Page 22 of 22 FirstFirst ... 111213141516171819202122
Results 316 to 320 of 320

Thread: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

  1. #316
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,540
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    I concur that in some contexts, the sea represents the peoples of the earth or kingdoms of the earth. However, speaking of "context" it makes no sense to claim that the *sea* in Rev 20:13 is anything but literal.

    Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

    If the sea above denotes the place of the deadaccording to you, why did the same verse say that "death and hell delivered up those in them? You know, it's OK to concede sometimes that you're wrong rather than employ your literary skill to convince the gullible that a bad interpretation is true.
    The sea gave up the dead which were in it shows that the sea was A place of the dead. death and hell also delivered up the dead denoting them as also places of the dead.
    IOW there are THREE places denoted as the place of the dead. The sea is a PHYSICAL location where people died in storms etc and so are not put in holes in the ground, so it is used for the dead as a stand in. Hades is the Greek, and Sheol the Hebrew, and Saxon is hell, which all mean a hole in the ground, which is a PHYSICAL location, but used to mean the place where the dead go. Death is then mentioned for anyone who dies in unknown ways, perhaps burnt to death etc.
    So I am not sure what I am expected to say I am wrong about.
    It is very clear in Rev 20:13 the sea is not a literal place anymore than death is a literal place or hades is a literal place.

    It may well be the dead sea or it may not be - it's speculative. But what cannot be refuted is that the sea in Rev 20:13 is literal and it's no more in Rev 21:1. As I pointed out, there's no way you can logically make the sea of v-13 people or places of the earth when death and hell are also mentioned in the same context as delivering the dead in them.
    Not really speculative as it flows east from Jerusalem, and places are stated which are around the Dead Sea.
    The sea in Rev 20:13 is very clearly NOT literal, and some sort of sea is no more in Rev 21:1.
    However as Rev 21:1 refers to the time when Jesus returns as this is when the NJ comes down out of heaven (a chronology problem you still have) then clearly there is a sea (multiples of them) during the time of the MK and the NJ.

  2. #317
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    7,149
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by ForHisglory View Post
    The sea gave up the dead which were in it shows that the sea was A place of the dead. death and hell also delivered up the dead denoting them as also places of the dead.
    IOW there are THREE places denoted as the place of the dead. The sea is a PHYSICAL location where people died in storms etc and so are not put in holes in the ground, so it is used for the dead as a stand in. Hades is the Greek, and Sheol the Hebrew, and Saxon is hell, which all mean a hole in the ground, which is a PHYSICAL location, but used to mean the place where the dead go. Death is then mentioned for anyone who dies in unknown ways, perhaps burnt to death etc.
    So I am not sure what I am expected to say I am wrong about.
    It is very clear in Rev 20:13 the sea is not a literal place anymore than death is a literal place or hades is a literal place.
    You have just confirmed that the sea cited in Rev 20:13 refers to those that died in the waters, although you called it "A place of the dead". You may deny as much as you like, but no one but you believes that the sea in v-13 is not the physical sea. And the likes of those held by the sea include Osama bin Laden, etc.

    Not really speculative as it flows east from Jerusalem, and places are stated which are around the Dead Sea.
    The sea in Rev 20:13 is very clearly NOT literal, and some sort of sea is no more in Rev 21:1.
    However as Rev 21:1 refers to the time when Jesus returns as this is when the NJ comes down out of heaven (a chronology problem you still have) then clearly there is a sea (multiples of them) during the time of the MK and the NJ.
    Obviously, you have a problem keeping in touch with what I'm saying. I have been consistent that the sea will remain throughout the MK but will cease to exist after the NHNE comes into effect after the MK is over.

  3. #318
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,540
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    You have just confirmed that the sea cited in Rev 20:13 refers to those that died in the waters, although you called it "A place of the dead". You may deny as much as you like, but no one but you believes that the sea in v-13 is not the physical sea. And the likes of those held by the sea include Osama bin Laden, etc.
    It is a place of the dead, just as Hades is a place of the dead, and just as Death is a place of the dead. We KNWO this without a single DOUBT because this is where the dead souls are coming from.
    It is ASSOCIATED with the PHYSICAL location, just as Hades is ASSOCIATED with the earth ( a hole in the ground).
    Yet NOBODY thinks Hades is LITERALLY the PHYSICAL earth
    So IF you hold that the sea in Rev 20:13 is the LITERAL sea must also think Hades is the LITERAL earth, and that therefore the literal earth is cast into the LoF.

