Just as the Jewish leaders did not expect Jesus to be the Messiah. They were mistaken. And we can't be sure what Paul taught because the most important information was left out of his letters. Perhaps God did that on purpose. The information left out was just who or what held back the evil one. The early church fathers, who may have heard it from someone who knew Paul, said it was the Roman Empire. So as long as the Roman Empire existed, the evil one would be held back. We can't know because all Paul said on the subject was that he had told them in word in person, so he didn't write it down.
Question on books of the bible dating
- Thread starter Rella
- Start date
No. Jesus specifically stated why He read what He read. It was fulfilled in their presence. He stopped because if He hadn't, then He would have lied. He had not fulfilled the rest yet.
You don't seem to understand just what is His answer actually was in Acts 1.
6 So when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, “Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” 7 He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority; 8 but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth.”
Did Jesus say no to the restoration of the kingdom to Israel. No He did not. He just told them that it isn't happening now, but that the Father has fixed such as time (restoration of the kingdom to Isreal) by His own authority. It is none of your business as to when the Father will do it, but instead, you are to be His witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the Earth. This is spoken to the disciples, and passed on to the church.
You forget about multiple fulfillment prophecies. Jesus brought up a small number of those Himself.
I think you need to read the passage again.
Luke 23:28 says "28 But Jesus turning to them said, “Daughters of Jerusalem, stop weeping for Me, but weep for yourselves and for your children." The above makes no sense.
I think it is more ridiculous to say that the passage is about Christ and His suffering. I mean what does "10 “I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, [h]the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn." have to do with Christ and His suffering? It speaks of the salvation of the elect of Israel. It is quite clear. Paul also speaks to the salvation of the elect of Israel in Romans.
It is the scripture saying it. Zechariah is clear by itself. You say it speaks to Christ and His suffering, however a plain reading of the prophecy gives a completely different meaning. Again John only pointed out that Jesus is the One who was pierced. He did not mention anything else from the prophecy. Why? John's purpose was writing to a Jewish audience, and thus used Old Testament prophecy to show that the Messiah in the Old Testament is Jesus. Who is the One who was pierced that they will look upon and will mourn over? Jesus. See? Here He is being pierced and looked upon. The Old Testament that speaks of the coming of God to Israel in the end... that is Jesus. Here is the proof in the flesh.
Granted Christ's Kingdom is obviously not powerful enough to destroy such an incredibly vast and powerful Empire such as Rome. Apparently I have to make it even simpler.
"31 “You, O king, were looking and behold, there was a single great statue; that statue, which was large and [ao]of extraordinary splendor, was standing in front of you, and its appearance was awesome. 32 The head of that statue was made of fine gold, its breast and its arms of silver, its belly and its thighs of bronze, 33 its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. 34 You [ap]continued looking until a stone was cut out without hands, and it struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay and crushed them. 35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were crushed [aq]all at the same time and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away so that not a trace of them was found. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain and filled the whole earth."
God is being very clear here. The wind carried them away so that not a trace of them was found. That is probably the most figurative way to speak of obliteration. Not a trace found. And then the stone becomes a great mountain and fills the Earth. That speaks of Christ's Kingdom that fills the whole Earth. Why would you change the straight forward word of God "Thus saith the Lord" simply due to your POV and beliefs. You don't interpret the Old Testament from the new. Prophecies about Christ weren't interpreted through the events of the day. The authors of the gospel show how the prophecies of the Old Testament spoke directly of Christ, without any special interpretation necessary. All they did was shine a light on it. The religious leaders didn't have to interpret prophecy to tell Herod where the King of the Jews was to be born. Prophecy was very specific, and that is what the religious leaders told him. Bethlehem because a prophecy came right out and said it.
Why would I want to change everything God said in scripture, spoke clearly and succinctly, simply because of my POV? You have already told me that I am not doing that, because I am being literal. That means, I am taking scripture at face value. You change a whole passage that spoke of war with Israel, death and destruction, and said the prophecy was solely about the suffering of Christ. It makes absolutely NO SENSE. You do not interpret the Old Testament from the new. The New Testament is an extension of the Old Testament. You say there is only one program, but it is you who seems to believe there is more than one. Because I believe there is only one program, the New Testament extends outward as a continuation of the Old. Since you do not, you have to interpret the Old Testament from the New, since it is a new program that completely changes the Old Testament.
