ECT Matthew 24:3ff is spoken to the very elect of God

[Interplanner]

Danoh,
They are looking at the cross right then in the account, for crying out loud! Are you unable to agree even to that? The quote interprets that historic reality. Do you habitually pick a random verse 20 verses away for any given verse?

CRossR,
There is no reason to leave the 1st century, the first generation of Christians, when reading the Rev until absolutely necessary. It's first chapter said they were things that were at hand, quick, present.

The apostles expectation was that the coming would happen right after the DofJ, which is Babylon full of the blood of prophets and saints, and the Rev relates those two things that way. But in Mt24B (after v29) there is an allowance that the 2nd coming could be delayed, and there is explanation and defense of that delay in 2 Pet 3.

I don't base anything on the Rev that is not crystal clear in a letter.

 

[Danoh]

Danoh,

They are looking at the cross right then in the account, for crying out loud! Are you unable to agree even to that?

Calm down, brother, lol

And, are you blind - in the Zachariah account they mourn what they did. Whereas in John they spit on Him - duh-uh.

By the way, that other forum recently added a Buy and Sell - forum.

I guess they will be supporting Clown Trump for President.

 

[Interplanner]

Danoh,
you simply cannot stay on point can you? John 19 is not a sudden schitzophrenic departure to things 2500 years in the future. It is a line from the very passage of Zech that you are stuck on, saying that they looked on him whom they pierced. So they in Zech is the crowd at the crucifixion. We are done.

John does not go "and also, 2500 years from now there will be an incident where..." If you are thinking of the REv 1, you are forcing it to be future when it says it is about things current, at hand, happening quickly.

 

[Danoh]

Danoh,
you simply cannot stay on point can you? John 19 is not a sudden schitzophrenic departure to things 2500 years in the future. It is a line from the very passage of Zech that you are stuck on, saying that they looked on him whom they pierced. So they in Zech is the crowd at the crucifixion. We are done.

John does not go "and also, 2500 years from now there will be an incident where..." If you are thinking of the REv 1, you are forcing it to be future when it says it is about things current, at hand, happening quickly.

Come on, brother; who said anything about either writers asserting 2,500 years later.

That it has turned out that way; well, only the Father knows the times or the seasons he has put in his power.

 

[tetelestai]

That it has turned out that way; well,

Would it should tell you, is your Futurism is wrong.

 

[tetelestai]

If you are thinking of the REv 1, you are forcing it to be future when it says it is about things current, at hand, happening quickly.

E.W. Bullinger claimed every single event in the book of Revelation is still the yet future. Bullinger of course, is considered the grandaddy of Hyper-Dispensationalism.

He claimed the seven churches haven't existed yet.

TOL posters SaulToPaul, heir, John W, and musterion actually believe this nonsense. It's Hyper-Dispensationalism on steroids.

So, if they claim the seven churches in Revelation haven't even been built yet, you can only imagine how they feel about "things current, at hand, happening quickly"

 

[Cross Reference]

Danoh,

CRossR,
There is no reason to leave the 1st century, the first generation of Christians, when reading the Rev until absolutely necessary. It's first chapter said they were things that were at hand, quick, present.

There is every reason to leave it since there are 2k years between many issues. BTW Is chapter 4 too far away from the first chapter for you?

". . . . . Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter." Revelation 4:1 (KJV)

Certainly "hereafter" is not speaking of things beyond the first century.

The apostles expectation was that the coming would happen right after the DofJ, which is Babylon full of the blood of prophets and saints, and the Rev relates those two things that way.

That all is conjectured at best. Not in the least does it relate anything to Babylon or anything re the destruction of Jerusalem given that Jesus did not tell them when that would take place. So they had no clue except to be prepared.

But in Mt24B (after v29) there is an allowance that the 2nd coming could be delayed, and there is explanation and defense of that delay in 2 Pet 3.

By what words was any "allowance" inferred? It is pretty clear when it would happen, though.

Here, read it again for the first time:

"Immediately after the tribulation of those days [written about in Rev 12 and 13] shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and 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 from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Matthew 24:29-33 (KJV)

I don't base anything on the Rev that is not crystal clear in a letter.

I think you have spiritual cataracts that you and yours can ignore such "clear" evidence contrary to your doctrine.

 

[Danoh]

Would it should tell you, is your Futurism is wrong.

I can't get past the different sense between Zechariah and John.

 

[Cross Reference]

I can't get past the difference sense between Zechariah and John.

It generally accepted the same John wrote Rev 1:7-8. Think on that as well.

 

[Danoh]

E.W. Bullinger claimed every single event in the book of Revelation is still the yet future. Bullinger of course, is considered the grandaddy of Hyper-Dispensationalism.

He claimed the seven churches haven't existed yet.

TOL posters SaulToPaul, heir, John W, and musterion actually believe this nonsense. It's Hyper-Dispensationalism on steroids.

So, if they claim the seven churches in Revelation haven't even been built yet, you can only imagine how they feel about "things current, at hand, happening quickly"

You sure they all see things that way? As it is between you; Aaron; Inter; and IAMAB; so it is within Mid-Acts - there are differences in understanding of some things between us as well.

 

[Cross Reference]

You sure they all see things that way? As it is between you; Aaron; Inter; and IAMAB; so it is within Mid-Acts - there are differences in understanding of some things between us as well.

To get out of your dilemma, Ya all need to stop worshipping your doctrines and start worshipping Jesus Christ. In that way you can avoid being viewed as anti-christ[ian]

 

[Interplanner]

Danoh,
I'm sure some of those people at the crucifixion wept at what they were seeing; not all were vicious mocking. Also, the pair of quotes come at the end of John saying what he was thinking as he stood there.

Many times the NT quote does not quite match what we see--several languages and miles and centuries removed. Best to go with it, not our understanding.

 

[Cross Reference]

Danoh,
I'm sure some of those people at the crucifixion wept at what they were seeing; not all were vicious mocking. Also, the pair of quotes come at the end of John saying what he was thinking as he stood there.

Many times the NT quote does not quite match what we see--several languages and miles and centuries removed. Best to go with it, not our understanding.

Yeah, you better do something because nothing will work for your in trying to figure things out using the scriptures. Excusing away by willful ignorance seems your only recourse of action.

 

[steko]

Judaea was a Roman Province in the first century.

There hasn't been a Judaea since, and there isn't going to be a Roman Province called Judaea in the future.

The prophecy only pertained to Jewish Christians who lived in Judaea, around Judaea, and traveled to Judaea.

(Luke 21:21) Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city.

How do you presently find yourself in a prophecy written specifically to people who lived in the Roman Province of Judaea and Jerusalem.

Jews in Israel call the land 'Judah and Samaria'.......today.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Its-time-to-learn-the-facts-about-Judea-and-Samaria-374704

Excerpt:

"I frequently take foreign visitors and officials on a tour of Efrat and Gush Etzion and am amazed at the well-meaning ignorance and preconceived positions that many, even friends of Israel, hold about the status of this area and wider Judea and Samaria. Usually, however, by the end of the tour many of these positions have been debunked and those that I speak with are astonished that there is even another side to the story, having been assured that the pro-Judea and Samaria position is based solely on the Bible.

I welcome and even challenge anyone and everyone to come and see the reality for themselves and learn the history and context of the region, if only for the sake of intellectual honesty. No one ever lost out through intellectual curiosity, and I am certain that we can lessen the next furor and international incident if a greater number of people can be made more familiar with the facts of history."

 

[Interplanner]

What is a Bible to a Jew writing for the JPost?

 

[steko]

What is a Bible to a Jew writing for the JPost?

Beside th' point.

 

[Interplanner]

No, because the NT has a very different way of handling these things. ever read Jn 4? 2 Cor 5 about 'we once knew Christ the ordinary way, but we do so no longer'?

Lots of modern futurist prophecy beliefs are the same as Judaism as though the NT never said a thing about it.

 

[Danoh]

What is a Bible to a Jew writing for the JPost?

It's there, in some sense; in their sense of things.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/No-Holds-Barred-Bar-mitzva-in-Judea-and-Samaria-338061

 

[Danoh]

No, because the NT has a very different way of handling these things. ever read Jn 4? 2 Cor 5 about 'we once knew Christ the ordinary way, but we do so no longer'?

Lots of modern futurist prophecy beliefs are the same as Judaism as though the NT never said a thing about it.

Yeah; that would appear to be the case to you given your failure to understand the Mystery you think is Ephesians 2 from your misreading of Ephesians 3 and Galatians 3.

 

[tetelestai]

Jews in Israel call the land 'Judah and Samaria'.......today.

And some people in England today, still call the United States "the colonies".

Even if we use the boundaries set by God found in the OT, the city of Jerusalem was in the territory given to Benjamin.

(Joshua 18:20,25) These were the boundaries that marked out the inheritance of the clans of Benjamin on all sides..... Gibeon, Ramah, Beeroth, 26 Mizpah, Kephirah, Mozah, 27 Rekem, Irpeel, Taralah, 28 Zelah, Haeleph, the Jebusite city (that is, Jerusalem), Gibeah and Kiriath—fourteen towns and their villages.

The warning Jesus gave was to the Christians who lived in the Roman Province called Judaea. This included the city of Jerusalem.

We know from secular history, that the prophecy was fulfilled in 66AD when many of the Christians fled to the mountains when they saw the Roman army surround Jerusalem just like Jesus said.

You keep forgetting that the Roman army surrounded Jerusalem and then destroyed the temple so that not one stone would be left standing upon another, which is EXACTLY how Jesus said it would happen.

Everything in Matt 24, Luke 21, and Mark 13 played out EXACTLY how Jesus said it would.

You are not only fighting history books, you are fighting the words of Jesus.