DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Religious Convictions
HTML https://religiousconvictions.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Religious Discussions
*****************************************************
#Post#: 226--------------------------------------------------
Re: What do these passages from John mean?
By: A nonny mouse Date: December 5, 2014, 1:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=A nonny mouse link=topic=25.msg225#msg225
date=1417805255]
I thought that's what I could remember you saying.
If not you then it must have been someone else.
Apologies for getting it wrong.
[/quote]
Maybe I was thinking back to the time when I had referred to the
'first resurrection as being Christ's second coming and you had
replied that when you "passed from death unto life that was a
resurrection".
From that it is only a small step the substitute 'coming' in
place of 'resurrection' since I believe that the first
resurrection is Christ's second coming.
#Post#: 227--------------------------------------------------
Re: What do these passages from John mean?
By: Deborah Date: December 5, 2014, 3:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=A nonny mouse link=topic=25.msg226#msg226
date=1417806500]
Maybe I was thinking back to the time when I had referred to the
'first resurrection as being Christ's second coming and you had
replied that when you "passed from death unto life that was a
resurrection".
From that it is only a small step the substitute 'coming' in
place of 'resurrection' since I believe that the first
resurrection is Christ's second coming.
[/quote]
Ah, I see where you are coming from now.
The mistake is to assume that my assertion can be simply slotted
into your framework. It can't, because the whole framework is
different.
#Post#: 228--------------------------------------------------
Re: What do these passages from John mean?
By: Ezra Date: December 5, 2014, 4:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=A nonny mouse link=topic=25.msg214#msg214
date=1417766728]
[size=12pt]What about scriptures that appear to point towards a
pre tribulation coming in order to select those account worthy
to live and reign with Christ for 1000 years? [/quote]
Because we were discussing Messiah in relation to unbelieving
Jews, the pre-tribulation coming of Christ was not in view.
However, I do believe that the Second Coming of Christ is in two
stages (1) at the Resurrection/Rapture FOR His saints before the
Tribulation and (2) at the Revelation in power and great glory
WITH His saints after the Great Tribulation. But those are
matters for another thread.
#Post#: 229--------------------------------------------------
Re: What do these passages from John mean?
By: Ezra Date: December 5, 2014, 5:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=25.msg216#msg216
date=1417782954]
I was not asking about the many generations of Jews that came
after Jesus' day. I was asking about the people he was talking
to specifically. Who is the "ye" in this sentence? [/quote]
Before we answer that question, we must ask ourselves "What was
the attitude of the Jews being addressed towards their present
King-Messiah?" If it was totally negative, they would certainly
not be seeking for Yeshua at all. As a matter of fact, the
Bible record tells us that all the unbelieving Jews joined
together to condemn Him to death. So the"ye" is generic for all
unbelieving Jews, and what they would be seeking (as noted in
their history and prophesied by Christ) is false Messiahs.
[QUOTE]I also ask what happened to Caiaphas in your opinion?
[/QUOTE]
We need not rely on opinion. We are told in Scripture (Jn 18:14)
that it was Caiphas who "gave counsel" to the Jews that Jesus
should be put to death. So Caiphas in in Hades awaiting his
final judgement and confinement in the Lake of Fire (Hell).
[QUOTE] Matthew 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said:
nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of
man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds
of heaven.
In your opinion, has Caiaphas seen this yet? If not, where is
he now? Is he looking for Jesus now and can't find him? And
when will this be fulfilled? I'm trying to sort your concepts
out. Will Caiaphas be resurrected later and be saved? Again,
your chronology confuses me. The entire chapter of Matthew 24
is about events that would happen before the destruction of the
Temple. [/QUOTE]
No, Caiaphas never saw this, and never will, since he is in
Hades. That prophecy is for the nation of Israel per se (Rev
1:7). As to the entire chapter of Matthew 24, it is a summary
of major events between the first coming of Christ (in humility)
and His second coming in power and great glory. The destruction
of the temple took place in 70 AD, but those prophecies
encompass everything in the book of Revelation. There is much
more to come in the future, and the kingdom of Israel will be
redeemed and restored by Christ after His second coming.
[QUOTE] Matthew 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all
these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left
here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came
unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be?
and what shall be the [b]sign of thy coming, and of the end of
the world?
