In Revelation 16: 14 it say "For they are the spirits of Devils which go forth to the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the great day of God Almighty."

Now at this time the final beast is set up and people have the mark of the beast. Now everyone says that the antichrist will be a world ruler of a united world. How is this possible if it says clearly above that there will be other kings other than that Antichrist? There still must be seperate countries that have there own kings.

What makes people think that the Antichrist will be a man? when it plainly talks about the number of the beast?

The number of the beast is the numbre of an empire, like rome, for example. Beast's are world powers. Everyone knows that. Maybe were misinterpreting the scripture?

I thought the Antichrist would at least have to face the Army of the East (the Chinese)? I mean, since there is a battle, there must be more than ONE faction...

You speak as though the bible was writen in america. haha...the army of the east would be the US or Europe or both.

It says in Daniel that the two horned goat are the two kings of media and persia. Now a ragged goat from the east with the horn between his eyes runs at the two horned goat over land and sea and hits that poor goat with so much force it breaks the two hornes right off!

now the ragged goat from the what the bible says "Grecia". Grecia is "Greece" in spanish. Now if it be Greece, there may be a return of old Greece once again or a new world order that is centered around Greece where the antichrist is Ceasor.

What saith the Scriptures? What is the CONTEXT of verses being used? What does the first verse of Revelation say? "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants--things which must SHORTLY TAKE PLACE!" If they were to take place SHORTLY in John's day, how could they apply to us?

Notice also verse 3--"Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is NEAR!" If the time was NEAR in John's day, how could it be NEAR to us?

Furthermore, there is NO mention of an "antichrist" in the Revelation. This term is used only in John's epistles. What was the time frame? John clearly said "It is the LAST hour; and as YOU [those to whom John was THEN writing] have heard that antichrist is coming, even NOW [in John's day] many antichrists have come, by which WE [John and his contemporaries] know that it is the LAST hour" (1 John 2:18). These 'antichrists" are further identified as those who "went out from US [John and his contemporaries], but they were not of US . . . ." (1 John 2:19).

Who is antichrist? He "is a liar . . . who denies that Jesus is the Christ. He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son." CONTEXT is key. The LAST hour refers to the same time frame John is given in the Revelation--the things which must SHORTLY take place" and the "time is NEAR."

Why is everything about us? Antichrist was of John's day NOT ours!

What do you make of this? "And this is the spirit of antichrist [every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh] which YOU [John's contemporaries] have heard was coming, and is NOW already in the world!" (1 John 4:3).

Note also John's second epistle--"For many deceivers HAVE GONE [in John's day!] out into the world who do not confess JESUS AS COMING IN THE FLESH. This is a deceiver and AN ANTICHRIST!" (2 John 7).

While there are still those today who deny Christ came in the flesh and deceive many, as there have been throughout history, there is no personage known as an ANTICHRIST who is to come!

Again, John clearly gave us the time frame for these things if we will but look. In his day, it was the LAST hour! In his day the time was NEAR! In his day those things were to take place SHORTLY!

Preterist

Rev 13:And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. 18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.


Clearly you are mistaken. It clearly states that the number is the number of a man, not the number of an empire.

yes, but some texts say "for it is the number of man" not "A man". I heard that when the it was transferred over into greek it was misunderstood.

But yeah, besides that i totally understand now, i don't know what i was thinking.

No worries Jason, At least you can be corrected. A rare trait these days.

I try to avoid allegations of translation error which are made by modern translations against the KJV. I have never found one of these to be correct upon investigation. The KJV us utterly reliable; and if it is not then we have no utterly reliable English Bible at all.

There are also other descriptions of the antiChrist in Daniel.
Daniel 8:23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up 24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy [7] people. 25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace [8] shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

For an excellent article on the antichrist, or should I say book, you can't go past Arthur Pinks "The Antichrist"
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Pink/antichrist01.htm

I don't agree with everything he says but generally it is exceptional in its thoroughness and veracity.

In particular you will be interested in Chapter 5
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Pink/antichrist05.htm
In this chapter Pink shows that the Antichrist is a man possessed by a devil, the very son of Satan himself.

hellenized...influenced by philosophies...

concidered to be westernized...from the west...Greece was west of Israel...

Thanks guys! i appriciate your help.

The title of your post is John's Revelation. It is not John's revelation it is: Re 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Let's not split hairs. It is the revelation of Jesus Christ who revealed it to John.

QUOTE(HAMMER @ Jan 27 2007, 06:06 PM) [snapback]100047[/snapback]

It is not John's revelation it is: Re 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Note: "things which must SHORTLY come to pass." What does SHORTLY mean?

Preterist

There will be many other kings during the Antichrist's reign. There will be the ten kings who support him, in Revelation 17 and Daniel 7. There will be also kings representing blocks of countries that near the end of the Anitchrist's reign will rebel against him, in the account of Daniel 7:40-45.

