Ananias917 wrote:

On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 11:25:38 -0600, "Daniel & Annette
Halligan" <Penguin@cybrzn.com> spake thusly:

Ananias, I see that you don't believe in the Rapture. You have not done any
type of word study into the original Greek text or Latin. In Greek the word
is use as "Harpazo" which means, to seize by force or to snatch up.

The end times teachers, which is where you get your
belief from, have you focusing on the wrong Greek word.

Do not think that you are some Biblical genius and I am
just some poor schlub, who just opened his Bible.

The fact is, that it is you who has not studied. You
read this in end timer teachings and now act as if
you are a scholar. (:

The fact is, that the futurists are highly ignorant
of both the Old Testament and proper exegesis.

You people pretend that I have never read the passage
you reference, as if the Bible is all new to me.

Did it ever occur to you, that maybe, just maybe,
there might be just a microbe of a chance that
you and they are wrong?

If you are indeed interested in the truth, then keep
reading and I will show you that there is no such
thing as the rapture in the Bible.

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17

16) For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with
a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the
trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

The first thing to look at, is the fact that the end
timers are claiming that everyone will see Jesus return
and everyone will hear the trump of God and see the
dead rise, etc.. But they don't realize what a
contradiction they teach, considering that the
Rapturists also claim that believers will disappear and
the world won't know what happened. So now we should
ask some questions, to see how well your beliefs hold
up in the light of Scripture.

If it is the dead who are raised, doesn't it make sense
that it is the dead who will hear the "trump" of God?
Note that v17 starts with, "THEN", meaning that the
trump is something for the dead to hear, not the
living. This happens (the trump) and that happens (the
dead rise) and "THEN we who are alive and remain...".

Since the Rapturists claim that our disappearance will
be all of the sudden and without warning and that the
world won't know what happened, let me ask you,
wouldn't a loud trump, heard 'round the world, be
considered a warning? :) Thus, what they claim
cannot be true.

Now if they claim that only the saved will hear it,
then they have left the literalism that they claim
about this appearance being visual and the trump
being heard around the world and so, defeat their own
argument of literalism in this passage. Besides, they
say we are supposed to be suddenly taken. It isn't
that sudden, if everyone on Earth heard the trump and
then had to wait for the dead to rise and all this is
going on for all to see and yet, the world won't know
what happened and we will be taken all of the sudden
and they will be puzzled as to what happened?

I don't think that works out logically, do you? :)

The futurists have not thought their doctrine through.

17) Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught
up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord
in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Now the first big problem here in taking this passage
the way they do, is that if it were as they say, we
would be stuck in, or just above the atmosphere forever
and so would Jesus. It doesn't allow for Him, nor us,
to go to Heaven, nor to return to Earth. It says that
we'll be in the air with Him, "FOREVER". I'm sure they
don't believe that, so the way they read it must be
wrong. Again, they must abandon the approach to this
passage that they use, which is actually two approaches
that contradict each other.

This is the verse (v17) that the Rapturists use to
claim that the Rapture is Biblical. They claim that
we will be caught up into the air and I'll agree that
the passage says that. But does it really say that? :)

Well, yes, in English, but not in the original Greek.
At least not that we will rise into the air above the
Earth. As I said, Tim LaHaye, et al, have you focusing
on the wrong word ("caught up") and since they note
the Greek for the words, "caught up", it is only
logical that we should heed what the Greek actually
says here. So let's look at another word in that
same passage and see if it sheds any light on this.

The Greeks had more than one word, that translates
into the English word, "air".

Now, if that air was the air in the sky, he would have
used a different word.

"And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and
the birds of the air (ouranos) have nests; but the Son
of man hath not where to lay his head." - Matthew 8:20

Ouranos = air - (the idea of elevation); the sky;
by extension heaven (as the abode of God)

But instead, Paul used a different word...

"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up
together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in
the air (aer): and so shall we ever be with the Lord."
- 1 Thessalonians 4:17

Aer = air - (to breathe unconsciously, that is,
respire; by analogy to blow); air (as naturally
circumambient)

The original Greek word used in this verse, does not
mean the air we look up and see way up in the sky, but
rather, it implies our breath and the air immediately
surrounding us. The transliterated word is "aer" and
means... to breathe unconsciously, that is, respire; by
analogy to blow); "air" (as naturally circumambient)

Circumambient = Encompassing on all sides; surrounding.