The rest of the chapter is about the things that would precede
the destruction of the Temple. This leaves me wondering how you
fit this into the overall picture. [/QUOTE]
Addressed above. The Preterist position (which fails to take
everything into account) claims that everything was fulfilled in
70 AD. We know from Scripture, as well as world history, that
that is not the case. We are certainly not in the Millenium.
[QUOTE] I read the pronouns simply. "Me" means Jesus and "ye"
means the people he was talking to. Your interpretation seems
to be vastly different. The "me" means people other than Jesus
and not him when he used the word "me." And you also may be
applying the "ye" to future generations and not to the people
Jesus was talking to. [/QUOTE]
We should remember that John the Baptist had proclaimed
Messiah's advent to the whole population of Judea. Thus when
Christ said "Me" He was referring to His official role as
King-Messiah. When He said "Ye" He was speaking not only of
those unbelieving Jews standing in front of Him, but all
unbelieving Jews until His second coming.
[QUOTE] You seem to have ideas about what "coming in power" and
"coming in glory" mean. Has it occurred to you that many
Christians could be looking for the wrong thing just the way
many Jews were and still are?... " [/QUOTE]
If we take "coming in power and great glory" in its plain
literal sense, it can only correspond to Rev 19:11-21 (and many
other passages), which has simply not occurred. There is no
speculation here. Scripture (OT and NT) is very clear that
Christ will physically return to deal with His enemies and to
deal with unbelieving Israel. And we cannot be looking "for the
wrong thing" since Christ has Himself said again and again, that
He will come in power and great glory.
[QUOTE] There are many Scriptures that promise he would return
soon. How many passages would you like me to quote? [/QUOTE]
"Soon" or "quickly" for God is not the same as it is for man,
since "a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when
it is past, and as a watch in the night" (Ps 90:4). Peter tells
us the same thing in 2 Pet 3:8. So for God about 2 days have
elapsed since the ascension of Christ.
[QUOTE] Corinthians 15:51 Behold, I shew 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. [/QUOTE]
Since this is speaking about the Rapture of the Church, and the
Church is still on earth, this is yet future.
[QUOTE] He was writing to them not to us. If it is a true
statement, it should be true for them; and if it was true for
them, perhaps it could be true also for us; but if it was not
true for them, why bother with it? Yet people will say they
all died -- they all slept -- and none of them heard the last
trump, no one was raised, and no one was changed.[/QUOTE]
All the saints who have died since the resurrection of Christ
are presently with Him, since to be absent from the body is to
be present with the Lord. Their bodies are still in their
graves. When the Resurrection/Rapture occurs, their souls and
spirits will be brought from Heaven to join their transformed
bodies, and all the saints will return to Heaven with Christ
(the ones which are alive at that point will also be transformed
and taken up, and all will be together).
[QUOTE] I also stoutly deny that Satan is "firmly in control of
the world." Dominion of the earth was given to man; and it's
always been man's. Satan's influence has always been
established by fraud and deceit, and by inspiring violence to
make people believe he has real power. He has no power at all
except that which people give him. [/QUOTE]
It is never a good thing for Christians to go into denial. When
Adam disobeyed, mankind lost dominion over the earth. That is
why Satan could offer ALL the kingdoms of the world and their
glory to Christ during His temptations (Mt 4:8,9). All one has
to do is read and listen to the news, observe what is currently
happening in the world, and recognize that sin and evil is
actually increasing under Satan's control. Islam was created by
Satan and is being used by Satan. Paul calls him "the god of
this world" AFTER the resurrection of Christ. The goal of
Islamists is world domination under a Caliphate, and they are
making good progress with their evil deeds.. So to deny that
Satan is controlling the kingdoms of the world is to deny
reality. Since Paul also calls him (AFTER the resurrection)
"the prince of the power of the air" it is God who has allowed
this evil angel to have power even after the resurrection of
Christ. Indeed, for 3 1/2 years in the future, Satan will
dominate this world completely through the Antichrist (the Beast
out of the Sea, Rev. 13:1-18).
#Post#: 230--------------------------------------------------
Re: What do these passages from John mean?
