the Great Tribulation and the AoD

[marty fox]

How do I continue to deceive them? What is that supposed to mean? We're focusing on what the text in Matt 24 means, and that has nothing to do with me one way or the other.

Sorry I don't mean you I mean satan he continues to deceive people who are already deceived

[divaD]

Actually you continue to deceive them

Matthew 24:22
22 “If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.

It was the elect that God chose to survive to go and tell the story of what happened in 70AD so that they would see that Jesus prophecy happend when He said that it would happen proving that he was the Messiah

Josephus stated that if the siege lasted longer no one would of survived it all fits history

Since you apparently failed to grasp my points the first time around, let's try again.

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Unbelieving Jews are already deceived. Unbelieving Jews couldn't care less about false christs, false great signs and wonders, etc. Especially in the first century leading up to 70 AD. In the first century they were face to face with the real Christ, witnessed many great signs and wonders, yet many of them still denied Christ. You don't try and deceive someone already deceived, you try and deceive someone who is not already deceived. Between unbelieving Jews and the church, which of these two would be a better fit for one who is not already deceived?

[divaD]

Sorry I don't mean you I mean satan he continues to deceive people who are already deceived

But since you did say 'you', which would have to mean me, are you perhaps thinking I'm satan then? If you meant satan, why didn't you just say satan rather than 'you'? Typos are understandable, but come on, I don't know if we can chalk this up to a typo though, which might mean you're harboring some evil thoughts about me because I dare challenge your beliefs. I guess only you and God know the truth of that matter.

[marty fox]

But since you did say 'you', which would have to mean me, are you perhaps thinking I'm satan then? If you meant satan, why didn't you just say satan rather than 'you'? Typos are understandable, but come on, I don't know if we can chalk this up to a typo though, which might mean you're harboring some evil thoughts about me because I dare challenge your beliefs. I guess only you and God know the truth of that matter.

Are you kidding me here I apologize and explained myself it wasn't a typo I was generalizing the word you for whoever deceives people

I have already told you that I hold no hard feelings towards you and I like how you challenge people and that you do change your view at times

if you look at your post you would see that you did the same thing that you accused me of and used the word you also and I didn't take it personally

[marty fox]

Since you apparently failed to grasp my points the first time around, let's try again.

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Unbelieving Jews are already deceived. Unbelieving Jews couldn't care less about false christs, false great signs and wonders, etc. Especially in the first century leading up to 70 AD. In the first century they were face to face with the real Christ, witnessed many great signs and wonders, yet many of them still denied Christ. You don't try and deceive someone already deceived, you try and deceive someone who is not already deceived. Between unbelieving Jews and the church, which of these two would be a better fit for one who is not already deceived?

The Jews were the elect people of god who were chosen to reveal the messiah to the world but the Jewish leadership had the people reject and kill their messiah thus the elect were deceived and the Jewish leadership were the perfect example of the false prophet

[ForHisglory]

Yes the one coming was Nero but I believe that revelation was written in the mid 60's of the first century

It isn't possible for Revelation to have been written DURING the reign of Nero IF you agree that it had to have been written before the events of 7 trumpets had happened which is BEFORE Nero died.
If you agree that Nero died on 9th June 68 AD, then 3.5 years before that would be 9th January 65 AD. So this is your reign of the beast - which you have as Nero.
The problem is that preceding the reign of the AC are the 5 months of the locusts, so this takes us to July 64 AD.
Now the fire in Rome occurred in July 64 AD. So for your claim to make any sense, then the 5th trumpet has to occur IMMEDIATELY following the fire, and this then followed by the 42 months of Nero.
Yet this has a further problem because we are told John was writing Revelation on the island of Patmos where he was sent. So this being sent to Patmos was AFTER the fire of Rome, and thus Nero starting his persecution against Christians.
So you have John writing revelation AFTER the 5th trumpet is blown. Wow!
I really don't think you have considered the chronological implications of your claim.
John did NOT write Revelation in the Mid 60s AD as that would mean no one would hear the Revelation until Nero was practically dead.

[ItsAllLinked]

Yes more Jews died in WW2 but in 70AD it was 11 out of every 12 people but what made 70AD the worst time was that they realized that God rejected them and not only did they lose there city but they lost their temple and God allowed it.

I think that its more of all nations hating Christians than Jews

I don't believe that the rapture is in the Olivit discourse but God gathering the surviving Jews the elect

Matthew 24:22
22 “If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.

If Matthew 24:31 is the rapture then why are the saints told to flee Jerusalem in verse 16?

I don’t believe in a rapture Marty.
Scripture shows we gather together at Christ’s coming and Christ’s coming is shown in Revelation to occur at the end of the GT.

You responded to one point I made and gave a personal opinion on the matter, which is debatable yet a valid opinion outside of any scriptural support.

What about the other two main points?
Hes clearly stating He will collect the saints immediately after.