It is discussing the air that we are breathing and that
which is immediately surrounding us (in Jewish thought,
up to about 10 feet around us and remember, they wrote
in Greek, but they were Jews). Will the end timers now
change their claim and say that Jesus would appear for
everyone to see, right in front of them (within 10 feet
of them), at the same time, since that is what would be
necessary for everyone to see Him at the same time?
Will there be 6 billion copies of Jesus, so that
everyone can see Him at the same time, in the "air"
that the verse actually describes? In order to stick
with the type of approach they use for this verse, they
must, in order to be honest about it, change their
belief and claim that 6 billion copies of Jesus will
appear. Remember, they brought the Greek into this,
so now they are bound to what it says. :)

The truth is, that they would be "caught up" in the
sense that they became changed and would never die
(sleep) and the air under discussion was the air around
them. The difference here was that there would be no
more death (sleep) for believers. It would be instant
translation upon death, instead of sleeping, once Jesus
returned. And Jesus did return, in 70 A.D..

Whoever remained until the return of Jesus, would still
be alive here on Earth (when that event took place upon
Jesus' return in 70 A.D.), but now death would be
permanently done away with. At least for believers.
The rest would face the second death. But remember,
Paul said this could not happen, until Jesus returned
and then death would lose its sting.

"O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy
victory?" - 1 Corinthians 15:55

We must also remember Jesus' statement...

Luke 17:20-21

20) And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the
kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said,
The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
21) Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for,
behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

The end timers make the same mistake that the Pharisees
did, demanding that God set up His kingdom here on
Earth, when Jesus said you would NOT be able to see the
kingdom of God coming here on Earth. It is within you.
It is a spiritual matter and so, instead of whipping
out passages now and saying, "What about this?", they
should realize that all they would be doing, is trying
to pit Scripture against Scripture, trying to make them
contradict each other. The passage above is clear and
easy to understand. Therefore, instead of trying to
make Jesus say something else, see if your
understanding of the other passages is questionable.

The bottom line here, is that the trump is heard by
the dead and the dead rising is not a physical event
that is seen with the eye and the "air" that they
would be "caught up" into, was the air surrounding
them, according to the Greek.

You futurists have Jesus returning a bunch of times!

He came to Earth the first time.

Then He returns, "secretly".

Then He returns again, to reign for 1,000 years.

Then He returns to judge everyone, yet you call it
the Second Coming?!?!?!

As for "clouds", they are symbolic of God's presence,
not literal clouds. And Jesus was being symbolic
when He said it in Matthew 24:29-30 as well.

Don't think so? Remember that ignorance of the OT
I mentioned? Take a look at the following passage,
which is FULFILLED PROPHECY of when Babylon
conquered Egypt and note that God is riding on
a cloud, yet no one saw Him literally, physically
riding a cloud...

"The burden of Egypt. Behold, the LORD rideth upon
a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols
of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and the heart
of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it." - Isaiah 19:1

As for 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2, which is another passage
that is usually referenced with the ones we went over
above, it was written in the 1st century, not the 21st.
So why do they pretend that Paul wrote it to them?

The only thing that can be said for certain, is that
at the time that Paul wrote it, it was still in the
future. It is not an honest approach to pretend
that it's still in the future now, because you just
started reading the Bible. :)

Note: Caps are used for emphasis and not for shouting.

The end timers (those who believe in the return of
Christ being future and the Rapture) like to make
claims about what the passages above mean and that they
demonstrate that Jesus did not return yet, because the
Bible says so. That's not an honest approach to the
text. What if Jesus returned tomorrow? The Bible
would still exist. Should we hold it up to Jesus and
tell Him He can't really be here, because the Bible
says He has not returned yet? :) Obviously that would
be foolish, but it demonstrates perfectly that a
Biblical text has a time frame. The question is, what
is that time frame?

First, we have to agree that Jesus and the Apostles
taught the truth. That there are no errors in
doctrine. If someone does not agree with that, then
there is no point in discussion, because they are now
cutting out the parts of the word of God that disagree
with their man made doctrine, instead of the other
way around.

The Bible is the inspired, infallible word of the
living God. If they are not in line with that
thinking, then they need to get on your knees and pray,
or throw their Bibles away, because if there are errors
in it, then we can't know what we can trust in it.
Picking and choosing what is right and what is wrong,
is just their way of saying that they know better than
Jesus and the Apostles and they make themselves God.

