• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Two needed eschatological reforms

Those were terms you used. All I did was make note of them and affirm your argument as such. No accusation and no attack against you personally. If you do not like it when you read it then do not post it.

No, how about we not assume anything and we do not base our thoughts, posts or criticisms on assumptions.
Then all your arguments are a moot point. You assume that Jesus didn't return in Revelation 19, though it has been shown that it is rather clear. The armies are heavenly (that is they are from heaven), but they are following Jesus. Where? Obviously to Earth, which is where the fighting is taking place. If Jesus is coming to Earth from heaven, from the clouds, then it is the reverse of Jesus ascension, so the second coming. I am not assuming anything, but following the flow of the passage.
Nice ad hominem.
You are on record arguing for assumptions, for habits, and attacking others. I simply observed it, noted it, drew attention to it in hopes of change.

Should not be difficult since you'll be remembering what you've already done.

The op and I disagree on some particulars but he's correct about the need to eliminate the clatter about the rapture and the millennium. Your view is the outlier here. If this were a Dispensationalist forum then you'd be right at home, but this isn't a Dispensationalist forum. You need to show up with something more than assumption, habit, and ad hominem of you wish to prove your end times views.
Why do you antagonize everyone?
 
Then all your arguments are a moot point.
No they're not.
You assume that Jesus didn't return in Revelation 19
Never happened.
, though it has been shown that it is rather clear.
Never happened.

The specific point being made is that the text never actually states Jesus is physically on earth but despite that silence you read a physical coming into the text. That is all you were asked to acknowledge and all you were asked to prove. You haven't made anything "clear." Every single time you quote a verse you read things into it that are not stated.
The armies are heavenly (that is they are from heaven), but they are following Jesus.
Yes, in heaven!!!

Revelation 19:13-15
He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses. From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty.

No mention of him being on earth. None. You infer it because you also infer the text implies it. You infer it despite the fact the majority of time God commands His armies He is in heaven. Even on the occasion His armies are on the earth (2 Kgs. 6), God is in heaven.

Genesis 22:11
But the angel of the LORD called to him from heaven and said, "Abraham, Abraham!" And he said, "Here I am."

Exodus 20:22
Then the LORD said to Moses, "Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, 'You yourselves have seen that I have spoken to you from heaven.

Deuteronomy 26:15
Look down from Your holy habitation, from heaven, and bless Your people Israel, and the ground which You have given us, a land flowing with milk and honey, as You swore to our fathers.'

Joshua 10:11
As they fled from before Israel, while they were at the descent of Beth-horon, the LORD threw large stones from heaven on them as far as Azekah, and they died; there were more who died from the hailstones than those whom the sons of Israel killed with the sword.

2 Kings 1:10-14
Elijah replied to the captain of fifty, "If I am a man of God, let fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty." Then fire came down from heaven and consumed him and his fifty. So he again sent to him another captain of fifty with his fifty. And he said to him, "O man of God, thus says the king, 'Come down quickly.'" Elijah replied to them, "If I am a man of God, let fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty." Then the fire of God came down from heaven and consumed him and his fifty. So he again sent the captain of a third fifty with his fifty. When the third captain of fifty went up, he came and bowed down on his knees before Elijah, and begged him and said to him, "O man of God, please let my life and the lives of these fifty servants of yours be precious in your sight. "Behold fire came down from heaven and consumed the first two captains of fifty with their fifties; but now let my life be precious in your sight."

2 Chronicles 6:21-25 Listen to the supplications of Your servant and of Your people Israel when they pray toward this place; hear from Your dwelling place, from heaven; hear and forgive. If a man sins against his neighbor and is made to take an oath, and he comes and takes an oath before Your altar in this house, then hear from heaven and act and judge Your servants, punishing the wicked by bringing his way on his own head and justifying the righteous by giving him according to his righteousness. "If Your people Israel are defeated before an enemy because they have sinned against You, and they return to You and confess Your name, and pray and make supplication before You in this house, then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of Your people Israel and bring them back to the land which You have given to them and to their fathers.