You are right that beasts do represent empires as in the four beasts coming out of the SEA in Daniel 7. But those same beasts in Daniel 7:17 as the angel is explaining to Daniel. as coming out of the EARTH not sea, are said to be "kings".

The little horn in particular is said to be more more stout than his fellows, which would relate to being a man, as in Daniel 8, also about the little horn, the king of fierce facial expression, is something peculiar to a man, and not a kingdom.

As far as the Antichrist's kingdom goes, I have concluded he will be over a spiritual empire called Mystery Babylon and also over a visible Roman Empire of the end times, although I don't think it will carry that name.

The four beast empires of the first part of Daniel 7 correspond to the empires represented by the metals in
the Daniel 2. In Revelation 13, we see the first three of the animals featured in the combined beast - so the fourth beast is different as it says in Daniel 7:7 in that it supercedes the other beasts but is present in the end times.

The Roman Empire which was at its peak during Jesus time when into dormacy, as did the counting of the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 when Jesus was crucified and resurrected.

During that dorminant state, the Roman Empire made a transition to the Holy Roman Empire with Leo V anointing Charlesmagne king of the Holy Roman Empire. Napolean basically ended the Holy Roman Empire
as a formal entity, but the relationship between the Vatican and the European Politicans has carried forward even to this day. It was and is a relationship of mutual benefit.

When the Antichrist is mortally wounded and recovers to declare that he is god, in Revelation 17, the ten kings ravage the woman with fire, which IMHO, is when the ten European kings aligined with the Antichrist will burn the Vatican to the ground, thus ending the centuries old "defacto" Holy Roman Empire. With the "Holy" significiation based upon the Vatican relationship gone, it will just be the Roman Empire again for those last three and a half years.

Getting back to Rev 16 and the seducing spirits that convince the kings of the world to gather at Armageddon to face the Lord as is confirmed in Revelation 19:19, that is near the end of the 7 years when the armies of Daniel 7:40-45 have been fighting the Antichrist, IMHO, disillusioned by that time of his claims to being god - when suddenly the heavens will part and they will see the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. That will cause panic unrivialed at any time in history. The seducing spirits will convince the kings of the earth that their only recourse is to ban together to try and stop Jesus .

I have put together a simple timeline showing the particulars of these events that you might be interested in - the 45 days in particular near the end when the armies stop fighting and assemble themselfs at Armageddon:



Peace,

Doug L.

Hi preterist,

1:11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.

Since the things in Rev 1:1 are identitfied in verse 1:11, as the things John is revealed in Revelation, "shorty" would be in relevancy to Jesus being the Alpha and Omega, i.e. the backdrop is eternity. As included in the things John was revealed are the destruction of this current world and heavens, the final judgment of the dead, the casting of death and hell into the lake of fire in Revelation 20. In Revelation 21, there is a new heaven, a new earth, and a new Jerusalem....i.e. eternity.

Considering that the last days of the last days began when Israel became a nation again in May 1948, and that generation will not pass away until all of the end-times prophecies are fulfilled - is the 2000 years since John was given Revelation against the backdrop of eternity, the things contained therein - in your opinion, those 2000 years relative to eternity would be "shortly" would it not?


Peace,

Doug L.

Doug: So you're saying that "shortly" which always means "shortly" EVERYWHERE else it is used in the NT and even in the Septuagint does NOT mean "shortly" in the Revelation because Jesus called Himself the Alpha and the Omega??? Why was John even inspired to use such a time-restrictive term when eternity was in mind? No, John was given the word "shortly" because in reality the things he was shown were to take place SHORTLY in his time!

Acts 25:4 (tachos)--Festus was going to Caesarea SHORTLY
Romans 16:20(tachos)--Satan would be crushed under THEIR feet SHORTLY
1 Corinthians 4:19(tachos)--Paul would come to them SHORTLY
Philippians 2:19(tachos)--Paul would send Timothy to them SHORTLY
Philippians 2:24(tachos)--Paul himself hoped to also come to them SHORTLY
1 Timothy 3:14(tachos)--Paul hoped to come to Timothy SHORTLY
2 Timothy 4:9 (tachos)--Paul exhorted Timothy to try hard to come to him SHORTLY
Hebrews 13:23 (tachos)--Paul expected Timothy SHORTLY
2 Peter 1:14 (tachos)--Paul spoke of his imminent death as coming SHORTLY

This Greek word "tachos" is the same word used in the Revelation. It ALWAYS means within a SHORT amount of time. It is only one's eschatological persuasion that causes him to seek some means to change the clear meaning of this term. Jesus' being the Alpha and Omega does NOT change the meaning of the word SHORTLY.

I encourage you to lay aside any theological persuasion and reread those opening verses of the Revelation as though you had never seen them before. What is your first impression? Do you not see, as I came to see (I am a former pre-trib, pre-mil dispensationalist) that only one's presuppositions cloud these clear verses? If you are truly a seeker of truth, you would be willing to lay everything on the line--every long-held, "precious", feel-good futuristic position--and let the Scriptures say what they say.