Now that we have that straight, I will first show a few
other quotes from the letters to the same church and
then I will show that the passages above do not say
what they think they do, as this "we are in the last
days and the Rapture is coming" doctrine is quite
easily disproved. I know that statement shocks some,
but they should pray first and then read on, trying as
best they can to put any doctrinal biases aside while
doing so. Most people simply don't read the words
in the Bible carefully.

So let's see what else Paul taught that same church,
in the same letter. Then let's completely dispel this
idea that people have about the passages above.

First, some other quotes from the same letter, which
show that it is clear that Paul was teaching that Jesus
would return in their lifetime (at least some of them
would still be alive)...

"For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing?
Are not even YE in the presence of our Lord Jesus
Christ at his coming?" - 1 Thessalonians 2:19

They (the Thessalonians) would be in the presence
of the Lord Jesus, AT HIS COMING.

Think that could mean that they would be returning with
Jesus, as part of the saints that would be coming with
Him? Read on...

1 Thessalonians 3:12-13

12) And the Lord make you to increase and abound in
love one toward another, and toward all men, even as
we do toward you:
13) To the end he may establish your hearts unblamable
in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming
of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.

They (the Thessalonians) would be "unblamable"
at the coming of the Lord Jesus, with all His saints.
Note, it does not say that they would come WITH
Jesus, as part of the saints, but rather, that they
would be unblamable, AT HIS COMING, when
He brought the saints with Him.

"But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day
should overtake you as a thief."
- 1 Thessalonians 5:5

Note that Paul told THEM that the day would not
overtake THEM as a thief.

"And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the
Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his
mighty angels," - 2 Thessalonians 1:7

Note, that those who are troubled in that church in
Thessalonica) would rest with them (the Apostles)
when Jesus returned.

Now before commenting in your mind, or getting ready
to respond to me by telling me that this may simply
mean whomever is alive at the time He returns, you must
first understand and acknowledge that this letter was
written as a response to a letter that they wrote to
Paul. That means that Paul was responding to the
Thessalonians, answering THEIR questions, NOT ours.
When he uses the word "you", he means it directed
toward the people he is writing to.

Would you write a letter to someone, answering their
questions and then when they read it, expect them to
think that it really means someone thousands of years
in the future? Of course not, so why expect that here?

And let me ask you this... when I am posting this
message and I just asked YOU if YOU would write a
letter like that, did you think I was really addressing
people thousands of years from now? Of course not.

There is much that can be said about the passage, such
as the fact that Paul said that the iniquity is already
working (in the 1st century) and the falling away,
which did occur in the first century and is even noted
in the NT. Something the end timers skip right over.
But the meat of the message from the end timers, is
that we should take those passages as meaning that
the day of Christ had not come yet. That is what
I will address and make a few points about. It is very
important to remember two things, while reading my
comments.

1) It was written to a 1st century church, in the 1st
century and so thus, must not be blindly applied
to any century we want to apply it to.

2) The end timers claim that this "day of the Lord"
means Jesus returning in judgment and that it is a
world wide event. How could the Thessalonians be
confused whether or not the Lord had come, when all
would supposedly "see Jesus riding on a cloud" and it
would be as, "lightning, from the east to the west"?
The fact is, some false teachers had entered the church
there (whether by letter, or letter and in person) and
claimed that Jesus had already returned, but ask
yourself, how could anyone possibly get away with
teaching that and confuse them, if it was going to be
a world wide event, that no one could possibly miss,
especially with heaven and earth passing away (which
end timers believe is a literal statement)? That is a
good, logical reason to assume that it was NOT going to
be a world wide destructive event and that Jesus used
commonly known Jewish symbolism in His teaching.

"Come now and let us reason together, saith the Lord"

Anyway, on with the comments...

2 Thessalonians 2:1-2

1) Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our
Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto
him,
2) That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled,
neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from
us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

Now while people try to claim that this verse has
something to do with the end of the world, or a
Rapture, etc., let's look at this logically. They
received a letter, or a word from someone who claimed
to be Apostles (probably forged with Paul's name and
the name of other Apostles), saying that the end had
come. So they wrote to Paul, to see if this were true.
The letter, or word, obviously purported to be from
the Apostles. Now let's see where that leaves us...