    Obviously, you have a problem keeping in touch with what I'm saying. I have been consistent that the sea will remain throughout the MK but will cease to exist after the NHNE comes into effect after the MK is over.
    I have kept in touch with your claim, but the point is that he River in Ezekiel 47 is the SAME river as in Rev 22, just as their is ONLY ONE NHNE.
    You do mental gymnastics ignoring that Rev 21:2 follows Rev 21:1, and others do the same with Isaiah 65 and 66.
    The simple and clear meaning is that the NJ comes down into the NHNE. It is the START of the one following the START of the other. The NHNE starts and God brings the NJ down into it, as His base of operations, to renew and restore the devastated earth.

  4. #319
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    7,149
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by ForHisglory View Post
    It is a place of the dead, just as Hades is a place of the dead, and just as Death is a place of the dead. We KNWO this without a single DOUBT because this is where the dead souls are coming from.
    It is ASSOCIATED with the PHYSICAL location, just as Hades is ASSOCIATED with the earth ( a hole in the ground).
    Yet NOBODY thinks Hades is LITERALLY the PHYSICAL earth
    So IF you hold that the sea in Rev 20:13 is the LITERAL sea must also think Hades is the LITERAL earth, and that therefore the literal earth is cast into the LoF.
    Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

    1. The Sea [physical] is a place of the dead. No argument here. However, does it negate its physical characteristic? I don't think so!
    2. Notice that "hell" in the text refers to the grave, ie, a physical hole in the ground.
    3. Since no dead rests in the air - the only places they are held are (1) in the ground/hell (2) the water/sea.

    Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

    To ensure there's no ambiguity that "hell" in v-13 denote the physical grave, *hell* in v-14 answers your question. IOW, v-14 denotes 'hell' in a spiritual/figurative sense thereby establishing a clear contrast in meaning contextually in its uses in verses 13 and 14. If you still disagree and without giving me the recapitulation b**s, how do you explain the use of 'hell' in differing contexts in these verses? Do you still believe they have the same meaning?

    You can deny scripture as much as you please - it won't change the TRUTH.

    I have kept in touch with your claim, but the point is that he River in Ezekiel 47 is the SAME river as in Rev 22, just as their is ONLY ONE NHNE.
    You do mental gymnastics ignoring that Rev 21:2 follows Rev 21:1, and others do the same with Isaiah 65 and 66.
    The simple and clear meaning is that the NJ comes down into the NHNE. It is the START of the one following the START of the other. The NHNE starts and God brings the NJ down into it, as His base of operations, to renew and restore the devastated earth.
    I see the NHNE as the replacement of the burnt up and varnished old one. Secondly, the NHNE doesn't 'grow' to cover the earth as you have maintained. We must agree to disagree on this one.

  5. #320
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,517

    Re: Is the temple in Rev 11:1-2 literal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

    1. The Sea [physical] is a place of the dead. No argument here. However, does it negate its physical characteristic? I don't think so!
    2. Notice that "hell" in the text refers to the grave, ie, a physical hole in the ground.
    3. Since no dead rests in the air - the only places they are held are (1) in the ground/hell (2) the water/sea.

    Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

    To ensure there's no ambiguity that "hell" in v-13 denote the physical grave, *hell* in v-14 answers your question. IOW, v-14 denotes 'hell' in a spiritual/figurative sense thereby establishing a clear contrast in meaning contextually in its uses in verses 13 and 14. If you still disagree and without giving me the recapitulation b**s, how do you explain the use of 'hell' in differing contexts in these verses? Do you still believe they have the same meaning?

    You can deny scripture as much as you please - it won't change the TRUTH.



    I see the NHNE as the replacement of the burnt up and varnished old one. Secondly, the NHNE doesn't 'grow' to cover the earth as you have maintained. We must agree to disagree on this one.


    Exactly.

    John doesn't present a NE that takes a thousand years to fill, outgrowing from Jerusalem around the globe.

    John tells us that when the last trumpet sounds, it is 'the time of the dead' that they are judged and rewarded; and it is the time the entire world and all kingdoms become Christ's Kingdom.

    Revelation 10-11 "there should be time no longer: But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets. And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth."

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. How literal are you?
    By DavidC in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: Aug 1st 2017, 09:00 PM
  2. A literal temple of God?
    By The Lion and his lamb in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: Apr 14th 2015, 06:32 PM
  3. Replies: 143
    Last Post: Jul 6th 2010, 07:46 PM
  4. how literal....
    By ilovemetal in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Aug 1st 2009, 05:37 PM
  5. Discussion A Literal Temple?
    By ZAB in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 125
    Last Post: May 26th 2009, 11:18 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
  •