"things which must SHORTLY take place . . . the time is NEAR."
"Behold, I am coming QUICKLY."

Jesus' being the Alpha and Omega means that He is of eternity past, present and future--not the words He uses to communicate with us who are not. He uses time-frame words with us because we are restricted in time. Soon, near, shortly, about to, at hand, quickly--mean just what they are meant to mean. They are not some special theological terms that lose their normal, usual, everyday meanings within eschatological references!

Your contention that the last days "of the last days" (???) began with the establishment of Israel as a nation in 1948 is pure conjecture. Your reasoning is faulty. You begin with this presupposition concerning Israel and from there you conclude that these are the last days and, therefore, shortly does not mean shortly in Revelation 1. Why do we not begin with the clear and go from there? The things of the Revelation happened shortly in John's day--let's study the book and understand the book in the context John, through inspiration, clearly established.

Preterist

Hi Preterist,

Why was John even inspired to use such a time-restrictive term when eternity was in mind?

It is not time restrictive, but time relavent.

I given my response since the time frame involved for ALL of what John was revealed is for eternity.

This Greek word "tachos" is the same word used in the Revelation. It ALWAYS means within a SHORT amount of time.

2000 years is a short amount of time when measured against eternity.

Your contention that the last days "of the last days" (???) began with the establishment of Israel as a nation in 1948 is pure conjecture. Your reasoning is faulty. You begin with this presupposition concerning Israel and from there you conclude that these are the last days and, therefore, shortly does not mean shortly in Revelation 1.

I conclude that "shortly" in Revelation 1 is "shortly" because the things that John was revealed spanned from Jesus's earthly time through to eternity. 2000 years would be shortly relavent to that timeframe.

Peace,

Doug L.

Shortly = The Lords Time.

2 Peter 3
7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.


Psalms 90
4 For a thousand years in Your sight Are like yesterday when it is past, And like a watch in the night.


Luke 12
37 Blessed are those servants whom the master, when he comes, will find watching. Assuredly, I say to you that he will gird himself and have them sit down to eat, and will come and serve them.

38 And if he should come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.

jason
Dont be so quick to back down.
The indefinite article "a" is not present in the Greek text. It is supplied by the translator.
Sometimes with a noun which the context proves to be definite the article is not used. This places stress upon the qualitative aspect of the noun rather than its mere identity. In Greek, an object of thought may be conceived of from two points of view: as to identity or quality. To convey the first point of view the Greek uses the article; for the second, it omits the article.
That means that you have to determine whether or not the indefinite article "a" is to be present from the context. In this case, the context seems toindicate that the emphasis is on quality of the noun. The humanness of the beast as opposed to the divinity of the Creator.

Since the book of Revelation, quotes or alludes to the OT over 600 times, and very heavily from Daniel, it is imperative to compare Revelation with the OT. The passage concerning the composite beast of Revelation 13:2 (Leopard, Bear, Lion) is obviously relying on Daniel 7. They are reversed in Revelation because John was living during the time of the Roman empire, the terrifying beast of Daniel 7, and Daniel lived during the time of the Babylonian Lion. John is looking backward, Daniel is looking forward.
Daniel is given the interpretation of the four beasts as four kings (v17). However the king is always recognized as the head of his kingdom, as in the parallel prophecy of Daniel 2, when Nebuchadnezzar is the head of gold (v38) but after him comes another kingdom and a 3rd and a fourth. So clearly the king represents his kingdom. The beasts symbolize kingdoms.
You are absolutely correct. The Beast of Revelation is a kingdom, granted there is always a head or a king, but the essense of the beast is a global kingdom power. That puts itself in God's place, claiming to be God (2Thes 2:4). In spite of his claim to diety and demands for worship, he is but human, with man's number.
The issue in Revelation 13 is Creature worship (he beast) as opposed to Creator Worship (Rev 14:7)
It is not about nations fighting each other, it is about man opposing the Creator.
3am

Hi 3AM,

I would say that the beast in Revelation is both, a king and a kingdom. In most instances, the beast represents a man - like in Revelation 17, as being the eighth king.

The only instance of the beast representing a kingdom is in Revelation 13:2. The king of that kingdom is also represented by the beast. The one of the seven heads that is mortally wounded is the Antichrist, as the seventh king of Revelation 17, future of John's time by 2000 year. When the Antichrist recovers, and ascends from the bottomless pit, he is the eighth king - and as it says in Revelation 17:11 the eighth king is the beast. That is, the overall beast of Revelation 13, whose number is the number of a man, and that the number is the number of his name. The information in Revelation 13:18 must be associated with the information of in 13:17... "the number of his name" being vitally important.

13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

That the beast is the AC, the eighth king is futher reinforced in Revelation 13:3, the world doesn't worship the one of the seven heads that was mortally wounded, but the overall beast.

