Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode_alt.php on line 1270

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode_alt.php on line 1270

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode_alt.php on line 1270

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode_alt.php on line 1270

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode_alt.php on line 1270

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode_alt.php on line 1270
BibleForums Christian Message Board - End Times Chat https://bibleforums.org/ Biblical Prophecy, End Time events in News, Middle East, Terrorism, wars and rumors of wars ... 1THESS 5:2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. en Sat, 19 Jan 2019 23:04:48 GMT vBulletin 60 https://bibleforums.org/images/misc/rss.png BibleForums Christian Message Board - End Times Chat https://bibleforums.org/ states or kings? https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276434-states-or-kings?goto=newpost Sat, 19 Jan 2019 19:27:06 GMT
In Dan 7 and in the book of Revelation we read of endtime "kings." In our time we've noticed, since the Magna Carta, limitations placed upon kings, ultimately resulting in democratic revolutions and democratic states.

However, the French Revolution led back to a kind of king--the dictator, who supposedly better served the masses. Instead of the king ruling alongside the nobility, he became more allied with the people as a political base. The Communist Revolution led to a single-party State, led by a kind of dictatorial party. Hitler became a kind of "king" with his Fascist overthrow of German government.

Today, we see a new kind of elitist movement, seemingly heading back to a "king" once again in the form of socialism. Again, it is a new push for a strong central government which acts on behalf of the people, as opposed to more democratic forms of government. It is, once again, a push by the central government, including both the executive and the nobility, to act on behalf of the people, rather than being controlled by democratic principles.

Here, in the U.S., we see a combination of the Democratic Party, the Left-Wing Media, and the Entertainment industry, as well as wealthy capitalists benefiting from this coalition, using propaganda to manipulate the people into giving them their rights and democratic control. I think this is already largely true in Europe.

My question is: Do you think this return to stronger central government, in the US and Europe, is a return to "kings" in the sense of one party systems and dictators? Do you think this is what Bible Prophecy had in mind when it referred to "10 kings" ruling alongside Antichrist?
End Times Chat randyk https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276434-states-or-kings
holy ground in the NT? https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276427-holy-ground-in-the-NT?goto=newpost Fri, 18 Jan 2019 23:45:02 GMT
The following is an email I sent to my brother, as we continue to discuss what "holy place" refers to in the Olivet Discourse. The "abomination of desolation" will "stand in the holy place." This is a sign the Disciples of Jesus were supposed to "see" and recognize it as somehow connected to the destruction of the temple, or the end of Jewish religion. This is just my musings on the subject for your consideration...

Jer 31.38-40 seems to indicate that Jerusalem, as a city, is holy territory. And that is not new, since Jerusalem has long been considered the "holy city." Isaiah, Daniel, Nehemiah, Matthew, and John referred to Jerusalem as the "holy city."

The extension of "holy place" from the temple to the city of Jerusalem appears to be an extended application of holy ground to holy people. The land in proximity to God's presence is holy, such as the Holy Place next to the Most Holy Place, or Moses' standing on holy ground next to the burning bush. And the people in Jerusalem, in proximity to the temple, are holy, being in the immediate vicinity of God's house, and benefiting from His priesthood.

Specifically, under the Law, the people of Jerusalem were made holy due to the priests being themselves made holy by the anointing oil, enabling their service on behalf of Israel, to render both themselves and the people who lived in God's immediate presence to be made holy. The purpose of the priestly service, after all, was to enable the people to come into immediate contact with the glory of God, causing them to be made holy. And those, among the common people, who lived in Jerusalem, lived in the presence of God's glory in the temple, enabling them to be considered holy, along with the priests.

Interestingly, I think it was author Gordon Lindsay who pointed out that [in Bible Prophecy] the larger dimensions of the city of Jerusalem better fit *today's Jerusalem* than the one that followed the Persian restoration or the time of Jesus! I don't know, however, whether Lindsay was pointing to Zech 14.10-11 or to Jer 31.38-40? They both represent expansion of the original territory of Jerusalem, expanding the area considered "holy."

As I said, in Zech 14, we have an extended application of what is made "holy"...
21 Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the Lord Almighty, and all who come to sacrifice will take some of the pots and cook in them.