What missionaries of Judaism?
It is a prophecy. They will come to accept Christ as Messiah. "blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord" is for the Messiah. It is the words of the people recognizing their king. They said this at the triumphal entry, but then rejected Him as their king. He thus condemns them and says that they will not see Him again until they truly say "blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord." That is, they will finally, verbally, and from their heart, souls, and mind, recognize Him and announce Him as king.
You know, I have come up with some ideas that line up with the prophecies found in the New Testament. As of last night, they are coming to fruition. I didn't think I had a chance of possibly being right, but it is so far turning out as my pet predictions say. The next few years will bear out whether I am on the right track. Is that the right track for predicting a time and date for the end of the world? Absolutely not. However, it does put it to within a generation. Kind of like Jesus was talking about at the Olivet Discourse. If you want to watch as the Bible commands (not because I am right or wrong, but simply because we are called to watch and wait, as we occupy ourselves until He comes, consider Trump. His foreign policy during his first term was one of peace. He fought using peace. He used lethal force when necessary to achieve peace. He almost ended the Korean War, which continues on until the North signs the armistice. He almost brought peace to Israel and the Middle East. He made an accord, which is just another form of covenant, with many, but not all the countries involved. He was going to build on those accords if he won the 2020 election. With the way that he makes deals, I could see him ending the war with Israel and getting Israel a temple at the same time. Now if that happened, I would give up and walk away. That would be too on the nose.
Consider he survived what would have been a fatal attempt on his life. He says the only reason he didn't die in the assassination attempt is because at that moment he moved and turned his head towards a chart he had on stage to point out some things. If he had not done that, he would have been assassinated. He is crediting God, as well as that chart. Yes, it is grandstanding, but for some people, a powerful motivator. You should pay attention, in case you see things happening which just happen to line up with a literal rendering of prophecy. As I have said before, technology is reaching the point that Revelation is moving from fantasy/Sci Fi, to reality. Some things to consider:
Elon Musk is supposed to join the administration and is basically considered Trump's best friend and right hand man. He is out preaching Donald Trump. He is also very big in the AI business, right down to his company that makes neural chips that have been successfully implanted in the brains of some people to the point that they can control a computer solely using their thoughts. One of the patients likes to play Counter Strike using the neural chips. (He is kind of paralyzed, so he can't actually play Counter Strike normally. Only through the implants.) Musk is also very big in AI, which could very well be something that makes the "image of the beast" a reality. He has already been accused of stealing designs for his robots from the movie "I, Robot".
Do I believe this is what will happen. Not really, but I am a cautious observer. I haven't given up on the plain reading of scripture and prophecy.
Galatians 3 "16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as referring to many, but rather to one, “And to your seed,” that is, Christ."
To be honest, I can't see any reason to ask 'who was voiding and setting aside the Promise'. In fact, I see nothing here that would even put such a question at the bottom of the list of things to think about in regards to this verse. It isn't even on the list. Even reading it in context does not bring up such questions. This whole section speaks to the intent of the law, which has nothing to do with voiding and setting aside the promise.
Well yeah. I mean, even when Jesus left in Acts 1, He did not say that the kingdom was not being restored to Israel. He said that it was none of their business as to when God would do that [restore the kingdom to Israel]. He could have said, have you not been listening? There is no kingdom to be restored to Israel. He didn't say that because the kingdom will be restored to Israel, but that wasn't for the disciples to deal with. It is solely the business of the Father. Jesus seems to have answered in the way we would if we were irritated by hearing the same question over and over. The disciples asked Him when He would present Himself as King and come into His kingdom at the Olivet Discourse. The disciples knew nothing of Jesus second coming. They didn't know He was going to leave. Yet they asked "what will be the sign of Your coming..."? That word for coming has a complex translation. It speaks of a king visiting their domain, that is their kingdom. "3952 (parousía) is a "technical term with reference to the visit of a king or some other official, 'a royal visit' "" So they were asking when Jesus would be unveiled and shown as king. Basically, when would the kingdom be established and when Jesus would come into this kingdom. They spoke using the eschatology of the Old Testament. Again, Jesus did not say it wouldn't happen, He just basically said, again, it isn't now, it is future. Other events happen first.