So, in regards to the beast in Revelation, it appears as though the focus is upon a man, the Antichrist. The imagery of the composite makeup of the lion, leopard, and bear in Revelation 13:2 are of a kingdom, agreed, that of the Antichrist's. Since the fourth empire replaced the third empire of the Greeks, the empire of the beast is different from the others in that it went basically into dormacy, like Israel the fig tree , for much of the past 2000 years. The Roman empire transitioned to the Holy Roman Empire, which was latter disolved by Napolean, although defacto the relationship between the Vatican and the European politicians remains to this day.... to the mutual benifit of each of other, Revaltion 17:2.

That relationship will lose its basis when the Antichrist declares that he is god, and the European ten will burn the Vatican to the ground, IMHO, Rev 17:16.

Once the "Holy" namesake is removed from the "Holy Roman Empire", in those final years it will be a defacto
Roman Empire of the West, whether it is called the Roman Empire during that time I don't know.

To me, it appears as though the Antichrist and the ten kings will assert their domance over the rest of the world, although certainly the world's population will embrace the Antichrist as god on a global scale. Sometime near the end of the 7 years, with the judgments of God befalling the Antichrist's world, it appears as though there will be disillusionment to the Antichrist's claim that he is god - since the Antichrist will be unable to stop the judgements - and the kings of the various nations will rebel against the Antichrist, the king of the West.

That would account for the battles in Daniel 11:40-44, that just preceed the termination of the Antichrist, Daniel 11:45. At which time, Mattthew 24:29-30 is fulfilled. The reaction by the Antichrist, Satan, and the False prophet will be Revelation 16:13, whereby they convince the warring armies already in the region to unify their forces along with those of the Antichrist to stop Jesus's Return to this planet.


Peace,

Doug L.

This is where the devil snook in and bamboozled everyone. The anti-christ looks like a lamb and speaks like a dragon. He has spread his polluted gospel all over the globe claiming that Christ is God but has exchanged the truth for his lies causing everyone who follows him to worship and serve the beast instead of the creator. No one knows what the true Christ taught any longer. The Beast is mans whole world. Structured in the image of satan who loves the things of man and is not mindful of the things of God. Here are the judgments for the end time when mans whole world will be destroyed. They prove that they have condemned the whole earth and everything that man has created.

30 "Therefore prophesy against them all these words, and say to them: 'The Lord will roar from on high, And utter His voice from His holy habitation; He will roar mightily against His fold. He will give a shout, as those who tread the grapes, Against all the inhabitants of the earth.
31 A noise will come to the ends of the earth-- For the Lord has a controversy with the nations; He will plead His case with all flesh. He will give those who are wicked to the sword,' says the Lord."
32 Thus says the Lord of hosts: "Behold, disaster shall go forth From nation to nation, And a great whirlwind shall be raised up From the farthest parts of the earth.
33 And at that day the slain of the Lord shall be from one end of the earth even to the other end of the earth. They shall not be lamented, or gathered, or buried; they shall become refuse on the ground.
34 "Wail, shepherds, and cry! Roll about in the ashes, You leaders of the flock! For the days of your slaughter and your dispersions are fulfilled; You shall fall like a precious vessel.
35 And the shepherds will have no way to flee, Nor the leaders of the flock to escape.
36 A voice of the cry of the shepherds, And a wailing of the leaders to the flock will be heard. For the Lord has plundered their pasture,
37 And the peaceful dwellings are cut down Because of the fierce anger of the Lord.


1 Come near, you nations, to hear; And heed, you people! Let the earth hear, and all that is in it, The world and all things that come forth from it.
2 For the indignation of the Lord is against all nations, And His fury against all their armies; He has utterly destroyed them, He has given them over to the slaughter.
3 Also their slain shall be thrown out; Their stench shall rise from their corpses, And the mountains shall be melted with their blood.

They will all kill each other when the Lord removes the water and food supply from earth for 1260 days.

[quote name='Godsloft.com' date='Feb 5 2007, 06:11 AM' post='100877']
[quote name='Preterist' post='100820' date='Feb 4 2007, 06:47 AM']
[quote name='Douggg' post='100620' date='Feb 2 2007, 01:58 AM']
[quote name='Preterist' post='100278' date='Jan 30 2007, 07:29 AM']
[quote name='HAMMER' post='100047' date='Jan 27 2007, 06:06 PM']

Acts 25:4 (tachos)--Festus was going to Caesarea SHORTLY
Romans 16:20(tachos)--Satan would be crushed under THEIR feet SHORTLY
1 Corinthians 4:19(tachos)--Paul would come to them SHORTLY
Philippians 2:19(tachos)--Paul would send Timothy to them SHORTLY
Philippians 2:24(tachos)--Paul himself hoped to also come to them SHORTLY
1 Timothy 3:14(tachos)--Paul hoped to come to Timothy SHORTLY
2 Timothy 4:9 (tachos)--Paul exhorted Timothy to try hard to come to him SHORTLY
Hebrews 13:23 (tachos)--Paul expected Timothy SHORTLY
2 Peter 1:14 (tachos)--Paul spoke of his imminent death as coming SHORTLY

Preterist
[/quote]
[size=4]
[color=#3333FF][b]Shortly = The Lords Time.