END: They wouldn't have thought the END OF THE WORLD
had come, since they obviously would have noticed that,
don't ya think?. :) There's one part of the man made
doctrine in the trash bucket. :)

RAPTURE: They also wouldn't think it had anything to do
with a Rapture, since if it did, why would they write
to Paul about it? Didn't they think he would be
raptured and gone, if he told them such a thing would
happen and they thought it had already occurred?
Therefore, they wouldn't have written to him about some
rapture, since they would have figured he wouldn't be
there to receive the letter. :) They also would have
been wondering why they weren't raptured. The fact is,
that they were Christians and they would have known,
had some "Rapture" (as these end timers preach it)
occurred, they wouldn't be there to write the letter,
so that wouldn't even be a question. :) There's
another piece of the man made doctrine in the
trash bucket. :)

No, it isn't discussing the end of the world, nor some
rapture. They are referring to the end, which was the
judgment and destruction of Jerusalem, which they had
heard happened and the "gathering" wasn't about a
disappearance of people from the planet and Paul wrote
back to reassure them that the end had not come yet.
The "end", the "last days", etc., were "at hand",
because what Jesus prophesied about, was the judgment
and destruction of Jerusalem (and He said that's what
it was, in Luke 21:20-22). The Scriptures are not
discussing a Rapture here. The end timers are mixing
up two different things and this comes from a lack of
understanding of language and imagery used by the
Holy men of God throughout the Old Testament. Paul
was a Pharisee of the strictest sect, yet people today
expect that this played no part in how he wrote.
That's ridiculous.

This is what I mean when I say that we need to look at
the other passages in light of Biblical truth and not
man made doctrines.

What these people don't even consider, is that no one
is given a second chance at salvation, in that God will
not appear before them and then say that now they have
to make a decision, which is what would have to happen,
should this Rapture occur. So what do these people do?
They claim that He returns invisibly the first time
(which is really the Second Coming folks, if you know
how to count) and that then He will return again,
later, visibly, which means that they actually believe
in THREE "Comings" of the Lord Jesus Christ, after
the first one. Has anyone ever bothered to count these
before? :) Oh, but wait, let me guess, since He isn't
visible and didn't touch down on Earth, that one
doesn't count, right? :)

So they wait, thinking that we are now in the last days
and that "soon", "at hand" and "near", which were
written in the first century, don't mean what they say.
They then go out and buy commentaries that stroke their
ego and their vanity, by telling them how these words
can really just mean, "at some time in the future, but
not necessarily soon, so the Bible really is about
you". The reality is, when you say that "at hand",
"soon" and "near" can mean any amount of time, because
the Lord isn't bound by time, you're only saying that
they mean nothing at all. Let's apply that rule to the
whole Bible and see what happens. The fact is, while
time may mean nothing to God, it does mean something to
us and God used humans to write the Bible to be read by
other humans, who do understand time frames when they
read them and expect that God is being honest with
them, when He communicates a human time frame.

The fact is, that if a Rapture occurred, it would mean
that people are given a second chance, since they would
know exactly when the judgment would be coming, to the
day (just count the 7 years, or 3.5, or whatever you
believe), even though Jesus said no one knows the day,
nor the hour. This idea is not supported by Scripture,
but rather, it contradicts Scripture.

It is obvious to anyone who reads the New Testament,
that Jesus taught that He would return within the same
generation of people standing there (Matthew 16:27-28;
24:34). It is also obvious that Paul taught the
immanency of Christ's return and that he expected it
to happen in their lifetime. So the question to the
end timers is simply: "Do you really think the Master
would allow Paul to teach this if it were not accurate
and also allow Paul to claim to be teaching what he
(Paul) learned from Jesus Himself?". Their answer
to this question shall be the judge of the accuracy of
their beliefs. Either they believe Jesus when He said
He would return before all of the Apostles died, or
they call Him a liar. Their choice.

Re: Matthew 16:27-28 (compare v27 w/Rev 22:12):

And don't let them make claims about it being the
Transfiguration. He said that SOME would still be
alive and NONE had died at the time of the
Transfiguration. And don't let them try to tell you
about "double fulfillment". Is heaven and earth going
to literally pass away twice? :) And if it happened
once already (literally), then where is this supposed
literal earthly kingdom that the end timers preach
about?

They have failed to take into proper consideration the
following passages (mentioned above)...

Matthew 16:27-28

27) For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his
Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every
man according to his works.

Note that this verse speaks of the judgment. There is
no mistaking that.

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.

Note that He clearly states that some STANDING THERE
would NOT die before His return.

