PDA

View Full Version : Signs of Last Days



PetriFB
Apr 25th 2007, 07:48 PM
If we start examining the signs preceding the coming of Jesus, then the words spoken by Jesus himself, in which He referred to the days of Noah and Lot concerning the generation experiencing the coming of Jesus, are a good starting point. He stated that the conditions just before His coming would very much resemble the societies of the time of Noah and Lot, and that before His coming, people would be as unprepared as then; in other words, history would in a way repeat itself.


http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Lastdays1

BeOfGoodCourage
Apr 25th 2007, 07:51 PM
If we start examining the signs preceding the coming of Jesus, then the words spoken by Jesus himself, in which He referred to the days of Noah and Lot concerning the generation experiencing the coming of Jesus, are a good starting point. He stated that the conditions just before His coming would very much resemble the societies of the time of Noah and Lot, and that before His coming, people would be as unprepared as then; in other words, history would in a way repeat itself.


http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Lastdays1


Are those days spoken of about being ill prepared or about life going on as usual?

God's Advocate
Apr 25th 2007, 10:43 PM
Are those days spoken of about being ill prepared or about life going on as usual?
I've actually been thinking about this myself. From what I see in the Bible, Noah's time was the time of an absolute low in human morality and faith in God. Lot's most remembered deed was pleading with God for the lives of Sodom and Gomorah (spelling?), the most evil and Godless cities in the entire world. I think endtimes will be preceded by another low in morality. I think that time is now.

God's Advocate
Apr 25th 2007, 10:46 PM
...............

Chris In O.C.
Apr 25th 2007, 10:47 PM
Are those days spoken of about being ill prepared or about life going on as usual?
I believe it's a combination of both

For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the arc
And they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away

Matthew 24:38-39

So today, just as it was in the times of Noah, most people are getting drunk, partying, getting married, throwing bachelor parties, eating almost non-stop, etc.... So when the tribulation begins, most folks, even some Christians, will be caught completely off-guard, they will not be prepared, and so they will be very easily deceived and manipulated by the anti-christ and other false prophets.

Just my $.02 of course

God's Advocate
Apr 25th 2007, 10:50 PM
I think the Anti-Christ is alive today. I don't know who it could be, but since I beleive the Last Days are not far away, it makes sence for the Enemy to be starting to get prepared. BTW I'm a little sketchy, but in the Bible, it says that Israel was destroyed from forces of the North, aided by many countries including Persia. Most people beleive that Persia is simply Iraq, but its borders actually extend into... Iran. Well, Russia (North of Israel) is suppling Iran (Parts of Persia were in Iran) with nuclear weapons. Does this look kind of intersting?

BeOfGoodCourage
Apr 25th 2007, 10:56 PM
I love you guys, in Christ, so let me make that plain up front. I look forward to meeting all the saints saved throughout the generations. But I do not hold to a future antichrist who is any different then any generation of antichrists, so my reasoning is not based on yours and thus draw my conclusions differently from Scripture.

God's Advocate
Apr 25th 2007, 11:03 PM
Whatever works for you, if you beleive in Salvation through Jesus Christ you'll have peace either way!

Yodas_Prodigy
Apr 26th 2007, 04:06 AM
Could you be confusing the "Last Days" with the "Second Coming"?

It seems that the "Last Days" were during the first century, before the destruction of the Temple. Reading throughout the New Testament, time markers are all over the place. "It is near", "Right at the Door", "Soon to take place". John even said that he was a partaker in it (see Revelations 1).

The "Last Days" are probably the same as the "End of the Age". Again, this all leads to 70 a.d. when the Temple was destroyed and Jews were masacred and taken in to slavery.

The Age that came to a close was the Jewish Age, or maybe better said, the time of the Law.

possumliving
Apr 26th 2007, 07:24 AM
II Thess. 2 states plainly that those that do not love the Truth so that they might be saved come under a spirit of delusion.

So, when someone states, Peace, peace! when there is no peace, they will believe it.

Steph

Yodas_Prodigy
Apr 26th 2007, 12:20 PM
So, were the Thessalonian letters written before 70 a.d. and the Neronic persecution? Perhaps you let your presuppositions dictate the text rather than the historical record.