Nehemiah 9:13
Then You came down on Mount Sinai, and spoke with them from heaven; You gave them just ordinances and true laws, Good statutes and commandments.

From heaven is the overwhelmingly, most frequently occurring place of God and His actions on the earth. God commands hundreds of things while in heaven and they are done on earth. Look at the Nehemiah 9 verse just quoted. It states He came down on Mt. Sinai and spoke from heaven. He was not physically on Sinai. God being in heaven and effecting events on earth is the normal, standard operating procedure, the default setting.

But you think ALL of that - everything previously stated in the whole Bible - should be ignored for the sake of assuming something is implied so you can infer something else not actually stated.

You have not made anything clear. That statement is rubbish.
Where? Obviously to Earth, which is where the fighting is taking place.
While Jesus is in heaven. He will remain in heaven seated at his Father's right hand on his Father's throne until the LORD defeats the Lord's enemies (Ps. 110).

I, unlike you, can actually point to scripture that explicitly states what I post.
If Jesus is coming to Earth from heaven, from the clouds, then it is the reverse of Jesus ascension, so the second coming. I am not assuming anything, but following the flow of the passage.
Which is exactly what happens in Revelation 21, not Revelation 19.
Why do you antagonize everyone?
You are responsible for your experience and I cannot make anyone believe, think, feel, or do anything. The attempt to make me the bad guy here fails because what I have done is show you what scripture actually states, what it does not explicitly state, and what it can and cannot be made to say when whole scripture is examined.

If you feel antagonized by that then it is not me doing any antagonizing.
If Jesus is ....
"If"???

Post 61 is a testimony to your method. You read scripture selectively and inferentially. The entire post doesn't once rely on anything plainly stated beyond the armies being in heaven. You move them. Scripture does not.
 
Then all your arguments are a moot point. You assume that Jesus didn't return in Revelation 19, though it has been shown that it is rather clear. The armies are heavenly (that is they are from heaven), but they are following Jesus. Where? Obviously to Earth, which is where the fighting is taking place. If Jesus is coming to Earth from heaven, from the clouds, then it is the reverse of Jesus ascension, so the second coming. I am not assuming anything, but following the flow of the passage.

Why do you antagonize everyone?

Re on the clouds
Where is the destruction of evil as Jesus left in Acts 1? I don’t see the resemblance between Acts 1 and 2 Thess 1, 2
 
Untrue. What is required is an accurate understanding of God's symbolism used across the entirety of Scripture - Old and New Testaments.
Exactly the opening instruction are signified the language of parable. Not to be confused with the literal historical they must be mixed. the eternal not seen with the historical temporal seen .

Revelation 1:1King James Version1 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:

Many translations leave out. . .and signified it.
 
No they're not.
You assume that Jesus returns to the first Earth in Revelation 21, even after this "Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea." (Revelation 21:1).

There is no first Earth for Jesus to return to to fulfill the promise of Acts 1. It has passed away. Rather explicitly, if you read all the scriptures regarding the fate of the first Earth.
Never happened.