There is no playing with the word "generation" as some
people try to do with Matthew 24:34, claiming that it
means, "the Jewish race", or "an age", etc.. That's a
load of hogwash! The word means just what it says.

Anyway, take a look at the following passage and then
let me ask you a question.

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass,
one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the
law, till all be fulfilled." - Matthew 5:18

If this "heaven and earth passing away" statement is a
literal event and it hasn't happened yet and Jesus said
that until it did, not one jot nor tittle of the Law
would pass, how come we are not still under the Law?
Doesn't it make sense that it either passed, or we are
still under the Law?

And they think that the Tribulation could not have
occurred yet, because nothing that horrible occurred
yet, they should think again. That is a false
statement and comes from ignorance. They have no clue
what happened in the 1st century and yet, make this
claim. When is the last time you heard of people being
covered in tar and such and hung from posts for miles
on roads and then lit on fire, while still alive, to be
used for street lamps? And what of the fighting over
babies, to cook for food and mass murder and beheadings
and torture that went on in the few years before the
destruction of Jerusalem? That's just a taste of what
went on. And lest we forget, Jesus' words were
fulfilled, to the letter during that period of time.

Now doesn't it make sense that all other passages must
be interpreted in light of those statements?

Their belief system does not hold up under Biblical
scrutiny.

Now I know the obvious question is, "If Jesus already
returned and all that happened, then what good is the
Bible to us?".

It is plenty good! God said, "Thou shalt not kill".
That is an ancient text, but isn't it still good today?

The fact is, that while these folks keep claiming Jesus
is coming and He never does, the atheists laugh at
them. And while they claim people are converted
because of the fear of His return, how many fall away,
because they are tired of hearing current events being
told as being in the Bible and that Jesus is returning
soon and never see it?

You see, I can point to my Bible and I can show how the
prophecies were fulfilled. How Jesus kept His promise.
How there is no more death. We are instantly taken to
Heaven at death. We do not "sleep", waiting for His
return. I also have no problem texts to deal with now.
For example, I don't have to try to get around the
following passage...

"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

He said, "this generation". No, He didn't say, "The
generation alive at the time when this happens.". He
said, "this generation". The problem is with how
people take v3. Folks think (due to bad translation of
the word) that the disciples asked about the "end of
the world". They didn't. They asked about the "end of
THE AGE". The Greek has a word for the physical world
(in its entirety). It is "kosmos". That word is not
used in v3, nor in any other place in the NT, where
it speaks of the coming destruction, but rather, always
uses a word that describes the region. And the word
there in Mat 24:3 is "aion", which means simply,
"an age". Note some other translations and you'll see
the words "the age" there in v3.

BTW, I also highly recommend taking a look at the LITV.
It is available free with e-Sword (which is also free).
And finally, not this FULFILLED PROPHECY about when
Babylon conquered Jerusalem and tell me that it isn't
the same language that Jesus used. This is history and
it cannot be denied. Any local library will show you
that much. :)

Note that it talks about, in regard to that event which
is past, "birth pangs", "the day of the Lord",
"judgment", the Sun and the Moon going dark, etc..

Isaiah 13:1,6-11

1) The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son
of Amoz did see.
6) Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand;
it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.
7) Therefore shall all hands be faint, and every
man's heart shall melt:
8) And they shall be afraid: pangs and sorrows shall
take hold of them; they shall be in pain as a woman
that travaileth: they shall be amazed one at another;
their faces shall be as flames.
9) Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with
wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and
he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.
10) For the stars of heaven and the constellations
thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be
darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not
cause her light to shine.
11) And I will punish the world for their evil, and the
wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the
arrogance of the proud to cease, and will lay low the
haughtiness of the terrible.

As I said, it is complete ignorance of the language of
the OT Scriptures, which is what the Apostles preached
from (Acts 18:28) that allows these doctrines to grow.

The difference here, was that this event was going to
be the removal of the Old Covenant system and that
was done spiritually when Jesus ascended and He
manifested that physically, in the destruction of
the Temple, in 70 AD and "not one stone was left
upon another" of the temple, literally.

Historical evidence of the return of Jesus being the
judgment on Jerusalem and the surrounding area.

Heavenly phenomena:

- A star resembling a sword
- A comet (Halley's Comet)
- A bright light shining around the altar
and the temple
- A vision of chariots and soldiers running around
among the clouds and all cities of Palestine.

