| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Echo2Drs" |
| Date: |
15 Jan 2005 11:42:17 AM |
| Object: |
The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
The Parable of the Tares
Matthew 13:24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of
heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
Matthew 13:25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the
wheat, and went his way.
Tares are weeds, but they look just like the wheat at first, until they bare
fruit. The fruit is black, easy to tell it from the wheat. The enemy planted
the tares along side the wheat.
Matthew 13:26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then
appeared the tares also.
Just picture a wheat field and how the wheat bends as the wind blows across the
field. The tares will not bend, they just stand out above the wheat.
Matthew 13:27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir,
didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
The word seed in Greek is sperma, just so you understand what it is talking
about.
Matthew 13:28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said
unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
You could see the tares above the wheat by this time.
Matthew 13:29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up
also the wheat with them.
It would be hard to separate the wheat from tares because the root systems
would have grown together by this time.
Matthew 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of
harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together... FIRST... the tares,
and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
(A barn is built on the ground here on EARTH. A barn does not float (or
rapture) around in the air. NOBODY is going anywhere! NOBODY is going to be
"raptured away!
The reapers will see the tares above the wheat, but their roots have grown
together. At the harvest, the reapers will separate the tares... FIRST... and
burn them. Do you understand the parable of the tares? We will move ahead to
verse 34.
Matthew 13:34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and
without a parable spake he not unto them:
Matthew 13:35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet,
saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been
kept secret from the foundation of the world.
The word foundation in Greek is katabole 2598, it means to throw down. This was
the over throw of evil mankind, (The Satan), at the end of the first world age.
This means the parable of the tares was keep secret from the beginning of this
present world age, until Jesus Christ told the parable. They still did not
understand the parable of the tares.
Matthew 13:36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and
his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares
of the field.
The disciples did not even understand the parable of the tares. Do you
understand the parable of the tares. Jesus The Christ will explain the parable
of the tares.
Matthew 13:37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is
the Son of man;
Jesus Christ sowed the good seed, sperma in the Greek.
Matthew 13:38 The field is the world; the good seed are the CHILDREN of the
kingdom; but the tares are the CHILDREN of the wicked [one];(The Satan)
(the word children means MORE THAN ONE)
The wheat field is the whole world. The good seed are the children of the
kingdom. The tares are the children of the wicked one. It is talking about
children, understand? "The Satan" is all the immoral acts and thoughts of
mankind!
Matthew 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of
the world; and the reapers are the angels.
The wicked one is the Devil, (Evil Mankind-The Devil) the harvest is the end of
this age and the reapers are the angels. Remember, Jesus Christ is not telling
a parable now, He is telling you what the parable means.
Matthew 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so
shall it be in the end of this world.
Remember the tares are gathered... FIRST... and burned in the fire. Remember
Jesus Christ is not telling a parable now, He is explaining the parable.
Matthew 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather
out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
The only people that are going any place are the tares. Wonder what happened to
the so called "RAPTURE THEORY" Now?! The RAPTURE THEORY is a FALSE TEACHING!
Matthew 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be
wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Matthew 13:43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of
their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
(Remember His children was gathered in His Barn, that tells us that His Kingdom
will be set up right here on this Earth. Nobody will be "Raptured Away" in the
air.
The rapture theory has been preached in many churches, and some even think they
want to be the FIRST ones taken, as in the scripture of the two women working
in the field the FIRST one is taken and the other one left!
Well if you understand the parable of the Tares, you realize the FIRST ones
taken are the Tares, so, I really don't think you want to be the FIRST ones
taken!
They are the ones burned in the bundles not gathered in His Barn!
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
15 Jan 2005 02:45:32 PM |
|
|
"...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: Then we which are alive and remain shall be
caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the
air..."
-- 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17
"Immediately after the tribulation... they shall see the Son of man
coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall
send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather
together his elect..."
-- Matthew 24:29-31
"...the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together
unto him..."
..
-- 2 Thessalonians 2:1
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bible Studies with Satan" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
15 Jan 2005 03:01:32 PM |
|
|
....
And there appeared another wonder in heaven. And lo and behold a great red
super-customized 1964 low-rider Chevy, having 700 horsepower and ten
la-cucaracha horns, and white leather tuck and roll seats stitched with seven
rows.
Rev. 12:3
.
|
|
|
| User: "Echo2Drs" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
07 Feb 2005 11:39:57 PM |
|
|
And there appeared another wonder in heaven. And lo and behold a great red
super-customized 1964 low-rider Chevy, having 700 horsepower and ten
la-cucaracha horns, and white leather tuck and roll seats stitched with seven
rows.
Rev. 12:3
Sorry, I prefer Toyota's myself!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Echo2Drs" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
16 Jan 2005 02:39:04 PM |
|
|
Subject: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture"
Noah found grace in Gods eyes didn't he? But Noah wasn't "raptured" away
either was he? He was told to build a boat or suffer a mouthful of saltwater!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Echo2Drs" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
15 Jan 2005 08:00:26 PM |
|
|
But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are
"asleep," (CROSSED OVER, "DIED") that ye sorrow not, ...even as "others"...
(HERE WITH US NOW, THE LIVE ONES) which have NO HOPE.
1Th 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also
which "sleep"...(DIED) in Jesus WILL GOD BRING WITH HIM.
....Sounds to me like He's coming HERE and bringing His followers with Him that
have already "slept"..."died!"
1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are
ALIVE [and] remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are
asleep, (DEAD).
1Th 4:16 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:
....Sounds to me like the Lord will DESCEND, from heaven, now why would we
ASSEND if He was DESCENDING HERE???!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
16 Jan 2005 02:50:06 PM |
|
|
On 15 Jan 2005 12:45:32 -0800, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, pontificated:
I have posted a response I just sent someone else last
night, so if any of this talks about questions you may
have asked and you didn't ask those questions, please
forgive me. This response does directly address your
Scripture quotes though.
In light of your demand for literalism when it
discusses stars falling to the earth, etc., while at
the same time, you try to make Jesus' direct statement
about returning within the lifetime of the Apostles be
figurative and mean something else, I would like you to
first take note of the following passages, which deal
with FULFILLED prophecies and please ANSWER the
questions that I ask...
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
Did they see the Lord literally riding on a cloud?
Did the idols literally move?
Did the heart of Egypt literally melt?
How about this one, which is a Psalm of David, AFTER
God delivered him from his enemies?
Psalm 18:9,14
9) He bowed the heavens also, and came down: and
darkness was under his feet.
14) Yea, he sent out his arrows, and scattered them;
and he shot out lightnings, and discomfited them.
Did God literally "bow the heavens"?
Did He have "darkness under His feet"?
Did God literally "send out arrows"?
Did God literally "shoot out lightnings" to defeat
David's enemies?
If you answered "No" to the questions, then you agree
that neither of these (and there are more) are literal
statements, yet you demand that I take the one that you
quoted literally. Both are saying the same thing. The
people would "see" Him and they would "see" Him "riding
on a cloud". Yet in the OT, more than once it talks
about God riding on a cloud in judgment and yet, no one
literally saw Him doing that. The cloud image is
merely a symbol of God's presence.
You forget who wrote these things. They were Jews.
Any Jew that read it, would immediately understand what
was being said and when Jesus (a Jew) said it to His
Jewish disciples, they would have immediately picked up
on it. That's why when He used imagery regarding the
end of the age and the judgment in Matthew 13, He asked
the disciples, "Have you understood all these things?"
and they said, "Yes, Lord". They were Jews and picked
up on the symbolism and imagery right away.
You need to stop reading the Bible as if it were
written in the 21st century. It wasn't and if you
truly want to understand what was written, it would
behoove you to study the life and times of those people
and the way that they thought, wrote and spoke. In
other words, in your mind, become a 1st century Jew and
then read it and you'll see a whole lot more of it open
up to you. It is also helpful to understand the Roman
way of life and some of the other peoples involved, who
were written to, in the letters of the NT. I spent
quite some time doing that and boy, did my
understanding open up!
"...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: Then we which are alive and remain shall be
caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the
air..."
-- 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17
"Immediately after the tribulation... they shall see the Son of man
coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall
send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather
together his elect..."
-- Matthew 24:29-31
The other Scripture that you would reference would be 1
Corinthians 15:52, which I'll deal with later, but
suffice it to say, it does not say that we will become
spiritual bodies. It says that we will all be changed.
Let me ask you a question. When you were born again,
were you changed? Did your physical body change?
It sounds as if you're pretty much giving the standard
arguments of those who believe in the Rapture and that
Jesus has yet to return. So what I think we need to do
here, is to look at the whole picture, using the
passages that the Rapturist/End Timers do.
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 you are
claiming that everyone will see Jesus return and
everyone will hear the trump of God and see the dead
rise, etc.. But you don't realize what a contradiction
you 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.
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 you 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? :) Now if you claim that only
the saved will hear it, then you have left the
literalism that you claim about this appearance being
visual and the trump being heard around the world and
so, defeat your own argument of literalism in this
passage. Besides, you 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? :)
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 you do, is that if it were as you 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 you
don't believe that, so the way you read it must be
wrong. Again, you must abandon the approach to this
passage that you 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 and since you noted the Greek in your
message, it is only logical that you should heed what
the Greek actually says.
The Greeks had more than one word, that translates into
the English word, "air". 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). Do you wish to now
change your 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 you use for this verse, you
must, in order to be honest about it, change your
belief and claim that 6 billion copies of Jesus will
appear. Remember, you brought the Greek into this, so
now you are bound to what it says. So what will it be?
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
That is what he meant and he was referencing the return
of Jesus. Note that we must put v55 above in context.
First we must acknowledge that when referencing death
for believers (OT, or NT), the statement is that they
"slept".
1 Corinthians 15:20-26
20) But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become
the firstfruits of them that slept.
Notice here, Christ became the firstfruits of those
that slept (past tense, died before His death and
resurrection). Now reference the statements about
Christ preaching to those in prison. Preaching what?
He rose and so they rose also (they were "sleeping").
Also see where there was a resurrection of the dead
when Christ was crucified. I am not saying that their
physical bodies rose (since it is not our physical
bodies that will rise, as I discuss later in this
message), but they were at least seen. At most, this
is a reference to those who died and had faith, before
Jesus came. God simply used a physical sign here, to
reveal a spiritual event that was taking place.
21) For since by man came death, by man came also the
resurrection of the dead.
22) For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all
be made alive.
Note, "shall be made alive". It is still in the
future. Those who die in Christ would sleep until His
return.
23) But every man in his own order: Christ the
firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his
coming.
See above. At the return of Christ, the believers
would rise.
24) Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered
up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall
have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25) For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies
under his feet.
26) The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
Note: The last enemy to be destroyed is death.
Now what the Rapturists do, is to try to claim that we
will die, be with God and then, one day, return to
Earth and be raised and take our old physical bodies
again, that have miraculously been changed. But does
that thinking hold water? No, it doesn't. Is that
teaching found anywhere in the Bible? No, it is not.
The fact is, that unless Christ returned, you die and
sleep until He does. Paul clearly taught that.
Anyway, let's look at 1 Corinthians a bit more...
1 Corinthians 15:35-37,50-55
35) But some man will say, How are the dead raised up?
and with what body do they come?
36) Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened,
except it die:
37) And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that
body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of
wheat, or of some other grain:
Notice here that Paul tells us that what is sown isn't
what is grown. Therefore, the body that goes into the
ground is not the body that is raised. So our physical
bodies can rot away all they like. It won't make any
difference, because their usefulness is gone. Our
physical bodies die and then we live unto eternal life.
50) Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood
cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth
corruption inherit incorruption.
Here Paul tells us that flesh and blood cannot inherit
the kingdom of God. So it is not a physical kingdom
here on Earth, as the end timers like to claim. Yet
they won't face the fact that they violate the words of
Jesus...
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.
You 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?",
realize that all you 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.