Never happened.
If you believe that Jesus didn't return in Revelation 19, how can you believe Jesus returns at all, even if we don't have Acts 1, since the first Earth passes away BEFORE Revelation 21:1. If anything, Revelation 19 is the triumphal return of Jesus in all His glory, leading His armies on a white horse, to face down the armies of the beast and the kings of the Earth. Show me that Revelation 19 does not explicitly show the defeat of the beast followed by the defeat of the armies by Jesus personally.
The specific point being made is that the text never actually states Jesus is physically on earth but despite that silence you read a physical coming into the text. That is all you were asked to acknowledge and all you were asked to prove. You haven't made anything "clear." Every single time you quote a verse you read things into it that are not stated.
I don't read it into the text. If Jesus is in heaven, and the armies of the beast and the kings of the earth are on Earth, and Jesus and His armies fight them in close combat, and physically seize the beast, then where are they? The spiritual war in heaven ended when Satan was cast out. We are now dealing with physical war on Earth, Satan's last stronghold, permitted by God until this time. The fulfillment of this is in Zechariah 12.
From heaven is the overwhelmingly, most frequently occurring place of God and His actions on the earth. God commands hundreds of things while in heaven and they are done on earth. Look at the Nehemiah 9 verse just quoted. It states He came down on Mt. Sinai and spoke from heaven. He was not physically on Sinai. God being in heaven and effecting events on earth is the normal, standard operating procedure, the default setting.
I don't see how this gives anyone the right to assume anything about a passage, except that one is using statistics to justify assumption. I would say that that is a logical fallacy.
But you think ALL of that - everything previously stated in the whole Bible - should be ignored for the sake of assuming something is implied so you can infer something else not actually stated.
No, I am saying that one should not make assumptions based off of that, and change what a passage states for matter of belief. Unless you are ready to become a unitarian, of course. There is a whole record in the Old Testament that is clear that God is One, and besides Him there is no other.
You have not made anything clear. That statement is rubbish.
What statement did I make? Are you tilting at windmills?
While Jesus is in heaven. He will remain in heaven seated at his Father's right hand on his Father's throne until the LORD defeats the Lord's enemies (Ps. 110).

I, unlike you, can actually point to scripture that explicitly states what I post.
The condescension is palpable. Did you consider Psalm 110:5 before changing what Psalm 110:1 says?
"5 The Lord is at Your right hand;
He [f]will shatter kings in the day of His wrath."
6 He will judge among the nations,
He [g]will fill them with corpses,
He [h]will shatter the [i]chief men over a broad country."

I forgot how many stadia the blood will cover up to a horse's bridle.

Whereas Psalm 110:1 simply states:
"1 The Lord says to my Lord:
“Sit at My right hand
Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.”

It does not explicitly state "He will remain in heaven seated at his Father's right hand on his Father's throne until the LORD defeats the Lord's enemies". Jesus defeats His own enemies. The Father only subjugates them under Christ, if I take the passage at face value.
Which is exactly what happens in Revelation 21, not Revelation 19.
Explain how Jesus can return to the first earth when Revelation 21:1 states: "1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea." There is no first Earth for Jesus to return to. My assumption is that you don't believe that Jesus is physically returning to first Earth as explicitly stated in Acts 1.
You are responsible for your experience and I cannot make anyone believe, think, feel, or do anything. The attempt to make me the bad guy here fails because what I have done is show you what scripture actually states, what it does not explicitly state, and what it can and cannot be made to say when whole scripture is examined.
I am not making you a bad guy. I am pointing out where you are going off the rails, while you are trying to knock me off the rails. I will make this request once again. If you want me to believe that you show what scripture actually states, then show me in Revelation 21 where it speaks of Jesus physically returning to Earth in the second coming. There are two responses, no, in which I have to assume it is because it isn't explicitly stated, though you keep saying it is, or you present a passage in Revelation 21 that explicitly shows Jesus descending from the clouds as recorded in Acts 1, to the first Earth.
If you feel antagonized by that then it is not me doing any antagonizing.
No, I have looked at other threads on the forum, and at times you are worse there. Very condescending.
"If"???

Post 61 is a testimony to your method. You read scripture selectively and inferentially. The entire post doesn't once rely on anything plainly stated beyond the armies being in heaven. You move them. Scripture does not.
Scripture does move them. What does it say about this army? They are following the one riding the white horse. They are MOVING. You keep ignoring the fact that they are moving, when it is clear in writing. They are following Jesus. Why? The rest of Revelation 19 tells you that. There is war on Earth, since the war in heaven concluded some chapters ago with Satan being ejected forever, along with the fallen angels who fought with him. Earth is the final battleground. While Satan is moving against the one who rides on the horse, and Israel (if it is destroyed, Satan's wins by default), The one who rides the horse is followed by the armies which are in heaven, to do battle against these armies on Earth. They seize the beast, and Jesus deals with the kings of the earth and their armies. (see Psalm 110:5).
 
Re on the clouds
Where is the destruction of evil as Jesus left in Acts 1? I don’t see the resemblance between Acts 1 and 2 Thess 1, 2
Revelation 19 and 20. In other words, the 70 weeks are not over yet.
 
Revelation 19 and 20. In other words, the 70 weeks are not over yet.

To ask another way, is their destruction when Jesus left in Acts 1 that we can also find in passages about the final day of judgement? If not, he must have been referring to other times when he came, the last of which was to Paul in prison about surviving Jerusalem and getting to Rome.
 
You assume that Jesus returns to the first Earth..........
No, I do not. I make no such assumption. This is just another example in a pile of occasions in which you have failed to correctly read what is written and willfully impose your own biases and prejudices on what is plainly stated.

The fact is nowhere in Revelation is Jesus stated to physically come to earth until Revelation chapter 21. Whether old earth or new earth, first, second, seventeenth million earth was never posited.

NOT ONCE!

Stop assuming others assume things.



The fact is Jesus is not actually explicitly stated to physically come to earth in Revelation 19 or 20 as you infer he does. You're on record stating his physical return is implied when it is not implied unless the reader first assumes conditions or circumstances also NOT stated. In other words, the pre-tribulational separated rapture point of view is an entirely inferential position that never reads the text of scripture exactly as written but instead approaches the text with pre-existing biases and piles on inference after inference. The result is an end times view far removed from what is actually explicitly stated:

Jesus comes to earth in chapter 21. Not before then.


Everything happening on earth is commanded from heaven. That is the way it has been since Genesis, and Psalm 110:1 makes it perfectly, explicitly clear: Jesus stays enthroned in heaven until his Father defeats all his enemies. The Lord remains seated until the LORD defeats the Lord's enemies. I can actually quote scripture explicitly stating that fact. It's not an opinion. It's not a doctrinally biased claim. It has absolutely nothing to do with my personal views on the matter or what any post-canonical man-made eschatology says.

Psalm 110:1
The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."

That is scripture, and scripture read exactly as written. The Lord remains seated until the LORD defeats the Lord's enemies. When all his enemies are defeated, then....

Revelation 21:3
....I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them.....

That verse actually, explicitly states God Himself is here on earth.

Revelation 21:22-24
saw no temple in it, for the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. And the city has no need of the sun or of the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God has illuminated it, and its lamp is the Lamb. The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it.

that is what the Bible actually, explicitly states. No need to read it to imply anything. No need to read it inferentially. Read it exactly as written. A bunch of stuff happens on earth for 20 chapters but not once is Jesus explicitly stated to physically be on earth. Everything that happens on earth is commanded from and has its impetus in heaven. Jesus comes after ALL of it is accomplished. The Lord sits at the right hand of the Lord on the LORD's throne until the LORD defeats all the Lord's enemies. He does nt eave before then, He does not leave for a pre-trib or mid-trib rapture. The disciples are handed over to tribulation and the great tribulation does not come until after the AoD and the disciples would see it happening. The Jezebel of Thyatira's church would be thrown into it by God and the church was told not to hold to her teachings but hold fast until Jesus came. They, all the other churches, were to overcome. Those who have washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb "come out of the great tribulation."
 
No, I do not. I make no such assumption. This is just another example in a pile of occasions in which you have failed to correctly read what is written and willfully impose your own biases and prejudices on what is plainly stated.

The fact is nowhere in Revelation is Jesus stated to physically come to earth until Revelation chapter 21. Whether old earth or new earth, first, second, seventeenth million earth was never posited.