I do believe that those who stayed in Jerusalem in 70 a.d. were deluded and felt safe. Yep, hundreds of thousands up to over a million were massacred for thinking and believing that they had peace and protection.

IamRyan
Apr 26th 2007, 06:39 PM
This is why I am more pre-trib because if the last days are like that days of Noah, then we would get saved before the disaster, just like Noah was.

Yodas_Prodigy
Apr 26th 2007, 08:11 PM
Question: Who was removed from the earth in the days of Noah?

Toolapc
Apr 27th 2007, 02:22 PM
this is a first now when i play xbox 360 im literlilly connected to the world you play video games with kids from around the world. its funny now when i play the 360 i can talk to kids from all over the world ive played with kids from japan the uk china and even south korea and this just started to happen because of the new systems like xbox 360. this to me is a sign that the world is ending because i can talk to kids from japan south korean and the uk all at the sametime when im playing a video game.

the biggest sign that i have seen is the North star likes to move has anyone else seen this

Johndigger
Apr 27th 2007, 02:48 PM
The OP posted this exact same post on several other forums. He may reply, due to having 128 other posts already. But that may be doubtful as he didn't respond on the other forums...



JD,
just sayin'

RogerW
Apr 27th 2007, 04:52 PM
Could you be confusing the "Last Days" with the "Second Coming"?

It seems that the "Last Days" were during the first century, before the destruction of the Temple. Reading throughout the New Testament, time markers are all over the place. "It is near", "Right at the Door", "Soon to take place". John even said that he was a partaker in it (see Revelations 1).

The "Last Days" are probably the same as the "End of the Age". Again, this all leads to 70 a.d. when the Temple was destroyed and Jews were masacred and taken in to slavery.

The Age that came to a close was the Jewish Age, or maybe better said, the time of the Law.

What is referenced as "being near", "at the door", or "soon"? Is it the Kingdom or the end of the Jewish age? While it is true the Jewish age does come to its complete and final end in AD 70 how does being near, at the door, or soon equate to anywhere from 10 years to 40 years? When we look for instance at the word translated "near" or "at hand" in Scripture (1451 eggus) we find this nearness is always a reference to immediate, or near in a sense of within minutes, days or within proximity (nearest). If these phrases were pointing to AD 70 then it does not fit the definition of nearness, or being at hand according to the Bible.

However, when we realize that which is near, at hand, at the door is the Kingdom then it fits very well the definition of near, and at hand according to how it is defined throughout the Scripture.

RW

DurbanDude
Apr 27th 2007, 05:52 PM
What is referenced as "being near", "at the door", or "soon"? Is it the Kingdom or the end of the Jewish age? While it is true the Jewish age does come to its complete and final end in AD 70 how does being near, at the door, or soon equate to anywhere from 10 years to 40 years? When we look for instance at the word translated "near" or "at hand" in Scripture (1451 eggus) we find this nearness is always a reference to immediate, or near in a sense of within minutes, days or within proximity (nearest). If these phrases were pointing to AD 70 then it does not fit the definition of nearness, or being at hand according to the Bible.

However, when we realize that which is near, at hand, at the door is the Kingdom then it fits very well the definition of near, and at hand according to how it is defined throughout the Scripture.

RW

Read 2 Peter 3:8,9 In the context of the 'coming' of Christ and the day of the Lord Peter says " But do not forget this one thing , dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years , and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you , not wanting anyone to perish ..."

Please do not misunderstand slowness , according to Peter if God takes a couple of days (a couple of thousand years) God is still fulfilling his word timeously. He is definitely not restricted to 40 years .

Yodas_Prodigy
Apr 28th 2007, 03:05 AM
Hello Roger,

A.T. Robertson disagrees with your statement. Regarding 1 Peter 4:7, ATR says, “How near Peter does not say, but he urges readiness.” [Word Pictures of the New Testament]. Dan Wallace seems to imply the same things. Now, Wallace is a Dispensationalist. I'm not sure about Robertson. I'm pretty sure he is at least a Premillenarian.

