The Galilean wedding is the model for the pre-trib rapture

[covenantee]

Satan has had the church deceived with Amillennial eschatology for hundreds of years.

Satan has had premils deceived with the Pharisees' eschatology for thousands of years.

Luke 17
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.

Whose eschatology to believe?

1. Pharisees'
2. Jesus'

Need a hint?

 

[Timtofly]

What does any of this have to do with what I said in the post you quoted (#1,225)? Do you agree with how rebuilder 454 interprets Matthew 25:1-13? Do you agree with him that the foolish virgins are saved Christians, but somehow not part of the bride of Christ? And that Jesus turns them away to face an Antichrist and tribulation rather than have them cast into "outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth" like those described in Matthew 7:21-23 who try to plead with Him by saying "Lord, Lord..."?

My point was to show how his interpretation of that passage is false. Do you have any thoughts on that or would you rather try to change the topic that was being discussed?

You have been asking how long this alleged tribulation is. I am not even talking about tribulation, but the Abomination of Desolation, where only evil is 100% the every day experience, and no Holy Spirit presence whatsoever. You all will go through that as well, no? This time that John says will last 42 months.

The topic is the Galilean wedding and the timing of the Second Coming in relationship to both those on earth, and the church gathered in heaven. Don't you think the vast majority of those innumerable multitude are already in heaven, albeit as souls instead of physically serving God day and night since the Cross in that heavenly temple? Not sure how souls serve God when all other beings have a physical body in heaven, but that is your issue not mine. Paul says they already have permanent incorruptible physical bodies.

The point is that there is no human Antichrist that is calling the shots. You claim that some are able to withstand deception, but if they are not, then they will receive the mark as they are now deceived, and obviously not part of the church, even though they thought they were at some point.

Pre-trib people as far as I can see have the wrong Second Coming just like you do. Revelation 19 are literal horses. Unless you can come up with some reasonable symbolism explanation. Have you seen a soul riding the soul of a horse? Cause you claim they have no bodies, so obviously the horses don't either.

While I am pre-trib as far as the church. Those on white horses are the firstfruits of the final harvest gathered during Jacob's Trouble. They would be allegedly those left behind chosen by God, despite their lack of faith. Because the metric is not that they choose God, but that God chooses them. You can see that in the fact the sheep did good acts even though they had no clue why. The final harvest in Matthew 13 is Jesus personally sowing, and witnessing calling each soul to Him, personally. The vast majority will be tossed into the LOF, but some, more than likely even church members, will find themselves part of the final harvest from the earth who were not raptured as the church. But even these don't stay on the earth during Satan's 42 months of AoD. The only people on the earth, who did not leave on white horses to return 42 months later, will be those with the mark, and those who chop off their heads.

Because, while you refuse to accept the chronological order of Revelation, I see Matthew 24 as arriving at the end, and then working backwards from the end, to the AoD, to Jacob's trouble, to the Second Coming, to the parable of the fig tree, and Israel restored as a recognized nation on earth.

Certainly you would not say Israel becomes a nation after the Second Coming, but you do, as you put the Second after the Aod, after the time of Jacob's trouble, followed by Israel becoming a nation.

 

[Timtofly]

Wrong. John indicated that 5 were already fallen at the time he wrote the book of Revelation.

Revelation 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. 10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

Nonsense. You are making Scripture say what you want it to say.

How was Rome no longer an empire in the first century?

How were the papal states, the Ten Toes no longer history in the first century?

The ten toes were destroyed at the Reformation.

John was talking about the image in Daniel 2. That is the only world history to date. Do you live in an alternate reality, where the Reformation happened before 70AD?

The dragon, the sea beast, and the scarlet colored beast is just another perspective, ie camera view of the image in Daniel 2 with 2 more world empires to go after the Reformation.

Daniel 2 is the only measure to go by. Not your modern made up reality.

 

[Brakelite]

The AC kills ALL REFUSING THE MARK.

Except he won't. There is a group described in both Revelation 12 and 14 that are alive and very well at the second coming. "They who keep the Commandments of God and have the faith and testimony of Jesus". Elsewhere we are told the testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of prophecy. Paul spoke of this group when he included himself among them when he said,
KJV 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17
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.
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:
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.
The question of course may be asked, remain from among who? I believe the are the remnant of the true church left behind after this...
KJV Matthew 13:24-30
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:
25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
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?
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?
29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.