Earthly phenomena (reported by priests)

- A quaking
- A great noise
- The sounds of a great multitude saying,
"Let us remove hence."

Read the testimonies and get more detailed information
at the following link...

http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyArchive/c/chariots-in-clouds.html
God removed His presence from the Temple for good!

And read Hebrews. It's all about the fact that first
came the physical (OT) and then the spiritual
fulfillment (not the other way around, as the futurists
believe).

And while you wait for Christ to reign, doesn't the
Bible say that He already does?

The thing you miss, when you claim that Christ does not
rule, is that God has ALWAYS ruled.

"But Abram said to the king of Sodom, “I have raised
my hand to the LORD, God Most High, the Possessor
of heaven and earth," - Genesis 14:22

"For the kingdom *_IS_* the LORD’s, And He rules
over the nations." - Psalm 22:28

"For the LORD Most High is awesome; He is a great
King over all the earth." - Psalm 47:2

Psalm 47:6-8

6) Sing praises to God, sing praises!
Sing praises to our King, sing praises!
7) For God is the King of all the earth;
Sing praises with understanding.
8) God reigns over the nations;
God sits on His holy throne.

And even before that was written. Joshua said that God
already ruled in his (Joshua's) day...

"...for the LORD your God, He *_IS_* God in heaven
above and on earth beneath" - Joshua 2:11

Note: "IS", not "will be".

God was obviously not on Earth sitting on a throne
at that point. Are you saying those passages were
not true? How do you explain this, in light of your
claim that He has yet to rule as King of the nations
of Earth?

The fact is, the people came to Jerusalem in the OT
to worship and God was not sitting on a physical
throne. In fact, God said the following...

Acts 7:48-50

48) However, the Most High does not dwell in temples
made with hands, as the prophet says:
49) Heaven is My throne,
And earth is My footstool.
What house will you build for Me? says the LORD,
Or what is the place of My rest?
50) Has My hand not made all these things?

How do we build an Earthly throne for someone
Who makes the planet Earth His footstool?

So when Zechariah says...

"And the LORD shall be King over all the earth.
In that day it shall be; The LORD is one; And
His name one." - Zechariah 14:9

...what it is saying, is that Christ will rule and
God's name will be unified in the Father and
Son, for all to know this.

That's what Paul meant when he said (and it
is why he said)...

"And when all things shall be subdued unto him,
then shall the Son also himself be subject unto
him that put all things under him, that God may
be all in all." - 1 Corinthians 15:28

This shows that the difference is that God handed it
over to Christ and did so, when Christ ascended. It
was not some "future event, thousands of years later".
Daniel said clearly that Christ would rule when He
ascended.

Sometimes just ONE WORD can change the ENTIRE
meaning and view of a passage and the context of it!
So pay close attention here, because that is exactly
what's about to happen. :)

Ancient of Days = God the Father
Son of Man = Jesus Christ

Daniel 7:13-14

13) I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like
the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven,
and came *_TO_* to the Ancient of days, and they
brought him near before him.
14) And there was given him dominion, and glory,
and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages,
should serve him: his dominion *_IS_* an everlasting
dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom
that which shall not be destroyed.

Note that He received His Kingdom when He ASCENDED.
He was not waiting to one day receive it. Take a look.

The Father (Ancient of Days) is in Heaven and it says
that He came *_TO_* the Ancient of Days and received
His dominion and glory, etc. and it says that His
dominion *IS* an everlasting dominion, thus proving
that it is a present tense statement at the time of
His ascension and that it is EVERLASTING. It is
NOT some 1,000 year reign. You can't have it both
ways. It can't be forever and end, even if temporarily
since it says that it is "everlasting" at the time He
receives it, which IS WHEN HE ASCENDED. Thus,
Christ began His rule when He ascended.

We should also take a look at Stephen's response,
when they were stoning him...

Acts 7:55-56

55) But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up
steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and
Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56) And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the
Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

Ah, how much we miss in our readings, huh?... :)

And as I said, Christ's reign is eternal.

Luke 1:31-33

31) And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb,
and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son
of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him
the throne of his father David:
33) And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever;
and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Thus, the Bible proves that Christ received His Kingdom
when He ascended and that His reign is eternal. And
nowhere and I mean nowhere, does the Bible teach that
Christ will rule from Earth.