By: Kerry Date: December 5, 2014, 6:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Ezra link=topic=25.msg229#msg229 date=1417822128]
Before we answer that question, we must ask ourselves "What was
the attitude of the Jews being addressed towards their present
King-Messiah?" If it was totally negative, they would certainly
not be seeking for Yeshua at all. As a matter of fact, the
Bible record tells us that all the unbelieving Jews joined
together to condemn Him to death. So the"ye" is generic for all
unbelieving Jews, and what they would be seeking (as noted in
their history and prophesied by Christ) is false
Messiahs.[/quote]
How does it apply to the people Jesus was talking to?
[quote]We need not rely on opinion. We are told in Scripture (Jn
18:14) that it was Caiphas who "gave counsel" to the Jews that
Jesus should be put to death.[/quote]Was he right or wrong?
John also tells us he said that by divine inspiration.
John 11:51 And this spake he not of himself: but being high
priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that
nation;
[quote]So Caiphas in in Hades awaiting his final judgement and
confinement in the Lake of Fire (Hell).
No, Caiaphas never saw this, and never will, since he is in
Hades. [/quote]So you say this does not apply to him although
Jesus was speaking to him, that it applies to others who were
not there? I find this unconvincing.
[quote]That prophecy is for the nation of Israel per se (Rev
1:7). As to the entire chapter of Matthew 24, it is a summary
of major events between the first coming of Christ (in humility)
and His second coming in power and great glory. The destruction
of the temple took place in 70 AD, but those prophecies
encompass everything in the book of Revelation. There is much
more to come in the future, and the kingdom of Israel will be
redeemed and restored by Christ after His second coming.
[/quote]
You seem to be overlooking:
Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave
unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly
come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his
servant John:
Shortly. Not thousands of years. Shortly.
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.
But you say they didn't see him then; and you say Caiaphas is in
Hades and never will see. I don't follow you. To me, things
are simpler. Things did come to pass shortly; and Caiaphas did
see and those who pierced Jesus also saw. However, it wasn't
in the way you may be thinking of.
[quote]Addressed above. The Preterist position (which fails to
take everything into account) claims that everything was
fulfilled in 70 AD. We know from Scripture, as well as world
history, that that is not the case. We are certainly not in
the Millenium.[/quote]Who is the "we" here? Not me. I don't
know that. If no one then or now is in the Millennium, why did
John write this in the past tense?
1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father;
to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
The kingdom was already coming when John the Baptist was
preaching.
We should remember that John the Baptist had proclaimed
Messiah's advent to the whole population of Judea. [quote]Thus
when Christ said "Me" He was referring to His official role as
King-Messiah. When He said "Ye" He was speaking not only of
those unbelieving Jews standing in front of Him, but all
unbelieving Jews until His second coming.[/quote]This is
nullifying the passage, making it into what you want it to read.
[quote]If we take "coming in power and great glory" in its plain
literal sense, it can only correspond to Rev 19:11-21 (and many
other passages), which has simply not occurred. There is no
speculation here.[/quote]
I remind you that the kingdom does not come by observation.
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:
As for speculating? I'd say you're speculating by believing
people could see the kingdom coming by observation. Have you
seen any of these things so that you can be so sure you know
what is meant?
As for coming in power and glory, there is a passage about how
it is possible to have religion by be in denial of the power.
The power is there, but the person either doesn't see it or
denies it. There were religious leaders even in Paul's day who
he described as "having a form of godliness but denying the
power thereof."
[quote]Scripture (OT and NT) is very clear that Christ will
physically return to deal with His enemies and to deal with
unbelieving Israel. And we cannot be looking "for the wrong
thing" since Christ has Himself said again and again, that He
will come in power and great glory. [/quote]You want to take
part of what he said and not the "soon" part.
[quote]"Soon" or "quickly" for God is not the same as it is for
man, since "a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday
when it is past, and as a watch in the night" (Ps 90:4). Peter
tells us the same thing in 2 Pet 3:8. So for God about 2 days
have elapsed since the ascension of Christ. [/quote]
Do you think the Scriptures were written to mislead us by using
the word "soon" to mean thousands of years? You are forgetting
that other passages say some people would see these things
before they died. That does not mean thousands of years. It
means "soon" -- in that very generation.