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.​

 

[Timtofly]

It's the Son of Man in the clouds (in the air) harvesting believers from the earth. If that doesn't remind you of 1 Thess 4:14-17, then I don't know what would. And LOL at you thinking I "agree with the "pre-trib" / "post trib" stance of the poster, the Light". Not even close. For you to think I agree with that shows an unbelievably high level of poor reading comprehension on your part. I believe in one rapture, not five like he does.


That is Revelation 14:17-20 which applies to unbelievers and that is contrasted with Revelation 14:14-16 which applies to believers. I'm applying Revelation 14:14-16 to the rapture, not Revelation 14:17-20. Do you understand what I'm saying? In other words, Revelation 14:14-16 relates to 1 Thess 4:14-17 and Revelation 14:17-20 relates to 1 Thess 5:2-3.


LOL. No, really? LOL!!! You are a comedian.


Oh, really? Nice job of proving that. Oh wait, you didn't.


Those are parallel passages. But, that concept is apparently beyond your ability to understand, unfortunately.

I couldn't make any sense of the rest of what you said, so I couldn't respond to it.

This parallel passage thing is as much an addition to God's Word as preterism and Jesuit futurism as many allege, as human understanding.

But none of you post trib, and post Millennial (Amil) adherents seem to grasp that point.

Daniel 9:27 did not take place in the first century, and is not a 7 year period at all. One cannot understand Revelation, without understanding what Daniel 9 is saying.

Revelation 14 is the winepress, that has no sacrifice taken away, and no Abomination of Desolation placed.

"And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

Time is declared over at the 7th Trumpet.

But the 42 months that ends at the winepress in Revelation 19 is an extension of time.

Revelation 14 is the winepress without that 42 month extension.

So not the same event in parallel views. One event is without a 42 month extension. The other event is after a 42 month extension. Revelation 13 is the result of time extended, because that 42 months mentioned should not happen, unless time is extended. Because time was already declared over in chapter 10, even before the 7th Trumpet sounds in chapter 11. The 7th Trumpet is the end of the final harvest.

And no one knows what will happen until God confirms the Covenant at the 7th Trumpet. Jesus being both God, and the Prince to come. These 42 months happen after the final harvest is over, and the nations left are all those worthy of being the bride of Christ, both Israel and all nations on the earth.

Explain why Jesus would kill His own loyal subjects:

"And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever."

Who do you think Jesus is King over on the earth? There are no nations and distinction between Israel and other nationalities in heaven. There are still kings of the earth that live outside of the New Jerusalem in the NHNE, per chapter 21. You claim all these people are dead, or the church in heaven. You deny those people living on the earth outside of the New Jerusalem. Revelation 14 is not talking about the rapture of the Church, but those living on the earth. This is not a Second Coming passage. This is the end of the final harvest after the Second Coming had already happened days, weeks, months, or years before.

The Second Coming is mentioned in Revelation 6. That is when the church is raptured and glorified. Revelation 14 are those after the Second Coming, not gathered with the church. So the 5 foolish virgins, who go through the tribulation, called the final harvest.

The erroneous parallel view doctrine of mankind is just an excuse to deny that Jesus is physically on the earth with His angels during the final harvest, even though that is a direct teaching of Jesus Himself in Matthew 13 and Matthew 25.

The 5th Seal in Revelation 6 is the only thing in Revelation that reminds me of all of Paul's teachings on the rapture, because the redeemed put on a robe of white just like Paul states, "death puts on life". Paul never states the church is removed from the earth with a sickle.

The 5th Seal is not about tribulation at all, nor martyrs for that matter. John says the church is complaining after being made righteous, that wickedness is still left unchecked on the earth, and when will sin be declared over. That is the time frame when those under the alter physically enjoying Paradise are all raptured from Paradise and come with Jesus to meet the church raptured from the earth, and all at that time put on white robes, and told to wait in Paradise a little longer until the final harvest is over, and other people are redeemed out of Adam's dead corruptible flesh, like they were. So this waiting period is the final harvest, and people are not all automatically dead in the 6th Seal when the baptism of fire happens and all the angels appear on the earth to gather the final harvest. Which means the time of Jacob's trouble just started, and Satan's 42 months of Abomination of Desolation will not be until after the 7th Trumpet.