There is a reason why the warnings came out like they did. Jesus warned his Jewish followers to flee from Jerusalem because of what he knew was to happen. The Apostles knew that Jerusalem was going to fall and they knew about the coming tribulation for the Saints by Nero.

Revelation 1:9 let's us know that John was sharing in the tribulation. Peter wrote of the tribulation that believers were experiencing.

Daniel and Revelation are closely tied together. Daniel was told to close up the prophecy for the time was not near. John was told to not close up the prophecy because the time was near.

These statements should be read as they were meant to be. Jesus said, "This generation shall not pass away until all these things take place." He also said that the Disciples would not have time to visit every town in Israel before he returns in Judgment. Sounds like less than 40 years fits the bill. Jesus said that some of you will be alive when these things come to pass. The transfiguration doesn't fit because everyone with whom Jesus spoke to was alive when Jesus was transfigured. 2,000+ years later don't fit because everyone should be dead to whom he spoke. But, 37-40 years later, some of the Apostles were still alive.

Jesus also used pronouns like "You", not "Them". He was speaking to and about those who were listening.

Hence, eggus can be used in the context described.

possumliving
Apr 28th 2007, 06:02 AM
So, were the Thessalonian letters written before 70 a.d. and the Neronic persecution? Perhaps you let your presuppositions dictate the text rather than the historical record.

I do believe that those who stayed in Jerusalem in 70 a.d. were deluded and felt safe. Yep, hundreds of thousands up to over a million were massacred for thinking and believing that they had peace and protection.
That is entirely irrelevent. Joel was written BC and has not completely been fulfilled.

I do believe that there are those that have strained the gnats so finely that they've strained the Truth completely out of its context.

possumliving
Apr 28th 2007, 06:05 AM
Hello Roger,

A.T. Robertson disagrees with your statement. Regarding 1 Peter 4:7, ATR says, “How near Peter does not say, but he urges readiness.” [Word Pictures of the New Testament]. Dan Wallace seems to imply the same things. Now, Wallace is a Dispensationalist. I'm not sure about Robertson. I'm pretty sure he is at least a Premillenarian.

There is a reason why the warnings came out like they did. Jesus warned his Jewish followers to flee from Jerusalem because of what he knew was to happen. The Apostles knew that Jerusalem was going to fall and they knew about the coming tribulation for the Saints by Nero.

Revelation 1:9 let's us know that John was sharing in the tribulation. Peter wrote of the tribulation that believers were experiencing.

Daniel and Revelation are closely tied together. Daniel was told to close up the prophecy for the time was not near. John was told to not close up the prophecy because the time was near.

These statements should be read as they were meant to be. Jesus said, "This generation shall not pass away until all these things take place." He also said that the Disciples would not have time to visit every town in Israel before he returns in Judgment. Sounds like less than 40 years fits the bill. Jesus said that some of you will be alive when these things come to pass. The transfiguration doesn't fit because everyone with whom Jesus spoke to was alive when Jesus was transfigured. 2,000+ years later don't fit because everyone should be dead to whom he spoke. But, 37-40 years later, some of the Apostles were still alive.

Jesus also used pronouns like "You", not "Them". He was speaking to and about those who were listening.

Hence, eggus can be used in the context described.

So, you are saying in effect, by your interpretation of Scripture that we have missed the return of Christ?

That's what the FALSE teachers in II Thess. had been doing. Telling them that Jesus had already returned. That's why Paul wrote II Thess 2 to state plainly what must happen prior to Christ's return.

Yodas_Prodigy
Apr 28th 2007, 08:02 PM
So, you are saying in effect, by your interpretation of Scripture that we have missed the return of Christ?

That's what the FALSE teachers in II Thess. had been doing. Telling them that Jesus had already returned. That's why Paul wrote II Thess 2 to state plainly what must happen prior to Christ's return.

You posed your question incorrectly. You should have asked, "Yoda, how do you view Christ's return?" You see, you have read your presuppositions in to the text and then in to your question.