When we are resurrected, it is not a reassembling of
our physical bodies. Rather, like the shell of a seed
that is disposed of, when what is inside comes out, so
are these bodies, when we die and our souls go to be
with God (see vs 35-37 above). In fact, that is the
analogy that Paul used (a seed), is it not?
51) Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all
sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52) In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the
last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead
shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
Now here you think you will hear a trumpet and our
physical bodies will be changed, but Paul doesn't
actually say that. He says that we will be changed.
He does not say, "Our physical bodies will be changed".
The dead (in Christ) will hear the trump and rise in
their permanent spiritual, incorruptible bodies, not
the living, but the living will be changed. Why does
it have to be a physical change? When we are born
again, are we not "translated into the kingdom of God's
dear Son"? Check Colossians 1:13. Yet no one looks
for a physical change. Isn't that a hypocritical
approach?
53) For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and
this mortal must put on immortality.
54) So when this corruptible shall have put on
incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on
immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying
that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55) O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy
victory?
Now when does mortality put on immortality? When the
mortal is sown. I.e., when we die. We have been
changed, in that we will not sleep when we die. This
can only be true if Christ has already returned. So
now (after His return) we are immediately resurrected.
This is why Paul says, "O death, where is thy sting?".
Death has been conquered now. There is no more dying
and waiting to be resurrected. Note the following...
"For I am in a strait between two, having a desire to
depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better:"
- Philippians 1:23
Now obviously Paul was talking about dying here. So
let me ask you, if he was to wait thousands of years
sleeping, why would he expect to be with Christ? Easy,
because he knew that Christ's return was imminent. If
he slept at all, he knew it wouldn't be for long. Of
course, now you may try to tell me how Paul wouldn't
know how much time passed. But that is just a copout
and an effort to ignore all of the other points I have
already made regarding this text.
Take a look at this passage from the OT and see what
happened to the dead and note that when the Bible
talked about death, it referred to sleep....
"For the living know that they shall die: but the dead
know not any thing..." - Ecclesiastes 9:5
The dead don't know anything. That is because they
slept. See the following Scripture also...
Acts 13:35-37
35) Wherefore he saith also in another psalm, Thou
shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
36) For David, after he had served his own generation
by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto
his fathers, and saw corruption:
37) But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.
Note that David saw corruption. I have no doubt that
he is now in Heaven, but he did see corruption of his
physical body. Why do people believe that we die, then
receive a spiritual body in Heaven and live in the
mansion that Jesus said He prepared for us and then
claim that the best thing, is that we will come back
here and get even newer and better bodies and live on
Earth, as if that would be better than Heaven? Is
Earth better than Heaven? If it is to be better, why
didn't God move here when He created it? And why would
Jesus bother preparing a place in the mansions in His
Father's house, if we were leaving Heaven? After all,
He didn't say, "hotel". He actually said mansions in
His Father's house. That is a place you live, not a
temporary setup. And remember, Paul and the others
spoke of rewards that they would see when they went to
be with Christ. By your logic, they would be only
temporary.
You have not supported your claim. You seem to think
that when two people have a different view of the same
Scriptures, that just posting the Scriptures is enough
to win an argument. It isn't. First, you must tell us
what you are claiming each passage means. You think
that in order to prove me wrong, you don't have to make
any argument. You post these Scriptures as if I, a
pastor, have never read them or something. If you wish
to prove that I am wrong, then prove it by showing me
why the passages you quote support your claim.
You also have repeatedly failed to address the
following passages...
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.
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.
Jesus said, "STANDING HERE".
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34
Jesus said, "THIS GENERATION".
Now doesn't it make sense that all other passages must
be interpreted in light of those statements?
"...the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together
unto him..."
.
-- 2 Thessalonians 2:1
And this was written in the 1st century, not the 21st.
So why do you pretend that Paul wrote it to you?
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 you do not agree with that, then there is
no point in discussion, because you are now cutting out
the parts of the word of God that disagree with your
man made doctrine, instead of the other way around.
The Bible is the inspired, infallible word of the
living God. If you are not in line with that thinking,
then you need to get on your knees and pray, or throw
your Bible away, because if there are errors in it,
then you don't know what you can trust in it. Picking
and choosing what is right and what is wrong, is just
your way of saying that you know better than Jesus and
the Apostles and you make yourself God.
Now that we have that straight, I will first show a few
other quotes from the letters to the same church (which
is what the quote above by the poster was taken from)
and then I will show that the passages he quoted do not
say what he thinks 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 you,
but please, pray first and then read on, trying as best
you can to put your doctrinal biases aside while doing
so. Most people simply don't read the words in the
Bible carefully. Please do so this time. There is no
rush. :) It would be most appreciated.
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 simply addresses
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 do you 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, so
don't go there. :)
You may not see this clearly now, but there is much
that can be said about the passage at the top of this
message that I am responding to, 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 this person, was 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). The Scriptures are not discussing a final
judgment, nor 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. 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, even though Jesus said no one knows the day, nor
the hour. This idea is not supported by Scripture, but
rather, it contradicts Scripture.
Well, let's ask you that question. 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 you 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?". Your answer to this question shall be the
judge of the accuracy of your beliefs. Either you
believe Jesus when He said He would return before all
of the Apostles died, or you call Him a liar. Your
choice. Make one.
And please, don't bother telling me about the
Transfiguration, because He said that SOME would still
be alive and NONE had died at the time of the
Transfiguration. And don't bother telling me 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?
And there's another thing. The end timers contradict
Jesus' words, when they talk about a literal kingdom on
Earth.
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:
Note that the Pharisees wanted to know when the Kingdom
of God would come to the Earth.
Now what was Jesus' response???
"The Kingdom of God cometh NOT WITH OBSERVATION"!!!
I.e., YOU WON'T SEE IT WITH YOUR EYES!!!
21) Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for,
behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
They WON'T say, "look here, or look there"!
The Kingdom of God is WITHIN YOU.
Are the end timers claiming that God will set up His
PHYSICAL Kingdom within them?
The fact is, that it is a spiritual kingdom that God
set up within believers, NOT a physical one and He said
that clearly.