[quote]Since this is speaking about the Rapture of the Church,
and the Church is still on earth, this is yet future.
All the saints who have died since the resurrection of Christ
are presently with Him, since to be absent from the body is to
be present with the Lord. Their bodies are still in their
graves. When the Resurrection/Rapture occurs, their souls and
spirits will be brought from Heaven to join their transformed
bodies, and all the saints will return to Heaven with Christ
(the ones which are alive at that point will also be transformed
and taken up, and all will be together). [/quote]The word
"rapture" is not Biblical. This is another recent invention of
men.
Matthew tells me that saints came out of their graves; but I
guess you think they were resurrected in physical bodies that
would die again.
[quote]It is never a good thing for Christians to go into
denial. When Adam disobeyed, mankind lost dominion over the
earth.[/quote]This may be your belief; but it's pure
speculation. Moreover it ignores the reason Jesus had to come
to the earth as a man. He did that to exercise lawful dominion
over the earth as a man.
[quote]That is why Satan could offer ALL the kingdoms of the
world and their glory to Christ during His temptations (Mt
4:8,9). All one has to do is read and listen to the news,
observe what is currently happening in the world, and recognize
that sin and evil is actually increasing under Satan's
control.[/quote]I consider your view of this satanic -- a view
fostered by the Devil to deceive men.
Satan got his control over the world by deceit. As long as men
are deceived and think he has something to offer them if they
bow down to him, he has power. Jesus was not taken in by such
a fraud.
[quote]Islam was created by Satan and is being used by
Satan.[/quote]You may be judged as you have judged.
[quote]Paul calls him "the god of this world" AFTER the
resurrection of Christ.[/quote]Rightfully Paul called him that
because men worship him and give him his power which is still
man's to decide how to use.
[quote]The goal of Islamists is world domination under a
Caliphate, and they are making good progress with their evil
deeds.. So to deny that Satan is controlling the kingdoms of the
world is to deny reality. Since Paul also calls him (AFTER the
resurrection) "the prince of the power of the air" it is God who
has allowed this evil angel to have power even after the
resurrection of Christ. Indeed, for 3 1/2 years in the future,
Satan will dominate this world completely through the Antichrist
(the Beast out of the Sea, Rev. 13:1-18).
[/quote]You appear overwrought to me. Now you're talking about
the "antichrist" which isn't even mentioned in Revelation. You
aren't making a lick of sense to me.
#Post#: 231--------------------------------------------------
Re: What do these passages from John mean?
By: Kerry Date: December 5, 2014, 7:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Helen link=topic=25.msg218#msg218 date=1417794352]
Agree he is not firmly in control. Yet I do believe that Adam
did not follow though with the intent of God..( by dropping the
ball in the Garden via sin.) Adam came under the serpent by
taking of the fruit. The Last Adam rectified the situation by
standing firm in the temptation in the wilderness against the
serpent, and taking back for man what God had given. When he
said "Worship me and I will give you the world." Jesus didn't
say .." It's not yours to give." Jesus knew by overcoming and
standing IN God all dominion would be returned to man.
That's how I have always see it ?
[/quote]Yes, pretty much the way I see it. Men give Satan any
authority he may have. After he got that authority, mankind got
so confused and boggled by the veil of delusion he put over them
they couldn't see their way out.
The day will come however when the majority of mankind sees
through the Satanic wiles and lies and no longer want him
around. When that happens, Satan's days are over; and God
Himself will descend to dwell among men. In one way, this has
already occurred in the life of the individual saint; but it has
not occurred for mankind as a whole.
And when that happens, all will see how wise God was to give
dominion of the earth to man. God's purposes will be made
manifest for all to see.
#Post#: 233--------------------------------------------------
Re: What do these passages from John mean?
By: A nonny mouse Date: December 5, 2014, 8:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Ezra link=topic=25.msg228#msg228 date=1417817899]
Because we were discussing Messiah in relation to unbelieving
Jews, the pre-tribulation coming of Christ was not in view.
However, I do believe that the Second Coming of Christ is in two
stages (1) at the Resurrection/Rapture FOR His saints before the
Tribulation and (2) at the Revelation in power and great glory
WITH His saints after the Great Tribulation. But those are
matters for another thread.
