the text) please explain...




    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    You are not right whatsoever to add to the text of Revelation a 7 year tribulation period. Sorry, you're wrong. You have the right to believe what you will, even if it goes against what Revelation says. But your freedom is not opting for the right choice if you insist on declaring that Revelation teaches a 7 year tribulation.
    Pretty sure i didn't add any words to the text.

    But if you believe i wrote a personal bible and added the word 7 year tribulation to the text of my bible (specifically in the book of Rev) you would be incorrect.

    So please stop with the accusations i'm telling you now i did not rewrite the book of Rev and add the words 7 year tribulation to any part

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Discussion Who is the Restrainer in 2 Thess 2?
    By Jesuslovesus in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: May 8th 2017, 04:35 AM
  2. 1 Thess 1:4-5
    By Eyelog in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: Apr 11th 2015, 05:20 AM
  3. Bespreking Die wegraping in 2 Thess 2
    By Henry44 in forum Gesprek oor die Eindtye en Aktuele sake
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: Sep 8th 2012, 08:28 AM
  4. 2 Thess 2
    By Beckrl in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: Jan 28th 2010, 11:31 PM
  5. Discussion 2 Thess 2:6-7
    By Beckrl in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Jun 28th 2009, 10:47 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •