The Anti-Christ to defeat all believers?

bizzt · Post by **bizzt** » Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:39 am

waynes world wrote:
August wrote:
Is Paul lying when he talks about the blessed hope in Titus 3:7? Thats the rapture and it has to come first.
Sorry, I just don't see how you arrive at that conclusion.

Titus 3:7 (KJV)
That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

The hope described there is the hope that we get as a result of grace, and that gives us the way to eternal life. Please provide your exegesis that shows this to be related to the rapture.
Its interesting that you leave out the part of that verse that talks about the blessed hope. And its not just about eternal life its about the resurection we who believe will all face. Don't you know that without it we are dead in our sins? Didn't you know that the Corinthians were also preterists and thought they had missed the rapture? I think you should read Daniel and Ezekiel if you don't think Israel will return to its homeland because if its not true. If there is no hope that the mortal must put on the immortal than Paul is lying and the whole Bible is a lie. The preterist view is not biblical because the dispersion of the Jews was prophesied by Jesus, not any resurection in 70 ad. Plus the book of Revelation was written in 95 ad long after it happened.

Actually Wayne The Resurrection of our Bodies is not what saves us but Jesus Dying and Resurrecting is what Saved us. How do you know the Corinthians were also Preterists?

waynes world · Post by **waynes world** » Thu Sep 22, 2005 11:01 am

I have but you won't acce[t any proof unless you agree with it so why should I bother? You have your mind made up thyat the tribulation has already happened and no proof I could ever offer you could change it. I suggest you read Ezekial and Daniel they both say that Israel must return to its homeland before any tribulation takes place. That certainly did not happen in 70ad. That idea just isn't Biblical. Plus Revelation was written in 95 ad and why would John write about something that already happened? The point isn't when the rapture will happen the point is are we ready? IF there is no rapture then being a Christian is a big waste of time and I'm no better off than a non-believer.

waynes world · Post by **waynes world** » Thu Sep 22, 2005 11:02 am

bizzt wrote:
waynes world wrote:
August wrote:
Is Paul lying when he talks about the blessed hope in Titus 3:7? Thats the rapture and it has to come first.
Sorry, I just don't see how you arrive at that conclusion.

Titus 3:7 (KJV)
That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

The hope described there is the hope that we get as a result of grace, and that gives us the way to eternal life. Please provide your exegesis that shows this to be related to the rapture.
Its interesting that you leave out the part of that verse that talks about the blessed hope. And its not just about eternal life its about the resurection we who believe will all face. Don't you know that without it we are dead in our sins? Didn't you know that the Corinthians were also preterists and thought they had missed the rapture? I think you should read Daniel and Ezekiel if you don't think Israel will return to its homeland because if its not true. If there is no hope that the mortal must put on the immortal than Paul is lying and the whole Bible is a lie. The preterist view is not biblical because the dispersion of the Jews was prophesied by Jesus, not any resurection in 70 ad. Plus the book of Revelation was written in 95 ad long after it happened.
Actually Wayne The Resurrection of our Bodies is not what saves us but Jesus Dying and Resurrecting is what Saved us. How do you know the Corinthians were also Preterists?

If Jesus was raised then we have to be raised to otherwise Paul is lying in 1 Corinthians 15.

puritan lad · Post by **puritan lad** » Thu Sep 22, 2005 11:54 am

waynes world wrote:I suggest you read Ezekial and Daniel they both say that Israel must return to its homeland before any tribulation takes place..

Show me the passages Wayne. Please point out the Scriptures that say this.

waynes world wrote:Plus Revelation was written in 95 ad and why would John write about something that already happened?.

Prove it Wayne. I have thoroughly shown that Revelation was written much earlier. Show me where I was wrong. Show me the evidence that it was written in 95 AD. You state this as a fact but have offered up no evidence whatsoever. Repeating this as a fact doesn't make it so.

waynes world wrote:The point isn't when the rapture will happen the point is are we ready? IF there is no rapture then being a Christian is a big waste of time and I'm no better off than a non-believer.

Are you for real Wayne? Ever hear of Hell?

waynes world · Post by **waynes world** » Thu Sep 22, 2005 6:44 pm

I wonder if you really know what your position is at all on the end times. Every time I dispprove one theory you switch to another. You seem to think one can believe in the post trib and the preterist view at the same time. Why can't you make up your mind? I believe the pre-trib is best way to understand the end times. Without Jesus returning for his saints we are no better off than any non believer and we'redead in our sins. Thats what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15. He is writing to Christians who thought they had missed the rapture, so the preterist view isn't a new view but one that is not at all biblical. The Jews have to return to their homeland. Daniel and Ezekiel both make that clear. It sounds to me like your way of salvation is to believe with whatever view you do. I want to know if you think we're saved by grace through faith in Eph 2:8-9 or are we saved by what view of the end times I have? I get the feeling from some here that a Christian cannot believe in the pretrib view and be saved.

puritan lad · Post by **puritan lad** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:11 am

waynes world wrote:I wonder if you really know what your position is at all on the end times. Every time I dispprove one theory you switch to another. You seem to think one can believe in the post trib and the preterist view at the same time. Why can't you make up your mind?

Thou shall not bear false witness.

waynes world wrote:I believe the pre-trib is best way to understand the end times. Without Jesus returning for his saints we are no better off than any non believer and we'redead in our sins.

After the resurrection Wayne (1 Thess 4:16-17), not before some tribulation period. Try using scripture to support your position. It helps.

waynes world wrote:Thats what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15. He is writing to Christians who thought they had missed the rapture, so the preterist view isn't a new view but one that is not at all biblical.

Says who? Give me the verse that says that Paul "is writing to Christians who thought they had missed the rapture". I missed that one. He is writing to those who deny the resurrection, not those who thought they missed the "rapture".

waynes world wrote:The Jews have to return to their homeland. Daniel and Ezekiel both make that clear. It sounds to me like your way of salvation is to believe with whatever view you do.

The Jews did return to their homeland, about 2,400 years ago after the Babylonian exile. Show me in the New Testament where this was to happen, since that is when the Diaspora of 70 AD took place.

waynes world wrote:I want to know if you think we're saved by grace through faith in Eph 2:8-9 or are we saved by what view of the end times I have? I get the feeling from some here that a Christian cannot believe in the pretrib view and be saved.

We're not discussing your salvation, we are discussing the endtimes. I assume that you are saved, since God changed your heart so that you to obey His commandments.

Now back to the discussion at hand...

bizzt · Post by **bizzt** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:25 am

waynes world wrote:I have but you won't acce[t any proof unless you agree with it so why should I bother? You have your mind made up thyat the tribulation has already happened and no proof I could ever offer you could change it. I suggest you read Ezekial and Daniel they both say that Israel must return to its homeland before any tribulation takes place. That certainly did not happen in 70ad. That idea just isn't Biblical. Plus Revelation was written in 95 ad and why would John write about something that already happened? The point isn't when the rapture will happen the point is are we ready? IF there is no rapture then being a Christian is a big waste of time and I'm no better off than a non-believer.

Are you talking to me? If you are I already have said I believe in the Pre-Trib Rapture. However I still would like to see your proof. As of yet I have not seen substantial Proof on your side of things and that is what I have been waiting for. Where in Ezekiel and Daniel? Where is your Proof of Revelation being Written in 95 AD? The Rapture has nothing to do with anyone being a Christian. Our hope is the resurrection in Jesus mind you the Rapture is something i Look forward to but it is the Resurrection that I await.

bizzt · Post by **bizzt** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:26 am

waynes world wrote:
bizzt wrote:
waynes world wrote:
August wrote:
Is Paul lying when he talks about the blessed hope in Titus 3:7? Thats the rapture and it has to come first.
Sorry, I just don't see how you arrive at that conclusion.

Titus 3:7 (KJV)
That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

The hope described there is the hope that we get as a result of grace, and that gives us the way to eternal life. Please provide your exegesis that shows this to be related to the rapture.
Its interesting that you leave out the part of that verse that talks about the blessed hope. And its not just about eternal life its about the resurection we who believe will all face. Don't you know that without it we are dead in our sins? Didn't you know that the Corinthians were also preterists and thought they had missed the rapture? I think you should read Daniel and Ezekiel if you don't think Israel will return to its homeland because if its not true. If there is no hope that the mortal must put on the immortal than Paul is lying and the whole Bible is a lie. The preterist view is not biblical because the dispersion of the Jews was prophesied by Jesus, not any resurection in 70 ad. Plus the book of Revelation was written in 95 ad long after it happened.
Actually Wayne The Resurrection of our Bodies is not what saves us but Jesus Dying and Resurrecting is what Saved us. How do you know the Corinthians were also Preterists?
If Jesus was raised then we have to be raised to otherwise Paul is lying in 1 Corinthians 15.

Is that not what the Blessed hope is for or the Resurrection?

bizzt · Post by **bizzt** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:28 am

waynes world wrote:I wonder if you really know what your position is at all on the end times. Every time I dispprove one theory you switch to another. You seem to think one can believe in the post trib and the preterist view at the same time. Why can't you make up your mind? I believe the pre-trib is best way to understand the end times. Without Jesus returning for his saints we are no better off than any non believer and we'redead in our sins. Thats what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15. He is writing to Christians who thought they had missed the rapture, so the preterist view isn't a new view but one that is not at all biblical. The Jews have to return to their homeland. Daniel and Ezekiel both make that clear. It sounds to me like your way of salvation is to believe with whatever view you do. I want to know if you think we're saved by grace through faith in Eph 2:8-9 or are we saved by what view of the end times I have? I get the feeling from some here that a Christian cannot believe in the pretrib view and be saved.

Can I say something... The Post Trib View is all about the Rapture. The Post Trib is the person goes through the Trib then is Raptured up. Saying that Post Trib view believes that the Rapture comes first after the Trib THEN the Resurection. The Preterist view is there is no Rapture! There is just the Resurrection!

I hope that clears that up?

waynes world · Post by **waynes world** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:27 am

In other words there are two resurections! I certainltly agree with that idea. There will be people who be saved during the tribulation and there will be a number who will survive all of the plagues and will join with Christ when he sets foot on the eart and split the mount of Olives in two. My proplem is with the view that the resurection happened in 70ad which makes no sense if Revelation was written in at least 90ad after the dispersion happened. Its just not a biblical view in my humble opinion.

puritan lad · Post by **puritan lad** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 12:24 pm

waynes world wrote:My proplem is with the view that the resurection happened in 70ad which makes no sense if Revelation was written in at least 90ad after the dispersion happened.

Wayne, One more time.

No one said that the resurrection happened in 70 AD (And please don't post that I said it unless you post the exact quote because it is a lie.) I also post tons of evidence showing that Revelation was written before Jerusalem fell during Nero's reign. Do you want to discuss the evidence, or do you want to just repeat your view over and over again until everyone believes it?

bizzt · Post by **bizzt** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 2:02 pm

waynes world wrote:In other words there are two resurections! I certainltly agree with that idea. There will be people who be saved during the tribulation and there will be a number who will survive all of the plagues and will join with Christ when he sets foot on the eart and split the mount of Olives in two. My proplem is with the view that the resurection happened in 70ad which makes no sense if Revelation was written in at least 90ad after the dispersion happened. Its just not a biblical view in my humble opinion.

Oh my Wayne...
Puritan has SAID

Point #1- Tribulation happened in 70AD
Point #2- There is no Rapture
Point #3- The Resurrection is the Blessed Hope
Point #4- The Resurrection will happen in the Future

Puritan I hope this is a good timeline for the Preterist View

70AD Destruction of Jerusalem (Tribulation)
Resurrection anytime after the Tribulation (70AD)
This Verse is still good I will come like a thief in the night as the Resurrection will be Judgement day.

Questions for you Wayne now that you are on this...

Where does it say Revelations was written in 95AD?
Do you have Proof of it?

Why do you keep on getting his Views mixed up? Most of the people that have posted understand Puritan's Views and where he is coming from! Geezz I even Understand his Views and I did not even know to much about Preterism before.

Anyways Wayne it is like you are skimming over the posts Puritan makes and not reading the Details?

waynes world · Post by **waynes world** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:01 pm

It sure looks to me like its Puritan Lad who is doing all the skimming. I think its a bit strange to me that he defends the view that the tribulation happened in 70ad as if it were a requirement for Christians to believe it and yet there''s no proof for it anywhere in the scriptires for it. I get the feeling that he wants to defend that view plus the post trib view. Any view but the pre-trib view is okay with him. Why can't Jesus return for us in the clouds? He has promised that in acts chapter one and in 1 thes 4 and it sure looks like a pre-trib rapture to me. The only thing we're not sure of is when it happens. Even Jesus doesn't know so I don't see how any of us can. Its not a salvation issue and I wish people would see that. The question isn't when Christ comes the question is will we be ready? Christ will come no matter how we view his coming.

bizzt · Post by **bizzt** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 10:08 am

waynes world wrote:It sure looks to me like its Puritan Lad who is doing all the skimming. I think its a bit strange to me that he defends the view that the tribulation happened in 70ad as if it were a requirement for Christians to believe it and yet there''s no proof for it anywhere in the scriptires for it. I get the feeling that he wants to defend that view plus the post trib view. Any view but the pre-trib view is okay with him. Why can't Jesus return for us in the clouds? He has promised that in acts chapter one and in 1 thes 4 and it sure looks like a pre-trib rapture to me. The only thing we're not sure of is when it happens. Even Jesus doesn't know so I don't see how any of us can. Its not a salvation issue and I wish people would see that. The question isn't when Christ comes the question is will we be ready? Christ will come no matter how we view his coming.

The one thing I will agree with you on is the View that I have seen that the Trib happened in 70AD is kind of Confusing Considering after reading the Proof of the Trib that Josephus Talks about does not entirely line up with what Revelation talks about. This is a Problem that needs to be addressed for the Preterist View.

puritan lad · Post by **puritan lad** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 10:29 am

bizzt,

I know where you are coming from, sort of. It's hard to get into this without any specifics. David Chilton wrote an entire exposition on the Book of Revelation called Days of Vengeance. It is no longer in print, but you should be able to find a used one somewhere. I highly recommend it.

Here are a few points that might make things a little clearer.

1.) The "coming on the clouds".

Many have concluded that this refers to the Second Coming described in Acts 1. However, I would disagree. God has "come in the clouds" (ie. in judgment many times. Check out Isaiah's prophecy against Babylon in Isaiah 19:1 and it's fulfillment in Isaiah 20:1-4. (See also Nahum's prophecy against Nineveh (Nahum 1:3).

2.) Signs in the sun, moon and stars.

This is a very common OT sign describing the fall of a kingdom. Consider Isaiah's prophecy concerning the fall of Babylon in Isaiah Chapter 13.

Isaiah 13:10
“For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.”

Joel uses similar language in his prophecy concerning the Day of Pentecost (Joel 2:28-32).

At least one fulfillment of this prophecy took place, according to Peter, on the Day of Pentecost

Acts 2:16-21
“But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

There are two excellent books my Milton Terry on the subject of Biblical Symbolism. Biblical Apocalptics and Biblical Hermenuetics. There are many early church fathers who interpreted them this way as well.

Also, keep in mind that we have Jesus' own words that He would Come and destroy the Pharisees (Matthew 21:40, 41, 45) and Peter's own words that Joel's prophecy concerning the "wonders in the heavens and in the earth: Blood and fire and pillars of smoke, sun turned into darkness and the moon into blood, " was fulfilled on the Day of Pentcost (Acts 2:16-20). It's amazing, especially in the modern day Pentecostal movement, how few people pick this up in their studies of this passage (I would say next to none).