The Lord's time??? God invented language so that He could communicate with us and we with Him. Words mean things! The whole point of 2 Peter 3:8 is that God exists outside of time. We do NOT. Why would He communicate with us through His holy Word by using a word in a strange way that would be confusing to us. Using 2 Peter 3:8 is a desperate attempt by futurists to try to negate the impact of time reference terms!

Furthermore, why do futurists only give one side to 2 Peter 3:8???? If with the Lord a day is as a thousand years, is not a thousand years as a day? Perhaps your 1000-year millennium will only last one day!!!! This entire argument is ridiculous. Notice also that it does NOT say a day IS a thousand years but rather that a day WITH THE LORD (NOT with us!!!!) is AS a thousand years. All this verse is saying is that GOD transcends time but He placed us within its confines--and He communicates with us within understandable time reference terminology. Did you even look at the above references which use shortly? Are those as a thousand years also? Shortly means shortly means shortly. God would NOT use such a time restrictive word if He meant something else!!! This is nonsense!

Preterist

darling child of God...allow the Holy Spirit to touch you...for
surely it is His desire to give you hope...and end the platform
for which you fight...

you asked me to give you my testimony...and it is not yet. I have
walked with the Lord for almost 22 years. i am not a scholar, nor
am i a denominationalist...i just walk with Him. sometimes, i
wonder if this is lunacy...and He tells me that He has not given
me a spirit of fear...so, we walk and talk. Jesus is coming...make
no mistake...and His return is imminent...it is...always imminent,
Jesus is come in the flesh...and is coming quickly.

are you ready to receive Him? as your Lord and Savior, to allow
Him the throne of your life...to bow and allow teachings and
other considerations to submit to the voice of the Lord who is longing
to have a fresh relationship with you now?

no condemnation. i read your answer to me earlier on, and i love
you for your willingness to share yourself...will you be willing to
share His presence?

i speak in love to you...and hope you will take my words to heart.
i was taught by the Holy Spirit, so please do not offend the
Holy Spirit for this is all i have been given...and this is all that i need
to cling to until the fullness...for i am persuaded nothing shall
separate me from the love of God, and He is here now...just ask.

love,
signet

There you go with that fast talking con game again Preterist. From now on I am going to call you Russ.

[quote name='Godsloft.com' date='Feb 18 2007, 03:02 PM' post='1025

QUOTE(Preterist)

The Lord's time??? God invented language so that He could communicate with us and we with Him. Words mean things! The whole point of 2 Peter 3:8 is that God exists outside of time. We do NOT. Why would He communicate with us through His holy Word by using a word in a strange way that would be confusing to us. Using 2 Peter 3:8 is a desperate attempt by futurists to try to negate the impact of time reference terms!

Furthermore, why do futurists only give one side to 2 Peter 3:8???? If with the Lord a day is as a thousand years, is not a thousand years as a day? Perhaps your 1000-year millennium will only last one day!!!! This entire argument is ridiculous. Notice also that it does NOT say a day IS a thousand years but rather that a day WITH THE LORD (NOT with us!!!!) is AS a thousand years. All this verse is saying is that GOD transcends time but He placed us within its confines--and He communicates with us within understandable time reference terminology. Did you even look at the above references which use shortly? Are those as a thousand years also? Shortly means shortly means shortly. God would NOT use such a time restrictive word if He meant something else!!! This is nonsense!

Preterist

QUOTE(Godsloft)

There you go with that fast talking con game again Preterist. From now on I am going to call you Russ.

Yeah, you caught me. I'm just a fast talking con artist! Here's my con:

"The coming of the Lord is AT HAND."
"The end of ALL things is AT HAND."
"Hereafter, YOU (Caiaphas) will see the Son of Man . . . COMING on the clouds of heaven."
"There are some of those standing HERE who will NOT taste death till THEY see the Son of Man COMING in
His kingdom."
"THIS generation will by no means pass away till ALL these things take place."
John was shown "the things which SHORTLY take place."
"The time is NEAR."
"Behold, I am COMING QUICKLY."

WHAT DO THE WORDS PLAINLY SAY, GODSLOFT? What's my con? THESE are the very words of Scripture!

Preterist

Preterist,

I agree with you that words mean things. and that God means what He says.
However, words do not always mean to us in 21st Century English, what they meant to God.
Exegesis is not enough, we must balance it with a good hermaneutic.
You have to go beyond simply asking "What did God say?" To what did God mean?
Is it possible that even though John and Paul were limited to writing in the Greek language, they were very Jewish,
and their thoughts were shaped by some 4000 years of OT history?
All through the OT, the fulfillment of God's promises
always involved waiting much longer that the promise seemed to warrent.
I could list many but for the sake of brevity, One is the very first prophecy in the Bible.
"And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel." Gen 3:15
When you crawl into their skin, as you rightly so like to do, the natural literal understanding of that
prophecy was that Eve, the only "woman" on the planet, and the one to whom God was speaking,
would be the mother of the seed that would crush the head of the serpent.

"She conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD."
Interestingly, the word "from" is not there.
She literally said, "I have gotten a man, The Lord!"
Cain means "Acquired."
You cant blame them for thinking that she would be the mother of the seed and that they had
"acquired the promise."
But you cannot escape the fact that God meant something different.
We have to be patient and let God work out His plan in His time.
The book of Revelation explicitly calls for the "patience of the saints." Revelation 14:12

God Promised Noah, he would destroy the world by flood.
Noah had to preach and wait for 120 years for God to fulfill his promise.
Then he had to wait in the ark 7 days before the waters finally came.

Then there was Abraham. God promised his offspring would be like the stars of the sky
yet he had to wait till he was 100 for his first born. He didnt expect over 400 years in
Egypt as slaves. And the promise has still not yet been fulfilled.

Read through the Psalms. They are always asking God "Why? How much longer do we have to wait?"
The prophet Ezekiel, Daniel, Habbackuk.
Even in Revelation, the souls under the altar cried out, "How long, God?"

God's people always have had to wait.
God is not slow, a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like a day.
God wants all to be saved. His plan will save as many as want to be saved.
Just as the people in Nineveh.
God delayed his judgment so they could have time to repent!
Peter explains that God is still patient today, not wanting any to perish.
He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. (2 Pe 3:9)

Instead of impatiently jumping to the conclusion that God has worked out his plan
in the resurrection of Christ and in 70AD, we should be more willing to patiently wait
for God to finish putting and end to sin and crushing the head of the serpent.
Jesus is going to come, the dead will be raised imperishable, the earth will be made new,
every tear will be dried up. But in God's time.
3am

QUOTE(3am @ Mar 6 2007, 08:14 PM) [snapback]104557[/snapback]

[/b]

3am: Compare Genesis 3:15 with Romans 16:20. Notice in the Genesis passage there is no time indicator--just a statement of fact of a future fulfillment. However, in the Romans passage there is clearly a time indicator--"The God of peace will crush Satan under YOUR feet SHORTLY." (in that day). The closer a prophecy comes to fulfillment the more prolific become the time statements. The time for fulfillment was AT HAND in that first-century, pre-AD 70 setting, hence the statements of SOON, ABOUT TO, AT HAND, SHORTLY, NEAR, QUICKLY, etc. We should be patient when God tells us simply to be patient (1 Thes. 5:14; Rom. 12:12); but when those first-century saints were told to be patient it was given in the context of a time statement.

For example, James said: "Therefore be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord . . . You also be patient . . . for the coming of the Lord is AT HAND." (James 5:7, 8). THEY were to be patient because the Lord's coming was AT HAND in their lifetimes. There is a big difference between the patience of these first-century believers and those of faith of the Old Testament.

Abraham "waited for the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God." Abraham was never promised that this would come in his lifetime, that it would be SOON. Likewise, Abel, Enoch, Noah, Isaac, Jacob, and Sarah "all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them AFAR OFF were assured of them" (Heb. 11:13). They desired "a better, that is, a heavenly country" (11:16). They were never promised that these things would happened to them SOON. But the NT saints were! "The coming of the Lord is AT HAND!"

God never promised Noah that the flood would come SOON or that its arrival was AT HAND! Abraham was never promised that God would SOON make of him a great nation!

What about the souls in Revelation 6? Yes, they asked "how long, O Lord, holy and true, until You judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell in the land?" They are told "that they should rest a LITTLE WHILE LONGER!" These are those who were predicted by Jesus to be persecuted, hated, and killed for His name's sake (Matthew 10 and 24)--persecuted and killed by those apostate Jews of Matthew 23 who would be judged guilty of all the righteous blood shed on the earth. Revelation is the execution of that Judgment--it is John's Olivet Discourse. Matthew 23 and 24 and the Revelation must be seen together!

Is Peter teaching universalism in his epistle? Are we to understand the "all" of 2 Peter 3:9 as everyone throughout all time? Will everyone eventually be saved? Peter provides the narrow context here in his use of the word "us." Who is the "us?" Is it not Peter and those to whom he is writing as well as those of that generation? Jesus said in Matthew 24:22 that the days would be shortened for the elect's sake. This is further clarified in John 6 when Jesus says: "ALL that the Father gives Me WILL come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out" (6:37). I suspect that we have more than eschatological differences, 3am. I surmise that we also have soteriological and harmartiological differences as well (e.g. for whom did Christ die, is man able to contribute anything to his salvation, and does Christ choose us or do we choose Him? (But that's for a different thread)!

In summary, the patience of those of the NT times is qualified by the time statements. The patience of those of the OT times is NOT. Promises were made that were not qualified with a time reference--they were simple predictions of a future undetermined and unrevealed time of fulfillment. The promises of the NT, however, were predictions of a future fulfillment set within the clear framework of numerous time statements that must not be ignored--SOON, AT HAND, NEAR, ABOUT TO, SHORTLY, QUICKLY, etc.