 

[WPM]

There are other trumpets. The last trump is the last of a series of 100 trumpet blasts. The last trump is blown on the feast of trumpets, the day of the fall fruit harvest. These feasts of God tell us exactly what is going to occur in the last days.

Where do you get these "100 trumpet blasts" in Revelation or Scripture? You seem to make it up as you go. With your ad-hoc mode of interpretation you could literally make the Bible say whatever you want it to - and you do.

It hurts my head reading your extra-biblical speculations and man-made teaching. Anything goes with you. There is no sound hermeneutics.

 

[Timtofly]

Pretribs deny the obvious reference to the rapture in 2 Thessalonians 1:10 which references the day "when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe". And they also deny what Paul obviously taught in 2 Thess 2:1-3 which is that the falling away and revealing of the man of sin have to occur first before the rapture occurs at His coming (parousia). They clearly will go out of their way to twist any scripture to make it fit their doctrine. It's sad to see.

No, pre-tribs get the Second Coming wrong the same as you do. They just call the second coming something else, not deny it.

The Day of the Lord is the millennium reign which amil do deny is what Peter was telling you all not to be ignorant about.

Are you just denying the fact that you are ignorant, or flat out denying God's Word? The Day of the Lord, the Millennium Kingdom, cannot start until Satan is revealed and bound in the pit. Satan does not have to be revealed before the Second Coming.

The Second Coming and the Day of the Lord are two distinct events. Peter said you are ignorant if you don't understand that point.

Being glorified in the saints is not what the Day of the Lord is for. That is also misinterpreted in 2 Corinthians 15. The Second Coming is a seperate event from "the end" because of the word "cometh". The end and the Second Coming is not the same event but two seperate events in the order of the redemption of creation. Paul said each in their own order, not one single all consuming event.

Satan is revealed at the Second Coming. That "wicked" is destroyed years later at the battle of Armageddon, and then the Day of the Lord can start once Satan is bound.

"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, (rapture and Second Coming, one event) 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 (interesting that amil claim we are in the day of the Lord as the inter advent period, denying Revelation 20 is chronologically after Revelation 19) is at hand (the Millennial Kingdom declared at the 7th Trumpet). Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come (the Millennial Kingdom), except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition. (Satan); Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God (Satan as the 8th king sitting on the throne in Jerusalem where Jesus was sitting as king at the 7th Trumpet). Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
And now ye know what withholdeth (the Holy Spirit through the church) that he (Satan) might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he (the Holy Spirit removed when the church is raptured) be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed (the AoD, the image brought to life for 42 months of desolation), whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: (at Armageddon, both the FP and this wicked are tossed into the LOF) Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders."

Now you can spin this Scripture any way you like, and you have, because you deny the Day of the Lord is the 1,000 years mentined in Revelation 20, after Satan is bound.

 

[Timtofly]

2 Thes 2.1 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

So the question has been raised: Was Paul strictly warning the Christians to not trust in any so-called "Rapture of the Church" until after Antichrist is revealed, or was he warning them that the "Rapture of the Church" cannot take place until Antichrist is actually destroyed? I'd like to make a few points on this.

1) The implication is that there is only one Coming of Christ for his Church, which in this text happens when Antichrist is destroyed. There is absolutely no reference to a Pretrib Rapture or to a Midtrib Rapture which takes place *before* the destruction of Antichrist.

There is assumed to be only one Coming of Christ for his Church, and it is explicitly placed at the destruction of Antichrist. Any assumption that a Secret Rapture takes place prior to this point is an assumption and an argument from silence, which is illegitimate.

Go by the explicit text here regarding Christ's Coming. Unless we are to add to Scripture an illicit Pretrib/Midtrip Coming the teaching is clear. 1st Antichrist is revealed. Then he is destroyed at Christ's Coming for his Church. Anything else added to this is an attempt to change Paul's intended meaning.

2) Why then did Paul warn 1st that Antichrist's "revelation" must take place, as opposed to his "destruction?" It is because Paul was wanting Christians to be on guard against the deception that would precede the destruction of Antichrist. Once Antichrist is destroyed there is no need of concern about whether Christ has come yet or not!

So the idea is to anticipate false teaching about Christ's Coming even before the destruction of Antichrist. This is why Paul warned the Christians not just to expect Christ's Coming at the destruction of Antichrist but also to be wary of false teaching about Christ's Coming *before* he comes to destroy Antichrist.

The so-called Pretrib or Midtrib Raptures are some of this "false teaching" that precedes the actual 2nd Coming of Christ at the destruction of Antichrist. These are teachings that Paul was warning about, not to accept a purported Coming of Christ that precedes the actual destruction of Antichrist.

Antichrist and prophetic deceptions precede the actual Coming of Christ for his Church. So the Church must be prepared for that even before his actual Coming! Believe in the text, and don't add to it! Some things are bound to be assumed, but we cannot assume something is doctrinal unless it is actually stated as such.

The one Coming of Christ is stated doctrinally. The fact Christ comes for his Church to destroy Antichrist and to deliver the Church from tribulation is doctrinal. Believe it, and don't believe "mystery revelation"--it is a fraud!

Scripture is made explicit precisely so that we can expose private revelation that comes from the spirit world and not from the Scripture text. Scripture is given to keep us from wandering astray with our imaginations and with the coercion of men and angels. Let's stick to the Bible!

Heb 9.28 he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

The Second Coming and the Day of the Lord are not the same event.

That is the problem.

If you claim to be pre-mill, then the Day of the Lord is the Millennial Kingdom. Jesus will physically sit on a throne in a temple in Jerusalem as King for a thousand years.

Otherwise, the Day of the Lord started at the Cross like Amil teach, which is what Paul was speaking against.

Satan is the one revealed as the "Man of Sin". Your translation calls Satan, the lawless one. The church should already acknowledge that even in the first century. That Wicked is the entity destroyed at a return, but not the Second Coming. That Wicked was not in Paul's day. Only Satan was at work in Paul's day. Paul does not explicitly say that being gathered to Christ is the same event as when that Wicked is destroyed.

That is the assumption many jump to in reading these verses. Even Amil can deny the Day of the Lord is the millennium, because all they interpret is that it is just a normal bright sunny day, that takes all by surprise.

 

[rebuilder 454]

Except he won't. There is a group described in both Revelation 12 and 14 that are alive and very well at the second coming. "They who keep the Commandments of God and have the faith and testimony of Jesus". Elsewhere we are told the testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of prophecy. Paul spoke of this group when he included himself among them when he said,
KJV 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17
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.
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:
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.
The question of course may be asked, remain from among who? I believe the are the remnant of the true church left behind after this...
KJV Matthew 13:24-30
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:
25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
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?
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?
29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.

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.​

The Jews are ushered to safety, possibly Petra, during the trib.
Well, there is another good pretrib rapture component you just brought up.
Why only Jews sealed????
Why only Jews ushered to safety?????

Thanks for adding to my point.
I do appreciate your accidental contribution to the pretrib rapture doctrine.

Only Jews escaping and sealed
Hmmmnn
Excellent point.
Thanks!!!!

 

[rebuilder 454]

LOL at the idea of the white horses being literal. They are not. Christ's coming is described symbolically in Revelation 19. He will not be literally riding on a white horse when He comes. Please ask God for wisdom to be able to discern the difference between literal and symbolic text (James 1:5-7).

 

[rebuilder 454]

Spiritual Israelite said:
"""LOL at the idea of the white horses being literal. They are not. Christ's coming is described symbolically in Revelation 19. He will not be literally riding on a white horse when He comes. Please ask God for wisdom to be able to discern the difference between literal and symbolic text (James 1:5-7).""""

Really ??? You laugh at the bible???

Rev19
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

Sorry to ruin your make believe deal.
But I fear for you, because changing Revelation to suit a weak doctrine is walking you into a bad place.
Careful friend.
Your doctrine,I am debunking, ain't worth it.
Anyone can see the horses are real.
What's next?
No robes?
No blood?
No saints on the horses?

Wow.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The Second Coming and the Day of the Lord are not the same event.

That is the problem.

That already creates a problem with me. On some occasions, the "Day of the Lord" is, in fact, the 2nd Coming! So we have to decide when "Day of the Lord" means "2nd Coming" and when it does not. It is context that determines how the term is being used. And "Day of the Lord" is used in several contexts--not just one.

On the other hand, "2nd Coming" has only one context. It is a technical word that can only mean what it is, with respect to the Bible. We could use the term outside of the Bible to mean anything we want, including the 2nd Coming of Trump.

If you claim to be pre-mill, then the Day of the Lord is the Millennial Kingdom.