Since you brought up the Thessalonian scripture, I'll ask you the following:

If the coming of Christ was to be as you view it, why would they send Paul a letter? Wouldn't they know that Paul would have been raptured (again, based on your belief system).

Time to think critically...

John146
Apr 29th 2007, 01:18 AM
This is why I am more pre-trib because if the last days are like that days of Noah, then we would get saved before the disaster, just like Noah was.

What people miss is that the flood came on the same day that Noah entered the ark and the ark door was shut:

26And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
27They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. - Luke 17:26-27

So, to be consistent, if the coming of Christ is like the days of Noah, then the same day that Christ comes in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who don't know God (2 Thess 1:8) and brings sudden destruction upon them (1 Thess 5:3) is also the day of the Rapture.

John146
Apr 29th 2007, 01:27 AM
Hello Roger,

A.T. Robertson disagrees with your statement. Regarding 1 Peter 4:7, ATR says, “How near Peter does not say, but he urges readiness.” [Word Pictures of the New Testament]. Dan Wallace seems to imply the same things. Now, Wallace is a Dispensationalist. I'm not sure about Robertson. I'm pretty sure he is at least a Premillenarian.

There is a reason why the warnings came out like they did. Jesus warned his Jewish followers to flee from Jerusalem because of what he knew was to happen. The Apostles knew that Jerusalem was going to fall and they knew about the coming tribulation for the Saints by Nero.

Revelation 1:9 let's us know that John was sharing in the tribulation. Peter wrote of the tribulation that believers were experiencing.

Daniel and Revelation are closely tied together. Daniel was told to close up the prophecy for the time was not near. John was told to not close up the prophecy because the time was near.

These statements should be read as they were meant to be. Jesus said, "This generation shall not pass away until all these things take place." He also said that the Disciples would not have time to visit every town in Israel before he returns in Judgment. Sounds like less than 40 years fits the bill. Jesus said that some of you will be alive when these things come to pass. The transfiguration doesn't fit because everyone with whom Jesus spoke to was alive when Jesus was transfigured. 2,000+ years later don't fit because everyone should be dead to whom he spoke. But, 37-40 years later, some of the Apostles were still alive.

Jesus also used pronouns like "You", not "Them". He was speaking to and about those who were listening.

Hence, eggus can be used in the context described.


1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
2Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw. - Revelation 1:1-2

Do you believe that Satan's little season, the Judgment (Rev 20:11-15) and the ushering in of the new heavens and new earth where there will be no more death has already occurred? I don't. Yet it says that all the future events spoken about in the Revelation of Jesus Christ that was given to John were to "shortly come to pass". Perhaps "shortly come to pass" doesn't mean what we would think that it means when we read it by our definition of time rather than God's.

And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. - Revelation 22:12

Did this already happen? Afterall, He said He was coming quickly. If so, what was the reward that He had with Him and what did He give every man according to his work?

RogerW
Apr 29th 2007, 02:54 AM
Hello Roger,

A.T. Robertson disagrees with your statement. Regarding 1 Peter 4:7, ATR says, “How near Peter does not say, but he urges readiness.” [Word Pictures of the New Testament]. Dan Wallace seems to imply the same things. Now, Wallace is a Dispensationalist. I'm not sure about Robertson. I'm pretty sure he is at least a Premillenarian.

There is a reason why the warnings came out like they did. Jesus warned his Jewish followers to flee from Jerusalem because of what he knew was to happen. The Apostles knew that Jerusalem was going to fall and they knew about the coming tribulation for the Saints by Nero.

Revelation 1:9 let's us know that John was sharing in the tribulation. Peter wrote of the tribulation that believers were experiencing.

Daniel and Revelation are closely tied together. Daniel was told to close up the prophecy for the time was not near. John was told to not close up the prophecy because the time was near.

These statements should be read as they were meant to be. Jesus said, "This generation shall not pass away until all these things take place." He also said that the Disciples would not have time to visit every town in Israel before he returns in Judgment. Sounds like less than 40 years fits the bill. Jesus said that some of you will be alive when these things come to pass. The transfiguration doesn't fit because everyone with whom Jesus spoke to was alive when Jesus was transfigured. 2,000+ years later don't fit because everyone should be dead to whom he spoke. But, 37-40 years later, some of the Apostles were still alive.

Jesus also used pronouns like "You", not "Them". He was speaking to and about those who were listening.

Hence, eggus can be used in the context described.


1Pe 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

I hear what you are saying regarding 1Pe 4:7. But, I don’t believe this verse disagrees with how “at hand” is used in an immediate sense throughout Scripture. Peter was writing his epistle from Rome, and referred to this city as Babylon (1Pe 5:13). Peter was writing to severely persecuted Christians. Peter wrote believing that the end of life was near, of that he was certain, and with the end of life Peter understood the believers would then be in the Eternal Kingdom. Peter even says that judgment is beginning at the house of God (vs. 17). Peter is telling the saints that in light of the persecution that will most likely take lives we should live as serious, solemn partakers of Christ’s sufferings with joy, calling upon God in prayer for His mercy in Christ for not only ourselves, but especially to all who are suffering for the name of Christ. When Peter writes “the end of all things is at hand” it certainly is to those who through persecution die physically for the name of Christ, which is exactly who Peter is writing to.

1Pe 4:12 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you:
1Pe 4:13 But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.
1Pe 4:14 If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.
1Pe 4:15 But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men's matters.
1Pe 4:16 Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.
1Pe 4:17 For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
1Pe 4:18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?
1Pe 4:19 Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.

The apostles knew Jerusalem would fall because Christ had warned them it would. They also knew there would be great tribulation, but Christ does not limit this tribulation to only Nero, the Roman Army or even the first century church. If Christ were not speaking to all saints throughout time then He didn’t have to include, “whoso readeth, let him understand.”

The fact that John was sharing in the tribulation tells us that persecution to Christians begins not from the Roman Army or Nero, but from the very beginning of the Church in time. We see this truth through the martyrdom of Stephen. How can you limit great tribulation to the Christians living in AD 70, especially since the church is and always has been built on the blood of the saints?

Ac 7:59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.
Ac 7:60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.

Re 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

Re 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

The time that is at hand is the Kingdom. Christ ushered in the Kingdom at the cross and resurrection. Christ is telling John to write these letters to the churches because the Kingdom is at hand. It is in fact a spoken Word away from every elect who is saved through Christ’s work on the cross. “Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.” Those who hear the Word, and are given faith to believe, and come into the Kingdom NOW because there is Power through the Word, Jesus Christ. This is why John is told not to seal up the prophecy, and it is also why Daniel is told to seal up the prophecy. Prophecy could not be understood until Christ literally went to the cross in time, and is literally raised from the grave.

I’ve already made this point in another thread so I’ve copied and pasted it here:

We fail to understand what Christ meant when He tells us the Kingdom is at hand. We often want to push this coming Kingdom into the far future, and view the Kingdom as belonging to the everlasting Kingdom of Heaven after the fullness of time. So we read passages of Scripture like Mt. 16:28 as though Christ is speaking of the Second Coming. But Christ is NOT speaking of His Second Coming in Judgment in this verse. He is saying that there are some standing there, listening to Him who will not die before they see; meaning to understand with the mind, to know, are convinced that the Kingdom has come in power.

Mt*16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Another oft misunderstood verse is Mt. 10:23. Without reading the verse in context it appears to teach the Second Coming in wrath and judgment. In context we read that Christ is sending His disciples unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel, telling them to preach to them that the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Christ warns His disciples that some of them will not receive them, and that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city. Then Christ says, “Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.” If Christ were referring to His Second Coming in wrath and Judgment would He have limited proclaiming the coming of the kingdom of heaven unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel? Doesn’t Christ tell us that the gospel MUST be preached unto all the world before He comes again? When Christ says they will not have gone over all the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come, He is talking about His coming to usher in the kingdom. Christ is speaking about ushering in His Kingdom through the cross, and resurrection. This is what Christ is saying when He tells us the kingdom is at hand. Christ ushered in the era/age/generation of His Kingdom at His birth, and confirmed it at the cross and resurrection.