The writer of Hebrews references Habakkuk in 10:37--

"For yet a LITTLE WHILE, and He who is coming will come and WILL NOT TARRY."

In Habakkuk 2:3 the Lord tells them to wait for the vision, though it tarry. It was not for then--it was for an appointed time. Nowhere does the Lord give them a statement of nearness or any indication that it was to be revealed any time soon. It is simply stated that at some appointed time it would surely come. And when it came, it would not tarry!

I am not impatiently jumping to conclusions, 3am. I am recognizing the time frame in which God accomplished what He promised to accomplish. It does not take deep thinking to understand simple terms such as SOON, AT HAND, NEAR, ABOUT TO, SHORTLY, QUICKLY, etc.

What did God say? SOON, NEAR, AT HAND, ABOUT TO, SHORTLY, QUICKLY!
What did God mean? SOON, NEAR, AT HAND, ABOUT TO, SHORTLY, QUICKLY!

That's good exegesis!
That's good hermeneutics!

Preterist

It may come sooner for you than for me. When a person dies in Christ they sleep in the dust until Christ returns and resurrects them back to Life. You do know what life is right Russ? Then all of the apostles are sleeping, waiting for Christ to return and bring them back to Life to subdue the world and start Christ's reign on earth.

Revelation 5
10 And have made us kings and priests to our God; And we shall reign on the earth."

Revelation 20
6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.

Preterist,
You need to relax preterist.
No one is talking about universalism or introducing soteriological and harmartiological problems.
Unless you consider free will and salvation by grace through faith a problem.
Here is what I wrote:
When I said that "God wants everyone to come to repentance," that was a direct quote from the text. Peter is dealing with some who thought that God was being slow since he had promised a deliverer 4000 years earlier, (since the begining of creation). They couldnt reconcile the 4000 year delay with the promise God made in Eden, that the deliverer would crush the head of the serpent. Four thousand years seems like God was being slow to them. But Peter assured them "the Lord was not being slow."
Then Peter makes his famous 1000 year time statement that what seems slow to us is not slow to God. "A thousand years is like a day to God." In other words, Peter is saying that what seems like a long time to us is not a long time according to God's reckoning. Conversely, "1000 years is like a day" to God. Soon to God could be 1000 years or 2000 years or more. Because to Him, it is like two or three days.

Then he explains the reason for the delay is that God does not want any one to perish, but all to come to repentance. That is not universalism. No one is saying that every one is going to be saved. But God is giving everyone who would be saved, the opportunity to do so. He comissioned the church to preach the Gospel to the world and he is going to give her time to do it. The "destruction of ungodly men" is coming. You are putting words in my mouth, actually Peters mouth, because I was just quoting Peter.

It seems to me that you are missing Peter's main point. That being, that we cannot use our perceptions of what is slow or fast, sooner or later and force those perceptions and meanings into God's intentions. You are doing the very thing Peter cautions us not to do.
3am

preterist,
I am breaking my response down into separate bite size pices.
I tend to get too wordy.

You wrote:
Here is another problem. You seem to be wanting to limit the "us" to include only those living in Peter's day. Am I correct?
Are you implying that Peter's epistle only applies to those who lived in his day?
If so, then would that mean Peter has nothing to say to us?
And how would we be able to determine what applied only to them and what does apply to us?
I have more coming but am out of time for right now.
God Bless
3am

QUOTE(3am @ Mar 7 2007, 09:48 AM) [snapback]104601[/snapback]

[/b]

Those are very good questions, 3 a.m. Context is always key. For example, when Jesus told His disciples (using the personal pronoun "you") to bring Him a donkey to ride, He is clearly not telling us to do that today! We would certainly all agree on that.

But when Paul or Peter wrote letters that were occasioned by specific things that were going on in their lives and in the lives of those who directly received their words, those personal pronouns held special relevance to them. In the same way, when Jesus spoke to His disciples on the Mount of Olives and said things directly to them (using the personal pronoun "you"), he intended to convey specific things to them about things that were to personally and actually impact them. He warned them of the very same things in Matthew 10. It was those specific twelve whom Jesus sent out. He commanded THEM, saying . . . . Then immediately after telling them about the things that were to directly happen to them, he said: "Assuredly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the cities of Israel before the Son of Man COMES." Clearly, these are predictions of certain things that concerned those particular disciples during that particular time in history.

In Matthew 6 and 7, however, we see the personal pronoun "you" again. But there is nothing of a specific predictive nature here. These are generalities. In other words, if those disciples found themselves in certain situations which are common to us all in all generations, they (and we by extension) were to behave in a certain way. For example, Jesus tells them that when they pray, they should pray to their Father behind closed doors and not to be seen by men as the hypocrites do. Certainly this pertains to us today. There are many precious teachings which Jesus imparted to His disciples by which all who believe in His name are to live. But there were also very specific things which Jesus predicted were to happen only to those disciples at that particular point in time.