The Day of the Lord may be applied to the Millennial Age. Again, it depends on context. It can apply to a literal day, the day of Christ's Coming, or it can apply to an era, the era of the Millennium.

Jesus will physically sit on a throne in a temple in Jerusalem as King for a thousand years.

Don't know what kind of "temple" that might be? He might himself be the Temple. Personally, I think he reigns spiritually until the end of the Millennial Age.

Otherwise, the Day of the Lord started at the Cross like Amil teach, which is what Paul was speaking against.

I don't think the Day of the Lord can be applied to the NT era unless it is an OT prophecy of the day of Christ's 1st Coming?

Satan is the one revealed as the "Man of Sin". Your translation calls Satan, the lawless one.

I don't see anywhere the Man of Sin being called Satan?

The church should already acknowledge that even in the first century. That Wicked is the entity destroyed at a return, but not the Second Coming. That Wicked was not in Paul's day. Only Satan was at work in Paul's day. Paul does not explicitly say that being gathered to Christ is the same event as when that Wicked is destroyed.

Actually it does. We are told that the Son of Man comes from heaven to gather his People, to deliver his People, and to destroy the Man of Sin. This is the moment at which God's Kingdom is inaugurated.

That is the assumption many jump to in reading these verses. Even Amil can deny the Day of the Lord is the millennium, because all they interpret is that it is just a normal bright sunny day, that takes all by surprise.

Yes, I'm not Amil.

 

[rebuilder 454]

That already creates a problem with me. On some occasions, the "Day of the Lord" is, in fact, the 2nd Coming! So we have to decide when "Day of the Lord" means "2nd Coming" and when it does not. It is context that determines how the term is being used. And "Day of the Lord" is used in several contexts--not just one.

On the other hand, "2nd Coming" has only one context. It is a technical word that can only mean what it is, with respect to the Bible. We could use the term outside of the Bible to mean anything we want, including the 2nd Coming of Trump.

The Day of the Lord may be applied to the Millennial Age. Again, it depends on context. It can apply to a literal day, the day of Christ's Coming, or it can apply to an era, the era of the Millennium.

Don't know what kind of "temple" that might be? He might himself be the Temple. Personally, I think he reigns spiritually until the end of the Millennial Age.

I don't think the Day of the Lord can be applied to the NT era unless it is an OT prophecy of the day of Christ's 1st Coming?

I don't see anywhere the Man of Sin being called Satan?

Actually it does. We are told that the Son of Man comes from heaven to gather his People, to deliver his People, and to destroy the Man of Sin. This is the moment at which God's Kingdom is inaugurated.

Yes, I'm not Amil.

Quote:
"""Actually it does. We are told that the Son of Man comes from heaven to gather his People, to deliver his People, and to destroy the Man of Sin. This is the moment at which God's Kingdom is inaugurated."""

Actually that is the second coming on white horses in Rev 19. The saints already in heaven during the trib. .
If you are referring to mat 24,"after tge trib", go back and reread it.
Angels gather from heaven.
In the pretrib rapture Jesus gathers from earth.
But you left out the gathering before the flood/ trib around vs 38 or so.
There we see the gathering pretrib, with zero setting of the end of the trib.
Rev 14:14 is kinda a bonus where we see Jews gathered,DURING THE TRIB, and that gathering is neither the main rapture nor anywhere near the "After the trib" gathering FROM HEAVEN, BY ANGELS.

But interesting nonetheless, how omissions on display also display false doctrine.

 

[Timtofly]

Yes, it is scripture and His feet touched down on the Mount of Olives already long ago. No reason to think He will do so again. Instead, He will be burning up and renewing this earth (including the Mount of Olives) with fire when He comes (2 Peter 3:10-12), resulting in the new earth.

You say He is not coming back to the Mount of Olives. You definitely don't have a Second Coming.

You have nothing.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Nonsense. You are making Scripture say what you want it to say.

You just repeat what people say to you. That is hilarious. You are completely clueless.

How was Rome no longer an empire in the first century?

I didn't say it wasn't. Here's your horrible reading comprehension skills at work again. You can't be taken seriously. At all.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Spiritual Israelite said:
"""LOL at the idea of the white horses being literal. They are not. Christ's coming is described symbolically in Revelation 19. He will not be literally riding on a white horse when He comes. Please ask God for wisdom to be able to discern the difference between literal and symbolic text (James 1:5-7).""""

Really ??? You laugh at the bible???

Of course I don't and you know it. You know I'm laughing at your interpretation of that scripture and not at the scripture itself. Why act otherwise? Why play dumb? You think I can't see through that? Do you read the whole book literally? You try to understand scripture only using your flawed human intellect (same as the babes in Christ who looked at scripture just like "the natural man" does - read 1 Cor 2 and 3) and nothing else. Where is your spiritual discernment?

 

[Timtofly]

Satan has had premils deceived with the Pharisees' eschatology for thousands of years.

Luke 17
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.

Whose eschatology to believe?

1. Pharisees'
2. Jesus'

Need a hint?

The post was not about those in heaven.

The post was about Amillennialist deceived by Satan on the earth.

Who said anything about God setting up a throne on the earth?

God has always had a throne called the GWT. Has nothing to do with a kingdom on the earth.

Jesus is going to sit on a throne in Jerusalem, but that is not the Kingdom of God. That is Jesus reigning over Israel.

I accept Jesus when He said He would come and sit on a throne in Jerusalem. That John wrote would have a length of 1,000 years.

 

[The Light]

The Day of the Lord is the millennium reign which amil do deny is what Peter was telling you all not to be ignorant about.

Are you just denying the fact that you are ignorant, or flat out denying God's Word? The Day of the Lord, the Millennium Kingdom, cannot start until Satan is revealed and bound in the pit. Satan does not have to be revealed before the Second Coming.

What you said is absolutely incorrect. The Day of the Lord is the 1-year wrath of God. The millennial kingdom begins AFTER the Day of the Lord.

 

[Timtofly]

That already creates a problem with me. On some occasions, the "Day of the Lord" is, in fact, the 2nd Coming! So we have to decide when "Day of the Lord" means "2nd Coming" and when it does not. It is context that determines how the term is being used. And "Day of the Lord" is used in several contexts--not just one.

On the other hand, "2nd Coming" has only one context. It is a technical word that can only mean what it is, with respect to the Bible. We could use the term outside of the Bible to mean anything we want, including the 2nd Coming of Trump.

The Day of the Lord may be applied to the Millennial Age. Again, it depends on context. It can apply to a literal day, the day of Christ's Coming, or it can apply to an era, the era of the Millennium.

Don't know what kind of "temple" that might be? He might himself be the Temple. Personally, I think he reigns spiritually until the end of the Millennial Age.

I don't think the Day of the Lord can be applied to the NT era unless it is an OT prophecy of the day of Christ's 1st Coming?

I don't see anywhere the Man of Sin being called Satan?

Actually it does. We are told that the Son of Man comes from heaven to gather his People, to deliver his People, and to destroy the Man of Sin. This is the moment at which God's Kingdom is inaugurated.

Yes, I'm not Amil.

The Day of the Lord is the same from Genesis to Revelation. No human needs to change the meaning for context.

The Second Coming is a theological construct that should only refer to the next time Jesus walks around on the earth, like He did in the first century.

But of course we have people here stuck in their erroneous beliefs that the Second Coming is not even to the earth.

While you may not be amil, you don't allow the physical presence of Jesus on the earth. That is not a Second Coming you adhere to. That is only a change of who lives on the earth, and who does not live on the earth.

Why would no one prior to the Flood return to live on the earth in mass numbers, after that judgement?

Why did the OT redeemed not return and live on the earth after the Cross?

The Day of the Lord is no different than the other two events, yet you have all those from even before the Flood, suddenly return and now live on the earth for the last 1,000 years.


Revelation 21 clearly points out that all those removed since the Flood only return in the New Jerusalem.

The Second Coming is not bringing all back. The Second Coming is the removal of the church to wait longer in Paradise until the New Jerusalem descends. Especially if you don't even have Jesus ruling on the earth. That would mean the church is still in heaven with Jesus ruling, no?

 

[The Light]

Where do you get these "100 trumpet blasts" in Revelation or Scripture? You seem to make it up as you go. With your ad-hoc mode of interpretation you could literally make the Bible say whatever you want it to - and you do.

It hurts my head reading your extra-biblical speculations and man-made teaching. Anything goes with you. There is no sound hermeneutics.

Leviticus 23
23 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

24 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall ye have a sabbath, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation.

25 Ye shall do no servile work therein: but ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord.

Numbers 29
1 And in the seventh month, on the first day of the month, ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no servile work: it is a day of blowing the trumpets unto you.