I posted Galatians 3:16 above, and no... it doesn't. Not even in its full context. I have no idea where you are getting this from. Paul speaks of the law not invalidating the promise. He then says that the law is a tutor that points to Christ.
"23 But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. 24 Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a [ai]tutor. 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is [aj]neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you [ak]belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s [al]descendants, heirs according to promise."
He also said:
"19 Why the Law then? It was added [ac]because of transgressions, having been ordained through angels by the [ad]agency of a mediator, until the seed would come to whom the promise had been made. 20 Now a mediator is not [ae]for one party only; whereas God is only one. 21 Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness [af]would indeed have been [ag]based on law. 22 But the Scripture has shut up [ah]everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe."
Again, I don't see anything you are saying here.
There is no special meaning here. Daniel gives the interpretation, which is going to be literal, and says
"44 In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be [av]left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever. 45 Inasmuch as you saw that a stone was cut out of the mountain without hands and that it crushed the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver and the gold, the great God has made known to the king what will take place [aw]in the future; so the dream is true and its interpretation is trustworthy.”"
Why don't you trust the interpretation give to Daniel by God? The interpretation is in response to:
" 34 You [ap]continued looking until a stone was cut out without hands, and it struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay and crushed them. 35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were crushed [aq]all at the same time and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away so that not a trace of them was found. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain and filled the whole earth."
This is pretty clear, and the interpretation given by God to Daniel goes to show it is true. God's interpretation of His own prophecy given to nebuchadnezzar says "it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms". That is the interpretation. And what does God have to say to that? "The great God has made known to the king what will take place in the future." Why? To show the dream is true, and the interpretation God gave to Nebuchadnezzar through Daniel is trustworthy. Why can't you find it trustworthy?
What you said would be like saying that we have to interpret the parable of the soils because Jesus didn't tell us everything. Except... He did. Everything you need to understand the prophecy of the statue, God gave to Nebuchadnezzar through Daniel. Just as God told gave the baker and the taste tester the direct interpretation of their prophecies/dreams through Joseph. The interpretation given by God was simplistic, literal, and came to pass exactly as stated. Why would God change His nature before Daniel came on the scene? I thought God never changes?
That has absolutely NOTHING to do with the vision in Daniel 2. If God did not say it in the interpretation He gave, it isn't there. You are adding to what God has said. God defined it for you, but you come out and say that He is wrong. Why? Because I am saying what God said, and you are saying I am wrong. I won't add to what was said, and I won't change it. The interpretation shows that the stone not cut by hands is the kingdom set up by the God of heaven which will never be destroyed. It will not have anything to do with anyone other then Christ. [will not be left for another people.] God is telling Nebuchadnezzar that this kingdom would destroy and supplant his statue of Empires.
Please, for the sake of all that is good and holy, stop adding to what God has said. Notice how I stopped where Daniel stopped. Why? That is all that is stated in the prophecy and interpretation. I am not going to add anything to it and court God's anger. You have actually changed it. If you are being expository and using exogesis, your view should strengthen what is said, not change it.
Again, it isn't a delay. A delay would mean the Father planned everything to occur on a certain day, but now He has to change it... a delay. A solely human concept that undermines God's nature. Peter took the time to explain this.
It may be best if you stop before you add more things for God to take issue with. I have problems, but it isn't with adding to what is present. Even you have stated this by saying I am being literal.
Again, I looked and I have no idea what you are talking about. "28 But Jesus turning to them said, “Daughters of Jerusalem, stop weeping for Me, but weep for yourselves and for your children." So, is the biological timestamp the fact that daughters can apparently cry? And the timestamp is that they need to stop crying for Jesus in the present, and instead change to weeping for themselves and their children? I can only work with what you gave me. I can even look at the context, and still not have a single clue what you are talking about.
Wow. Perhaps you should get on your knees and pray to God and tell God that He got the interpretation wrong in Daniel 2. God gave the interpretation of the dream to Daniel. The last time God interpreted dreams where we can check the veracity of the interpretation is with Joseph interpreting the dreams of the baker, the taste tester, and the 7 years of abundance and 7 years of famine. How literal were those interpretations? If I recall, they were literal to a fault. They were exact, right down to exactly what would happen, after how many days. Again, why would God's nature change that at one time He is direct and literal in interpreting dreams, but now He is all mysterious and hiding messages that can't be understood until after the New Testament? What is the point in telling Nebuchadnezzar that God told Him exactly what would happen so that he would know the dream is true and the interpretation is trustworthy? None of that can be if one has to wait for the New Testament. Nebuchadnezzar died many centuries prior. So basically he wouldn't find it true and trustworthy... yet God told him He could/would. Why? God told him exactly what was going to happen, just as He told Pharaoh through Joseph about the upcoming years of abundance and famine.
This is your point of view. You are interpreting scripture in light of your point of view to the point of saying it cannot be considered literally. Just as the statue has outward manifestation, so too will Christ's kingdom. There will be an outward manifestation of an eternal kingdom. The Kingdom on Earth in Israel will be a temporal manifestation of Christ's coming eternal kingdom. It will be that kingdom that Paul says the Son returns to the Father, that God might be all in all. (Or it is in Hebrews and we don't know the author. I occassionally get the reference wrong. I keep thinking it is one of the Corinthian books.) I understand the nature of the kingdom. It is eternal in aspect, and it will have a temporal manifestation in Israel as the Millennial kingdom.
EarlyActs
Well Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2023
- Messages
- 3,448
- Reaction score
- 398
- Points
- 83
???That is a dilly. ‘Don’t know what Paul meant.’
He was referring to the final leader of the revolt, John Gischala. The same as in Dan 8:13+. That’s why the abomination in Mt 24 etc is both a person and an event. The original Greek leaves it open to both.
Learn NT history. Need some authors? Even a commentary on Josephus Jewish war.
Stop thinking that everyone in the NT was thinking about the distant future. It is nonsense and there is no evidence. The belief that they would be with Christ right after the destruction is all through the NT.
He was consoling people who wondered what happens if friends or family die before reunion with Christ. A reasonable and direct and current question.
EarlyActs
Well Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2023
- Messages
- 3,448
- Reaction score
- 398
- Points
- 83
The Z passage was quoted for its value about Christ and his suffering. The one who was pierced. He was seen as such by the early believers and followers of Christ.
The Acts 26 passage, if you pay attention while reading, says that the only thing Paul was commissioned to speak about from the Scriptures is Christ, his sufferings and his being preached to the nations. That is saying the same thing, in different way, as Acts 1 where Jesus pointedly tells the disciples to stop asking about 'the kingdom of Israel' restoration. Because, as I said above, we always assume the assumed parts of our question are correct. We seldom realize we have the wrong question.
But you are more curious than that. On this Z passage, how could the passage not be about the suffering of Christ, the piercing? I'm afraid that many times now, you are stand for the position that you think you are opposing; it is very strange reading!
Since you are 10 responses ahead of me at this time (late Wed), please wait til I catch up.
EarlyActs
Well Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2023
- Messages
- 3,448
- Reaction score
- 398
- Points
- 83
re the Spirit
All the OT references to the outpouring are about just after Christ's gospel. It was to be an age in which the believers would reach out to the nations, like the ancient promise to Abraham said, Gal 3. God does not 'do' race-nations, says Rom 11:30. People who think they know what the Isaiah quote means never seem to read his close.
There is only one elect. God is not saving the elect of Israel apart from saving the elect period; through faith in Christ. This is true all the way back to when "Israel" was first a tribe. There has always been the whole community and within that was a remnant. But the only people who believe in a separate 'salvation' for the race-nation are people who, with D'ism, believe in two programs, which you say you do not, but that is not the case.
This is what is wrong with this whole conversation. I did not say that. I say we "Don't know what Paul taught". That is completely different.
II Thessalonians 2
Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the [a]coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, 2 that you not be quickly shaken from your [b]composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a [c]message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the [d]apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above [e]every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.
That is the blasphemies of the fourth beast in Daniel. The open boasts. And, stepping into the temple and declaring oneself to be God, opposing and exalting himself above every so-called god or object of worship, is the abomination. The end of sacrifice and all is because that recognizes God as God. They may be wrong in having sacrifices at all, but it is a reminder and image of the religion of Judaism, which is the worship of the One true God. (Judaism rightly practiced, such as when Josiah was king.)
5 Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things?
So Paul told these things to the church, but didn't expound upon it because he had already taught them.
6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed.
Sure they know. Paul taught them when he was with them. Because of this, he did not expound upon it. Of course, this can't have anything to do with the 70 weeks prophecy, because, according to you, this had ended already. But could it, since Paul is saying that the man of lawlessness is still being restrained, and started the chapter saying not to believe any letter from Paul saying that the day of the Lord has come. II Thessalonians was written almost 20 years after Christ. You think that if the 70 weeks had been fulfilled, he would stop talking as though they have not been fulfilled yet.
7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.
Again, the Thessalonians know who the one who restrains is, but Paul isn't telling us. You ASSUME based on your POV that it is someone, but look at the next verse...
8 Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His [f]coming; 9 that is, the one whose [g]coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and [h]signs and false wonders, 10 and with [i]all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. 11 For this reason God [j]will send upon them [k]a deluding influence so that they will believe [l]what is false, 12 in order that they all may be [m]judged who did not believe the truth, but [n]took pleasure in wickedness.
The ANTICHRIST, whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with power, signs, and false wonders. So, what kind of true blue miracles did
I already head that argument with someone else.
I didn't say that humans were thinking about the distant future... God is. The evidence is that we are still here, and Jesus has not yet returned. Even Jesus said that His return would be visibly, and when He returned, He would gather ALL of His elect from the four winds. (Poetic way of saying North, South, East, and West, so basically everywhere.)
"29 “But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from [r]the sky, and the powers of [s]the heavens will be shaken. 30 And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. 31 And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His [t]elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other."
Actually, I think he was consoling those who might be frightened by the ferocity of the day of the Lord. I mean, didn't Jesus say that it would be so great that if the days weren't shortened, there would be no flesh left on Earth? That would frighten a lot of people. Fear isn't removed by becoming a Christian, as not all believers are SSR rank like Paul. Most are normal/common, some rare, even fewer are epic or legendary. Not everyone is at a place in their faith that they could, on their own, consider torture, persecution, and pain. If it comes, God will be their support, but on their own, thoughts cause worry and fear.
He did write about consolation about friend or family, but that isn't in this passage. That is in I Thessalonians, not second Thessalonians.
Don't add to it. STOP DOING THAT. Are the warnings given not enough. The point of the usage of Zechariah is to tell the Jewish reader, as John was writing to the Jews, that Jesus is the star of all the eschatology passages in the Old Testament. Zechariah is eschatology. The Jews had a belief of eschatology which had the Messiah as King of a kingdom that has Jerusalem as its capitol. When the disciples asked Jesus those questions for the Olivet Discourse, they were speaking from their knoweldge of eschatology. They didn't know Jesus was going to leave and return. They only knew that Jesus would be the head of a kingdom in Israel, as the Messiah. The religious leaders failed to explain that the Messiah was coming twice. They erased the first coming, because they did not believe the Messiah, their king, would come as a suffering servant.
Jesus did not say stop thinking about the kingdom of Israel restoration. He didn't say that. He said that this event that the Father has scheduled, the Kingdom being restored to Israel, is the Father's business, it is not their business. He said it is none of their business the times and epochs scheduled by the Father. And so you don't say no, here it is again "He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority; " As the dispensationalists believe, the next "time/epoch" is the millennial kingdom, when the kingdom has been returned to Israel. If Jesus told them when, or even gave them an inkling, it would wreck the church. Why? There is another parable at the very end of the Olivet Discourse. Think on that.
It is talking about Israel RECOGNIZING WHO HE IS. It has nothing to do with His suffering. John points out how Jesus becomes that one Israel sees in the future, the One who was pierced. Isaiah speaks to it as a form of identification, as well as recognizing what He did. HE was wounded for our transgressions. When God finally rescues His elect in Israel, bringing an end to this temporal life and ushering in the eternal Kingdom that is not of this world (for it will be destroyed), the elect of Israel will recognize Christ not only as King, but for what He has done. This isn't salvation by some other atonement. This is God's regeneration on a national scale of elect proportion. (Like what I did there?) The only part of the nation of Israel that will remain when Jesus personally goes to them will be the elect. All the unbelievers will have perished in the battle that Christ shows up to win. Zechariah. The day God defends Judah first and Israel. He is fighting for His adopted children of the nation of Israel.