Now that was a direct answer to the claims about a
literal, physical kingdom on Earth, which was the same
mistaken claim that the Pharisees made.
Don't you people get it? The Jews looked for a
physical ruler Messiah and a physical King on Earth.
Yet the Messiah died on a cross and said that His
Kingdom was "not of this world" to Pilate, or His army
would fight here. Yet it didn't, because this world is
not where His kingdom is.
Jesus did not come here to rule the world, nor is He
coming here to set up some physical Kingdom, rebuilding
the Temple that He made sure was destroyed in 70 A.D..
The end timers have got Jesus once again erecting the
Old ways and sacrifice going on again. Do they not see
what they are saying? They are trying to erase Jesus'
work, by trying to make Him back peddle to the Old
Covenant. Outrageous!
The bottom line is, that looking for a physical Kingdom
on Earth was the mistake that the Pharisees made back
then and people today are making the same mistake.
And look at this passage also, regarding the Kingdom of
God and what it would be...
"And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty
and the Lamb are the temple of it." - Revelation 21:22
Now are the end timers saying that the New Jerusalem
will have a temple that is God Himself and that
believers will walk in and out of God Himself?
Remember, THEY preach that these end times passages are
all to be taken literally.
And btw, this also blows apart their belief about
waiting for the third temple to be physically built in
Jerusalem, which I know they are waiting for, because
the Bible says that God Himself would be the temple.
Unless of course, they wish to claim that God is a
physical building, in which Jews will once again offer
animal sacrifices?
Face it, this 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 you folks keep claiming Jesus
is coming and He never does, the atheists laugh at you.
And while you 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. The word there, 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).
www.e-Sword.net
I am waiting for the 4th edition, due out in April (or
thereabouts). It is a literal translation, from the
Majority Texts and the Majority Texts alone. It will
open your eyes to much that you don't normally see,
such as the immanency in many of the statements of
Jesus and the Apostles. The ALT is good also, but only
comes in NT form and can get confusing to read, the way
it is laid out. I normally use the KJV, but I really
like these other translations a lot. :)
Folks also have a problem with His statement in v35:
"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall
not pass away." - Matthew 24:35.
This is because they take this as a literal statement
(heaven and earth passing away). But if you were a 1st
century Jew, you would not have taken it literally, but
rather, symbolically, as the end of the age. Study the
life and times of the people and the way they wrote and
thought and spoke and you will read your Bible in a
whole different way. Remember, Jesus was a Jew and His
mission was to the Jews while on Earth and He spoke as
a Jew, to Jews and the Jews wrote Gospels and letters,
as Jews, about a Jew (Jesus) and wrote just as 1st
century Jews would write and wrote what Jesus (a 1st
century Jew) said as a Jew.
Does anybody have any idea how many times I said
"Jew(s)" in that paragraph? I lost count. :)
"But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the
lost sheep of the house of Israel." - Matthew 15:24
Of course, after His resurrection, He became a light
unto the Gentiles as well. But bear in mind, the
prophesied "time of the Gentiles" was in the 1st
century and reading Romans will confirm that for you.
Romans 10:17-21
17) So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the
word of God.
18) But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their
sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the
ends of the world.
19) But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith,
I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no
people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.
20) But Isaiah is very bold, and saith, I was found of
them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them
that asked not after me.
21) But to Israel he saith, All day long I have
stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and
gainsaying people.
The "foolish nation" is the Gentiles. And notice that
while people are waiting for the whole world to hear
the Gospel and say that could not have happened yet,
they forgot to count how many people were here in the
1st century and they fail to notice that in v19, Paul
says it had already happened. :) He also says it in
the following passage...
Colossians 1:5-6
5) For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven,
whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the
gospel;
6) Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world;
and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since
the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in
truth:
Read it carefully. :)
Also notice the following passages...
"What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which
followed not after righteousness, have attained to
righteousness, even the righteousness which is of
faith." - Romans 9:30
Paul was preaching to the Gentiles. The "time of the
Gentiles" was in the first century. If it wasn't, then
why did Paul become, "the Apostle to the Gentiles"?
Romans 11:11-13
11) I say then, Have they [the Jews] stumbled that they
should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall
salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke
them to jealousy.
12) Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world,
and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles;
how much more their fullness?
13) For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the
apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
Until the "fullness of the Gentiles" came in, Jesus
would not return. The mistake people make, is that
they think that when Paul says "all of Israel shall be
saved", that he is discussing physical Israel.
Romans 11:25-28
25) For I would not, brethren, that ye should be
ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in
your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened
to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come
in.
26) And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written,
There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall
turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27) For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall
take away their sins.
28) As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your
sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved
for the fathers' sakes.
Now I admit in a cursory reading it may seem that way.
But we all know that not every Jew will be saved. And
we must understand that Paul is using the word Israel
in two different ways in these passages. In v26, what
he is saying is that all of the Israel of God will be
saved. After all, what did he tell them that word
meant as far as salvation is concerned? He clearly
showed in the following passages, that Israel is not a
thing of the flesh and that he doesn't always use the
word to mean, "the literal Israel on Earth". And bear
in mind, he taught them this in the SAME letter, BEFORE
he made the statement about "all Israel shall be
saved".
Now before proceeding, this is very important! I said
above that he used the same word in two verses
differently. I can now prove that he did that, because
below, in v6, he will use the SAME WORD two different
ways, in the SAME VERSE!!!
Romans 9:1-8
1) I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience
also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,
2) That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in
my heart.
3) For I could wish that myself were accursed from
Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the
flesh:
4) Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption,
and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the
law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5) Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the
flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed
forever. Amen.
6) Not as though the word of God hath taken none
effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel:
7) Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are
they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be
called.
8) That is, They which are the children of the flesh,
these are not the children of God: but the children of
the promise are counted for the seed.
So you see, Paul was talking about all of Israel being
saved, meaning those who are part of the Promise. Not
the literal, physical Israel, but the "Israel of God".