Mt*10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Mt*10:7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Mt*10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
Mt*10:15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

Mt*10:22 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.
Mt*10:23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

Every time we read in the gospels and Revelation that the Kingdom is at hand it refers to the cross, and resurrection of Christ ushering in the Kingdom era/age/generation. (Mt. 3:2; 4:17: 10:7: 26:18,45,46; Mk 1:15; 14:42; Lu 21:30,31 Re 1:3; 22:10)

Two thousand plus years does not fit the definition for “at hand” or “near” as used in Scripture, neither does 37-40 years later. The only explanation that fits is that when Scripture speaks of this nearness, or something being at hand it can only be speaking of the Kingdom which came with the first advent and will be complete at the Second advent or fullness of time.

RW

possumliving
Apr 29th 2007, 06:56 AM
1Pe 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

I hear what you are saying regarding 1Pe 4:7. But, I don’t believe this verse disagrees with how “at hand” is used in an immediate sense throughout Scripture. Peter was writing his epistle from Rome, and referred to this city as Babylon (1Pe 5:13). Peter was writing to severely persecuted Christians. Peter wrote believing that the end of life was near, of that he was certain, and with the end of life Peter understood the believers would then be in the Eternal Kingdom. Peter even says that judgment is beginning at the house of God (vs. 17). Peter is telling the saints that in light of the persecution that will most likely take lives we should live as serious, solemn partakers of Christ’s sufferings with joy, calling upon God in prayer for His mercy in Christ for not only ourselves, but especially to all who are suffering for the name of Christ. When Peter writes “the end of all things is at hand” it certainly is to those who through persecution die physically for the name of Christ, which is exactly who Peter is writing to.

1Pe 4:12 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you:
1Pe 4:13 But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.
1Pe 4:14 If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.
1Pe 4:15 But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men's matters.
1Pe 4:16 Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.
1Pe 4:17 For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
1Pe 4:18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?
1Pe 4:19 Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.

The apostles knew Jerusalem would fall because Christ had warned them it would. They also knew there would be great tribulation, but Christ does not limit this tribulation to only Nero, the Roman Army or even the first century church. If Christ were not speaking to all saints throughout time then He didn’t have to include, “whoso readeth, let him understand.”

The fact that John was sharing in the tribulation tells us that persecution to Christians begins not from the Roman Army or Nero, but from the very beginning of the Church in time. We see this truth through the martyrdom of Stephen. How can you limit great tribulation to the Christians living in AD 70, especially since the church is and always has been built on the blood of the saints?

Ac 7:59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.
Ac 7:60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.

Re 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

Re 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

The time that is at hand is the Kingdom. Christ ushered in the Kingdom at the cross and resurrection. Christ is telling John to write these letters to the churches because the Kingdom is at hand. It is in fact a spoken Word away from every elect who is saved through Christ’s work on the cross. “Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.” Those who hear the Word, and are given faith to believe, and come into the Kingdom NOW because there is Power through the Word, Jesus Christ. This is why John is told not to seal up the prophecy, and it is also why Daniel is told to seal up the prophecy. Prophecy could not be understood until Christ literally went to the cross in time, and is literally raised from the grave.

I’ve already made this point in another thread so I’ve copied and pasted it here:

We fail to understand what Christ meant when He tells us the Kingdom is at hand. We often want to push this coming Kingdom into the far future, and view the Kingdom as belonging to the everlasting Kingdom of Heaven after the fullness of time. So we read passages of Scripture like Mt. 16:28 as though Christ is speaking of the Second Coming. But Christ is NOT speaking of His Second Coming in Judgment in this verse. He is saying that there are some standing there, listening to Him who will not die before they see; meaning to understand with the mind, to know, are convinced that the Kingdom has come in power.

Mt*16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Another oft misunderstood verse is Mt. 10:23. Without reading the verse in context it appears to teach the Second Coming in wrath and judgment. In context we read that Christ is sending His disciples unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel, telling them to preach to them that the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Christ warns His disciples that some of them will not receive them, and that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city. Then Christ says, “Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.” If Christ were referring to His Second Coming in wrath and Judgment would He have limited proclaiming the coming of the kingdom of heaven unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel? Doesn’t Christ tell us that the gospel MUST be preached unto all the world before He comes again? When Christ says they will not have gone over all the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come, He is talking about His coming to usher in the kingdom. Christ is speaking about ushering in His Kingdom through the cross, and resurrection. This is what Christ is saying when He tells us the kingdom is at hand. Christ ushered in the era/age/generation of His Kingdom at His birth, and confirmed it at the cross and resurrection.