It does appear, in Bible Prophecy, that the goal of making the Jewish People holy will somehow be achieved. It was initially made possible, legally, by Christ's priestly work in offering himself as a sacrifice to God. But this only made a small portion of Israel holy, namely, the Christian remnant of Israel.

But prophecy seems to indicate that the wicked in Israel will be removed, and the believing remnant turned into a fully consecrated nation, once again. At that time, the OT sacrificial system will no longer be required as a medium for transmitting holiness from God to the People. Instead, Christ's administration of his sacrifice will enable a whole nation to be declared holy, simply by their verbal commitment to God as a nation.

But what happened in the 70 AD event is different inasmuch as only a remnant of believers were created at that time. At that time, the "holy place" would've still been Jerusalem and the temple, although their priestly services would no longer have been needed nor recognized. Instead, the unbelieving majority would've been viewed as "devoted to destruction" by their failure to live under the administration of Christ's priestly services.

Thus, they were violators of God's "holy ground," requiring God to call in an unholy pagan army as "abominable desolators" of God's holy city. God's holiness had already been distributed outwards from Jerusalem among the people, and the Roman army took their stand among them, defiling God's holy people and the land from which Christ's ministry was launched.

At worst, it may be an interesting way of looking at it?
End Times Chat randyk https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276427-holy-ground-in-the-NT
<![CDATA[Is Ezekiel's vision the woman in Rev 12 being nourished in the wilderness]]> https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276413-Is-Ezekiel-s-vision-the-woman-in-Rev-12-being-nourished-in-the-wilderness?goto=newpost Wed, 16 Jan 2019 17:43:16 GMT Thoughts............I will reply. Thanks. Thoughts............I will reply. Thanks. ]]> End Times Chat ross3421 https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276413-Is-Ezekiel-s-vision-the-woman-in-Rev-12-being-nourished-in-the-wilderness Need Advice: What is the Dispensational Interpretation of Daniel’s Stone Kingdom? https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276393-What-is-the-Dispensational-Interpretation-of-Daniel’s-Stone-Kingdom?goto=newpost Mon, 14 Jan 2019 03:40:02 GMT I would like to understand the following vision from the viewpoint of the Dispensational system of prophecy. *What is the stone kingdom,* and when did it arrive? Does it begin at John the Baptist’s announcement (Matt. 3:1-2) and reach its ultimate... I would like to understand the following vision from the viewpoint of the Dispensational system of prophecy. What is the stone kingdom, and when did it arrive? Does it begin at John the Baptist’s announcement (Matt. 3:1-2) and reach its ultimate expression at Christ’s second coming? Or, has it been deferred until the Millennial reign?

“You saw, O king, and behold, a great image. This image, mighty and of exceeding brightness, stood before you, and its appearance was frightening. The head of this image was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its middle and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. As you looked, a stone was cut out by no human hand, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold, all together were broken in pieces, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that not a trace of them could be found. But the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth.”

“This was the dream. Now we will tell the king its interpretation … in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall the kingdom be left to another people. It shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever.”

(Daniel 2:31—36, 44)

Cyber ]]>
End Times Chat Cyberseeker https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276393-What-is-the-Dispensational-Interpretation-of-Daniel’s-Stone-Kingdom
Have you understood all this? https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276379-Have-you-understood-all-this?goto=newpost Sat, 12 Jan 2019 06:49:52 GMT After explaining to His disciples the parables of the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus asked them; Have you understood all this? Matthew 13:51 and they answered – Yes. It was a simple sounding question, but actually He was asking the most profound... After explaining to His disciples the parables of the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus asked them; Have you understood all this? Matthew 13:51 and they answered – Yes.
It was a simple sounding question, but actually He was asking the most profound question of the ages.. Jesus was asking if they knew that, in Gods eyes there are two and only two – classes of people in the world: Those that accept God and His Laws:
wheat, buried treasure, pearls and good fish - and the children of Satan: tares, weeds and worthless fish.

Matthew 13:37-42... He replied; The sower of the good seed is the Son of Man.
The field is the world, the good seed stands for the children of the Kingdom and the weeds, the children of the evil one.
The enemy who sowed the weeds is the devil The harvest is the end of time and the reapers are angels.
As the weeds are gathered up and burnt at the end of the age, the Son of Man will rid His Kingdom of every cause of sin and all whose deeds are evil. These will be thrown into the blazing furnace, where there will be much wailing and sorrow.

Matthew 13:43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the Kingdom of their Father If you have ears, then hear.

Just a speculation – but Jesus gave four parables about who will and who will not inherit the Kingdom;
1/ The wheat and the weeds – Messianic Jews and apostate Jews, the House of Judah.
2/ The buried treasure – The born again Christians who are also the House of Israel, hidden among the nations.
3/ A pearl of great value – A person who dedicates their life to the Lord.
4/ The good and worthless fish – Gentile peoples, believers and unbelievers.

Luke 6:20 Blessed are you who are in need; the Kingdom of God is yours.
Reference, Revised English Bible.

“There are two kinds of people – those who say to God: Thy will be done, and those to whom God says: “all right, then, have it your way” C.S. Lewis ]]>
End Times Chat Keraz https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276379-Have-you-understood-all-this
An historicist view of the Olivet Discourse. https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276368-An-historicist-view-of-the-Olivet-Discourse?goto=newpost Wed, 09 Jan 2019 01:44:54 GMT There are a number of views of the Olivet Discourse, including Historicist, the Preterist, and the Futurist. The Historicist interpreter sees biblical prophecies as being already fulfilled. For example, if you believe Jesus, at his 1st Coming,... There are a number of views of the Olivet Discourse, including Historicist, the Preterist, and the Futurist. The Historicist interpreter sees biblical prophecies as being already fulfilled. For example, if you believe Jesus, at his 1st Coming, fulfilled biblical prophecy, then you've indulged in an historicist interpretation.

Others believe in Futurist interpretations. If you believe that Jesus is Coming Again a 2nd time then you've indulged in futurist interpretation.

The Preterist is, in my opinion, too unorthodox, because he believes that most all of biblical prophecy has already been fulfilled, and very little future prophecy remains to be fulfilled. Most people have a combination of historicist and futurist interpretations. For example, most Christians believe that biblical prophecy was fulfilled in Jesus' 1st Coming, and will also be fulfilled in Jesus' 2nd Coming. Much less do people believe that virtually all biblical prophecy was fulfilled in the past.

I believe in a combination of both historicist and futurist interpretations, but I want to focus in particular upon the Olivet Discourse, where these various interpretive systems really have a conflict. I would argue that most of the Early Church Fathers believed that the Olivet Discourse focused primarily on the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD as a sign of God's rejection of Jewish worship. The temple was completely destroyed.

Luke 21.5 Some of his disciples were remarking about how the temple was adorned with beautiful stones and with gifts dedicated to God. But Jesus said, 6 “As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down.”
7 “Teacher,” they asked, “when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?”.....
20 “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 24 They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.....
32 “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."

Jesus began the Discourse at the temple, where he declared straight out that the temple would be destroyed, stone by stone. And when asked *when* this event would take place he explained it would take place in his own generation. And so, the Church Fathers largely saw in the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem an historicist fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy.

However, a couple of Church Fathers, Irenaeus and his disciple Hippolytus, saw in this same Discourse a prophecy of the coming Antichrist. This was the futurist interpretation. Although Antichrist himself is not named in Jesus' Olivet Discourse, Irenaeus assumed that this was talking about Antichrist, because he saw in the term "Abomination of Desolation" a picture of the Antichrist. (see Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.25.1-5)

Since Irenaeus was a notable futurist interpreter of the Olivet Discourse, let's examine why he inserted Antichrist into this discussion. Let me just say that he saw in the term "Abomination of Desolation" the Antichrist because he saw a relationship between 2 Thessalonians 2 and Matthew 24. As the Abomination "stands in the Holy Place,"the Antichrist "sits in the temple of God." These two passages sound alike, but are not necessarily the same thing. However, Irenaeus thought so.

Matthew 24.15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains."
2 Thess 2.4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

The Preterists, by contrast, see the Abomination of Desolation as historically fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. But they go much farther and refuse to accept a future Beast and and a future Antichrist, which is portrayed in the book of Revelation. These are portrayed as taking place in the last 3.5 years of the age in Revelation 13.