[Trivalee]

It is entirely consistent to think Luke 21 is about 70 AD and Matt 24 is not.
You need to read Luke 17, then realise that it is from the Olivet Discourse, and that Luke put things together topically.
It then makes you realise that there are TWO different occasions that Jesus spoke of in the Olivet Discourse in which you were to flee.
The sign for one (Luke 21 armies) is a different and incompatible sign with that in the other (Matt 24 the AoD).
Armies are OUTSIDE surrounding - which in 66 AD then left, and so Christians fled.
The AoD however is INSIDE - which is yet to happen, regardless of Randyk's attempts to explain it as having happened.

For these to be about the same event, means you have armies inside and outside, in which case you cannot flee.

I agree that the AoD spoken at the Olivet Discourse didn't happen in 70AD. It is still in the future. I've always argued that Luke tried to separate the events of 70AD from the end time AoD by diving his account into two separate chapters "17 & 21". But he ended up confusing his readers more in the process.

[Trivalee]

I think the threat of genocide committed against Israel is real. It's been real for centuries, and it'st still real. The Palestinians, the Iranians, and most of the Moslem world want to wipe them out. (They want to do this by assimilation, with respect to the people. They want to wipe out a "Jewish State" by military force.)

The book of Esther was written to highlight this real and present danger. And yes, the longer Jewish vulnerability in the world continues, the greater the danger to Jewish extinction. It seems to me that the UN exists for the sole purpose of passing resolutions against the tiny state of Israel. Talk about bullying! You'd think a billion or so Muslims could find something better to do with their money and vast land holdings than to pick on a tiny portion of land in their Middle Eastern region?

So no, I do think genocide is the danger that must be "cut short" at Christ's Coming.

Do you realise that you are suddenly giving the GT a new definition -- one which ignores what the Bible says it is? You will fare better if you use scripture to interpret a prophecy rather than using current affairs. I will never trivialise the genocides (past and future) against Israel, but I will hold back rather than allow you to draw me into an errant definition of the GT.

My argument is that Matthew, Mark, and Luke relate the exact same Discourse. And Luke clearly defines the Great Tribulation as the Jewish Experience, beginning in Jesus' time and ending at the Coming of Christ.

As I pointed out to Marty, the Jewish Experience incorporated the Christian experience as well, because the Jewish People included Christians. As such, the Jewish believers were described as being persecuted by Jews and Romans at that time.

And by extension this applies to Christians everywhere all down through the age. This does not, however, disturb my definition of the Great Tribulation, which is, I believe, how Jesus defined it in Luke.

I don't doubt that Jews and Christians share in the protracted persecution since the resurrection, but I maintain that the Great Tribulation by definition is completely different in scope.

The "all flesh" reference is to Israel. The Great Tribulation refers to the Jewish Experience. And the Jewish Experience incorporates both the believers' experience and the unbelievers' experience.

These experiences were different, respectively. However, we are indeed talking about the Jewish Experience at that time.

By extension, this description would incorporate believers from other nations over time, because the gospel adopted by the Jewish believers later was adopted by believers from other nations. As such, the Great Tribulation begins as a Jewish Experience and ends up incorporating the experience of all Christians.

It has to do with a *bilateral experience* between the unbelievers among the Jews who experience judgment, and believers among the Jews who are now united with believers from all nations.

I am completely in disagreement with your interpretation of many parts of the Great Tribultion and your understanding of "all flesh" per the text is wrong. You made this weird description is your last post and I pointed it out, and here, you repeat it yet again. How can "all flesh be Israel" yet by "extension the description incoporates the international church"? Your position is pretty vague at best. It's either all flesh denotes ALL that is in Christ (elect - Jew and Gentile) or it doesn't, it can't be anything in-between.

I see the Rapture of the Church *at* Christ's Coming--not before. Christ comes to rescue all Christians from persecution. And he comes to rescue the nation Israel from destruction, since the destruction of the Israeli State could mean extinction of the Jewish People.

I agree that the Rapture will occur at Christ' Coming. I just don't believe that it fits the *shortened* Jesus said will save lives.

[marty fox]

I don’t believe in a rapture Marty.
Scripture shows we gather together at Christ’s coming and Christ’s coming is shown in Revelation to occur at the end of the GT.

You responded to one point I made and gave a personal opinion on the matter, which is debatable yet a valid opinion outside of any scriptural support.

What about the other two main points?
Hes clearly stating He will collect the saints immediately after.

I guess we are on the same page maybe I call it the rapture but I believe that God gathers us at the very last moment of our world at His coming right before He destroys it with fire

I thought that I did respond to all of your points so which two?

Its not the saints that I believe that He was collecting at that time but the ones He chose to survive 70AD. He didn't actually take them up to heaven but protected them

[marty fox]

It isn't possible for Revelation to have been written DURING the reign of Nero IF you agree that it had to have been written before the events of 7 trumpets had happened which is BEFORE Nero died.
If you agree that Nero died on 9th June 68 AD, then 3.5 years before that would be 9th January 65 AD. So this is your reign of the beast - which you have as Nero.
The problem is that preceding the reign of the AC are the 5 months of the locusts, so this takes us to July 64 AD.
Now the fire in Rome occurred in July 64 AD. So for your claim to make any sense, then the 5th trumpet has to occur IMMEDIATELY following the fire, and this then followed by the 42 months of Nero.
Yet this has a further problem because we are told John was writing Revelation on the island of Patmos where he was sent. So this being sent to Patmos was AFTER the fire of Rome, and thus Nero starting his persecution against Christians.
So you have John writing revelation AFTER the 5th trumpet is blown. Wow!
I really don't think you have considered the chronological implications of your claim.
John did NOT write Revelation in the Mid 60s AD as that would mean no one would hear the Revelation until Nero was practically dead.

I don't see Revelation as all chronological. The beast I believe to be a demon over the empire of Rome and influencing its leaders and Nero playing a main part of it with the persecution. The trumpets were after Nero died during the siege of Jerusalem.

[Trivalee]

Amen



Randy, I would be interested in knowing what verses support a future reign of "a" anti-Christ.

Here are the verses that talk about an AC.

1 John 2:22

Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.

1 John 4:3

and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.

1 John 2:18

Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.

2 John 1:7

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh This is the deceiver and the antichrist



Here is what I see.

The anti-Christ was first century.

I believe these verses refer to the Jews of the first century. I do not believe theses verse refer to Nero or Titus.

The word Antichrist is only found 4 times in all of Scripture. It is not found in the Book of Revelation. It is not the same as the Beast.

I sincerely believe John (an apostle to the Jews according to Gal. 2) wrote it in a veiled way to condemn the unbelieving Jews he was ministering to in Jerusalem:

1. Denies the Father and the Son. (they deny the Trinity and that the Father and Son are One)
2. Does not confess Jesus is from God
3. Who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. In other words they deny the Incarnation, God becoming man in the flesh. (They acknowledge that Jesus came and existed but that he was a demon who led Israel astray.)

Reason it out from the 4 passages!

The anti-Christ Is not a single individual but ANYONE (apostate Jews and all) who denies the deity of Christ, the oneness of Christ with the Father (ie. the Trinity) and deny that Christ the Messiah was incarnate/ came in the flesh. All Muslims are anti-Christ; all unbelievers are anti-Christ; all Jews who deny that Jesus is the Messiah are anti-Christ.

It is not to be associated with the Beast exclusively, though he himself was antichrist as well!

Notice also John says they are living in the "last hour!" when he wrote 1 John in the 60's AD! He says it twice in 1 John 2: 18.

The last hour of WHAT? He knows the end is near when he wrote this in the 60's AD!

70 AD was coming for the Jews!

Food for thought anyway...

Regards,

Blue

1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come (FUTURE), even now (PRESENT)are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

Notice that the future antichrist is singular, i.e. an individual? But antichrists (plural) are already here. Dan 7's little horn and Rev 13 talks about the future antichrist also, who goes by various names such as the Beast, Man of sin, Antichrist, etc.

[Trivalee]

I don’t believe in a rapture Marty.
Scripture shows we gather together at Christ’s coming and Christ’s coming is shown in Revelation to occur at the end of the GT.

You responded to one point I made and gave a personal opinion on the matter, which is debatable yet a valid opinion outside of any scriptural support.

What about the other two main points?
Hes clearly stating He will collect the saints immediately after.

Looks like you're with Keraz on this - who doesn't believe in the rapture also, but it's a scriptural fact (1 Cor 15:51).

[Keraz]

Looks like you're with Keraz on this - who doesn't believe in the rapture also, but it's a scriptural fact (1 Cor 15:51).

As my name is mentioned, I cannot let this false statement pass.

I would have thought, Trivalee, that after all this time you would read scripture for what it says, not what you or however many other people think it says.

1 Corinthians 15:51 Listen! I will unfold a mystery: we shall not all die, but we shall be changed....
Where does that say we go to heaven?
The context of 1 Cor 15 from verse 24-58 is about what happens after the Millennium. Proved by how it is only then that Death is done away with. Revelation 22:1-7

Not only does the Bible never say that we humans will go to heaven, but Jesus unequivocally stated that such a thing was impossible. John 3:13, John 8:21-23, +

[CadyandZoe]

As my name is mentioned, I cannot let this false statement pass.

I would have thought, Trivalee, that after all this time you would read scripture for what it says, not what you or however many other people think it says.

1 Corinthians 15:51 Listen! I will unfold a mystery: we shall not all die, but we shall be changed....
Where does that say we go to heaven?
The context of 1 Cor 15 from verse 24-58 is about what happens after the Millennium. Proved by how it is only then that Death is done away with. Revelation 22:1-7

Not only does the Bible never say that we humans will go to heaven, but Jesus unequivocally stated that such a thing was impossible. John 3:13, John 8:21-23, +

While 1Corinthians doesn't mention the millennial period by name, one can find a hint of it in the following passage.

1Corinthians 15:

20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21 For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, 24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death. 27 For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. 28 When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

The millennial period is described in the bold sentence above. Compare this with the Revelation passage.

Revelation 20:

4 Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years.

This records the idea that the saints are raised before death is defeated.