Not all of those of Israel (flesh) are of Israel
(promise). So it is not logical and it is unScriptural
to assume that there will come a day when all the Jews
will be saved. And history has already shown that to
be untrue. So what do the end timers do? They keep
trying to stretch out the "time of the Gentiles", to
fit a false, man made doctrine.
Also look at the following...
Romans 15:8-12
8) Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the
circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the
promises made unto the fathers:
Rom 15:9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for
his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will
confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy
name.
Rom 15:10 And again he saith, Rejoice, ye Gentiles,
with his people.
Rom 15:11 And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles;
and laud him, all ye people.
Rom 15:12 And again, Isaiah saith, There shall be a
root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the
Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust.
This was happening in the 1st century, folks.
There are more specifics that can be given regarding
prophecy and the "time of the Gentiles", but these
passages show that Paul recognized that this had to
occur before Jesus' return, which even the end timers
admit. However, according to JESUS' OWN WORDS, this
also had to occur before all of the Apostles died.
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 you are not still under the Law?
Doesn't it make sense that it either passed, or we are
still under the Law?
Think about that for a while, before answering. Your
immediate response, if you have one and it is one of
the common ones, when carefully studied, will cause
contradictions in the Bible, so just think about it
carefully before you respond, please.
And btw, if you think that the Tribulation could not
have occurred yet, because nothing that horrible
occurred yet, think again. That is a false statement
and comes from ignorance. You 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.
Do yourself a favor and read Matthew 23 - Matthew 25
and count how many times He says, "this generation" and
"you" and remember that He is in the temple in chapter
23 and that when His disciples ask Him the questions
(end of the age, etc.) in 24:3, that He is showing them
the Temple grounds when He says "not one stone shall be
left upon another" and that that is exactly what
happened when Jerusalem was conquered. The temple was
burned and afterward, the Romans took it apart, stone
by stone, to retrieve the gold that melted and ran
between the stones. Literally, not one stone was left
upon another. But hey, let's wait for a third temple
to be built and then for that to happen all over again,
right? I don't think so.
Also note that He tells those IN JUDAEA to flee to the
mountains. His statements are about a LOCAL EVENT.
Anyway, I believe that I have demonstrated that there
are some problems with the end times way of thinking.
I also know for a fact, that each of the three beliefs
(premillennial, amillennial and postmillennial) are
easy to disprove and when all three can be disproved,
why hang on to any of them? The Rapture is also easily
disproved.
I would be happy to respond to any questions folks
might have. All I ask is that in asking questions, you
don't ignore what has been said here. Firing questions
at me, does not disprove what I have said here. It is
understandable that you would have questions, but
first, you must acknowledge what has been said in this
message and either talk about it if you disagree,
giving solid support for your beliefs, or agree with
it. If you simply say, "Well, what about this? Or
this?", all you are doing at that point, is pitting
Scripture against Scripture and I'm sure you would
agree, that that's no way to do it. So I welcome
comments, discussion and debates. But my rules are
these...
1) The Bible is the only text under consideration here.
2) You may use a Strong's to show the original
language. However, others like Thayer's, etc., that
try to give 4,000 definitions for each word, are not
acceptable. When that is done, it is done to force the
original language to fit today's man made doctrines.
Strong's has been the standard and so I feel it is fair
to say that it is the one that should be used.
3) Your responses must give Scripture quotes that you
wish to put forth, as well as an explanation IN YOUR
OWN WORDS for why it means what you claim it means.
Web links won't even be looked at. Posting them only
tells me that you are either lazy, or don't think it's
important enough to give your time to it (while
claiming it is very important to others), or that you
are not capable of defending your own beliefs and if
that is the case, then why do you believe them?
Anyway, that's all I ask and I think it's reasonable.
Of course, you are always welcome to quote your own
words from another message, or a web page that you made
and worded yourself. Just paste the text into your
message. Do so in a response to a specific point
though. Just responding to a whole post with a web
page isn't the same as dealing specifically with
specific points made.
Anyway, take care and God bless.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Prophet8" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
16 Jan 2005 04:21:51 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:mqjlu05p55agjeqf5uftf4hoing5nvican@4ax.com...
On 15 Jan 2005 12:45:32 -0800, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, pontificated:
I have posted a response I just sent someone else last
night, so if any of this talks about questions you may
have asked and you didn't ask those questions, please
forgive me. This response does directly address your
Scripture quotes though.
Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they
also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of
him. Even so, Amen.
Sure looks literal.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
17 Jan 2005 06:40:20 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:21:51 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:mqjlu05p55agjeqf5uftf4hoing5nvican@4ax.com...
On 15 Jan 2005 12:45:32 -0800, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, pontificated:
I have posted a response I just sent someone else last
night, so if any of this talks about questions you may
have asked and you didn't ask those questions, please
forgive me. This response does directly address your
Scripture quotes though.
Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they
also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of
him. Even so, Amen.
Sure looks literal.
Then why don't you take the following to be literal?
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.
Judgment.
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.
Jesus returns and some of the Apostles would be alive
when it happened.
Also...
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34
You don't seem to take those clear statements
literally. Why not?
As to your claim that the clouds thing is literal,
let's look at this FULFILLED prophecy...
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
Did they see the Lord literally riding on a cloud?
Did the idols literally move?
Did the heart of Egypt literally melt?
What now? And why didn't you even bother with my post?
I explained everything very carefully. You chose to
ignore it all and make a claim about literalism.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Prophet8" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
17 Jan 2005 11:12:39 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3hmou050qcfjraqc4nahvk95vvqndpg602@4ax.com...
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:21:51 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:mqjlu05p55agjeqf5uftf4hoing5nvican@4ax.com...
On 15 Jan 2005 12:45:32 -0800, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, pontificated:
I have posted a response I just sent someone else last
night, so if any of this talks about questions you may
have asked and you didn't ask those questions, please
forgive me. This response does directly address your
Scripture quotes though.
Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and
they
also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because
of
him. Even so, Amen.
Sure looks literal.
Then why don't you take the following to be literal?
Don't have a clue where you got that impression.... The places where the
Bible uses metaphors, it clearly defines them. I've never had any problems
identifying them, so i'm not sure why you are.
So is that your master explanation for how "all the prophesies have been
fulfilled by 70ad" by claiming it was all just a metaphor? Btw, the book of
Revelation wasn't even written till after 70 ad, so the idea that a
prophetic book would be written about the past is almost humorous.
Re 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of
the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
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.
Judgment.
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.
Jesus returns and some of the Apostles would be alive
when it happened.
Also...
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34
You don't seem to take those clear statements
literally. Why not?
As to your claim that the clouds thing is literal,
let's look at this FULFILLED prophecy...
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
Did they see the Lord literally riding on a cloud?
Did the idols literally move?
Did the heart of Egypt literally melt?
What now? And why didn't you even bother with my post?
I explained everything very carefully. You chose to
ignore it all and make a claim about literalism.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
19 Jan 2005 02:35:04 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 05:12:39 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3hmou050qcfjraqc4nahvk95vvqndpg602@4ax.com...
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:21:51 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:mqjlu05p55agjeqf5uftf4hoing5nvican@4ax.com...
On 15 Jan 2005 12:45:32 -0800, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, pontificated:
I have posted a response I just sent someone else last
night, so if any of this talks about questions you may
have asked and you didn't ask those questions, please
forgive me. This response does directly address your
Scripture quotes though.
Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and
they
also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because
of
him. Even so, Amen.
Sure looks literal.
Then why don't you take the following to be literal?
Don't have a clue where you got that impression.... The places where the
Bible uses metaphors, it clearly defines them. I've never had any problems
identifying them, so i'm not sure why you are.
Obviously, you have had problems identifying them. :)
And no, the Bible does not always make clear its use of
metaphors. It does not say, "This is a metaphor".
However, if you study the way of living, thinking and
writing of the Jews at that time, you will have a much
better grasp of what is and isn't, a metaphor. Jesus
was speaking to 1st century Jews and the only question
to ask, is how THEY would have taken His statement and
THEY would have immediately picked up on it.
So is that your master explanation for how "all the prophesies have been
fulfilled by 70ad" by claiming it was all just a metaphor?
Let us deal with the issue at hand and leave the
insults and the practice of putting words into my mouth
behind, shall we? Your really bad attempt at
redefining my argument is obvious to anyone who reads
these posts.
The fact is, I don't have time to argue with someone
who cannot defend their own beliefs and yet, insists
that they are right and that I prove my case and then
when I do, ignores what I have said and makes false
statements about why I believe what I do, as you have
done in your response.
Btw, the book of
Revelation wasn't even written till after 70 ad, so the idea that a
prophetic book would be written about the past is almost humorous.
See below. Also, the Book of Revelation was not
written well after 70 A.D.. You people keep claiming
that, but won't prove it.
The fact is, if it was written after 70 A.D., then why
doesn't it mention the temple having already been
destroyed, when that site was the most important site
in the world to the 1st century Jews?
Many people make claims about late dates for almost all
of the NT and yet, we see no mention of the temple
having been destroyed. It is a ridiculous, modernist
assumption that comes from complete ignorance of their
way of life, that makes the statement that no one would
have mentioned their holy place having been destroyed
and their holy city being ravaged by the Roman army, in
any of the Gospels, Acts, or their letters, if these
late dates are correct. And that is exactly what
you're saying, when you make these claims.
If you will not respond honestly and directly to the
points I have made, then there is no sense in trying to
carry on a discussion with you. So I await one more
response from you.
If you decide to respond and if in it, you deal with
the points I made (which I left quoted in this reply),
then we can proceed.
If you choose to respond again, insulting me and
avoiding the points I made, because you are angry that
someone may be able to show your man made doctrine to
be just that, then I will no longer respond to your
posts. There is no sense in it.
If you can prove your beliefs Scripturally, then I will
believe them too. If you can't, then ask yourself why
you continue to believe them.
And no, I will not waste days reading web links. If
you can't defend your own beliefs, then why do you
believe them? And why do you claim they're Scriptural?
Isn't your hope in eternal life with Jesus? The
resurrection? It certainly was for the Apostles.
"But when Paul perceived that the one part were
Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the
council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of
a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I
am called in question." - Acts 23:6
Paul also said...
1 Corinthians 15:12-17
12) Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the
dead, how say some among you that there is no
resurrection of the dead?
13) But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then
is Christ not risen:
14) And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching
vain, and your faith is also vain.
15) Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God;
because we have testified of God that he raised up
Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead
rise not.
16) For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ
raised:
17) And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye
are yet in your sins.
Now you preach that it is in the future. That the
resurrection hasn't taken place yet. Tell me then, how
is it that believers die and go to be with Jesus, if
the resurrection hasn't happened yet? Have you ever
thought to question that? No need to respond. That
was a rhetorical question.
And since you preach it is in the future, then what I
request of you, is the following...
"But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready
always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a
reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and
fear:" - 1 Peter 3:15
So by responding the way that you do, which is really
no response at all, just insults, you admit that you
are not able to "give an answer... a reason of the
hope that is within you".
That is your problem and insulting me does not solve it
for you. I tell you this as admonishment and not to be
rude.
Re 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of
the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
You quote a verse with which you attempt to insult me.
See above.
The fact is, it is quite obvious to everyone who
practices honest criticism (meaning to dissect these
messages for truth, without any bias), that you were
afraid to attempt to deal with what I posted (below).
Why did you not answer specifically and directly to the
points I made? Here they are, still quoted. Please
answer them honestly, specifically and directly.
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.
Judgment.
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.
Jesus returns and some of the Apostles would be alive
when it happened.
Also...
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34
You don't seem to take those clear statements
literally. Why not?
As to your claim that the clouds thing is literal,
let's look at this FULFILLED prophecy...
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
Did they see the Lord literally riding on a cloud?
Did the idols literally move?
Did the heart of Egypt literally melt?
What now? And why didn't you even bother with my post?
I explained everything very carefully. You chose to
ignore it all and make a claim about literalism.
___
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditations." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Prophet8" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
25 Jan 2005 09:09:57 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ni5su091fbmqralbd6jleli7nrheqct1pa@4ax.com...
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 05:12:39 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3hmou050qcfjraqc4nahvk95vvqndpg602@4ax.com...
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:21:51 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:mqjlu05p55agjeqf5uftf4hoing5nvican@4ax.com...
On 15 Jan 2005 12:45:32 -0800, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, pontificated:
I have posted a response I just sent someone else last
night, so if any of this talks about questions you may
have asked and you didn't ask those questions, please
forgive me. This response does directly address your
Scripture quotes though.
Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him,
and
they
also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail
because
of
him. Even so, Amen.
Sure looks literal.
Then why don't you take the following to be literal?
Don't have a clue where you got that impression.... The places where the
Bible uses metaphors, it clearly defines them. I've never had any
problems
identifying them, so i'm not sure why you are.
Obviously, you have had problems identifying them. :)
And no, the Bible does not always make clear its use of
metaphors. It does not say, "This is a metaphor".
However, if you study the way of living, thinking and
writing of the Jews at that time, you will have a much
better grasp of what is and isn't, a metaphor. Jesus
was speaking to 1st century Jews and the only question
to ask, is how THEY would have taken His statement and
THEY would have immediately picked up on it.
So is that your master explanation for how "all the prophesies have been
fulfilled by 70ad" by claiming it was all just a metaphor?
Let us deal with the issue at hand and leave the
insults and the practice of putting words into my mouth
behind, shall we? Your really bad attempt at
redefining my argument is obvious to anyone who reads
these posts.
The fact is, I don't have time to argue with someone
who cannot defend their own beliefs and yet, insists
that they are right and that I prove my case and then
when I do, ignores what I have said and makes false
statements about why I believe what I do, as you have
done in your response.
Btw, the book of
Revelation wasn't even written till after 70 ad, so the idea that a
prophetic book would be written about the past is almost humorous.
See below. Also, the Book of Revelation was not
written well after 70 A.D.. You people keep claiming
that, but won't prove it.
Hehe... Ok, so lets say you are right and it was written that year.... You'd
still have an impossible time trying to fit the entire prophesy of
revelation into 12 months.
Just so you know, however, the evidence for a 95/96 A.D. date is
overwhelming (Goswiller, n.d., p. 3), Irenaeus even explicitly stating that
John wrote the book during Domitian's reign (Glasson, 1965, p. 8; Morris,
1980, p. 1338).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
26 Jan 2005 07:46:00 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:09:57 GMT, after pondering deep
thoughts, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now> spake
thusly:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ni5su091fbmqralbd6jleli7nrheqct1pa@4ax.com...
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 05:12:39 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3hmou050qcfjraqc4nahvk95vvqndpg602@4ax.com...
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:21:51 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:mqjlu05p55agjeqf5uftf4hoing5nvican@4ax.com...
On 15 Jan 2005 12:45:32 -0800, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, pontificated:
I have posted a response I just sent someone else last
night, so if any of this talks about questions you may
have asked and you didn't ask those questions, please
forgive me. This response does directly address your
Scripture quotes though.
Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him,
and
they
also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail
because
of
him. Even so, Amen.
Sure looks literal.
Then why don't you take the following to be literal?
Don't have a clue where you got that impression.... The places where the
Bible uses metaphors, it clearly defines them. I've never had any
problems
identifying them, so i'm not sure why you are.
Obviously, you have had problems identifying them. :)
And no, the Bible does not always make clear its use of
metaphors. It does not say, "This is a metaphor".
However, if you study the way of living, thinking and
writing of the Jews at that time, you will have a much
better grasp of what is and isn't, a metaphor. Jesus
was speaking to 1st century Jews and the only question
to ask, is how THEY would have taken His statement and
THEY would have immediately picked up on it.
So is that your master explanation for how "all the prophesies have been
fulfilled by 70ad" by claiming it was all just a metaphor?
Let us deal with the issue at hand and leave the
insults and the practice of putting words into my mouth
behind, shall we? Your really bad attempt at
redefining my argument is obvious to anyone who reads
these posts.
The fact is, I don't have time to argue with someone
who cannot defend their own beliefs and yet, insists
that they are right and that I prove my case and then
when I do, ignores what I have said and makes false
statements about why I believe what I do, as you have
done in your response.
Btw, the book of
Revelation wasn't even written till after 70 ad, so the idea that a
prophetic book would be written about the past is almost humorous.
See below. Also, the Book of Revelation was not
written well after 70 A.D.. You people keep claiming
that, but won't prove it.
Hehe... Ok, so lets say you are right and it was written that year.... You'd
still have an impossible time trying to fit the entire prophesy of
revelation into 12 months.
I didn't say it was written THAT YEAR. I said before
70 A.D..
Just so you know, however, the evidence for a 95/96 A.D. date is
overwhelming (Goswiller, n.d., p. 3), Irenaeus even explicitly stating that
John wrote the book during Domitian's reign (Glasson, 1965, p. 8; Morris,
1980, p. 1338).
You are wrong. The evidence is not "overwhelming" and
no one can be sure what he said and it is taken not
directly from a writing by Irenaeus, but from a much
later quote of him by Eusebius.
Once again, you post opinion. Those comments are based
on one piece of supposed evidence.
The only evidence used to support a late date that I
can see, is the following quote of Irenaeus by Eusebius
in 325 A.D..
"We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing
positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were
necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed
in this present time, it would have been announced by
him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was
seen no very long time since, but almost in our day,
towards the end of Domitian's reign."
Now the "that" which is being referred to, could be the
vision itself, or the book describing the vision.
There is no way to know by this quote. We don't even
know that the quote is accurate, since it is a quote in
325 A.D., of someone who lived a while before that,
about a third person (Polycarp), who supposedly said
such and such.
Irenaeus made a statement in his 5th book, which
seems to indicate an early date, by placing it with
"the ancient documents", which were the New Testament
writings, which were known to have been written prior
to the destruction of Jerusalem and says the following
regarding the name and number of the Beast found in
Revelation...
"As these things are so, and this number is found in
all the approved and ancient copies."
