Biblical scholar's date for rapture: May 21, 2011

reply to post by defcon5


In response to the comming of Christ; Please re read Matthew chapter 24. Jesus clearly states in vs 35-37 that he is refering to the heaven and earth passing away and the comming of the Son of man. In vs 2 Jesus tells about the destruction of the Temple then in vs 3 the disciples ask what shall be the sign of his return and the end of the world then Jesus answers them in vs 4 - 51. So yes he talks about the destruction of the Temple and then goes on to tell us about the end of the age and his return. They are two different events.

Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof, MAT 6:34.

Wow! That's amazing! It's almost 2012 save a month and a few days.

Another one going along with the 2012 bandwagon. Gotta love the publicity that this 2012 thing is getting. People love the herd especially when it means watching an idiot-friendly movie.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by Unregistered]

Originally posted by troubleshooter
reply to post by skunknuts

 

Jesus said, "...of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." Matthew 24:36

Real Christians don't set dates.

End of thread here. No man will ever know the date nor the time. This isn't true Christian thinking. I myself believe, and I do not fear any of these dates that everyone is throwing at us. Since I can ever remember people have been setting doomsday dates left and right, and so far not one has hit. I think it's, in a way, human nature for us to keep everyone on their toes stating that the end is near. I like living life expecting something to happen, but being comfortable not knowing when. Disasters happen all of the time... I've almost perished several times from tornadoes, but I still pressed through the weather.

If people are fearful for the rapture, just try to live a life of benevolence and acknowledge why you are here.

Originally posted by troubleshooter
reply to post by skunknuts

 

Jesus said, "...of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." Matthew 24:36

Real Christians don't set dates.

Thank you!!! If you are a Christian and believe the Bible than there is no way anyone can predict it.

Originally posted by defcon5
So credibility in your mind has to do with you being a grammar nazi? You recall this quote?

That's not being a grammar nazi. The book of Revelation (Singular), was defined by Chapter 1, Verse 1.

Again, I ask the question. If you can't understand that it's the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to Him, how can you claim ANYTHING else about the book? The entirety of the book was about his Revelation, or Revealing, or Unveiling however you want to put it, about himself.

It's not a series of revelations. It is one, singular. The Revelation (singular) of Jesus Christ.

Jesus at one time did NOT know the hour. Does he now know? Read Revelation 1:1 for the answer. This often sits VERY uncomfortable with people because it implies that Christ did not know everything the Father knew -- even though Christ himself said as much.

I believe he very much knows today, and is waiting for Psalm 110 to play out.

He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone.

Context. A prostitute is about to be stoned by Pharisee's, which by default is adultery sin. I seem to recall a couple people calling those same Pharisee's whitewashed walls, and of their father, the devil.

How about this quote?

1 Cor 6:1-3

Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?

Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?

Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

I'm not saying you are sinning, I'm judging your teaching which is what is commanded of me, via Acts 17:11. I search the scriptures daily to see whither or not what you say is true. Your teaching is left wanting.

It was a series of Revelations, not a single revelation. Its such a common slang that its not even questioned anymore as it sounds more grammatically correct.

Word > Slang.

Rev 1:1 says otherwise as I've re-iterated numerous times already. Don't debate me, debate the text. That is between you and the Holy Spirit.

All the stuff about 70Ad I mentioned above comes from Daniel, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, not a single bit of that comes from Revelation.

Mark, Mathew and Luke, particularly Matthew and Luke are talking about two separate things (although similar) and a GREAT many Scholars mistake this and lump them all in the same group. I implore you to underline the word "before", and "then shall" in those passages.

Namely the "Olivet Discourse" in Matthew 24, and Luke 21.

Matthews account and Luke diverges, namely "Then shall" (Verses, 9, 10, 11, et al)

And Lukes account -- "But before these things", (Luke 21:12).

Luke dealt with the Fall of Jerusalem in 70AD. Matthew did not. Matthews account is AFTER those things, namely the fall. I stand by the grammar of the text, which I add does NOT support your assertion.

Luke account is correct, that generation DID see those things. As a historical oddity, during the fall it is rumored not ONE Christian died in that instance because of those warnings. Matthew deals with AFTER that Generation as defined by the text itself.

Slow down and read the Bible, particularly the before's, afters, and until statements.

If you cannot read and comprehend my posts, which are plain as day, then save your sarcasm for elsewhere.

I comprehended them rather clearly, and I think I've once again reiterated that you have not understood Revelation 1:1, and thus, the entire book. That's not sarcasm, that's fact. I just added your err with the Olivet discourse to this posting.

Please show me a direct quote of me stating anything about the destruction of 70ad relating to what is written in Revelation besides that the Pontifex Maximus, and Rome appear in both prophecies.

Sorry, i don't believe the RCC or the Pontifex Maximus is the AntiChrist. Typical Protestantism arrogance blaming Rome.

I believe it will stem from Islam.

Why?

Daniel 9:26
.....and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Namely, the PEOPLE of the Prince that shall come. Prince being the AntiChrist. Who were the PEOPLE of the prince? The Roman Catholic Church? No, it wasn't even formed yet. Legion X was conscripted people in the area. Who is there today? The RCC? No, Muslims.

Also the fact that the 7 Kingdoms in Revelation are such in Rev 12:

Egypt
Assyria
Babylon
Medo-Persia
Greece
Rome

Originally posted by defcon5
I believe that I mention Wesley more then Luther

Irrelevant. Luther is generally considered the "father" of protestants. It's a generalized statement and matters not who you quoted more.

but all Protestants should be following Historicism, not Preterism or Futurism.

No. They should be following what the scripture says -- and the spirit which wrote it, not a structured belief system or following of any 'ism'. Acts 17:11.

That is one theory on the topic

I covered this on another post.

.. God fulfilled his covenant with them.

I was unaware that "everlasting" meant only until 70AD. Are you claiming that God is a liar?

Gen 17:7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an Everlasting Covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.

Again, Paul HAMMERS this away in Romans for no less than 3 chapters that Israel still has a role and a future to play.

For I would not, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part has happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles has come in (Romans 11:25).

Another of those "until" statements. Paul is imploring you to understand this fully.

Your god is a strange god. One who does not delight in making and keeping his promises. The God I follow does.

I fail to see what other part there is for Israel to play in the End of Times?

For every fulfilled prophecy of the first coming, there are nearly 7 to 8 regarding his second. It's even suggested that Revelation PAST the 7 Letters to the Churches was not written in Greek, but originally Hebrew (due to the structure).

You might want to check that out and ask yourself why would stuff past the churches be written in Hebrew originally? I can answer that question.

..sacrifice no longer is acceptable in Gods eyes

Then why is it carried out as memorial in Ezekiel's temple in Chp 40-48. Is the Church -- or Israel supposed to do this?

"The Just Shall Live by Faith" is not new. It was in Hab 2:4. They were saved the same way we were, only that they believed on the promise of the Messiah. Christ was a stumbling block to them (Romans 9:31-33). Remember, Abraham saw Christ's day (John 8:56), and acted out the prophecy of one Father sacrificing his son and it was attribited to him as faith. (Hebrews 17:11)

Lets be really honest about why Futurism

We must be watching a different media. I see a media hell bent on destroying, tarnishing, or outright denying that Christ and or even the Jewish God even existed. The 'god' of this world is very much at work, and it's certainly not in favor of the truth.

However, Futurism IS Catholic Dogma from the Counter Reformation; THAT IS AN INDESPUTABLE FACT!

It can be disputed. Catholics generally agree with Augustine in that they are amillennialists.

So why are the Protestant Christian majority in this country following it? Because it is pushed on them by the Zionist media:

Acts 17:11 -- not Zionist media.

The Left Behind Series and Movies, Hal Lindsey,

... lol.

The Seventh Sign, The End of Days, heck even the Oman…

You can't be serious with these movies. They are so far off base and twist the truth so badly I don't know where to begin. Shall we add Constantine and Legion into that mix too?

Maybe some, but if your following Futurism,

No. You might want to read 1st Thessalonians and "3rd" Thessalonians. The real '2nd' was a forgery in which Paul refutes in his 2nd epistle, and clearly they at Thessalonica were concerned that they were in the Day of Christ. 'Futurism' that is clearly in 2nd Thes long before your 1500 Jesuit? God Forbid.

The ONE prophecy of Futurisms that came true…

The prophecy that Ezekiel stated came true.

A self fulfilling prophecy.

Inaccurate and misleading. A prophecy stated and fulfilled by Ezekiel, written thousands of years before it happened. If the futurists as you put it made any prophecy, it was re-stating what Ezekiel had already said. That ones kind hard to explain away.

Should it?

A rhetorical question. I'm not her son. Just someone who takes his scripture seriously using the full armor of God (Ephesians) -- and not man.

quoted from all the darn time.

I'm not a bible version pounder, namely KJV vs the NIV. Both have mistranslations. E-Sword is good for the basics.

However, Prophecy is extordinary detailed, and the English translation must be crosschecked. Else you would miss things like the aleph tau present in Zec 12:10 that was not translated. It's basically stating the same as "Alpha and Omega" in the Greek. With those included, guess what it says?

... and they shall look upon me [aleph tau] whom they have pierced... Zechariah 12:10

Same thing is present in Genesis 1:1

It could be stated that "In the Beginning, God [aleph tau], created the Heavens and the Earth"

Had those been translated correctly, we today would not have Jehovah's Witnesses as it's pretty clear who the Aleph and the Tau / Alpha and the Omega, is in Revelation.

So how does her son going to Bible College make her an expert?

Because Greek is a complex and thourough language. English is not. If you're not aware of the Greek, you WILL miss-apply the finer points of scriptures if you depend on English. The book of Hebrews is a example, as the English implies you can lose salvation with one sin willingly -- whereas the Greek does not.

Knowing Greek and reading those scriptures in such, gives you a much better upperhand in understanding these points.

A lot of those independent churches are huge supporters of Futurism and Zionism for some reason.

It actually stems from the language and the text itself defcon. Again, you're depending on the English with limited understanding of the Greek. The Greek is much more precise, and some English words simply cannot convey the meaning.

If you are trained in Greek, then you do have more of an understanding than someone who is not trained.

The conspiracy theories past this do not matter to me. I care what the scripture says, not the Moody institute.