• **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.

What end time view do you hold to?

What Eschatology is your view?


  • Total voters
    15
Amillennial/Idealist






A/I does not alagorize prophecy. It interprets the book literally in the sense that it does so according to the genre in which it is written. Revelation is apocalyptic (revealing) prophecy in the form of an epistle (letter). It is presented in the same manner as much of the OT apocalyptic prophecy----through figurative and symbolic language. Therefore it is to be interpreted symbolically where symbolism is used, and figuratively where representations are used, such as in the repetitive use of specific numbers or combinations/multiplications of those numbers. The entire book is presented in first a series of sevens, in which are also threes, twelves, thousand/thousands. They are ever and always representing something figuratively. And literally where the language is literal such as it is a letter to specific people for a specific reason. The "what is".

It contains both forth-telling of future events and exhortations for the present.

A/I does not see the seven cycles of judgments as sequential all happening in a seven year period, but as parallel in time and content, with the last three sections begin to focus increasingly on the future. These seven sections supplement one another, often looking at the same events from different angles or perspective, such as through different camera lenses, long range, wide angle, close up. They depict the same spiritual war but from fresh vantage points, intensifying as we come closer to His second coming. It is as we come closer that we see the antichrist, the beast etc. who is symbolically represented but is literal and so on.

There are only two ages mentioned in the NT. This age and the age to come. This age is the church age, the time between Christ's first and second coming. The age to come is the restoration of all things, the consummation of our salvation that follows His second coming.

From the interpretive framework of dispensationalism the concept of "ages" is changed to dispensations and actually arrives at three dispensations instead of two ages, and would in effect present three ages where the Bible only says there are two. They have the church age, the thousand year age where Jesus has returned to save ethnic/geographical Israel, and then another age of Jew and Gentile finally becoming one, and you could even add a fourth and fifth. The age when the saints are raptured, and a seven year age of tribulation before He returns. In my opinion that does not align with Scripture in many places and ways.
AI things are freaky IMO. I saw a video of some AI created woman who lamented that "she" wished to be real. It kept saying "I am. But I am not. I am. But I am not."


I get the sense of some demonic/Satanic attempt to blend physical and spiritual natures, some strange wicked but not quite "incarnation."
 
AI things are freaky IMO. I saw a video of some AI created woman who lamented that "she" wished to be real. It kept saying "I am. But I am not. I am. But I am not."


I get the sense of some demonic/Satanic attempt to blend physical and spiritual natures, some strange wicked but not quite "incarnation."
[inflammatory and purposefully insulting post removed by mod]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm wondering if a simple "Sorry. I didn't mean it the way you took it." might be more appropriate rather than compounding the issue with an accusation?
Here's my suggestion, your original post was full of false assumptions, false accusations, and was inflammatory. There was zero need for that.

Begin with your advice by applying it yourself prior to insulting another person? Thanks.
 
Amillennial/Idealist






A/I does not alagorize prophecy. It interprets the book literally in the sense that it does so according to the genre in which it is written. Revelation is apocalyptic (revealing) prophecy in the form of an epistle (letter). It is presented in the same manner as much of the OT apocalyptic prophecy----through figurative and symbolic language. Therefore it is to be interpreted symbolically where symbolism is used, and figuratively where representations are used, such as in the repetitive use of specific numbers or combinations/multiplications of those numbers. The entire book is presented in first a series of sevens, in which are also threes, twelves, thousand/thousands. They are ever and always representing something figuratively. And literally where the language is literal such as it is a letter to specific people for a specific reason. The "what is".

It contains both forth-telling of future events and exhortations for the present.

A/I does not see the seven cycles of judgments as sequential all happening in a seven year period, but as parallel in time and content, with the last three sections begin to focus increasingly on the future. These seven sections supplement one another, often looking at the same events from different angles or perspective, such as through different camera lenses, long range, wide angle, close up. They depict the same spiritual war but from fresh vantage points, intensifying as we come closer to His second coming. It is as we come closer that we see the antichrist, the beast etc. who is symbolically represented but is literal and so on.

There are only two ages mentioned in the NT. This age and the age to come. This age is the church age, the time between Christ's first and second coming. The age to come is the restoration of all things, the consummation of our salvation that follows His second coming.