NOT ONCE!

Stop assuming others assume things.



The fact is Jesus is not actually explicitly stated to physically come to earth in Revelation 19 or 20 as you infer he does. You're on record stating his physical return is implied when it is not implied unless the reader first assumes conditions or circumstances also NOT stated. In other words, the pre-tribulational separated rapture point of view is an entirely inferential position that never reads the text of scripture exactly as written but instead approaches the text with pre-existing biases and piles on inference after inference. The result is an end times view far removed from what is actually explicitly stated:

Jesus comes to earth in chapter 21. Not before then.


Everything happening on earth is commanded from heaven. That is the way it has been since Genesis, and Psalm 110:1 makes it perfectly, explicitly clear: Jesus stays enthroned in heaven until his Father defeats all his enemies. The Lord remains seated until the LORD defeats the Lord's enemies. I can actually quote scripture explicitly stating that fact. It's not an opinion. It's not a doctrinally biased claim. It has absolutely nothing to do with my personal views on the matter or what any post-canonical man-made eschatology says.

Psalm 110:1
The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."

That is scripture, and scripture read exactly as written. The Lord remains seated until the LORD defeats the Lord's enemies. When all his enemies are defeated, then....

Revelation 21:3
....I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them.....

That verse actually, explicitly states God Himself is here on earth.

Revelation 21:22-24
saw no temple in it, for the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. And the city has no need of the sun or of the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God has illuminated it, and its lamp is the Lamb. The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth https://biblehub.com/nasb_/revelation/21.htm#fnwill bring their glory into it.

that is what the Bible actually, explicitly states. No need to read it to imply anything. No need to read it inferentially. Read it exactly as written. A bunch of stuff happens on earth for 20 chapters but not once is Jesus explicitly stated to physically be on earth. Everything that happens on earth is commanded from and has its impetus in heaven. Jesus comes after ALL of it is accomplished. The Lord sits at the right hand of the Lord on the LORD's throne until the LORD defeats all the Lord's enemies. He does nt eave before then, He does not leave for a pre-trib or mid-trib rapture. The disciples are handed over to tribulation and the great tribulation does not come until after the AoD and the disciples would see it happening. The Jezebel of Thyatira's church would be thrown into it by God and the church was told not to hold to her teachings but hold fast until Jesus came. They, all the other churches, were to overcome. Those who have washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb "come out of the great tribulation."
I asked for explicit mention in Revelation 21 of Jesus physical return to Earth, and should have added, as it is stated in Acts 1. It isn't here. I mean, I guess INFERENCES could be made that this somehow fulfills Acts 1. You also just threw out the rest of Psalm 110, simply because it doesn't agree. And it is explicit. There is no explicit return of Christ mentioned in Revelation 21 that does any kind of justice to what Jesus said in Matthew 24, what others such as Paul has said, and with what was said in Acts 1. Where is His return with a shout? Revelation 19. You think the army would be silent? And you have the shout of the angel prior, calling all the birds of the Earth to partake in the feast of the slaughter.

Why do you think Jesus would make His return silent? He isn't even seen in Revelation 21. In Revelation 19, He makes a show of it. A show of force against the beast and the armies of the kings of the Earth. You deny Him a glorious return as the Messiah/Savior of Israel, and you deny Him a glorious return. Where is His victory? Where is His glory? Some after thought in a chapter devoted to the New Jerusalem? Jesus is a lamp. That's all we get in Revelation 21.
 
I asked for explicit mention in Revelation 21 of Jesus physical return to Earth, and should have added, as it is stated in Acts 1.
And you got it.