And the very thought of an earthly throne for even God
was mocked as follows:

Acts 7:48-51

48) But, the Most High does not dwell in temples made
with hands, as the prophet says,
49) "Heaven is My throne and earth is My footstool.
What house will you build Me, says the Lord, or what is
the place of My rest?
50) Has not My hand made all these things?"
51) O stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears!
You always resist the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did,
so you do.

To think that God will nevertheless come back in Christ
and sit on an earthly throne defies the discontent the
Lord had for such a thought in the first place. David's
throne was a foreshadow of the throne of glory where
Christ now sits.

Acts 2:30-36

30) Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God
had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his
loins, according to the flesh, He would raise up Christ
to sit upon his throne,
31) seeing this beforehand, he spoke of the
resurrection of Christ, that His soul was not left in
Hades, nor would His flesh see corruption,
32) God raised up this Jesus, of which we all are
witnesses.
33) Therefore being exalted to the right of God, and
having received from the Father the promise of the Holy
Spirit, He has poured out this which you now see and
hear.
34) For David has not ascended into the heavens, but he
says himself, "The LORD said to my Lord, Sit at My
right hand
35) until I place Your enemies as a footstool to Your
feet."
36) Therefore let all the house of Israel know
assuredly that God made this same Jesus, whom you
crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Note: HAS MADE, PAST TENSE!

The above passage states plainly the reason why Christ
would be raised. It would be to sit on the throne of
David. "God had sworn with an oath to him, that
of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he
would raise up Christ to sit on his throne."

And we read that Christ was indeed raised. "This Jesus
hath God raised up."

And we not that He raised Him up to do what?
To sit on His throne.

Go back again to Daniel 7:13-14, which shows us that
Christ received His throne when He ascended and
we see that this fits perfectly!

So if, as the futurists claim, He was raised to sit on
the throne of David, and that seating has not yet
occurred, is it mere coincidence that the passage
speaks of Christ being "seated"? Is that "seating"
something other than that which is upon the throne
of David? Not at all. The throne of David was in
reference to the throne at the right hand of the Father
in which Christ is King over all.

Note the first passage in the following Scripture shows
that Christ was already seated, past tense and shows
that His throne is in Heaven, not on Earth. The rest
is made up by the futurists. Nowhere does the Bible
teach that Christ would leave His throne! His reign
IS ETERNAL (Luke 1:31-33) !

Ephesians 1:20-22

20) which He worked in Christ in raising Him from
the dead, and He seated Him at His right hand in the
heavenlies,
21) far above all principality and authority and power
and dominion, and every name being named, not only
in this world, but also in the coming age.
22) And He has put all things under His feet and gave
Him to be Head over all things to the church,

Notice that the above passage says that Christ is
seated at God's right hand far above all powers, not
only in this world. In other words, he is seated above
all powers in this world! Dispensationalism induces
its proponents to believe that He is not yet seated on
David's throne over this world because sin yet abounds
in this world. However, the Bible says quite plainly
that sin will exist beneath His reign, because He is
not reigning until after sin and all enemies are made
his footstool, but He is reigning until all enemies are
made his footstool.

In other words, the futurists have it backwards!
They claim that Christ can't be reigning, because
sin is here and that he reigns after sin is gone.
The Bible says THE OPPOSITE. It says that He
is reigning NOW and will hand over His Kingdom
after all of His enemies are made His footstool.

1 Corinthians 15:24-26

24) then is the end, when He delivers the kingdom
to God, even the Father; when He makes to cease
all rule and all authority and power.
25) for it is right for Him to reign until He has put
all the enemies under His feet.
26) The last enemy made to cease is death.

Note that it says that He will deliver the Kingdom
to His Father. Let me ask you... How can He deliver
what He does not possess, if He is not yet reigning?

I would welcome reasonable and polite conversation.
Please do not insult me again, by implying that I
don't know my Bible. (:

If we end up disagreeing, okay. But I ask that we be
honest with each other and with ourselves and concede
points when they are made and cannot be refuted and
I have proved that Christ received His Kingdom and
began His eternal reign, when He ascended, have I not?

And please don't say no and then paste in Scriptures,
which means that you're ignoring what I said and
pitting the Bible against itself. More Scriptures is
fine, but please deal with what I've written (I know
it is long and you can't respond to every single word)
and if you're going to add more Scripture, make sure
that it COMPLIMENTS what is already posted and
please explain, in YOUR own words (not web links)
how it adds to what I have posted and disproves
what I have said.