Take your time. At least it is about the same topic, and not multiple disparate topics. The topic is how the 70th week has a future fulfillment because, just like a football game, we are at half time. The game clock stopped running. The final fulfillment of the 70th week is to come. How can we be sure? Line it up to the Olivet discourse. The 70th week includes the time of Jacob's trouble, which is the Great Tribulation Jesus spoke of which ends upon His second coming. Immediately afterwards, Jesus bodily returns to Earth to gather the elect. What God has decreed for His people, will end with the ending of the world.
Red Baker
Well Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2023
- Messages
- 1,240
- Reaction score
- 515
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Easley, S.C.
- Website
- www.reddit.com
- Faith
- Member of the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven
- Country
- USA
No you have not, but have in time past many times over.
No, I'm not God, neither is it a presumption on my part, but a noted confession of history, which we can disregard if we at least have a word quoted from the man himself, which there are not even a word, even according to those who have read every word that he wrote, where he only mentioned Jesus by name once, and that not in a godly, humble manner~you judge, I'm only saying what is known by those who love his writings! I read very little of the man, and realized, what a waste of precious time and also knew, that truth is contain only within the holy scriptures.
By your own words here proves that you are using history attempting to understand scriptures! The Ten horns whereas the a little horn came up among them is understood only by following scriptures. I have a doctor's appointment early this morning, but can come back and go into details later~for now:
"And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast" Revelation 17:12
These ten kings (ten a number for totality) are the nations on the earth when the little season of Revelation 20 starts at the time of the end. They will have power for a short time! One hour, a little season. They will give their mind and strength to the devil during this time and to the building up of BABYLON, THE GREAT (which is this world with its religion and commerce, entertainments, etc. ) Even in the last two hundred years, THIS WORLD has made a MAJOR change; the world in many parts of it, looks like a resort that our forefathers could only image in their wildest imaginations. There are places of entertainments everywhere; and every sort of fleshly pleasure you can think of is here in MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT CITY for all WHO WILL FALL DOWN AND WORSHIP THE BEAST! And we will add, most people of the nations of Babylon are MAD on these idols found therein. The truth is: they want more; and we will add, that they are sacrificing their children to these dumb idols is plain to all who has the mind of true wisdom.
These kings will DESTROY the religious PART OF BABYLON just before this world comes to an end, or, at least will silence them! There will be a very short space of time when this world will be free of Religion as we know it. God's saints will be protected, Revelation 12:16-17
But it will be a time of TROUBLE, the which the world has never seen, nor will see...... religiously speaking. The world truly believes that if they could eliminate religion, then their troubles and problems could be eliminated! Let's see if I'm a false prophet, or, one that truly see and proclaims the truth.
Deuteronomy 18:22
“When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.”Read Revelation 17:13-15. She shall be destroyed JUST AS JERUSALEM was by Nebuchadnezzar of old. There is NO WAY to explain those three verses than the way we did and keep the scriptural sense that the Holy Ghost intended.
Taken from my small article on Mystery Babylon, the Great.
Last edited:
EarlyActs
Well Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2023
- Messages
- 3,448
- Reaction score
- 398
- Points
- 83
Re the NT interp of the OT
Yes you absolutely use the NT as the official interp. It could take about 2 years of going through the list, but it is nothing like what you are saying.
On Dan 2 , you have missed the point. If it was going to be a kingdom like the existing,it would have become stainless steel or titanium. The whole thing is a metaphor that a totally different force was coming, which states could never have.
When you read Acts 2-4, about what kind of kingdom arrived, it is only imperative. People should honor the Son (Ps 2) bc of the status God just gave him. It is not an office in Jerusalem or Antioch or anywhere.
To not ‘have external manifestation’ means it is not nor will not be like those on earth. A completely new force compels its member to volunteer freely in the day of his power.’
It has no other forms in the future. The Mill image in the Rev is only a symbol of it. That’s why there is no Mill in 2P3, as I’ve said 3x now.
Be sure to absorb the biological timestamp of Lk 23:28.
We can simplify this bit piece exchange if you DM me.
Similar threads