[/quote]
Personally, I may be with you on that, and particularly with the
linking of the 'first resurrection' with the recently coined
word 'rapture' rather than 'parousia' (as per 1 Thess.4)
although Danger Mouse seems not to agree.
#Post#: 234--------------------------------------------------
Re: What do these passages from John mean?
By: Ezra Date: December 5, 2014, 8:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=A nonny mouse link=topic=25.msg233#msg233
date=1417832174]
Personally, I may be with you on that, and particularly with the
linking of the 'first resurrection' with the recently coined
word 'rapture' rather than 'parousia' (as per 1 Thess.4)
although Danger Mouse seems not to agree.[/quote]
A nonny mouse,
It is really unfortunate that Christians are divided over this
doctrine of the Blessed Hope. But what is even more disturbing
is that the opponents of a pretribulation Resurrection/Rapture
keep on promoting the false notion that this is a "new" doctrine
(or as you have said for the Rapture "a recently coined word").
That is simply not the case. When you turn 1 Thess 4:17 in the
Greek Textus Receptus (Stephens 1550 ed) you will find the Greek
word harpagesometha which is literally "shall be caught away"
and translated (KJV) as "shall be caught up together".
Now when you turn to Jerome's Vulgate (c. 400 AD) you will find
the Latin verb rapiemur (first-person plural future passive
indicative of rapiō which is Anglicized to "Rapture".
Rapiemur = harpagesometha. So Rapture goes back to a period
over 1600 years.
I am certainly not "recommending" Jerome's Vulgate. But this
helps us to undertand that the doctrine of the Rapture is not
new, and as a matter of fact some of the Early Church Fathers
clearly held to it.
#Post#: 235--------------------------------------------------
Re: What do these passages from John mean?
By: Kerry Date: December 5, 2014, 8:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=A nonny mouse link=topic=25.msg233#msg233
date=1417832174]
Personally, I may be with you on that, and particularly with the
linking of the 'first resurrection' with the recently coined
word 'rapture' rather than 'parousia' (as per 1 Thess.4)
although Danger Mouse seems not to agree.
[/quote]Take a look at the passage in context:
1 Thessalonians 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.
Who is the "we" in that passage? Paul and the Thessalonians?
Or us today?
[quote]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.[/quote]
Again, who is the "we"? If Paul misled them and they were
never caught up, why should we believe this passage might apply
to us or to anyone else?
[quote]18 Wherefore comfort one another with these
words.[/quote]
Small comfort is it never happened as Paul promised them. Let's
also backtrack just a little:
1 Thessalonians 2:19 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?
Can we believe that they were in the presence of the Lord
Jesus Christ at his coming, even as Paul was writing?
#Post#: 236--------------------------------------------------
Re: What do these passages from John mean?
By: Kerry Date: December 5, 2014, 8:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Ezra link=topic=25.msg234#msg234 date=1417833733]
A nonny mouse,
It is really unfortunate that Christians are divided over this
doctrine of the Blessed Hope. But what is even more disturbing
is that the opponents of a pretribulation Resurrection/Rapture
keep on promoting the false notion that this is a "new" doctrine
(or as you have said for the Rapture "a recently coined word").
That is simply not the case. When you turn 1 Thess 4:17 in the
Greek Textus Receptus (Stephens 1550 ed) you will find the Greek
word harpagesometha which is literally "shall be caught away"
and translated (KJV) as "shall be caught up together".
Now when you turn to Jerome's Vulgate (c. 400 AD) you will find
the Latin verb rapiemur (first-person plural future passive
indicative of rapiō which is Anglicized to "Rapture".
Rapiemur = harpagesometha. So Rapture goes back to a period
over 1600 years.
I am certainly not "recommending" Jerome's Vulgate.
[/quote]Yes, and that Latin word is also connected to our word
"rape." The current concept of the Rapture is quite new. My
research suggests that Catholics never interpreted that passage
to mean what Rapture believers do today. Nor has the Orthodox
Church.
[quote]But this helps us to undertand that the doctrine of the
Rapture is not new, and as a matter of fact some of the Early
Church Fathers clearly held to it.[/quote]Which ones? You say
"clearly" but I'd like to know just who held to it.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page