Copies of what? Revelation. It was copied and
circulated.
You need to show why, if the temple in Jerusalem was
destroyed, it is not mentioned in any of the NT
writings, that liberal scholars like to put late dates
on. Jerusalem was the holy city and destroying the
temple would have been one of the biggest events in
history to them. To assume that no one would have
mentioned it, is preposterous.
You must also bear in mind that in Revelation, John
was told to go and witness to kings and nations. If he
was in his 90's at the time, how was he to do this?
Certainly he was close to death at that point. Dating
this writing into the 90's A.D., places a very elderly
man on this mission. And don't bring up Abraham. They
lived longer back then.
The ONLY important thing here, is what the
Scriptures say. The "church fathers" were fallible
men, just like you and I. They were not writing
Scripture.
___
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditations." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Prophet8" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
27 Jan 2005 05:53:00 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ve7fv0djohtjuenj82718e2b3gg9gkg9g6@4ax.com...
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:09:57 GMT, after pondering deep
thoughts, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now> spake
thusly:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ni5su091fbmqralbd6jleli7nrheqct1pa@4ax.com...
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 05:12:39 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3hmou050qcfjraqc4nahvk95vvqndpg602@4ax.com...
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:21:51 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in
message
news:mqjlu05p55agjeqf5uftf4hoing5nvican@4ax.com...
On 15 Jan 2005 12:45:32 -0800, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, pontificated:
I have posted a response I just sent someone else last
night, so if any of this talks about questions you may
have asked and you didn't ask those questions, please
forgive me. This response does directly address your
Scripture quotes though.
Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him,
and
they
also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail
because
of
him. Even so, Amen.
Sure looks literal.
Then why don't you take the following to be literal?
Don't have a clue where you got that impression.... The places where
the
Bible uses metaphors, it clearly defines them. I've never had any
problems
identifying them, so i'm not sure why you are.
Obviously, you have had problems identifying them. :)
And no, the Bible does not always make clear its use of
metaphors. It does not say, "This is a metaphor".
However, if you study the way of living, thinking and
writing of the Jews at that time, you will have a much
better grasp of what is and isn't, a metaphor. Jesus
was speaking to 1st century Jews and the only question
to ask, is how THEY would have taken His statement and
THEY would have immediately picked up on it.
So is that your master explanation for how "all the prophesies have
been
fulfilled by 70ad" by claiming it was all just a metaphor?
Let us deal with the issue at hand and leave the
insults and the practice of putting words into my mouth
behind, shall we? Your really bad attempt at
redefining my argument is obvious to anyone who reads
these posts.
The fact is, I don't have time to argue with someone
who cannot defend their own beliefs and yet, insists
that they are right and that I prove my case and then
when I do, ignores what I have said and makes false
statements about why I believe what I do, as you have
done in your response.
Btw, the book of
Revelation wasn't even written till after 70 ad, so the idea that a
prophetic book would be written about the past is almost humorous.
See below. Also, the Book of Revelation was not
written well after 70 A.D.. You people keep claiming
that, but won't prove it.
Hehe... Ok, so lets say you are right and it was written that year....
You'd
still have an impossible time trying to fit the entire prophesy of
revelation into 12 months.
I didn't say it was written THAT YEAR. I said before
70 A.D..
You provide no proof for that.... Neither for the fulfilment of prophesy.
Just so you know, however, the evidence for a 95/96 A.D. date is
overwhelming (Goswiller, n.d., p. 3), Irenaeus even explicitly stating
that
John wrote the book during Domitian's reign (Glasson, 1965, p. 8; Morris,
1980, p. 1338).
You are wrong. The evidence is not "overwhelming" and
no one can be sure what he said and it is taken not
directly from a writing by Irenaeus, but from a much
later quote of him by Eusebius.
So you admit that if the proof exists to show the Revelation was written
after 70 AD, your theory fails?
Once again, you post opinion. Those comments are based
on one piece of supposed evidence.
Good evidence. But i see why you would, at all costs, have to refute any
that doesn' t fit your opinion.
The only evidence used to support a late date that I
can see, is the following quote of Irenaeus by Eusebius
in 325 A.D..
"We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing
positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were
necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed
in this present time, it would have been announced by
him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was
seen no very long time since, but almost in our day,
towards the end of Domitian's reign."
Now the "that" which is being referred to, could be the
vision itself, or the book describing the vision.
There is no way to know by this quote. We don't even
know that the quote is accurate, since it is a quote in
325 A.D., of someone who lived a while before that,
about a third person (Polycarp), who supposedly said
such and such.
Irenaeus made a statement in his 5th book, which
seems to indicate an early date, by placing it with
"the ancient documents", which were the New Testament
writings, which were known to have been written prior
to the destruction of Jerusalem and says the following
regarding the name and number of the Beast found in
Revelation...
"As these things are so, and this number is found in
all the approved and ancient copies."
Copies of what? Revelation. It was copied and
circulated.
You need to show why, if the temple in Jerusalem was
destroyed, it is not mentioned in any of the NT
writings, that liberal scholars like to put late dates
on. Jerusalem was the holy city and destroying the
temple would have been one of the biggest events in
history to them.
Be silly to prophesy about it, or have Christ "reveal" it to them, then...
wouldn't it. ;-)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: The False Teaching of the "Rapture" |
28 Jan 2005 06:30:13 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 23:53:00 GMT, after pondering deep
thoughts, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now> spake
thusly:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ve7fv0djohtjuenj82718e2b3gg9gkg9g6@4ax.com...
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:09:57 GMT, after pondering deep
thoughts, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now> spake
thusly:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ni5su091fbmqralbd6jleli7nrheqct1pa@4ax.com...
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 05:12:39 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3hmou050qcfjraqc4nahvk95vvqndpg602@4ax.com...
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:21:51 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Prophet8" <someone@truthforever.now>
pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in
message
news:mqjlu05p55agjeqf5uftf4hoing5nvican@4ax.com...
On 15 Jan 2005 12:45:32 -0800, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, pontificated:
I have posted a response I just sent someone else last
night, so | | | | | | | | | | |