In other words, just pasting Scripture and assuming
you are right about the meaning would be arrogant,
wouldn't it? I have read the Bible 15 times and I
have read various books in the OT many times and
have read the NT hundreds of times. I point this
out to let you know that I am obviously familiar
with the Bible and yet, I see things differently than
you do, so you'll have to back up your claims. :)

I look forward to a lively discussion, should you
decide to partake in one! :)

Lies and False Accusations by Pastor Dave, (aka Ananias917)

(See post "Pastor Dave is Invisable to me" alt.christnet.christianlife,
11/19/05)

Brandon said: "I have lost count on how many posts you have called
people names, and cused even. You return insult for insult, and rudness
for rudness, how can you stand on your soap box and say you have a
shepards heart for the flock. You do not answer questions when asked,
and avoid any evidence when presented it. Your a mean person that does
dishoner to God's good name by calling yourself a Pastor.
I pray for you,
Brandon

Pastor Dave said, "Find me telling one lie." (11/26)

a) On more than one occasion Dave accused owd, "Now you go ahead and
keep pasting links to the daily news.."
Dave, please post a link to any post or statement of where I (owd) "keep
pasting links to the daily news..."
If you cannot or will not, then you are proven to be a liar and false
accusar.

b) Dave posted, "The simple fact is, that what you bombard us with, is
day after day of news reports, with claims that they're in the Bible.
Dave, please post a those links where I (owd) have "bombard you with, is
day after day of news reports, with claims that they're in the Bible."
If you cannot or will not, then you are proven to be a liar and false
accusar.

c) Dave posted, "Btw, have you written a letter of apology to Saddam
Hussein yet? Have you taken the time to apologize to him, for calling
him, "The AntiChrist"?
Dave, please post the link to where I (owd) stated, said, or calling
him, "The AntiChrist"?
If you cannot or will not, then you are proven to be a liar and false
accusar.

d) Hey, thanks for being a "good Christian" and continuing this thread...
Dave, this is another false accusation-- because, YOU POSTED into this
thread _19 TIMES_ to my (owd) SIX (6) posts. There are about eight
people who posted to this thread, and you OUT POSTED them all! YOU ARE
THE ONE WHO KEPT THE THREAD GOING!
Proving (again) that you are a false accuser.

e) Dave accused, "You practice newspaper prophecy, trying to wrap your
Bible around the daily news. Everything that happens in the news,
suddenly becomes, "Bible prophecy being fulfilled before our eyes".
Dave, please post links to any post or statement where I claim
"Everything that happens in the news, suddenly becomes, "Bible prophecy
being fulfilled before our eyes".
If you cannot or will not, then you are proven to be a liar and false
accusar.


(See Post "Knowing When" by oldwetdog, alt.christnet.christainlife 11/26/05)

f) Dave said: "Thank you for proving that you cannot deal with my words.
Yet, of course, you claim to be refuting my supposedly, "false
doctrine"." First, note that "Pastor Dave" refused to respond to the
content or subject of the post.
Second, "Pastor Dave" accused 'futurists' of "saying no one can know
when, then claiming it will be in this generation."
The post (which Dave posted into *FOUR* times) was an explanation of the
lie that no one can know when. This post explained that there is a
difference between knowing the Day and Hour, and recognizing the
generation. Dave "top posted" (the act of a Troll) his false
accusations, but refused to consider the subject of the post.

(See "A Time for Everything" by oldwetdog alt.christnet.christianlife
11/28/05)

g) Dave: "Well, you said it's all about YOU and YOUR time and that YOU
have the answers, didn't YOU?"
Dave, please post the link where I (owd) said, "it's all about YOU (me)
and YOUR (my) time and that YOU (I) have the answers, didn't YOU (I)?"
If you cannot or will not, then you are proven to be a liar and false
accusar.

(See "Some Serious Questions" by oldwetdog, alt.christnet.christianlife
12/6/05)

h) Dave, you accused: "That's what YOU say. You claim to know that we
are the generation that will see Jesus return and a lot of other things,
like Europe is in the Bible and so are nuclear weapons AND you claim
these things ARE FACT and also that you do NOT INTERPRET.
Dave, please post a link to the post or statement where I said that I
"do NOT INTERPRET."
If you cannot or will not or do not then you are a false accuser.

Now let us hear the conclusion of the matter:
Pastor Dave (aka Ananias917) is a liar and false accuser.

owd