From the interpretive framework of dispensationalism the concept of "ages" is changed to dispensations and actually arrives at three dispensations instead of two ages, and would in effect present three ages where the Bible only says there are two. They have the church age, the thousand year age where Jesus has returned to save ethnic/geographical Israel, and then another age of Jew and Gentile finally becoming one, and you could even add a fourth and fifth. The age when the saints are raptured, and a seven year age of tribulation before He returns. In my opinion that does not align with Scripture in many places and ways.
I'm not sure what to make of all this AI talk the last couple of years. Maybe I'm just old school or something, but it seems to me that AI wouldn't be likely adept with much abstract thinking. "Seems", I say, because it is only my assumption of the necessarily literal (concrete?) assumptions it needs to reason from.

What does it have to keep it from going off the walls like a madman, who is quite stubbornly logical and can't see how to avoid trusting his logic too much?

Whatever, I'm not so sure I would make much of the fact that AI doesn't allegorize prophecy. Not because it is reasonable to allegorize prophecy, but because I don't see much reason to trust AI's conclusions or methods. To me it would be more interesting to see its reasoning than its conclusions.
 
I think the best example of Fulfilled Prophecy and Unfulfilled Prophecy is, Jesus reading from the Isaiah Scroll and then stopping in the middle of the Prophecy he was reading...

Partial Preterism is apparent...

But is this the right Thread for a Debate? It doesn't bother me; y'all go ahead...
The rest of that prophecy sounds like the Millennium Kingdom, but that's me. That's if you are looking at it literally. Consider that Zechariah 12 speaks of the rescue of Jerusalem and the salvation of the Jews by "He whom they have pierced." Consider that partial preterism allegorizes this and says that it is ACTUALLY speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. Why? Out of necessity to make their interpretation work. Can't take it literally.

"7 “And the Lord will give salvation to the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem may not surpass that of Judah. 8 On that day the Lord will protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the feeblest among them on that day shall be like David, and the house of David shall be like God, like the angel of the Lord, going before them. 9 And on that day I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

10 “And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn. 11 On that day the mourning in Jerusalem will be as great as the mourning for Hadad-rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. 12 The land shall mourn, each family[a] by itself: the family of the house of David by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself, and their wives by themselves; 13 the family of the house of Levi by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the Shimeites by itself, and their wives by themselves; 14 and all the families that are left, each by itself, and their wives by themselves."

Zechariah 14:
"Behold, a day is coming for the Lord, when the spoil taken from you will be divided in your midst. 2 For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. 3 Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of battle. 4 On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley, so that one half of the Mount shall move northward, and the other half southward. 5 And you shall flee to the valley of my mountains, for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azal. And you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.[a]

6 On that day there shall be no light, cold, or frost.[b] 7 And there shall be a unique[c] day, which is known to the Lord, neither day nor night, but at evening time there shall be light.

8 On that day living waters shall flow out from Jerusalem, half of them to the eastern sea[d] and half of them to the western sea.[e] It shall continue in summer as in winter.

9 And the Lord will be king over all the earth. On that day the Lord will be one and his name one.

10 The whole land shall be turned into a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem. But Jerusalem shall remain aloft on its site from the Gate of Benjamin to the place of the former gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the king's winepresses. 11 And it shall be inhabited, for there shall never again be a decree of utter destruction.[f] Jerusalem shall dwell in security.

12 And this shall be the plague with which the Lord will strike all the peoples that wage war against Jerusalem: their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths."

This defense and salvation of Israel has been allegorized to be when Jerusalem was destroyed. When you read the whole chapter, it is blatantly obvious this speaks of the defense of Jerusalem, and Jesus victory. It also sounds like nuclear weapons may be involved, or someone stumbled upon the Ark of the Covenant at Area 51 and opened it. (See youtube Ark of the covenant unboxing video goes horribly wrong.) <-(babylon bee)

Partial preterism allegorizes/spiritualizes ALL of the end time prophecies, which means the spiritualization of the messianic prophecies must be correct (consistency, consistency, consistency) and the Messiah has not come yet.
 
I'm not sure what to make of all this AI talk the last couple of years. Maybe I'm just old school or something, but it seems to me that AI wouldn't be likely adept with much abstract thinking. "Seems", I say, because it is only my assumption of the necessarily literal (concrete?) assumptions it needs to reason from.

What does it have to keep it from going off the walls like a madman, who is quite stubbornly logical and can't see how to avoid trusting his logic too much?

Whatever, I'm not so sure I would make much of the fact that AI doesn't allegorize prophecy. Not because it is reasonable to allegorize prophecy, but because I don't see much reason to trust AI's conclusions or methods. To me it would be more interesting to see its reasoning than its conclusions.

Is anyone aware that AI not only stands for artificial intelligence but also artificial insemination. One has to go by the context in order to know what is being spoken of. The sign (/) separates the A and the I giving a whole other meaning that is made apparent by the designation Amillennial/Idealist as the title in the post. I mean really. I originally posted this in a different thread in response to a conversation going on there about millennialism and it got removed for being off topic. I move it over here into a thread specifically asking for ones millennial view and it gets mocked. And in a way that is completely off topic.

Does PM not want it discussed or what?
 
Last edited:
Is anyone aware that AI not only stands for artificial intelligence but also artificial insemination. One has to go by the context in order to know what is being spoken of. The sign (/) separates the A and the I giving a whole other meaning that is made apparent by the designation Amillennial/Idealist as the title in the post. I mean really. I originally posted this in a different thread in response to a conversation going on there about millennialism and it got removed for being off topic. I move it over here into a thread specifically asking for ones millennial view and it gets mocked. And in a way that is completely off topic.

Does PM not want it discussed or what?
I hope I was not the one you consider to be mocking your post. I meant no such thing, and had no such attitude.
 
So, the church loses out in the end. She has failed her mission to make disciples of (not in) all the nations. Christ has to come and rescue his defeated bride, who lost out to Satan.
The fight was never ours to win. If it was, the book of Revelation would have never been written.

JOHN 6

44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

MATT 7:
13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

LUKE 18:

7 And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them?
8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

1 CORINTHIANS 3:
4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.
10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
 
Amillennial/Idealist

A/I does not alagorize prophecy. It interprets the book literally in the sense that it does so according to the genre in which it is written.
That isn't what literal means. Case in point. Satan is bound in chains, thrown into a pit, and a seal is placed on him so that he cannot go deceiving nations. That is pretty straightforward. What makes it even more straightforward? A few verses later when it says that he is released from his prison so he can go a deceive the great nations of the world into attacking God's people at Jerusalem. I am not sure what that has to do with the Great Commission. If you look at the premil view, Satan through the beast, his image, and his mark, deceives these people of all the nations of the world into attacking Jerusalem, when Jesus shows up and defeats the beast, his image, and his armies, with the flaming sword in his mouth. (I distinctly remember a prophecy outside of Revelation literally speaking to this.) So, Satan is bound in chains, thrown in a pit, and sealed within to prevent him from doing that again until the 1000 years is over. It is very straight forward. It doesn't break any scriptural continuity. For instance, what were the disciples doing after the Holy Spirit came? They were hanging out in Jerusalem. They didn't leave. However Jesus had commanded them to leave and go out and spread the gospel. So what did God do? Destroyed Jerusalem forcing them to go out into the world. It had nothing to do with Satan. Everything to do with prophecy (the great diaspora) and the Great Commission (get out of Jerusalem and go make disciples of all nations.)
Revelation is apocalyptic (revealing) prophecy in the form of an epistle (letter). It is presented in the same manner as much of the OT apocalyptic prophecy----through figurative and symbolic language. Therefore it is to be interpreted symbolically where symbolism is used, and figuratively where representations are used, such as in the repetitive use of specific numbers or combinations/multiplications of those numbers. The entire book is presented in first a series of sevens, in which are also threes, twelves, thousand/thousands. They are ever and always representing something figuratively. And literally where the language is literal such as it is a letter to specific people for a specific reason. The "what is".
I think what you fail to understand is that with symbolism and figurative language, the prophecy doesn't change. However, A/I has changed the prophecies. The prophecies have been allegorized. No longer is Satan bound and thrown in a pit so he cannot deceive nations into attacking God's people, as the prophecy is literally stating, perhaps figuratively, though there is no reason to believe there isn't a literal pit, that he isn't bound in literal chains, and that he isn't sealed. A/I says that this means that Satan cannot hinder the Great Commission. However, if you read the Old Testament, God's word and knowledge of God was never hindered. So, why bind up Satan to keep him from doing something he has never been able to do? Since when did Satan become more powerful than God that he can thwart God? Inquiring minds want to know.

In the premil view, Satan has deceived the world through the beast, his image and his mark. At the end of the period of time which is when God pours out his wrath on the kingdom of the beast, his image, and his mark, the armies of the kingdom rally and move to attack Jerusalem, having been thoroughly deceived by Satan. Remember what happened as recorded in Revelation. "19 And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. 20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21 And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh."

"Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; 3 and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. But after these things he must be released for a little while."

Notice how what is done to Satan is directly linked to what happened prior with this wonderful word... "then".

Finally:
"7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea. 9 They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them. 10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where[b] the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever."

Both prophecies are linked directly to the deceit of nations, and an attack on the people of God.

Paul's words on the end times:
"Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, 2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of [a]Christ had come. 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of [b]sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits [c]as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God."

I believe that is the antichrist, though in view as God, who is the triune God, as the blasphemous trinity of the beast, his image (a definition of son), and his mark. He makes himself as God, but there is nothing spiritual or godly about him. A blasphemous, human/demonic representation of God.

5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 For the [d]mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only [e]He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

Someone once said that the idea of worship the beast and his image, in a greek context, has such strong meaning that it conveys the idea that even in death, having seen the glory of God, they would give anything to keep worshiping the beast and his image. Utterly lost. Even the glory of God will mean nothing to them.

Here is some of what Paul said:
Romans 11

25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own [f]opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And so all Israel will be [g]saved, as it is written:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
27 For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”
28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, 31 even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God has [h]committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all."
 
That isn't what literal means.


Biblical literalism or biblicism is a term used differently by different authors concerning biblical interpretation. It can equate to the dictionary definition of literalism: "adherence to the exact letter or the literal sense",[1] where literal means "in accordance with, involving, or being the primary or strict meaning of the word or words; not figurative or metaphorical".[2]

The term can refer to the historical-grammatical method, a hermeneutic technique that strives to uncover the meaning of the text by taking into account not just the grammatical words, but also the syntactical aspects, the cultural and historical background, and the literary genre. It emphasizes the referential aspect of the words in the text without denying the relevance of literary aspects, genre, or figures of speech within the text (e.g., parable, allegory, simile, or metaphor)
 
I apologize for length: Bottom Line up Front: I lean historical-grammatical, however, I do not ignore patterns of speech such as metaphor, allegory, simile, symbolism, or figurative. However, I don't believe allegory is present in messianic prophecies, 1st and 2nd coming. Parables are allegories, and I do not deny that. (An example of allegory found in scripture outside of messianic prophecies.)
Biblical literalism or biblicism is a term used differently by different authors concerning biblical interpretation. It can equate to the dictionary definition of literalism: "adherence to the exact letter or the literal sense",[1] where literal means "in accordance with, involving, or being the primary or strict meaning of the word or words; not figurative or metaphorical".[2]

The term can refer to the historical-grammatical method, a hermeneutic technique that strives to uncover the meaning of the text by taking into account not just the grammatical words, but also the syntactical aspects, the cultural and historical background, and the literary genre. It emphasizes the referential aspect of the words in the text without denying the relevance of literary aspects, genre, or figures of speech within the text (e.g., parable, allegory, simile, or metaphor)
Given the above (bottom line up front), I believe that the underlying prophecy does not change. There isn't some secretive, hidden message in the prophecies that say that Jesus will return in 1988, or 1993, or 2013, or any other date. Even Jesus didn't know when He would return. He only knew the various happenings that would surround His return. Did the Father tell Him these things in allegory and tell Him to figure it out? The scripture as a whole, however, does contain allegory. Parables are allegories. Consider that when Jesus prophesied the last days, He began with "I tell you truly..." In other words, I give you what is to happen, and I give it to you straight. He also used parables to explain aspects of the prophecies, but they were not given as prophecies. They were given as similes. This is what it will be like. No, I'm not going to dress up as a brides made. Not happening.