Jesus told those disciples that they themselves would see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet. Why do we yet look for another? Furthermore, when Jesus addressed specific people and predicted certain things about them using the personal pronoun "you," he clearly confined the fulfillment of that prophecy to that individual (e.g. Caiaphas, Mat. 26:64) or group of people (e.g. those standing here, Mat. 16:28).

As for Peter--he has a great deal to say to us. So does Paul. Can you not feel the great sense of expectation on the part of those first-century saints? Something was coming. Something that was going to change them and their world forever. They were not excited about something that was to take place thousands of years hence while they suffered through great tribulation which often led to horrible death. Their Lord was coming back to them as He promised in John 14 and elsewhere. He would avenge their blood (see Matthew 23) and judge the ungodly forever. Instead of dying and going to Hades to wait as those under the old heavens and earth did, all believers at the death of the body would go immediately into the presence of God. That is what Paul described when he spoke of the dead in Christ rising first and then those who were alive at the parousia. This is the time for which Abraham and the OT saints waited (Heb. 11). Christ came and destroyed the victory and sting of death forever. This mortal has put on immortality and corruption has put on incorruption. In a sense, since that time, it could be said of the believer that he does not really die--he has already passed from death unto life. Death has no sting; death has no victory. Christ has conquered all His enemies. The Church is victorious! We serve a risen Savior who's in the world today! He is in control. What more do we want as believers? He is using us to proclaim the good news and bring others into His kingdom which is not of this world.

Satan is NOT alive and well on planet earth--Jesus is! There is no coming antichrist who will take charge. The world is not going to be burned up and melted! That is not the meaning of the word Peter used.

Anyway, this is getting much too long. I'm sure it has raised many more questions! I look forward to hearing from you, 3 a.m.!

Preterist

Even the Donkey talking to Balaam couln't save him in the long run. So I guess you were just created for this purpose Russ. Even those who could be drawn off to destruction with you were created for that purpose.

Matthew 13
40 Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age.
41 The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness,
42 and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.


2 Peter 2
15 They have forsaken the right way and gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Beor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;
16 but he was rebuked for his iniquity: a dumb donkey speaking with a man's voice restrained the madness of the prophet.
17 These are wells without water, clouds carried by a tempest, for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.
18 For when they speak great swelling words of emptiness, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through lewdness, the ones who have actually escaped from those who live in error.
19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by whom a person is overcome, by him also he is brought into bondage.

Preterist,
You wrote:
It seems to me that you claim all specific predictive expressions pertain only to those disciples and others liveing at that particular time.
However Paul wrote specifically to the members of the church in Thessalonica that When the Lord comes,
the dead in Christ would be raised first then those who are alive and left will be caught up into the clouds with them to be with the Lord for ever.
This is a very specific prediction spoken to a very specific group.
If we follow your principle, this happened in 70AD and it does not apply to us today.
Since there is no specific text in the NT that says that those who die after the Lord comes will go to
heaven immediately, then what do you base your hope for eternal life upon?

Likewise, John said that the time is coming when there will be a new heaven and a new earth.
God will dry up every tear. there will be no more death. No more curse. The Lamb will dwell among
his servants. Rev 21 & 22
Again this is a very specific prediction which was made to a specific group of people.
What assurance do we have that every tear will be dried up, there will be no more sickness or death
for us?
3am

Preterist,
You wrote: Three more Questions:
1, If as you say, the parousia occured in 70AD, then what evidience can you point to which proves there was a resurrection of all the saints in AD70 and that Abraham is now in the New Jerusalem?

2. If as you say, "Christ came and destroyed the victory and sting of death forever," then why do we still have death. Even if as you say, believers would go immediately into the presence of God," what about unbelievers? They would still die. The wages of sin is death. Are you saying that now, since 70AD, the wages of sin is not death?

3. If as you say, "all believers at the death of the body would go immediately into the presence of God," where is one verse in the Bible that says that?

3am

Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? 7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. 8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. 9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. 10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

I don't find anything in scripture to indicate that men have seen Jesus come in the clouds after the manner spoken of here.

So, we should be able to safely conclude that this has not happened yet?

In Christ,

Mike

QUOTE

Hay Russ.
Russ Witt died in his sins believing that nonsense and is lost for eternity. With his body riddled with canser he couldn't come out of it and went on to die. Such is the lot of a preterist.

There is no antichrist in the revelation of John. John is the one who told us that there were already many antichrists in the world and explains them as a type. The spirits of devils that go out to the kings of the earth are the spirits of the giants who ate people and each other. It will be men hunting men for food and drink that will motivate the devils camp to find and attack the camps of the Saints, right at the return of the Lord. This will all take place after over 4 billion people have already been killed world wide. The devils camp will be small in comparison to the camp of the saints but they will have aircraft and tanks and all of mans arms still doing their dirty work. In the camps of the saints there will only be people and nothing else.