They believe the Beast was fulfilled in the ancient Roman Empire. And they believe that the Antichrist was fulfilled in either Nero or in some other ruler in ancient history. Since Preterism was introduced by Alcasar in the early 17th century, it is not really an interpretation with a great depth of historical validation.

As I said, most of the Church Fathers seemed to favor the historicist position, which I also take. And even the Preterists take some of this position. But the historicist position does not mean that there are no futurist elements in the Olivet Discourse. It only means that they see the primary focus of the Discourse, with respect to the Abomination of Desolation, to be the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Other elements in the Discourse remain future, such as the preaching of the gospel to all nations and the dispersion of the Jews into all nations. And of course, Christ comes the 2nd time to defeat the Antichrist.

So let's take a look at how the Abomination of Desolation should be viewed, from an historicist perspective. 1st, the Abomination of Desolation contains the word "desolation," which corresponds to Jesus' description of the temple's desolation. Furthermore, since Jesus said this would take place in his own generation, this "desolation" could only have been the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

Secondly, Luke in ch. 21 explicitly declares that Jerusalem, in the process of being destroyed, would be encircled by armies. This is said in the same place in the Discourse where the other versions describe the Abomination of Desolation. Thus, the Abomination of Desolation is the encirclement of Jerusalem by armies.

Matthew and Mark latched onto Jesus' words, the "Abomination of Deesolation," while Luke latched onto Jesus' description of the "encirclement of Jerusalem by armies." Jesus' actual discourse was likely much longer than we have recorded, and Jesus likely referred to both the Abomination of Desolation and the encirclement of Jerusalem by armies. But since the Abomination of Desolation and the encirclement of Jerusalem by armies take place in the exact same place in the Discourse, they likely referred to the same event.

Thirdly, historicists would see a connection between the destruction of Jerusalem Jesus described and Daniel's description, in ch. 9, of the same. In Daniel 9 is the famous 70 Weeks Prophecy, which is fulfilled with the cutting off of Christ, and with the destruction of "the city and the sanctuary. And later he described it as the "Abomination of Desolation."

However, there are several references to an Abomination of Desolation in Daniel. Some of these references seem to apply to Antiochus 4 of the 2nd century AD. Only one of these references refers to the destruction of Jerusalem in the time of Christ, and that is in Dan 9.

And so, the Olivet Discourse appears to be Jesus' version of the 70 Weeks Prophecy in Daniel 9, identifying the Abomination of Desolation as the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. It is at that time, when Jerusalem is defeated by the Romans, that the period of great tribulation begins for the Jewish People, ending with the fulfillment of the "times of the Gentiles" at the end of the age. In the meantime, believers among the Jews initially, and later Christians from all nations, suffer in this tribulation, as they await the end of their gospel mission.

There is concern about how the Abomination of Desolation can "stand in the holy place," and many have disagreed on exactly what the "abomination" is, and where it "stands?" I personally believe it is self-explanatory in Luke's version, and in Daniel 9 itself. It is the armies of Rome who stand against Jerusalem and the temple, encircling Jerusalem and laying siege against it, that identifies them as an "abomination" standing on the "holy outskirts" of Jerusalem.

Some see the "Holy Place" here as the temple itself. But the armies initially surrounded Jerusalem in 66 AD, and withdrew, giving time for Christians to flee from the city and from the countryside. The actual destruction of the city took place later in 70 AD when a 2nd Army arrived in Jerusalem to destroy the city and the sanctuary.

I see no need, however, to believe the "holy place" refers to the temple, even though that is the most common use of the term "holy place." Rather, an area adjacent to God's dwelling place can be viewed itself as a "holy place," and not strictly the area where God Himself sits.

For example, the Holy Place inside the temple was adjacent to God's dwelling in the Holy of Holies. The courtyard of the priests was considered a "holy place" because it was adjacent to the temple. And Jerusalem itself is considered the "holy city" because it is the city surrounding the temple courtyard and the temple itself.

So I would ask, why wouldn't the area around Jerusalem be considered holy if it is adjacent to the holy city? In fact these armies are described by Jesus as "standing in the holy place" when they lay siege to Jerusalem. So it must be that the holy place is the territory in the vicinity of Jerusalem from which an army can attack. ]]>
End Times Chat randyk https://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/276368-An-historicist-view-of-the-Olivet-Discourse