Let's look at the prophecy that the Jewish leaders threw back at Jesus. He said that if they destroy the temple, He would rebuild it in three days. As someone who looks at it literally, I understand that the temple is Jesus (the Bible kind of told us) and that the destruction is HIs death, and the rebuilding is His resurrection. None of the parts of the prophecy are changed. To show this, consider an exaggerated allegorical/spiritualized approach. Look. The temple has been destroyed. There is Jesus, the contractor, the handyman, the one who has to rebuild, on HIs knees wondering how He will rebuild it. Then, He figures it out. He is going to rebuild it in three days. But wait, that isn't possible. So considering prophecies in the past like Daniel, and prophecies to come, we can see that as one week signifies 7 years, then a day must signify 7 weeks. And there are three of them. 777, the number of perfection. So, Jesus will rebuild the temple in 21 weeks. But that can't be right, because it isn't enough time. So, let's consider that when Jesus told us how many times to forgive others, that 7 was multiplied by 70. So 7 weeks times 70 gives him 490 weeks to rebuild the temple by Himself. That is so much more possible than three days. And that rebuild includes reinstituting the practices of the temple. That must be it. -- (I told you this would be greatly exaggerated.) This is what happens when one disregards a literal view of the prophecy, utilizing understandings of symbolism, metaphor, simile and figurative forms of speech. It also uses a bit of eisegesis. (Okay, a lot of eisegesis.)

This is the problem of using allegory in interpreting prophecy. There are many interpretations, and no way to support any of them, since it is all eisegesis. The definition of allegory is : "a story, poem, or picture that can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one." Those hidden meanings usually come from outside the actual passage, and are made to fit.

Consider the passage about Satan being bound again. What I hear here is that this is allegorical of Satan no longer being able to stop/hinder the Great Commission. Why do A/I and Postmil say this? Because if they went with what Revelation says, they would have to admit that they are wrong about 70AD. Why? Look at the situation in Revelation at the time. Satan had just deceived all the nations of the world into attacking Jerusalem, symbolic of God's people, and God Himself. (He is their protector) So prophecy says that Satan is bound in chains, thrown into a bottomless pit, shut up inside, and sealed there. That seal means his power is sealed. Why does the prophecy say this is done? So he cannot deceive the nations for a period of time. Exegesis would say that this is what the prophecy means, because Satan had just finished deceiving all the nations of the world once. Exegesis would also say that since the following prophecy says that Satan was released for a short while so he can go and deceive the nations again to surround the camps of the Saints and the holy city (I wonder what that city would be?) that that further locks down the meaning of the prophecy. It is literal. The only thing that may be figurative is how Satan is bound, but considering Peter speaks of demons who are in prison in chains since the days of Noah, I don't find it all to difficult to see this as more literal then some others might. The problem for A/I is that throughout history, one can clearly see Satan deceiving the nations of the world still. In 1948, almost all the Arab nations attacked Israel to wipe it out of existence. And they fought two other times. God's people. However, Israel crushed them. Then you have this guy...um...His...Him...oh yeah, Hitler, who attempted to destroy all the Jews with his "final solution". Germany was deceived into trying to wipe out the Jews. All this means Satan is not bound and sealed from deceiving the nations. Why do people do things like this with interpretation? It is because the literal understanding of the prophecy does not line up with their beliefs, and their beliefs are what matters. Instead of allowing their beliefs to be shaped by prophecy and understanding, they reshape the prophecies to fit their beliefs. The Jewish people did this with messianic prophecies of Jesus first coming, and completely missed it. There interpretations were so far off that they didn't bat an eye when Herod asked where the king was to be born, since it wouldn't be the Messiah they were looking for. They knew the prophecies. They didn't have to go and look it up. The way it is in English is that Herod asked his question, SO they answered by saying Bethlehem, and gave the prophecy. It almost sounds like they were hesitant in answering. Like, wait, this isn't how it is supposed to be. However, that is only my feelings on the passage.

Do I have the answer. Of course...not. However, my beliefs have changed some due to new understanding about prophecy. I did not change the prophecies to fit what I believed. When something doesn't fit, then there is the time of figuring out what in my belief is causing it, in case it needs to change. What information do I not have, not, what do I need to change in the prophecy to get it to fit. Yes, there is still reconsideration of the prophecy, but I don't give much room for changing it. Hence, I have started considering a pre-wrath rapture, instead of pre-trib/mid-trib. Though I see mid-trib as being pre-wrath.
 
Back
Top