Acts 1 states, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched him go into heaven." Revelation 21-22 has him coming down out of heaven (the reverse of being taken up into heaven) and coming to earth (the reverse of him going into heaven AND Act1 states they will see him come exactly as they saw him leave, which means they will be on earth, see him from on earth, and NOT be anywhere else when they watch him come in just the same way as they saw him leave.
It isn't here. I mean, I guess INFERENCES could be made that this somehow fulfills Acts 1.
No. Inferences are not necessary. Just read the text as written. I've already admonished you about guessing. I've often admonished you about inferences. Start first with what is plainly, explicitly stated. Any inferences logically made must come from what is explicit.
You also just threw out the rest of Psalm 110
No, I did not. I have covered every verse of Psalm 110 in many threads. The next verse says he extends the LORD's sceptor from Zion.

Where is Zion?

Judaizers and modern futurists say it is earthly Israel. The psalmist says it is heaven.

Psalm 134:1-3
Behold, bless the LORD, all servants of the LORD, who serve by night in the house of the LORD! Lift up your hands to the sanctuary and bless the LORD. May the LORD bless you from Zion, He who made heaven and earth.

Eschatologically speaking, the author of Hebrews explicitly stated the following,

Hebrews 12:22-24
But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.

Mount Zion and the city of God are the heavenly Jerusalem.

So I have two points to make. The first is once again I have scripture that actually explicitly states what I post and you do not. The second is you are trying real hard to find flaws in what I am posting but you are not trying hard to accept the scriptures posted. Do not believe me. My views are nothing. Believe scripture. Believe it exactly as written.

Everything in Psalm 110 is said in the explicitly stated context of the Lord sitting at the LORD's right hand until the LORD make a footstool of the Lord's enemies. During that time the Lord extends the LORD's scepter from Zion, and he rules in the midst of his enemies (not all his enemies are on earth). His people serve him, the kings are shattered, the nations judged and filled with corpses, and he lifts up his head all while seated at the LORD's right hand. Not once is he explicitly stated to physically come to earth and the psalm parallels Revelation perfectly (although Revelation provides greater detail). After his enemies are defeated he's no longer in heaven. Revelation 21-22 report his coming to earth.
, simply because it doesn't agree.
Except it does when you leave out all your inferences.
And it is explicit. There is no explicit return of Christ mentioned in Revelation 21...
Yeah, we're done here. I just showed you where the Revelation 21-22 narrative explicitly states Jesus comes down to earth in the new Jerusalem and God is dwelling among men on earth. All anyone has to do is open their Bible and read the text of Revelation 21:1-22:5 for themselves. Jesus leaves heaven. He leaves heaven in the new city of peace (Jeru = city; salem = peace) as its temple and its light. God dwells on earth with men and the kings bring their glory into the temple (Jesus).


You are being contrary.

Good night.
 
And you got it.

Acts 1 states, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched him go into heaven." Revelation 21-22 has him coming down out of heaven (the reverse of being taken up into heaven) and coming to earth (the reverse of him going into heaven AND Act1 states they will see him come exactly as they saw him leave, which means they will be on earth, see him from on earth, and NOT be anywhere else when they watch him come in just the same way as they saw him leave.

No. Inferences are not necessary. Just read the text as written. I've already admonished you about guessing. I've often admonished you about inferences. Start first with what is plainly, explicitly stated. Any inferences logically made must come from what is explicit.

No, I did not. I have covered every verse of Psalm 110 in many threads. The next verse says he extends the LORD's sceptor from Zion.

Where is Zion?

Judaizers and modern futurists say it is earthly Israel. The psalmist says it is heaven.

Psalm 134:1-3
Behold, bless the LORD, all servants of the LORD, who serve by night in the house of the LORD! Lift up your hands to the sanctuary and bless the LORD. May the LORD bless you from Zion, He who made heaven and earth.

Eschatologically speaking, the author of Hebrews explicitly stated the following,

Hebrews 12:22-24
But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.

Mount Zion and the city of God are the heavenly Jerusalem.

So I have two points to make. The first is once again I have scripture that actually explicitly states what I post and you do not. The second is you are trying real hard to find flaws in what I am posting but you are not trying hard to accept the scriptures posted. Do not believe me. My views are nothing. Believe scripture. Believe it exactly as written.

Everything in Psalm 110 is said in the explicitly stated context of the Lord sitting at the LORD's right hand until the LORD make a footstool of the Lord's enemies. During that time the Lord extends the LORD's scepter from Zion, and he rules in the midst of his enemies (not all his enemies are on earth). His people serve him, the kings are shattered, the nations judged and filled with corpses, and he lifts up his head all while seated at the LORD's right hand. Not once is he explicitly stated to physically come to earth and the psalm parallels Revelation perfectly (although Revelation provides greater detail). After his enemies are defeated he's no longer in heaven. Revelation 21-22 report his coming to earth.

Except it does when you leave out all your inferences.

Yeah, we're done here. I just showed you where the Revelation 21-22 narrative explicitly states Jesus comes down to earth in the new Jerusalem and God is dwelling among men on earth. All anyone has to do is open their Bible and read the text of Revelation 21:1-22:5 for themselves. Jesus leaves heaven. He leaves heaven in the new city of peace (Jeru = city; salem = peace) as its temple and its light. God dwells on earth with men and the kings bring their glory into the temple (Jesus).


You are being contrary.

Good night.
I asked you to show me explicitly where it states that Jesus second coming is in Revelation 21-22. You have failed. Where is Jesus name, and His coming in power and great glory? Why is this all about New Jersusalem, if this is Jesus returning on the clouds of heaven, in power and great glory? (As Jesus said of Himself in Matthew 24.) So, as I said it would be over. It's done. There is no discussing anything with you.
 
I asked you to show me explicitly where it states that Jesus second coming is in Revelation 21-22. You have failed. Where is Jesus name, and His coming in power and great glory? Why is this all about New Jersusalem, if this is Jesus returning on the clouds of heaven, in power and great glory? (As Jesus said of Himself in Matthew 24.) So, as I said it would be over. It's done. There is no discussing anything with you.
Yes, and the question was answered. It was also answered in avoidance of all the questions I first asked you. Post 71 changes the question. One of the ways the entire exchange between you and I could be characterized is, "I am not going to answer or address any of the inquiries Josh posts but I am going to demand he answer everything I ask."

My answer to your question is to say the phrase "the second coming" is an addition to the Bible! That phrase does not exist anywhere in the Bible. The closest anyone will ever get to THE second coming is Hebrews 9:27 which specifically and explicitly states that when Jesus "appears" a second time he does so for a salvation that has nothing to do with sin.

Hebrews 9:28 NAS
so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.

Hebrews 9:28 KJV
so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.

Hebrews 9:28 ESV
so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.

...and there is no mention of him physically living on earth! My answer to your question is to tell you the question itself is flawed. That qualifies it as a red herring. That red herring would not have been committed without the pre-existing doctrinal bias.

Let's observe what just happened because despite the fact few if any of my inquires, requests, and observation have been addressed, I freely, willingly, directly and immediately answer all the questions I am asked. Furthermore, in my last post I made note AGAIN of how frequently you read scripture inferentially and thereby invariably add things to it the verses cited never state. You readily admit you read scripture inferentially but that's the only bit of honesty I've received, and it took many posts to get to that fact. This is another occasion where what I post perfectly reconciles with what scripture actually explicitly states and where there is no scripture explicitly stating what you post. Do not assume Hebrews 9:28 - the only verse in the Bible specifically mentioning a second appearance - means Jesus is physically on earth (especially not for a literal 1000 years).

The fact is Jesus comes many times in many ways for many purposes in the New Testament and very few of them have him physically on the earth. The normal, standard operating procedure, the overwhelmingly most frequent report of scripture is both the LORD and the Lord do not set foot physically on the earth. In point of fact, Jesus often comes in ways where there is no report of his physical body! Jesus came in the form of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Jesus came to Saul on the road to Damascus, but he spoke to Saul on earth from heaven. Look it up. He came in judgment against Jerusalem in 70 AD, exactly as he had before when he sent the Assyrians and Babylonians in judgments against Israel. Jesus comes many times in many ways for many purposes and Acts 1 does NOT mention the word "second" or state he is physically on the earth. Every time I'm asked a question I answer it and then ask you something, but I never get an immediate direct answer. I get new questions, new accusations, and new subterfuge.

Will Jesus come again? Yes!

I am NOT one of those who wrongly think all the prophecies in the Bible are all fulfilled. The historical view in all of Christendom prior to the invention of Dispensational Premillennialism is that the rapture and the "second" or final coming are not two separate events. That is what Historic Premillennialists believe and have believed since the first century. It is what the Amillennialists, Postmillennialists, Panmillennialists, and Idealists have believed since the inception of those eschatological points of view. ONLY the Dispensational Premillennial eschatologies (or more generically, the modern futurist eschatologies) think and teach differently. They are the outliers. They are the statistical outliers. They are the normative outliers. Does that automatically make them wrong? No! But since what they teach is some diametrically opposed to the things all other Christians have believed for 20 millennia an examination of the outlying view is warranted. Why? Because if DPism is correct then Christianity has been wrong.

More cogently is the fact (nearly) everything you do with scripture is inferential. Everyone else begins with the plain, blunt, explicit statements in scripture and works from what is explicitly stated to what can be inferred only after reading what is written as written.
This can easily and readily be tested with a single question. If the question is answered honestly, directly, unequivocally, and immediately then some semblance of integrity with God's word is attained. Any delay and/or obfuscation proves my point. Answer that question before I take up the rest of Post #71. Prove you are capable of parity, Make the next post one word long. Yes or No.



Is the phrase "the second coming" explicitly stated anywhere in the Bible?


Yes or No
 
Here are two reforms that are needed to get to effective eschatology.

1, we need to see from the NT letters in normal language
Exactly. God certainly knows how to speak plainly.

Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:

(not Judaic symbolism in the Rev),
Actually, it's Christian symbolism. Or rather, God's symbolism to Christians (Whether Jew or Greek).

And they are in normal letters of the ABCs...

Just messing with you. I agree. All prophecies, doctrines, and mysteries of the Bible must be interpreted by plain language of the Bible.

that the final day of judgement is quickly over.
You're right. i don't read anything about the time duration of God's final judgement. Now, the Bible does speak of that great day of judgment. But that being as a thousand years can certainly apply.

It nearly happened in the 1st century.
???

The believers are picked up by Christ just before this, and the next thing they know is the comfort of his arms, along with all who preceded them in the NHNE.
Talk about mysterious stuff. I thought you were calling for discipline of plain Scripture about such things.

This should eliminate all the clatter about the rapture
You reject the first resurrection of the saints, to meet the Lord in the air at His return to earth?

the most complete non-symbolic passage of the NT on the future (2 P 3) mentions neither of them, but satisfies all the questions.
While you're calling for plain letters. You need to use them in context of all the plain letters.

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.
And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
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.


Pretty plain letters to me.

Just because it's with power over the earth, doesn't make it a symbol nor a mystery. Afterall, the Red Sea did part with Moses' rod, and the sun did stand still at Joshua's word.
 

Two needed eschatological reforms​


1. The last days and great tribulation for the NT saints on earth, has been since Jesus Christ rose from the dead.

2. There are two kinds of tribulation on earth: the wrath of the wicked upon the righteous, and the wrath of God upon the wicked.

The end of these last days with the rise of the last great antichrist on earth, will first be with great tribulation and wrath of man upon saints. And then after their resurrection into the air at the Lord's return, there will be the great tribulation and wrath of the Lord made upon the wicked still on earth.

The saints are not appointed to wrath of God on earth, but we certainly are appointed to tribulation and wrath of man for righteousness' sake.

Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly:
 
Back
Top