Mt*10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Mt*10:7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Mt*10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
Mt*10:15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

Mt*10:22 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.
Mt*10:23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

Every time we read in the gospels and Revelation that the Kingdom is at hand it refers to the cross, and resurrection of Christ ushering in the Kingdom era/age/generation. (Mt. 3:2; 4:17: 10:7: 26:18,45,46; Mk 1:15; 14:42; Lu 21:30,31 Re 1:3; 22:10)

Two thousand plus years does not fit the definition for “at hand” or “near” as used in Scripture, neither does 37-40 years later. The only explanation that fits is that when Scripture speaks of this nearness, or something being at hand it can only be speaking of the Kingdom which came with the first advent and will be complete at the Second advent or fullness of time.

RW
Thank you!

Steph

StrongVibe
Apr 29th 2007, 03:16 PM
what is the difference between the last days and Armageddon? Will Armageddon occur in the last days then God will come?

RogerW
Apr 29th 2007, 06:21 PM
Thank you!

Steph

You're welcome!

RW

Yodas_Prodigy
Apr 30th 2007, 05:46 PM
Hello Roger,

I am planning a response. Just need to find time :)

Yodas_Prodigy
Apr 30th 2007, 05:48 PM
Bump for possumliving,

Since you brought up the Thessalonian scripture, I'll ask you the following:

If the coming of Christ was to be as you view it, why would they send Paul a letter? Wouldn't they know that Paul would have been raptured (again, based on your belief system).

possumliving
May 1st 2007, 01:18 AM
Bump for possumliving,

Since you brought up the Thessalonian scripture, I'll ask you the following:

If the coming of Christ was to be as you view it, why would they send Paul a letter? Wouldn't they know that Paul would have been raptured (again, based on your belief system).
I don't normally respond to people who have shown themselves to be arrogant because they aren't looking for a discussion but an argument.

But to answer your question, If the coming of Christ IS to be as I view it, and as the Bible plainly states that it is, they didn't believe or teach the rapture theory so why in the world would they even think that there had been one?

Secondly, I imagine back then, just as there are today, there are those that would contact Paul and say, "Hey dude! I serve in the church at Thessalinica and you are not going to believe what those bozos have cooked up now! They are trying to tell these poor baby Christians that they've already missed the return of our Lord!

So brother, could you please write a letter and go over that doctrine once more? I'm afraid that many are being lead astray and a lot of them are distrubed."

Sheep are gullible, ignorant, easily preyed upon critters. They still are. That's why when i hear people come into forums that promote many of the doctrines going around today it makes me want to puke.

The Lord told Peter to feed His sheep. Our shepherds have obviously quite feeding the sheep and are only feeding themselves. They aren't bandaging up the wounds either. What a pity for themselves and the sheep!

But I did catch how you phrased that question, "If the coming of Christ was to be as you view it", as if since Christ failed to return according to your interpretation He must not be fulfilling His Word?

There is a huge move on to discredit Scripture and I find that those with your view do much to encourage it. All it takes for those that don't know the Word is a little doubt argued with false reasoning.

Steph

Yodas_Prodigy
May 1st 2007, 02:09 PM
I don't normally respond to people who have shown themselves to be arrogant because they aren't looking for a discussion but an argument.


Asking questions is a form of iron sharpening iron. I ask these questions because I am a recent convert to the position that I am espousing. If I am wrong, I am willing to change.

So, please don't jump to calling someone arrogant unless you have walked in their shoes.

Yodas_Prodigy
May 1st 2007, 02:18 PM
But I did catch how you phrased that question, "If the coming of Christ was to be as you view it", as if since Christ failed to return according to your interpretation He must not be fulfilling His Word?

