Beware The Snare Of Date-setting!

[LambOfChrist]

fil32322003;
I am not sure your intent on the post about the trees. The good and evil are the knowledge of God's word coupled with the worldly teachings of the occult. This is the sin of Babylon the Great. She has blended the word of God with the word of every religion on earth to came up with her own blend. This has taken the voice of God far from her. How can one hear from God when he drinks the water of the world.

It seams you would compare the study of prophecy and the teaching of the same to the bad fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. If this is true then why is it the God has given us the word of prophecy? Why did Jesus teach so much prophecy? Why did Peter tell us to study it as light that shines in a dark place until the day dawns and the morning star arise in our hearts. Beware if this was your intent for it is against the word of Christ and that would make it anti-Christ.

Look at the sin of Jezebel. She destroyed the prophets of God. She wanted her will, not God's will. Is she not in the churches today trying to quench the spirit of prophecy? Is not the testimony of Jesus the spirit of prophecy?

He says "Call on me and I will show you great and mighty things you know not of."

Jesus said, "Watch! and again I say Watch!"

Watch what. He said when you "see" the abomination. How are you going to see the abomination if you don't watch for it. When he said watch he was speaking about his coming back. We are to watch for it by watching the events in prophecy so we don't miss it. Those who are unsure that it is the Lord's coming where unsure because they don't know the prophecies. The go and buy the books on prophecy to do a quick study but they are like the 5 wicked virgins who are to late by the time they realize it is time.

This is not that hard to understand. Just open your heart to what the word says. Not one or 2 verses but the whole council of God.

 

[KingJ]

If the Father did not intend for Jesus to know but for us to seek it out then the above verse makes sense.

That makes no sense. If we are able to seek it out, how much more Jesus?

In the book of Acts he said, "But ye shall receive power when the Holy Ghost comes upon you" Why even have all of the prophecies concerning events surrounding the rapture if we can't have a clue when it will be? We know from scripture it is at the last trumpet. If we can tell from scripture when the last trumpet will sound, then we can know the time of his return. This is not that hard to see. The 2 witnesses are raptured when the 7th trumpet sounds. The 7th trumpet is the last trumpet. Blessed is he who waits and comes to the 1335 days is at the same time. Just what is so blessed about that day for those who wait

I am sorry LambofChrist, I can't agree with you at all. We will need to agree to disagree. I don't like that phrase but feel its fine to state that on this subject.

We know as much as Jesus about the rapture. If Jesus knew more He would surely have told us and not wasted His time telling us to look for the season.

 

[calvin]

sorry, becoming mistrustful with posts apparently disappearing without explanation. I would delete this post entirely, but I can't

 

[LambOfChrist]

Why would you delete this post altogether? Isn't the reason for a forum to be able to come together is Christ and search out the truth. Or is it to come together and promote our interpretation of the truth. There are 3 who disagree in this post. Should one be frozen out so the others can bully their opinion because they have the power to do so?

I have said nothing to warrant this. I believe that scripture tells us when the rapture will take place. I only believe what the word says. Jesus said this power to know the time of his return was not given to him. But then he said we would receive power when the Holy Ghost comes upon us. Thessalonians says it is thru the church that the manifold wisdom of God is to be made known to the powers and principalities in heavenly places.

My understanding is thru scripture and thru experience. I new nothing nothing of Jesus before he was revealed to me at the age of 33. Then in the area of prophecy I learned that the word said he will return to the earth to set up his kingdom on the earth. Thru the word I then learned that he will gather his elect to be with him and that we would be changed in a moment in a twinkling of an eye into the likeness of Christ.

I learned these things because the Holy Ghost reveled it to me. So far you surely cannot disagree with me. Yet this is about the prophecy of the rapture.I don't know the day or the hour and am not setting a date at this point but I know that he will gather us to be with him and he will return to set up his kingdom.

So what else does the word say about the rapture? The psalmist said it is a delight for the righteous to seek out the truth. I find it an awesome thing to be able to understand the plan of God. It is as light that shines in a dark place.

I have no problem seeing when the Lord will rapture the church. I don't seek my will, I seek his. If it tells me in the word when it will take place I will accept that as truth. If it is hidden from me then I will accept that as truth. If it comes against what I have believed and taught to be true, then I will change my mind about what I have believed. Or should I remain a false prophet or false teacher willingly? I don't think so.

So does this forum promote the truth regardless of the beliefs of the moderators, or does it promote the beliefs of the moderators because they are the only bearers of the truth? I want to believe that all who read this are seeking the truth and willing to change their belief if proof is given to do so. Then I will know it is a Christian site with true Christians at the helm.

 

[LambOfChrist]

KingJ;
I believe it possible that Jesus did not know the day or the hour because he did not know when the final 7 years would begin. no-one could tell when the rapture would come until the covenant was signed. But this causes a dilemma for those who believe in a 7 year tribulation and a pre-tribulation rapture because with that doctrine they can't see the rapture because it comes before the 7 years begins. However, if you tear down this belief in a 7 year tribulation then the pre-tribulation rapture doctrine loses it's grip and the scriptures regarding the rapture become alive and easy to follow.

You can agree to disagree if you wish but it would be better if you seek to prove the truth rather than defend your truth. What does the word say about it? I don't mean just one verse but rather the whole council of God.

 

[HisManySongs]

So does this forum promote the truth regardless of the beliefs of the moderators, or does it promote the beliefs of the moderators because they are the only bearers of the truth? I want to believe that all who read this are seeking the truth and willing to change their belief if proof is given to do so. Then I will know it is a Christian site with true Christians at the helm.

Moderators do not impose their beliefs on the forum.

Our experience with these discussions is that many who post in them are not willing to change their beliefs based on proof. It's the 'first person/third person' rule. My proof (first person) is the only correct proof while their proof (third person) is false. This is what leads to heated discussions as both sides dig in and refuse to give an inch.

 

[KingJ]

KingJ; I believe it possible that Jesus did not know the day or the hour because he did not know when the final 7 years would begin. no-one could tell when the rapture would come until the covenant was signed. But this causes a dilemma for those who believe in a 7 year tribulation and a pre-tribulation rapture because with that doctrine they can't see the rapture because it comes before the 7 years begins. However, if you tear down this belief in a 7 year tribulation then the pre-tribulation rapture doctrine loses it's grip and the scriptures regarding the rapture become alive and easy to follow.

I think I am losing you. Are you saying that oneday we will be able to calculate the date of the rapture and not Jesus?

You can agree to disagree if you wish but it would be better if you seek to prove the truth rather than defend your truth. What does the word say about it? I don't mean just one verse but rather the whole council of God

The rapture has been well discussed on this site. Just search the older threads. You say ''if I seek to prove the truth''. How much truth (Jesus) can be gained from a 'serious' discussion on the timing of the rapture? A casual discussion is fine.

 

[Major]

Major;
I just read your post on the woman and found no revelation there at all. You relate a woman with the dream of Joseph. This does not prove the woman is Israel unless you choose to believe it. The dragon with it's 10 horns and 7 heads does not appear til the end of time. The church today is walking in the light of prophetic scripture coming true at this time. The sun is the natural giver of light and Peter said to study prophecy as light. Israel has no light at this time. They are in complete darkness. The woman has the moon under her feet where she walks. The majority of the church today is full of sins and pride and walking in darkness even tho they know the time is here. There are 12 apostles that are the kings of the 12 tribes of Israel. These could just as easily be the 12 stars as the sons of Jacob are. And there were only 11 stars in Jacobs dream, not 12. Israel did not over come by the blood of the lamb and the rest of the children of Israel do not hold the testimony of Jesus, the church does.

Thinking that the church is Israel or somehow the church has replaced Israel is the reason your interpretations are confusing and seem "nonsense" to you.

The church has not and will not and can not relace the nation of Israel my friend. The apostles are not the kings of the 12 tribes. How could Dr. Luke a "Gentile" be a king of the tribe of Jews?????? That would be against all Bible teaching and I encourage you to pray about this and do some indepth study. In Jacobs dream you forgot Joseph who would be the 12th.

You make a lot of comments but you do not quote any Bible Scriptures for basis of your opinion.

Allow me to verify my comments by posting Romans 11:i-1.......
"1I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
2God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying,

Romans 11:16-17...
"Version (KJV)
16For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
17And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;

Romans 9:1-6.....
King James Version (KJV)
1I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,
2That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
3For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
4Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
6Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:


Edited per Community Rules 2.1 and 3.2B

 

[Major]

You say this "he" here is the beast. You are stating a fact that has no proof to be fact. The "he" here is the prince of the people who destroyed the temple in 70 AD. That people were the Roman Soldiers at the order of Caesar. So this "he" must be related to Rome in some way. However, the beast of Rev 13 is the beast of Daniel 7 with it's 10 horns. This beast comes out of Islam, not Rome. Daniel proves this by saying he comes from one of the 4 notable ones in Daniel 8:8 when speaking of the little horn of the last days. Again, we know it is the last days from verse 17 at the "time of the end". So these are 2 distinctly different men of the last days and "he" is not the beasts Little Horn.

You say you have no idea when this will be. This is only because you refuse to see the possibility that the EPNI is the covenant based on religious teachings on prophecy. You must cast down the imaginations and bring into captivity the word if you are to ever see clearly.

My goodness brother.

You say and I quote: "You say this "he" here is the beast. You are stating a fact that has no proof to be fact".

This is in responce to Revelation 13:1-10 which I now post to confirm who this beast is which you say there is no proof of........

Rev. 13:1-10........................
And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a BEAST rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
2And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
3And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
4And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the BEAST: and they worshipped the BEAST, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
5And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
6And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
8And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
9If any man have an ear, let him hear.
10He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

 

[Major]

You say this "he" here is the beast. You are stating a fact that has no proof to be fact. The "he" here is the prince of the people who destroyed the temple in 70 AD. That people were the Roman Soldiers at the order of Caesar. So this "he" must be related to Rome in some way. However, the beast of Rev 13 is the beast of Daniel 7 with it's 10 horns. This beast comes out of Islam, not Rome. Daniel proves this by saying he comes from one of the 4 notable ones in Daniel 8:8 when speaking of the little horn of the last days. Again, we know it is the last days from verse 17 at the "time of the end". So these are 2 distinctly different men of the last days and "he" is not the beasts Little Horn.

You say you have no idea when this will be. This is only because you refuse to see the possibility that the EPNI is the covenant based on religious teachings on prophecy. You must cast down the imaginations and bring into captivity the word if you are to ever see clearly.

I ask you once again.......what Bible quotes do you wish to p[ost that would validate your opinion????

This is the "BIBLE STUDY" section of this site and it would be helpful if you could post some so that we (I) can verify where you are coming from with your comments.

So far your comments are only showing that you are a PRETERIST in your understanding.

 

[Major]

Moderators do not impose their beliefs on the forum.

Our experience with these discussions is that many who post in them are not willing to change their beliefs based on proof. It's the 'first person/third person' rule. My proof (first person) is the only correct proof while their proof (third person) is false. This is what leads to heated discussions as both sides dig in and refuse to give an inch.

I agree 100% and that is why Bible quotes for the basis of a post are necessary.

Then we can discuss the exergesis of the truth from what the Bible says on any subject and not what we think or have been taught.

Edited per Community Rule 3.2B

 

[LambOfChrist]

Major;
Where did you get the idea that I believe the church is Israel? Is it because you think the woman of rev is Israel. You are confusing your interpretation of the word with what the word says. The word never says the woman is Israel. Nor did I say that the church replaced Israel.
My interpretations don't seem nonsense to me at all.
You say the apostles are not kings over the 12 tribes of Israel. Why then did Jesus say they would rule with him over the 12 tribes of Israel?
I left Joseph out of the number because it was Joseph who would rule over the others. He is not ruling over himself.
I make a lot of comments to you who believe you know the scriptures. Why should I tell you where the scripture is if you know the scriptures? But, ask me where I get the scripture to back up a comment and I will tell you.
The rest of your post is admonishing me for something I did not say, nor do I believe, so I will not comment on it.

 

[calvin]

Moderators do not impose their beliefs on the forum.
LambofChrist had posted:

So does this forum promote the truth regardless of the beliefs of the moderators, or does it promote the beliefs of the moderators because they are the only bearers of the truth? I want to believe that all who read this are seeking the truth and willing to change their belief if proof is given to do so. Then I will know it is a Christian site with true Christians at the helm.

Our experience with these discussions is that many who post in them are not willing to change their beliefs based on proof. It's the 'first person/third person' rule. My proof (first person) is the only correct proof while their proof (third person) is false. This is what leads to heated discussions as both sides dig in and refuse to give an inch.

Unfortunately LoC misunderstood my post on deletion #23.
It was not directed at him, or any of his posts, I was merely lamenting the fact that as a humble pleb, I can not delete my own posts even though that was my considered intent. His reply was then mostly directed at me because he thought I was targeting his post, (which I most emphatically was not). I have since settled his mind on this matter via PM.

 

[LambOfChrist]

Major;
I must tell you that I once thought as you do that the prince who made the covenant was the King of Revelation 13. However. there is only one's opinion to declare it. You quoted the description of the beast of revelation 13. You could just as easily quoted the description of any character in the bible. It is your belief that this is the same man. However, is there a good reason to believe they are not the same man?

What scripture proves they are the same man. None. There is only opinion.

However, if they are different men then the Little Horn, who heads the Beast, can come out of one of the areas ruled by the 4 generals of Alexander the Great, while the prince who makes the covenant can come out of Rome, where Caesar sat. Am I a fool to believe this or isn't this what the word actually says in Daniel 9:26,27 and Daniel 8:8,9. And isn't the Little Horn the same man as the King of Revelation 13?

You say I am confused, yet scripture agrees with me. Again Daniel 9:26,27 And after 3score and 2 weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince who 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.
And he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation and that determined shall be poured out on the desolate.

This one MUST come from the Roman Empire in some way.

Daniel 8:8,9 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed great toward the south, toward the east and toward the pleasant land.

This one MUST come from the Middle East somewhere.

 

[LambOfChrist]

Major;
I see you think I am a PRETERIST. I do not believe all prophecy of Daniel was fulfilled before 70 AD, nor do I believe that the church has replaced Israel.

 

[Rumely]

I have made edits to some posts in this thread, citing the Community Rules upon which the edits were based. I have chosen this route to minimize the disruption of discussion (as opposed to deleting entire posts) and to maximize the civility of the discourse. This is a time-consuming approach, so I will not always use it. Today I had time. I think you will find that my edits are virtually unnoticable to those who have not actually written the posts.
Let's be careful not only of what we say, but how we say it.

 

[Kevin]

Coming back to the word "midst" used in Dan. 9:27.

Every single one of my lexicons and bible dictionaries say it means in the middle. So the covenant has to be broken in the middle, not somewhere in two thirds or six ninths but slap bang in the middle.

In context the covenant is supposed to be broken when the sacrifice is stopped. As far as I know the Jews stopped the daily sacrifice when Jerusalem was looted by the Babylonians. If the ENPI was this covenant then where is the daily sacrifice surely it should be taking place today?


H2677
ֲחִצי
ḥaṣiy
: A masculine noun indicating half, middle. It is used about 120 times to express half of something by placing it before the word: half of their beards (2Sa_10:4); with a pronoun suffix added to it, such as nû, us, it means half of us (2Sa_18:3). It is also used to indicate the middle measure of something: with ‛aḏ preceding, it means up to half of something (Exo_27:5, height); with the preposition befollowed by a time word, it means half of the days (Psa_102:24 [25]; Jer_17:11); or half of the night, midnight (Exo_12:29
).

 

[Major]

Major;
Where did you get the idea that I believe the church is Israel? Is it because you think the woman of rev is Israel. You are confusing your interpretation of the word with what the word says. The word never says the woman is Israel. Nor did I say that the church replaced Israel.
My interpretations don't seem nonsense to me at all.
You say the apostles are not kings over the 12 tribes of Israel. Why then did Jesus say they would rule with him over the 12 tribes of Israel?
I left Joseph out of the number because it was Joseph who would rule over the others. He is not ruling over himself.
I make a lot of comments to you who believe you know the scriptures. Why should I tell you where the scripture is if you know the scriptures? But, ask me where I get the scripture to back up a comment and I will tell you.
The rest of your post is admonishing me for something I did not say, nor do I believe, so I will not comment on it.

My apologies if I stated something you did not say or imply. I only responded to your comments in post #11.

You said.........
"However, that being said, who is the child of Revelation 12. Is this not a rapture of those who are obedient to Christ at the beginning of the last 3 1/2 years? Their mother overcame by the blood of the lamb and the word of their testimony and their brethren were persecuted for having the testimony of Jesus. The Child HAS to be a part of the church ".

That appered to me to say that you believe the woman in Rev. 12 is the CHURCH which rejects the Nation of Israel as the woman and JESUS as the Child.

The "little Horn" does NOT lead the Beast my friend.

The "Little Horn" of Daniel IS the Beast of Rev. 13 and he is empowered by Satan. He will be a human being controlled by Satan himself. I believe we agree on that.

In comment #35 you said..........."I do not believe all prophecy of Daniel was fulfilled before 70 AD".

The key there is the word ALL correct??? That would then fall under the heading of "Partial Preterist".

 

[Major]

Major;
Where did you get the idea that I believe the church is Israel? Is it because you think the woman of rev is Israel. You are confusing your interpretation of the word with what the word says. The word never says the woman is Israel. Nor did I say that the church replaced Israel.
My interpretations don't seem nonsense to me at all.
You say the apostles are not kings over the 12 tribes of Israel. Why then did Jesus say they would rule with him over the 12 tribes of Israel?
I left Joseph out of the number because it was Joseph who would rule over the others. He is not ruling over himself.
I make a lot of comments to you who believe you know the scriptures. Why should I tell you where the scripture is if you know the scriptures? But, ask me where I get the scripture to back up a comment and I will tell you.
The rest of your post is admonishing me for something I did not say, nor do I believe, so I will not comment on it.

My apologies if you were offended.

Please do not thnk that because I quote a lot of Scriptures means I know where they are that YOU want to use.

Where do you get the Scriptures??

You should quote the Scriptures that give your opinion Biblical context and valadity. This section is the Bible Study area so I feel that it is important to list Bible verses as our basis of truth.

I never intend to offend...........Only trying to be Biblically correct my friend.

 

[LambOfChrist]

kevin;
I think I have given a good case for the word midst and backed it up by sound scripture with Daniel 8:14. Believe what you will. I have done my own study of the word midst in the Strong's concordance which say it can be either midst or middle and have found 2 occasions in the word where the same word was definitely used as midst. One is where the Lord said a man who gains wealth by wicked means will lose it in the midst of his day.

Are we to believe that the Lord takes the wicked mans earnings from him exactly in the middle of his life time every time? That would be nonsense. I will not beat that dead horse.