There is a huge move on to discredit Scripture and I find that those with your view do much to encourage it. All it takes for those that don't know the Word is a little doubt argued with false reasoning.

Steph

There you go now, lumping me in with those who want to discredit scripture. For someone calling me arrogant earlier, now you are accusing me of not believing the Bible.

Tell me, since you are probably a Pre-Mil Dispensationalist, which Rapture view is correct, Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, Pre-Wrath, Partial Rapture or Post-Trib? You guys can't even agree on the timing of Christ's return.

The views that I am leaning towards are held by people like A.A. Hodge, Charles Hodge, Louis Berkhof, and John Calvin to name a few. Do you want to accuse them of discrediting the Bible too?

quiet dove
May 1st 2007, 05:11 PM
You guys are having a good discussion but personal jabs will push any productive conversation right out the window. :hmm: Since the Bible says to love your enemies surely it also teaches to not insult fellow believers, we should edify each other not insult and tear down, irreguardless of our different understandings and view points, we are all being taught by God and learning
QD:)

Realist1981
May 1st 2007, 07:13 PM
this is a first now when i play xbox 360 im literlilly connected to the world you play video games with kids from around the world. its funny now when i play the 360 i can talk to kids from all over the world ive played with kids from japan the uk china and even south korea and this just started to happen because of the new systems like xbox 360. this to me is a sign that the world is ending because i can talk to kids from japan south korean and the uk all at the sametime when im playing a video game.

the biggest sign that i have seen is the North star likes to move has anyone else seen this

what do you mean by that? I havent noticed it but then again I dont pay too much attention to detail in the skies.

third hero
May 1st 2007, 09:36 PM
Yoda's prodigy, you implied that at the time of 70AD, or the time when Jerusalem was destroyed, that Christ had returned then, gathered the righteous, and delivered judgment against the wicked. Is this your position? There, I jumpstarted the discussion without the "insulting language".

possumliving
May 2nd 2007, 07:06 AM
So, you are saying in effect, by your interpretation of Scripture that we have missed the return of Christ?

Your Response:

You posed your question incorrectly. You should have asked, "Yoda, how do you view Christ's return?" You see, you have read your presuppositions in to the text and then in to your question.

And yes, I do view it as arrogance to think that by telling someone that they posed their question incorrectly is a handy way of avoiding answering the question.

Like I stated earlier, most people who show themselves to be arrogant aren't in it for the discussion but are wanting an arguement.

And throwing out a bunch of labels at me to try and get me to buy into it isn't going to work either. Since you obviously have no idea what I believe and aren't really interested.

I've had my fill of arrogance, hippocracy, ect. ect for the year already.

possumliving
May 2nd 2007, 07:09 AM
There you go now, lumping me in with those who want to discredit scripture. For someone calling me arrogant earlier, now you are accusing me of not believing the Bible.

Tell me, since you are probably a Pre-Mil Dispensationalist, which Rapture view is correct, Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, Pre-Wrath, Partial Rapture or Post-Trib? You guys can't even agree on the timing of Christ's return.

The views that I am leaning towards are held by people like A.A. Hodge, Charles Hodge, Louis Berkhof, and John Calvin to name a few. Do you want to accuse them of discrediting the Bible too?
Yoda, you have every right to ask a question, but please don't put words into my mouth or into my responses that I didn't state.

StrongVibe
May 2nd 2007, 10:36 PM
what is the difference between the last days and Armageddon? Will Armageddon occur in the last days then God will come?

David Taylor
May 3rd 2007, 03:43 PM
You guys are having a good discussion but personal jabs will push any productive conversation right out the window. :hmm: Since the Bible says to love your enemies surely it also teaches to not insult fellow believers, we should edify each other not insult and tear down, irreguardless of our different understandings and view points, we are all being taught by God and learning
QD:)

Good advice QD....unfortunately, it seems noone that needed to listen, was listening...because the bickery and jabs just kept coming after you posted this.

Let's try another approach......

The Op doesn't seem to be interested in the original intent of this post anyway, and hasn't replied back to it since posting it (or PMs about updating their userCP question) so....
This thread is now put to sleep. :sleeping: