The Mark of the Beast
Pastor Dave
The Mark of the Beast, by Kenneth J. Davies
Many have wondered about Rev. 13:16-17; 14:9-11, etc.
regarding what is usually called "the mark of the beast".
Sad to say, most Christians are woefully unfamiliar with
the Old Testament. Therefore, when they approach
the book of Revelation, they do so with literalistic,
21st century "interpretations".
The first thing one must acknowledge about Revelation,
is that it is a book composed almost entirely of symbols.
Symbols that a first century Jew would have found
immediately recognizable. These symbols were used
before in such books as Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Ezekiel,
Daniel and Zechariah.
If I wrote to you that a friend of mine had "kicked the
bucket", you would understand that it meant he had died.
However, 2000 years from now, a person reading my letter
may not understand this usage and wonder why my friend
kicked a bucket. He might assume my friend was angry!
His assumption, of course, would be wrong, because he
would be taking a figurative (symbolic) statement literally.
The same is true of the language of the Revelation. When
a "mark" is spoken of, it should bring to mind a previous
reference to a mark, found in Ezek 9:3-6. In that context,
Jerusalem was also about to be besieged and destroyed
(by the Babylonians). The Lord commanded an angel to
place "a mark on the foreheads" of those that lamented
the wickedness of the city. This angel is described as
having "a writer's inkhorn at his side" (9:3), with which
he was to mark the righteous. It is clear from the context
that this was not to be taken literally, as if an angel
needed to carry a pen around with him and an inkhorn in
which to dip it. This was a symbolic way of showing that
there was a specific class of people within the doomed city
that were being set apart for preservation (9:6). The mark
is an emblem of ownership. In Revelation, a similar "mark"
is placed on those whom God wishes to preserve (14:1).
A "mark" is also received by those loyal to the beast,
one which sets them apart for destruction (14:9-11).
We must allow Scripture to interpret itself whenever possible.
Whether or not it or its fulfillment conforms to our ideas of
what it should be like, is irrelevant! Most people today jump
into the book of Revelation with the brazen assumption that
it speaks of our times or a time yet future. This ignores the
book's clear statements regarding the time of its fulfillment.
To the readers of the first century, not the 20th, it was written
that these were "things which must shortly come to pass"
(Rev. 1:1) and that the time for its fulfillment was "at hand"
(Rev. 1:3). And just in case they missed the point, it was
reiterated at the end of the book that these were "things
which must shortly be done" (Rev. 22:6). Christ said to them,
"Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me,
to give to every man according to his works" (Rev. 22:12).
Compare this to Matt. 16:27-28, in which Jesus stated that
some of those listening to Him at that time would not die
before seeing the fulfillment of His prophecy. "For the Son
of man shall come ... and then He shall reward every man
according to his works".
Let us be careful to "hear what the Spirit says to the churches"
and allow God's Word to guide our interpretation, not vice-versa!
After all, why would anyone open any ancient text and begin
to read it with the assumption that it was written to them
(especially when the writer states to whom he addressed it)
and that it's all about them?
Again, why would anyone open an ancient text and sit down
to read it and begin with this assumption?
--
Pastor Dave
Upon exiting the Constitutional Convention Benjamin
Franklin was approached by a group of citizens asking
what sort of government the delegates had created.
His answer was: "A republic, if you can keep it."
Peter B.
Again it would behoove you to study the scriptures. The Mark of the Beast
was needed to buy or sell anything and the mark was taken willingly by the
people involved. It is not a "spiritual" mark.
Revelation 13:16-18 (King James Version)
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond,
to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the
name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the
beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred
threescore and six.
Revelation 14:9-11 (King James Version)
9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man
worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or
in his hand,
10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured
out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be
tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and
in the presence of the Lamb:
11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they
have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and
whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
Because it was written to me. To me and everyone who believes on the Lord
Jesus Christ for salvation, and before that to the Jews That they might
know and worship the Lord.
> Again, why would anyone open an ancient text and sit down
> to read it and begin with this assumption?
Good question, why do you assume so much?
You need to be particularly careful about how you apporoach this particular
book, it comes with a warning.
Revelation 22:19 (King James Version)
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of
the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
When you begin by insulting a pastor and telling him
in your arrogance that he should study the Bible and
that you know what it all means, then you shouldn't
expect a discussion, but a note about your arrogance.
--
Pastor Dave
"Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia." - Charles Schulz.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
> Pastor Dave wrote:
>
>> The Mark of the Beast, by Kenneth J. Davies
>>
>> The first thing one must acknowledge about Revelation,
>> is that it is a book composed almost entirely of symbols.
>> Symbols that a first century Jew would have found
>> immediately recognizable. These symbols were used
>> before in such books as Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Ezekiel,
>> Daniel and Zechariah.
>>
>> Let us be careful to "hear what the Spirit says to the churches"
>> and allow God's Word to guide our interpretation, not vice-versa!
>>
>> After all, why would anyone open any ancient text and begin
>> to read it with the assumption that it was written to them
>> (especially when the writer states to whom he addressed it)
>> and that it's all about them?
>
> Because it was written to me. To me and everyone who believes
> on the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation and before that to the Jews
> That they might know and worship the Lord.
Where does it say that? Oh, that's right, it doesn't.
You say that and add to the words of Revelation!
"For I testify together with everyone hearing the Words
of the prophecy of this Book, if anyone adds to these
things, God will add upon him the plagues having been
written in this Book." - Revelation 22:18
And btw, according to John, you're wrong:
"John TO THE SEVEN ASSEMBLIES IN ASIA:
Grace to you and peace, from the One who
is and who was and who is coming, and from
the seven spirits which are before His throne;"
- Revelation 1:4
--
Pastor Dave
"For the day is near, even the day of the Lord is near,
a cloudy day; it shall be the time of the heathen. And
the sword shall come upon Egypt, and great pain shall
be in Ethiopia, when the slain shall fall in Egypt, and
they shall take away her multitude, and her foundations
shall be broken down." - Ezekiel 30:3-4 (prophecy about
Egypt, fulfilled in 480 B.C.)
Peter B.
Ok Dave, you are wrong. Stone wrong. You misquote the Bible, poison pen it,
distort it, intentionally. Feel better?
Take what I said and present it to your congregation.
Have them get on this board and see their "pastor" in action.
You are flat out wrong, either intentionally of deceived by jailhouse
religionists. Open your eyes and get rid of the anger.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
Claims are not proof. An proof is one thing you never offer.
When cornered, you insult, tell lies about the other person
and demand an apology from them.
And I'm not the one who added words to it. That was you.
> Take what I said and present it to your congregation.
Thank you for proving you ego to us all. You actually
seem to think that what you say is important enough
for people to actually do that! Bawahahaha!!!
Trust me, if I ever did that, it would be to give them
a great laugh! :)
--
Pastor Dave
The Last Days were in the first century:
"And saying, Repent ye: for the Kingdom of Heaven
is AT HAND." - Matthew 3:2
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
> You misquote the Bible, poison pen it, distort it, intentionally.
Why don't you prove your claims? You're good at accusing people.
Why not prove what you say?
1) Prove that I misquoted the Bible. This should be fun
to watch, considering that I didn't quote it in this thread.
2) Prove that I "poison penned it".
3) Prove that I intentionally distorted it.
And contrary to your claims, repeating your claims are not proof!
But we both know what you will do! Just as you always do!
You will repeat your claims again and make more accusations
that you will refuse to back up and then when I call you a liar
for doing so, since if you weren't lying, indeed, you would have
backed up your claims, you'll demand proof and an apology,
just like the hypocrite that you are!
Go ahead, Petey! We're waiting! <chuckle>
--
Pastor Dave
If the professor on Gilligan's Island can make a radio
out of a coconut, why can't he fix a hole in a boat?
Peter B.
Pope Dave, I quote scripture to show you your errors, or post the scripture
address. In a few cases I think you should be able to reread your posted
scripture since you claim to be the final authority on it.
> And I'm not the one who added words to it. That was you.
>
>> Take what I said and present it to your congregation.
>
> Thank you for proving you ego to us all. You actually
> seem to think that what you say is important enough
> for people to actually do that! Bawahahaha!!!
>
> Trust me, if I ever did that, it would be to give them
> a great laugh! :)
I doubt it Pope Dave, prove me wrong. put them on line afterwards. Provide
a video link to your service.
Peter B.
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 22:30:15 -0800, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> spake thusly:
>
>> You misquote the Bible, poison pen it, distort it, intentionally.
>
> Why don't you prove your claims? You're good at accusing people.
> Why not prove what you say?
>
> 1) Prove that I misquoted the Bible. This should be fun
> to watch, considering that I didn't quote it in this thread.
>
> 2) Prove that I "poison penned it".
>
> 3) Prove that I intentionally distorted it.
>
> And contrary to your claims, repeating your claims are not proof!
>
> But we both know what you will do! Just as you always do!
>
> You will repeat your claims again and make more accusations
> that you will refuse to back up and then when I call you a liar
> for doing so, since if you weren't lying, indeed, you would have
> backed up your claims, you'll demand proof and an apology,
> just like the hypocrite that you are!
>
> Go ahead, Petey! We're waiting! <chuckle>
Sorry Pope Dave, I told you as I wrote it. I quoted the scripture to you at
the time. Like the river flowing "in" the garden of Eden when it Clearly
says "out". I don't indiscriminately write these things like you've done
here. When you do it I call you out on it Pope Dave, while it is happening.
You could have chosen to explain your errors or corrected them. It was your
choice. No sense in whining about it now.
Peter B.
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of
this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him
the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take
away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his
part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things
which are written in this book.
The Holy Bible : King James Version. (Re 22:18-19)
There are a couple verses after this Pope Dave, verses 20 and 21
I see as usual you did not copy the part that you allude to. Do you need me
to provide you with a decent bible?
> And btw, according to John, you're wrong:
>
> "John TO THE SEVEN ASSEMBLIES IN ASIA:
> Grace to you and peace, from the One who
> is and who was and who is coming, and from
> the seven spirits which are before His throne;"
> - Revelation 1:4
It would be nice to know what you are referencing here.
BTW, for your info, "and Judas went and hung himself."
bear
<chuckle>
Dave is *the* champ when it comes to whining, he has to find something
that he is good at and comprending the Bible is not one of them.
Bear
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
>>> Ok Dave, you are wrong. Stone wrong. You misquote
>>> the Bible, poison pen it, distort it, intentionally. Feel better?
>>
>> Claims are not proof. And proof is one thing you never offer.
>> When cornered, you insult, tell lies about the other person
>> and demand an apology from them.
>
> Pope Dave
You just proved my point. The sad part is, you can't
even comprehend that you just did that. (:
>>> Take what I said and present it to your congregation.
>>
>> Thank you for proving you ego to us all. You actually
>> seem to think that what you say is important enough
>> for people to actually do that! Bawahahaha!!!
>>
>> Trust me, if I ever did that, it would be to give them
>> a great laugh! :)
>
>I doubt it Pope Dave, prove me wrong. put them on line
> afterwards. Provide a video link to your service.
Are you really this stupid?! You know what the sad part is?
You're actually going to run around claiming that I ran from
your challenge, as if someone would actually do all of this,
just because dumb ass Peter demands it! BAWAHAHAHA!!!
--
Pastor Dave
"If you keep doing what you always do, you keep getting
what you always got." - Orlando
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
As I thought. No proof.
--
Pastor Dave
"All living things grow and reproduce their like... This process
of self production, of like begetting like, is the essence of
heredity. Heredity is the antithesis of evolution... Evolution
is a process which makes the descendants unlike their ancestors."
- Theodosius Dobzhansky, Geneticist, Zoologist
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
>> And I'm not the one who added words to it. That was you.
>>
>>> Take what I said and present it to your congregation.
>>
>> Thank you for proving you ego to us all. You actually
>> seem to think that what you say is important enough
>> for people to actually do that! Bawahahaha!!!
>>
>> Trust me, if I ever did that, it would be to give them
>> a great laugh! :)
>
>I doubt it Pope Dave, prove me wrong. put them on line afterwards. Provide
>a video link to your service.
You know, you have quite the go there, if you actually think
that YOU should be up at the pulpit! <chuckle>
And as for you adding words, YOU are the one who said about
Revelation, that it was addressed to you also! Yet Revelation
does not say that! And while you keep claiming that you quote
Scripture to me to prove me wrong I quoted back Revelation
to you, to show you who it was addressed to and we see
NO response from you! You know you're a liar, that's why!
<chuckle>
--
Pastor Dave
"If you want to see what children can do, you must stop
giving them things." - Norman Douglas
Linda Lee
> On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 23:30:54 -0500, Pastor Dave wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 10:33:13 -0800, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> spake thusly:
>
> >> Pastor Dave wrote:
>
> >>> The Mark of the Beast, by Kenneth J. Davies
>
> >>> The first thing one must acknowledge about Revelation,
> >>> is that it is a book composed almost entirely of symbols.
> >>> Symbols that a first century Jew would have found
> >>> immediately recognizable. These symbols were used
> >>> before in such books as Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Ezekiel,
> >>> Daniel and Zechariah.
>
> >>> Let us be careful to "hear what the Spirit says to the churches"
> >>> and allow God's Word to guide our interpretation, not vice-versa!
>
> >>> After all, why would anyone open any ancient text and begin
> >>> to read it with the assumption that it was written to them
> >>> (especially when the writer states to whom he addressed it)
> >>> and that it's all about them?
>
> >> Because it was written to me. To me and everyone who believes
> >> on the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation and before that to the Jews
There is nothing in the Book of Revelation to indicate it was to the
Jews. The prophesy was not to the Jews, but to believers, those who
follow the Messiah, the members of 'the church of God', whether the
*believers* were Israelite believers or Gentile believers.
> >> That they might know and worship the Lord.
>
> > Where does it say that? Oh, that's right, it doesn't.
> > You say that and add to the words of Revelation!
>
> > "For I testify together with everyone hearing the Words
> > of the prophecy of this Book, if anyone adds to these
> > things, God will add upon him the plagues having been
> > written in this Book." - Revelation 22:18
>
> 18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of
> this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him
> the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take
> away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his
> part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things
> which are written in this book.
> The Holy Bible : King James Version. (Re 22:18-19)
>
> There are a couple verses after this Pope Dave, verses 20 and 21
Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come
quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Rev 22:21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
The Book of Revelation is written to believers about the establishment
of the Kingdom of God, beginning then with the ministry of the Messiah
and continuing until the end of time, so the "time is at hand" for the
prophesies of that book to begin to be fulfilled (Rev. 22:10).
Rev. 22:10 "And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the
prophecy of this book: ***for the time is at hand."***
>
> > "John TO THE SEVEN ASSEMBLIES IN ASIA:
> > Grace to you and peace, from the One who
> > is and who was and who is coming, and from
> > the seven spirits which are before His throne;"
> > - Revelation 1:4
>
> It would be nice to know what you are referencing here.
The already-existing churches of the church of God that continue until
this day.
The KJV Bible reads:
Rev. 1:4, "John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto
you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come
[God/Messiah]; and from the seven Spirits which are before his
throne".
Churches - Gk. 1577 - 'ekklēsia' - "a calling out, that is,
(concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation
(Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or
saints in heaven or both)".
In reference to the "calling out" of believers:
Rev. 18:4, "And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, **Come out
of her, my people,** that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye
receive not of her plagues."
>
> BTW, for your info, "and Judas went and hung himself."
What does that have to do with the seven churches?
bear
tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 09:01:23 -0800, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> spake thusly:
>
>
>>>> Ok Dave, you are wrong. Stone wrong. You misquote
>>>> the Bible, poison pen it, distort it, intentionally. Feel better?
>>>
>>> Claims are not proof. And proof is one thing you never offer.
>>> When cornered, you insult, tell lies about the other person
>>> and demand an apology from them.
>>
>> Pope Dave
>
>You just proved my point. The sad part is, you can't
>even comprehend that you just did that. (:
>
>
>>>> Take what I said and present it to your congregation.
>>>
>>> Thank you for proving you ego to us all. You actually
>>> seem to think that what you say is important enough
>>> for people to actually do that! Bawahahaha!!!
>>>
>>> Trust me, if I ever did that, it would be to give them
>>> a great laugh! :)
>>
>>I doubt it Pope Dave, prove me wrong. put them on line
>> afterwards. Provide a video link to your service.
>
>Are you really this stupid?! You know what the sad part is?
>You're actually going to run around claiming that I ran from
>your challenge,
That is exactly what you did, which is SOP for you when someone gets
the best of the argument. Time to fall back on the kill file so you
can pretend that he did not make you look ridiculous.
Bear
bear
Hey, perhaps he is a "pastor" in disguise, therefore, he does not have
to offer proof, it is your duty to accept what he tells you.
Bawahahahahahahahaha
Bear
bear
You must be kidding Linda! Now if you believe that you can defend that
belief by answering questions that can be proven with scripture, I
would like to see it.
Bear
>Churches - Gk. 1577 - 'ekkle?sia' - "a calling out, that is,
Linda Lee
Kidding about what? That the Book of Revelation was written to the
believers in the *already established* church of God? That is
obviously written in Revelation. If you want to claim it was written
to the Jews who still rejected the Messiah, you need to provide some
proof; I can't prove a negative that is NOT there. I really think YOU
"must be kidding" because I don't see how anyone could think this was
not written to existing churches of the church of God.
Rev. 1:4 "John *to the seven churches* which are in Asia: Grace be
unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to
come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne".
Regarding the "seven churches" mentioned in "Rev. 1:4 ...We are not to
suppose that they were the only *CHRISTIAN Churches* then in Asia
Minor; there were several others then in Phrygia, Pamphylia, Galatia,
Pontus, Cappadocia, etc., etc. But these seven were those which lay
nearest to the apostle, and were more particularly under his care;
though ***THE MESSAGE WAS SENT TO THE CHURCHES IN GENERAL, and perhaps
it concerns the whole CHRISTIAN world" - 'Adam Clarke's Commentary on
the Bible'.
Rev 1:11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and,
What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches
which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos,
and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto
Laodicea.
bear
Well, it seems obvious to me that you do not believe that you can
defend your view since you did not jump at the offer to do so. I will
be happy to defend mine, if, you will agree to answer my questions and
provide scriptural proof for those answers, and I will do the same.
How about a verse-by-verse discussion of the book and we can see who
is kidding, are you willing? OTOH, I am not getting into a, "I say
this and you say that" and nothing is proven either way.
Bear
Peter B.
You are so sad, the irony of calling you pope escapes you. I haven't gone
around posting about you like you have me. Plus you totally avoided
answering this post. Snipping it as is your rule.
Tell me, how come I am so honored as to have you frequently dbl answering
posts? Am I really so special? Or do you just enjoy spewing forth from your
heart?
Peter B.
I replied, I also was not ignorant enough to take the verse that you quoted
an apply it improperly as you did. Anyone meant anyone, including you or I.
Peter B.
Are you so old that your short term mem loss has already kicked in. I gave
you proof, not that it was necessary as you would ignore it like you just
did.
Peter B.
> On Jan 6, 12:21 pm, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 23:30:54 -0500, Pastor Dave wrote:
>>> On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 10:33:13 -0800, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> spake thusly:
>>
>>>> Pastor Dave wrote:
>>
>>>>> The Mark of the Beast, by Kenneth J. Davies
>>
>>>>> The first thing one must acknowledge about Revelation,
>>>>> is that it is a book composed almost entirely of symbols.
>>>>> Symbols that a first century Jew would have found
>>>>> immediately recognizable. These symbols were used
>>>>> before in such books as Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Ezekiel,
>>>>> Daniel and Zechariah.
>>
>>>>> Let us be careful to "hear what the Spirit says to the churches"
>>>>> and allow God's Word to guide our interpretation, not vice-versa!
>>
>>>>> After all, why would anyone open any ancient text and begin
>>>>> to read it with the assumption that it was written to them
>>>>> (especially when the writer states to whom he addressed it)
>>>>> and that it's all about them?
>>
>>>> Because it was written to me. To me and everyone who believes
>>>> on the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation and before that to the Jews
>
> There is nothing in the Book of Revelation to indicate it was to the
> Jews. The prophesy was not to the Jews, but to believers, those who
> follow the Messiah, the members of 'the church of God', whether the
> *believers* were Israelite believers or Gentile believers.
>
It was to all believers. Why did you bring this up?
It had to do with his "point" which is out of context.
Linda Lee
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 11:20:26 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee
>
>
>
Baloney. I already did 'defend my view', as I gave Scripture and
biblical commentary supporting it. You did not jump at the offer to
defend your view as you've supplied *nothing* in your reply here to
support your false claim that John was writing to unbelieving Jews who
rejected the Messiah. Your view is downright silly - why would the
Jews accept as credible a letter from an apostle they rejected as an
heretic, and follower of a man they'd had crucified?
Rev. 1:4 "John *to the seven churches* which are in Asia: Grace be
unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to
come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne".
FROM 'Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible' regarding the "seven
churches" mentioned in Rev. 1:4 -
Ike E 1/1/11
news:3d1ci61o42jjknunk...@4ax.com...
[snippeth]
> Dave is *the* champ when it comes to whining, he has to find something
> that he is good at and comprending the Bible is not one of them.
Ah, the hypocrisy: You're as clueless as he is.
Ike
--
********
Which of the following is the correct way to read Bible prophecy?
A. Immediacy
B. Historicism
C. Dispensationalism
D. Preterism (Full or Partial)
E. Idealism
F. Realized/Sapiential Eschatology
G. All of the above
H. None of the above
Based on an examination of how (not just what) Jesus and the prophets
prophesied, "The Triune Hypothesis" is a guide to reading the Bible
prophetically in all three dimensions of interpretation-the horizontal axis
in time (what was, is, and/or is to come), the perpendicular axis in
application (literal, figurative, and/or spiritual), and the vertical axis
in context (thesis, generality, and/or antithesis).
Topics of discussion include the resurrections, the triune "Last Days," the
Pentecosts, the one-baptism-in-three-parts, the triple application of the
Elijah prophecies, the Temples in Jerusalem, the Abominations of Desolation,
the Triune Israel, the devolution of prophecy, and much more.
Kindle Version:
Print Version:
Facebook: (discussions enabled)
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657386473773
Web: (filtered blog comments enabled)
http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.html
Linda Lee
Because you said it was to "everyone who believes on the Lord Jesus
Christ for salvation and before that to the Jews" thereby separating
"the Jews" from those who believe in the Messiah for salvation. I
suppose you meant it was to "everyone who believes on the Lord Jesus
Christ for salvation and before that to the Jews" who believed in the
Messiah for salvation.
Still don't get it; he said nothing about the twelve apostles.
Peter B.
Well I must apologize, I was correct the first time. Dave was in the
business of mixing things up. Ezekiel's prophesy in chapter 38-39 and
around is to the Jew. It is no excuse, but that is what I get answering
something on my way out the door.
On a personal note, it was very difficult reading Ezekiel knowing that Gods
wrath was going to tear up the Israelites, especially the Levite. There is
a new covenant at this time, and it is called the covenant of Peace.
Different than all the rest, yet includes parts of all. This one we
currently have most believers have not lived up to their potential I am
fast finding out. And perhaps we have had the greatest freedom and use of
Gods power available to us yet look at all the weaknesses in this ng. I am
not excluding myself (yet). The next covenant will answer the question to
anyone that ask or even dares to think that they can blame their behaviors
on a God they cannot see, nor "feel" and that "if you were here in front of
me I would be different". Typical for kids, not adults. Why? because Christ
rules 1000 years directly. From the least to the most they will have direct
knowledge of Him. Satan will be thrown in the bottomless pit for 1K years.
At the end of it all he will be released and, get this, *still* Round up
many of the peoples on this earth to come against Jesus and the saints.
You can guess who looses.
He was using a verse out of context. The seven trumpets were part of that
verse and cannot modify Gods word even if they wished. My comment just
emphasized his error.
Peter B.
The Laodicean is the only church to go through the GT. Rev speaks to that,
it speaks to being prepared and escaping, it speaks to all the heathen that
are left warning, especially about 666 it speaks to the Jew to get out!
While the gettin is good, many do, many are left, they stayed. It speaks to
the defiling of the Temple. It speaks to the biblical book not yet written.
It encompasses much. As always God speaks to all. It ties a lot of the OT
prophesies together. You do not want to go through that, you must die for
your sins, there is no NT covenant operating.
Linda Lee
The Book of Revelation is written to the seven Christian churches of
the church of God in Asia (Rev. 1:4). It speaks to Israelite
*disciples of the Messiah* to come out of Jerusalem before it was
destroyed. (See the following prophesy of the DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM
by THE MESSIAH in Luke 19:41-44.)
Luk 19:41 And when he [Yahashua` the Messiah] was come near, he
beheld the city [JERUSALEM], and wept over it,
Luk 19:42 Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this
thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid
from thine eyes.
Luk 19:43 FOR THE DAYS SHALL COME upon thee, that THINE ENEMIES SHALL
cast a trench about thee, and COMPASS THEE round, and keep thee in on
every side,
Luk 19:44 And SHALL LAY THEE EVEN WITH THE GROUND, and thy children
within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another;
because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation [THEIR
"VISITATION" FROM GOD IN THE FORM OF THE MESSIAH AND SAVIOUR].
The Book of Revelation is NOT written to the heathen or to unbelieving
Jews who did not follow the Messiah. They would have had no respect
for the vision of John, a disciple/apostle of the Messiah they
rejected. The vision given John of course concerns all these people,
but the letter was not written and sent TO anyone except the followers
of the Messiah - that is why Revelation is addressed to "the seven
churches" in Rev. 1:4.
Linda Lee
Dave? How was Dave mixing things up? Dave did not mention Ezekiel
38-39 or Gog and Magog, which Ezekiel speaks about. I repeat, "There
is nothing in the Book of Revelation to indicate it was to the Jews."
The Book of Revelation is addressed only to the seven Christian
churches in Asia (Rev. 1:4), and among other things, it warns them to
come out of Jerusalem, which would be destroyed.
The city Rev. 18:4 warns the disciples of the Messiah to come out of,
which city is destroyed in one day (Jerusalem), is not the same as the
battle of Gog and Magog, which battle is *prevented* when Gog and
Magog are destroyed (Rev. 20:9).
Linda Lee
Your off the wall comment did not emphasize his error. If you think
something was taken out of context, you should say that; not just
throw in some totally unrelated comment that just makes you look
confused.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<lindag...@juno.com> spake thusly:
> Peter B. wrote:
>
>> Linda Lee wrote:
>>
>>> FROM 'Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible'
>>> regarding the "seven churches" mentioned in
>>> Rev. 1:4
>>>
>>> "Rev. 1:4 ...We are not to suppose that they were
>>> the only *CHRISTIAN Churches* then in Asia Minor;
>>> there were several others then in Phrygia, Pamphylia,
>>> Galatia, Pontus, Cappadocia, etc., etc. But these
>>> seven were those which lay nearest to the apostle
>>> and were more particularly under his care; though
>>> ***THE MESSAGE WAS SENT TO THE CHURCHES
>>> IN GENERAL, and perhaps it concerns the whole
>>> CHRISTIAN world"
>>> - 'Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible'.
>>
>> The Laodicean is the only church to go through
>> the GT. Rev speaks to that, it speaks to being
>> prepared and escaping, it speaks to all the
>> heathen that are left warning, especially about
>> 666 it speaks to the Jew to get out!
>
> The Book of Revelation is written to the seven
> Christian churches of the church of God in Asia
> (Rev. 1:4). It speaks to Israelite *disciples of
> the Messiah* to come out of Jerusalem before
> it was destroyed (See the following prophesy
> of the DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM by
> THE MESSIAH in Luke 19:41-44.)
Amen! Revelation was about the coming passing
of the Old Covenant world, which happened during
the Jewish War, with much of the city being burned,
as well as the Temple being burned and torn apart
stone by stone, just as Jesus said would happen.
2 Peter 3:7,10
7) But the heavens and the earth now, having been
stored up by the same Word, are being kept for fire
to a day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.
10) But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the
night, in which the heavens will pass away with rushing
sound and having burned the elements will be dissolved
and the earth and the works in it will be burned up.
Elements = Mosaic economy.
> The Book of Revelation is NOT written to the heathen
> or to unbelieving Jews who did not follow the Messiah.
> They would have had no respect for the vision of John
Of course not. Why would they take heed of such
a warning and vision? :)
People like Peter claim to tell us what the Bible says
and add their own words to it and claim not to need
anybody. Yet, when it comes down to it, they show
that they get their so called "understanding" from
parroting others. (:
--
Pastor Dave
"The real mark of someone who wants to know the Truth
is not that they expect others to prove it to them,
but that they seek after it themselves." - Chayil
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<lindag...@juno.com> spake thusly:
>> Well I must apologize, I was correct the first time.
>> Dave was in the business of mixing things up.
>> Ezekiel's prophesy in chapter 38-39 and around
>> is to the Jew. It is no excuse, but that is what
>> I get answering something on my way out the door.
>
>
> Dave? How was Dave mixing things up? Dave did not
> mention Ezekiel 38-39 or Gog and Magog, which Ezekiel
> speaks about.
Peter, out of his hatred for me, likes to jump on Bear's
bandwagon. Bear likes to lie and claim that I keep
running from his supposed "question" about Ezek 38-39.
A long time ago, he asked me when Ezek 38-39 was fulfilled.
Of course he did this, changing the subject of a thread that
I had started, thinking no one would see his dishonesty.
I did answer it, which he denied and then demanded that
I quote it. I pointed him to it once and he denied it again.
From that point on, I refused to keep going around in
circles with him and told him that there was no point
in continuing to show him what he was going to keep
denying anyway.
So now he keeps running around claiming that I never
answered it and that I kill filed him because I'm afraid
of the question.
He also claims that if I can't answer it, it proves that
Preterism is false, even though as I told him (and of
course he ignored and still does), even if I couldn't
answer it, it doesn't prove Preterism false. It only
proves that I do not know the answer to one question.
Furthermore, not Bear, nor any other Futurist can answer
every question posed to them about their doctrine with
regard to very single verse from the Bible, nor would
anyone expect them to be able to and that doesn't
prove their doctrine wrong either.
As I said, Bear ignores this simple logical fact and anyone
who would deny such a simple fact and keep repeating
the rant that not being able to answer one single question
(if that were the case about Ezek 38-39, which it wasn't)
means that an entire doctrine is wrong, has revealed
themselves as someone who is intentionally refusing
to acknowledge logic and reason and what does that say
about them, except that they are intentionally dishonest?
So anyway, now he keeps chasing me around and has
been for years, telling his lies whenever and wherever
he can and Peter is eating it up, while preaching that
he loves everyone. :)
Back to the message... :)
There is one point that I do disagree with you on though
(from another post) about the Kingdom of God in relation
to your other post about this subject in Revelation and
I don't know if you want me to start another thread
about it, or go into it here, as it isn't really about what
you mention here, but is indirectly related to it.
--
Pastor Dave
"To walk in darkness is enlightenment to the carnal mind
and without knowledge of Truth they will deny the same
until the day of judgement." - Unknown
Peter B.
I said, "The Laodicean is the only church to go through the GT. Rev speaks
to that,
it speaks to being prepared and escaping, it speaks to all the heathen that
are left warning, especially about 666 it speaks to the Jew to get out!
While the gettin is good, many do, many are left, they stayed. It speaks to
the defiling of the Temple. It speaks to the biblical book not yet written.
It encompasses much. As always God speaks to all. It ties a lot of the OT
prophesies together. You do not want to go through that, you must die for
your sins, there is no NT covenant operating."
This is the temple of the Great Tribulation. Why are you so confused.
Sort of renders your arguments moot, eh?
Peter B.
Wrong Dragon breath, it is about the temple during the period of the Great
Tribulation. You are speaking of the destruction of the Temple by Romans.
Peter B.
It should have caused thought, but I will consider that next time.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
>I said, "The Laodicean is the only church to go through the GT. Rev speaks
>to that,
>it speaks to being prepared and escaping, it speaks to all the heathen that
>are left warning, especially about 666 it speaks to the Jew to get out!
>While the gettin is good, many do, many are left, they stayed. It speaks to
>the defiling of the Temple. It speaks to the biblical book not yet written.
>It encompasses much. As always God speaks to all. It ties a lot of the OT
>prophesies together. You do not want to go through that, you must die for
>your sins, there is no NT covenant operating."
>
>This is the temple of the Great Tribulation. Why are you so confused.
>Sort of renders your arguments moot, eh?
More assumptions by Peter of things that the Bible does not say.
Unless he can show us where the Bible says;
"The Laodicean is the only church to go through the great tribulation."
Why would only one church go through it? :)
--
Pastor Dave
"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more
to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."
-Antoine de Saint-Exupery
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
> Pastor Dave wrote:
>
>> Linda Lee spake thusly:
You always start your responses with insults and yet,
claim to love people. Hmmm...
The fact is, you make assumptions and you cannot
back them up.
Furthermore, since the Temple was destroyed by
the Romans exactly as Jesus described, why do
you pretend that the Bible says the same thing
was to happen twice? Can you show us where
Jesus (not Peter) says;
"But just skip it the first time it happens, guys!"
--
Pastor Dave
A clear conscience makes a soft pillow.
Linda Lee
wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 21:32:37 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee
"Some are of opinion that these words refer to the destruction of
Jerusalem; and so the passing away of the heavens may design the
removal of their church state and ordinances, Heb. 12:26, and the
melting of the elements the ceasing of the ceremonial law, called the
elements of the world, Gal. 4:3 [and Gal. 4:9], and the burning of the
earth the destruction of the land of Judea, expressed in such a manner
in Deut. 29:23, and particularly of the temple, and the curious works
in that, which were all burnt up and destroyed by fire, though Titus
endeavoured to prevent it, but could not (k): which sense may be
included, inasmuch as there was a promise of Christ's coming to
destroy the Jewish nation, and was expected; and which destruction was
a prelude of the destruction of the world, and is sometimes expressed
in such like language as that is; but then this must not take place,
to the exclusion of the other sense: and whereas this sense makes the
words to be taken partly in a figurative, and partly in a literal way;
and seeing the heavens and the earth are in the context only literally
taken, the former sense is to be preferred; and to which best agrees
the following use to be made of these things." - 'John Gill's
Exposition of the Entire Bible'.
>
> > The Book of Revelation is NOT written to the heathen
> > or to unbelieving Jews who did not follow the Messiah.
> > They would have had no respect for the vision of John
>
> Of course not. Why would they take heed of such
> a warning and vision? :)
No one who had rejected the gospel of the kingdom of God would.
>
> People like Peter claim to tell us what the Bible says
> and add their own words to it and claim not to need
> anybody. Yet, when it comes down to it, they show
> that they get their so called "understanding" from
> parroting others. (:
I don't know who those "others" would be in this case; I've never
heard anyone claim the Book of Revelation was addressed to Jews who
rejected the Messiah when it is obviously addressed to the churches of
believers within the church of God.
Peter B.
Here, from above, a whole slew of books just thrown into the mix.
>>>>>>> The first thing one must acknowledge about Revelation,
> >>>>>>> is that it is a book composed almost entirely of symbols.
> >>>>>>> Symbols that a first century Jew would have found
> >>>>>>> immediately recognizable. �These symbols were used
> >>>>>>> before in such books as Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Ezekiel,
> >>>>>>> Daniel and Zechariah.
See them ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> The city Rev. 18:4 warns the disciples of the Messiah to come out of,
> which city is destroyed in one day (Jerusalem), is not the same as the
> battle of Gog and Magog, which battle is *prevented* when Gog and
> Magog are destroyed (Rev. 20:9).
>
Has nothing to do with the original 12 disciples, nothing to do with
Jerusalem. It is a spiritual Babylon that the believers are to leave. It
could be the US, or the port of Dubai (sp) or ???? I can't say at this
time.
Linda Lee
wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 21:33:32 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee
Since you bring it up, what was the answer you proposed? Maybe I'll
agree with you.
I don't think it has occurred yet. Some bible commentators believe it
(Armageddon/battle of Gog and Magog) refers to the 'Turks' and
Russians coming against the modern state of Israel. I think that is
possible and is the tool God will use to reveal God as the Messiah to
those in Israel.
But that doesn't mean those in Israel are already believers in the
Messiah before Gog and Magog are destroyed because Revelation says the
voice of the bridegroom [Christ] and of the bride [the church] would
never be heard in Jerusalem (Mystery Babylon) again:
Rev. 18:23, "And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in
thee; and *** the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be
heard no more at all in thee".***
Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall
be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by
nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree:
how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed
into their own olive tree?
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of
this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that
blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the
Gentiles be come in.
Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There
shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness
from Jacob:
Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away
their sins.
Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes:
but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers'
sakes.
Rom 11:29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
Rom 11:30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now
obtained mercy through their unbelief:
Rom 11:31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your
mercy they also may obtain mercy.
Rom 11:32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might
have mercy upon all.
> means that an entire doctrine is wrong, has revealed
> themselves as someone who is intentionally refusing
> to acknowledge logic and reason and what does that say
> about them, except that they are intentionally dishonest?
I don't think it proves dishonesty; just a belief that one unexplained
thing makes an unusual doctrine fail, and there have been many
theories about the meaning of the vision in the Book of Revelation
floating around. Many people are not very logical or at least won't
admit to the logic of something when they're in an argument.
>
> So anyway, now he keeps chasing me around and has
> been for years, telling his lies whenever and wherever
> he can and Peter is eating it up, while preaching that
> he loves everyone. :)
Well, since you bring it up, you did ridicule Peter B. for claiming
God spoke to him, although anyone using that claim as a debate tool is
not very convincing to me either.
>
> Back to the message... :)
>
> There is one point that I do disagree with you on though
> (from another post) about the Kingdom of God in relation
> to your other post about this subject in Revelation and
> I don't know if you want me to start another thread
> about it, or go into it here, as it isn't really about what
> you mention here, but is indirectly related to it.
I don't know what you're referring to, but go ahead, post it here.
If you're talking about this ("The Book of Revelation is written to
believers about the establishment of the Kingdom of God, beginning
then with the ministry of the Messiah
and continuing until the end of time, so the "time is at hand" for the
prophesies of that book to begin to be fulfilled (Rev. 22:10)."), I
already know you think that it began with the destruction of
Jerusalem, but I think it began with the Messiah's ministry (during
which he prophesies about the destruction of Jerusalem), since the
Messiah said in Matt. 12:28, "But if I cast out devils by the Spirit
of God, then the KINGDOM OF GOD IS COME UNTO YOU" i.e. the kingdom of
God was already there.
Linda Lee
The rest of your comment following was still there at the bottom of
this post.
> While the gettin is good, many do, many are left, they stayed. It speaks to
> the defiling of the Temple. It speaks to the biblical book not yet written.
> It encompasses much. As always God speaks to all. It ties a lot of the OT
> prophesies together. You do not want to go through that, you must die for
> your sins, there is no NT covenant operating."
>
> This is the temple of the Great Tribulation. Why are you so confused.
> Sort of renders your arguments moot, eh?
You are confused Peter, and you are ignoring the Scriptures provided
to straighten out your confusion. Repeating your error doesn't do any
good. Rev. 1:4 plainly tells you this letter is addressed to and was
sent to the seven churches; it is not addressed to unbelieving Jews
and heathens. (Yes, anyone NOW can read it now that we have printing
presses and Internet service and nearly everyone can access a Bible,
but that is NOT the point; the point is who John intended as his
readers then and to whom he sent this letter. It's actually a letter,
not a book, and it was a warning that the disciples should heed to
escape the destruction that was about to befall Jerusalem.
Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to
SHEW UNTO HIS SERVANTS THINGS WHICH MUST **SHORTLY COME TO PASS;** and
he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
Rev 1:2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of
Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
Rev 1:3 BLESSED IS HE THAT READETH, and they THAT HEAR THE WORDS OF
THIS PROPHECY, and keep those things which are written therein: ***FOR
THE TIME IS AT HAND.***
Rev 1:4 John ****TO THE SEVEN CHURCHES**** which are in Asia: Grace
be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is
to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne
And what is the "temple of the Great Tribulation"? And what "biblical
book not yet written"? You aren't making much sense tonight; you need
to explain your comments.
Linda Lee
Thought for what? I still don't know what verse you think he took out
of context because you never said what it was as he never mentioned
the seven trumpets you brought up. There's enough confusion going on
without people throwing in some bizarre statement that makes
absolutely no sense. It certainly didn't make one see what verse you
thought he took out of context or that he had done that at all. It
would have made more sense if you'd said something like - 'since you
like things taken out of context, Judas hanged himself'.
Peter B.
You are such a liar.
> The fact is, you make assumptions and you cannot
> back them up.
>
Nother lie.
> Furthermore, since the Temple was destroyed by
> the Romans exactly as Jesus described, why do
> you pretend that the Bible says the same thing
> was to happen twice? Can you show us where
> Jesus (not Peter) says;
>
the propehecy of the destruction of Jerusalem was long standing, just not
useing the verses you tried to use which was ridiculus becuause God is the
one who destroys the temple at the end of the GT.
> "But just skip it the first time it happens, guys!"
Mocking God again?
Peter B.
What disciples?
> Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to
> SHEW UNTO HIS SERVANTS THINGS WHICH MUST **SHORTLY COME TO PASS;** and
> he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
> Rev 1:2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of
> Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
> Rev 1:3 BLESSED IS HE THAT READETH, and they THAT HEAR THE WORDS OF
> THIS PROPHECY, and keep those things which are written therein: ***FOR
> THE TIME IS AT HAND.***
> Rev 1:4 John ****TO THE SEVEN CHURCHES**** which are in Asia: Grace
> be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is
> to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne
>
No disciples mentioned here. Verse 3 this is a book of a promise, Blessed
is he that readeth and hear. Got it, anyone that reads it and hears it, not
distorts it, will get a blessing?
> And what is the "temple of the Great Tribulation"? And what "biblical
> book not yet written"? You aren't making much sense tonight; you need
> to explain your comments.
>
The Temple that will be built I believe is already built and laid aside
waiting for the right moment to put it up. Many other things are already
prepped or constructed. It is the temple that the anti-christ will sit
himself on as "God". Read the book of Rev where John is asked to eat the
book. tastes sweet but is bitter to the belly.
Peter B.
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 22:32:17 -0800, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> spake thusly:
>
>>I said, "The Laodicean is the only church to go through the GT. Rev speaks
>>to that,
>>it speaks to being prepared and escaping, it speaks to all the heathen that
>>are left warning, especially about 666 it speaks to the Jew to get out!
>>While the gettin is good, many do, many are left, they stayed. It speaks to
>>the defiling of the Temple. It speaks to the biblical book not yet written.
>>It encompasses much. As always God speaks to all. It ties a lot of the OT
>>prophesies together. You do not want to go through that, you must die for
>>your sins, there is no NT covenant operating."
>>
>>This is the temple of the Great Tribulation. Why are you so confused.
>>Sort of renders your arguments moot, eh?
>
> More assumptions by Peter of things that the Bible does not say.
>
> Unless he can show us where the Bible says;
>
> "The Laodicean is the only church to go through the great tribulation."
>
> Why would only one church go through it? :)
Read revelations to find out.
Linda Lee
> On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 01:12:26 -0500, Pastor Dave wrote:
> > On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 21:32:37 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee
What are you talking about? There is no temple mentioned in the Book
of Revelation other than the second temple that was destroyed by the
Romans (Rev. 11:2) and **the temple of God on his throne IN HEAVEN
(Rev. 11:19, 14:17 , 15:5).** There is no "temple of the Great
Tribulation" or "temple during the period of the Great Tribulation".
Linda Lee
wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 22:32:17 -0800, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> spake thusly:
>
> >I said, "The Laodicean is the only church to go through the GT. Rev speaks
> >to that,
> >it speaks to being prepared and escaping, it speaks to all the heathen that
> >are left warning, especially about 666 it speaks to the Jew to get out!
> >While the gettin is good, many do, many are left, they stayed. It speaks to
> >the defiling of the Temple. It speaks to the biblical book not yet written.
> >It encompasses much. As always God speaks to all. It ties a lot of the OT
> >prophesies together. You do not want to go through that, you must die for
> >your sins, there is no NT covenant operating."
>
> >This is the temple of the Great Tribulation. Why are you so confused.
> >Sort of renders your arguments moot, eh?
>
> More assumptions by Peter of things that the Bible does not say.
>
> Unless he can show us where the Bible says;
>
> "The Laodicean is the only church to go through the great tribulation."
>
> Why would only one church go through it? :)
Especially since all seven churches are being warned about it.
I think he gets that from the Messiah's criticism of them, but as the
Messiah also said in Rev. 3:18, "I counsel thee to buy of me gold
tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that
thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not
appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see",
and to all the churches in Rev. 3:19, "As many as I love, I rebuke and
chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent". None of the churches were
condemned in this vision or singled out to suffer.
Linda Lee
How is that a lie? You said that to him in a post in which he was
speaking to me; it wasn't even in response to something he'd said to
you. I guess "always" was an exaggeration and therefore untrue.
I don't know who started this feud, but I know if you were my
children, I'd definitely separate you until you could both play nice.
You're both believers and neither of you are being very loving to your
brother. Do you hate each other now?
1Jn 4:20, "If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a
liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he
love God whom he hath not seen?"
>
> > The fact is, you make assumptions and you cannot
> > back them up.
>
> Nother lie.
Then do back them up because you've said several things in this thread
that you have not supplied any support for at all, neither from the
Bible, or bible dictionaries or commentaries or anywhere else, and
made no explanation for them. It isn't debate to just make flat
statements without any sort of proof at all.
Linda Lee
The disciples in the seven churches to whom John was addressing his
letter concerning his vision and warning.
>
> > Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to
> > SHEW UNTO HIS SERVANTS THINGS WHICH MUST **SHORTLY COME TO PASS;** and
> > he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
> > Rev 1:2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of
> > Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
> > Rev 1:3 BLESSED IS HE THAT READETH, and they THAT HEAR THE WORDS OF
> > THIS PROPHECY, and keep those things which are written therein: ***FOR
> > THE TIME IS AT HAND.***
> > Rev 1:4 John ****TO THE SEVEN CHURCHES**** which are in Asia: Grace
> > be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is
> > to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne
>
> No disciples mentioned here.
WHO do you think were members of the seven churches of the church of
God if not disciples of the Messiah?
> Verse 3 this is a book of a promise, Blessed
> is he that readeth and hear. Got it, anyone that reads it and hears it, not
> distorts it, will get a blessing?
The readers in the seven churches to whom John sent the letter would
be blessed if they read, heard (understood), and kept (remembered) the
things John wrote to them because "the time is at hand" i.e. they
would not die when these things happened because they would have fled.
WE aren't blessed if we read it. You really are not comprehending much
today.
>
> > And what is the "temple of the Great Tribulation"? And what "biblical
> > book not yet written"? You aren't making much sense tonight; you need
> > to explain your comments.
>
> The Temple that will be built I believe is already built and laid aside
> waiting for the right moment to put it up.
Baloney. You have given NO SUPPORT for this ludicrous claim. You
saying "I believe" means nothing.
> Many other things are already
> prepped or constructed. It is the temple that the anti-christ will sit
> himself on as "God". Read the book of Rev where John is asked to eat the
> book. tastes sweet but is bitter to the belly.
I have no idea where you get that this indicates anything about an
already constructed temple!
Rev 10:9 And I went unto the angel, and said unto him, Give me the
little book. And he said unto me, Take it, and eat it up; and it shall
make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey.
Rev 10:10 And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate
it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had
eaten it, my belly was bitter.
Sounds to me like it means the vision was not good news, but it was a
blessing (sweet) because it warned them to escape the bad news given.
Linda Lee
The Book of Revelation says nothing about the Laodicean church having
to suffer the great tribulation, but the other six churches don't.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<lindag...@juno.com> spake thusly:
> Since you bring it up, what was the answer you proposed?
> Maybe I'll agree with you.
I'd have to dig up the post again, as I'm not going
to write it all out again. It was a long post. :)
Like I said, I did it once for Bear and I'm not going
to do it again. That's if it can even be found. It's
old now. :)
>I don't think it has occurred yet. Some bible commentators believe it
>(Armageddon/battle of Gog and Magog) refers to the 'Turks' and
>Russians coming against the modern state of Israel. I think that is
>possible and is the tool God will use to reveal God as the Messiah to
>those in Israel.
Relabeling things isn't a proper method.
Especially for those who claim to take the
Bible literally. It says "horses", not "tanks".
This does not say that God will save all of national Israel.
>> means that an entire doctrine is wrong, has revealed
>> themselves as someone who is intentionally refusing
>> to acknowledge logic and reason and what does that say
>> about them, except that they are intentionally dishonest?
>
>I don't think it proves dishonesty; just a belief that one unexplained
>thing makes an unusual doctrine fail, and there have been many
>theories about the meaning of the vision in the Book of Revelation
>floating around. Many people are not very logical or at least won't
>admit to the logic of something when they're in an argument.
A doctrine isn't about one book and not having one answer
to one question does not make a doctrine fail and it does
prove dishonesty to claim that not having an answer to
one question shows that a doctrine fails, since if that is
the case, then every doctrine fails.
>> There is one point that I do disagree with you on though
>> (from another post) about the Kingdom of God in relation
>> to your other post about this subject in Revelation and
>> I don't know if you want me to start another thread
>> about it, or go into it here, as it isn't really about what
>> you mention here, but is indirectly related to it.
>
> I don't know what you're referring to, but go ahead, post it here.
>
>If you're talking about this ("The Book of Revelation is written to
>believers about the establishment of the Kingdom of God, beginning
>then with the ministry of the Messiah
>and continuing until the end of time, so the "time is at hand" for the
>prophesies of that book to begin to be fulfilled (Rev. 22:10)."), I
>already know you think that it began with the destruction of
>Jerusalem, but I think it began with the Messiah's ministry (during
>which he prophesies about the destruction of Jerusalem), since the
>Messiah said in Matt. 12:28, "But if I cast out devils by the Spirit
>of God, then the KINGDOM OF GOD IS COME UNTO YOU" i.e. the kingdom of
>God was already there.
The Kingdom of God did come unto them.
But the age had not been established yet,
any more than it was in Noah's day, until
after the flood. But God's forgiveness had
come unto those people that died in it.
--
Pastor Dave
All we can do every day is the next right thing.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<lindag...@juno.com> spake thusly:
>If you're talking about this ("The Book of Revelation is written to
>believers about the establishment of the Kingdom of God, beginning
>then with the ministry of the Messiah
>and continuing until the end of time, so the "time is at hand" for the
>prophesies of that book to begin to be fulfilled (Rev. 22:10)."), I
>already know you think that it began with the destruction of
>Jerusalem, but I think it began with the Messiah's ministry (during
>which he prophesies about the destruction of Jerusalem), since the
>Messiah said in Matt. 12:28, "But if I cast out devils by the Spirit
>of God, then the KINGDOM OF GOD IS COME UNTO YOU" i.e. the kingdom of
>God was already there.
The last days are not thousands of years long,
just because someone wants to stretch them
to their time, today. Nor did Jesus and the
Apostles preach any such thing. They preached
them ending within their generation.
Furthermore, what you're proposing when you
say that the church age had started with the
ministry of Jesus, is that the last days were
about the church age. It's the same thing as
saying that when the last days end, so does
the church age, otherwise the term "last days"
has no meaning, if what's going on doesn't end.
The last days were the last days of the Mosaic Age.
After that was destroyed, the church age began
and the "last days" were over. The church age
goes on forever!
This is no different than during the time of Noah.
He preached those "last days" and God's offer of
forgiveness was "upon them". They cold accept,
or reject what God was offering. But it wasn't
until the Flood came, that the next age began.
--
Pastor Dave
"Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered
by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone." - Ayn Rand
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<lindag...@juno.com> spake thusly:
Don't you understand, Linda? You're just not saved
if you don't agree with Peter!
--
Pastor Dave
"For the day is near, even the day of the Lord is near,
a cloudy day; it shall be the time of the heathen. And
the sword shall come upon Egypt, and great pain shall
be in Ethiopia, when the slain shall fall in Egypt, and
they shall take away her multitude, and her foundations
shall be broken down." - Ezekiel 30:3-4 (prophecy about
Egypt, fulfilled in 480 B.C.)
Peter B.
I already commented on it. The verse near the beginning of Rev with the
seven trumpets in it You snipped it out. so here it is.
>>>>> "John TO THE SEVEN ASSEMBLIES IN ASIA:
>>>>> Grace to you and peace, from the One who
>>>>> is and who was and who is coming, and from
>>>>> the seven spirits which are before His throne;"
>>>>> - Revelation 1:4
You can see my comments above.
That was his excuse for why he could modify REV however he wanted.
If you like go back up the thread and start over
Peter B.
> Peter, out of his hatred for me, likes to jump on Bear's
> bandwagon. Bear likes to lie and claim that I keep
> running from his supposed "question" about Ezek 38-39.
You poor baby. I don't hate you, never did. You may have issues of self
worth, but that has nothing to do with me. I quoted you verses to show
where we differed and you blow up, act like you cannot be questioned about
anything and call names add in generalized ideas that you have about this
or that group instead of holding a discussion with me. Based on what I
actually said. You keep reiterating the same old tripe about this group or
that, go on and on in your posts about you being attacked when I never had
at that point and had no intention of it. You used poison well thinking to
create a deragatory idea about your perceived opponents before any had a
chance to answer your posts. Yet you still don't see how pathetic you are.
I'm done trying to share anything with you. I dust off my shoes.
Peter B.
And we stem from one of the seven, meaning Dave cannot escape punishment if
he changes the wording of the book.
>>
>>> Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to
>>> SHEW UNTO HIS SERVANTS THINGS WHICH MUST **SHORTLY COME TO PASS;** and
>>> he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
>>> Rev 1:2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of
>>> Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
>>> Rev 1:3 BLESSED IS HE THAT READETH, and they THAT HEAR THE WORDS OF
>>> THIS PROPHECY, and keep those things which are written therein: ***FOR
>>> THE TIME IS AT HAND.***
>>> Rev 1:4 John ****TO THE SEVEN CHURCHES**** which are in Asia: Grace
>>> be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is
>>> to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne
>>
>> No disciples mentioned here.
>
> WHO do you think were members of the seven churches of the church of
> God if not disciples of the Messiah?
>
Sorry, I was thinking of the original 12.
So this means that it is talking to Dave, you, and I.
>> Verse 3 this is a book of a promise, Blessed
>> is he that readeth and hear. Got it, anyone that reads it and hears it, not
>> distorts it, will get a blessing?
>
> The readers in the seven churches to whom John sent the letter would
> be blessed if they read, heard (understood), and kept (remembered) the
> things John wrote to them because "the time is at hand" i.e. they
> would not die when these things happened because they would have fled.
> WE aren't blessed if we read it. You really are not comprehending much
> today.
>
It is a promise to all that read it. A blessing. no stipulations on it. Do
you see any?
Sorry, but many die after reading this, some before the events, some during
the events. Most of this has yet to happen, like the army of 200 million.
The rebuilding of the temple, the destruction of the temple by God and the
rebuilding of the temple by God. The child playing on the hole where a
snake lives, the lion laying down with a Jesus and the saints ruling the
world. and so on.
>>
>>> And what is the "temple of the Great Tribulation"? And what "biblical
>>> book not yet written"? You aren't making much sense tonight; you need
>>> to explain your comments.
>>
>> The Temple that will be built I believe is already built and laid aside
>> waiting for the right moment to put it up.
>
> Baloney. You have given NO SUPPORT for this ludicrous claim. You
> saying "I believe" means nothing.
>
I know that parts of the temple have already been prepared. I have lost
track of what is going on, so "I believe" it is complete based on their
track record for building, their desire to have it, and the amount of time
since my last contacts. So it does have a base, a reasonable one. You can
call it ludicrous it you wish won't bother me for a second.
>> Many other things are already
>> prepped or constructed. It is the temple that the anti-christ will sit
>> himself on as "God". Read the book of Rev where John is asked to eat the
>> book. tastes sweet but is bitter to the belly.
>
> I have no idea where you get that this indicates anything about an
> already constructed temple!
>
You already said you thought it was ludicrous.
> Rev 10:9 And I went unto the angel, and said unto him, Give me the
> little book. And he said unto me, Take it, and eat it up; and it shall
> make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey.
> Rev 10:10 And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate
> it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had
> eaten it, my belly was bitter.
>
> Sounds to me like it means the vision was not good news, but it was a
> blessing (sweet) because it warned them to escape the bad news given.
So you found it. The book was not a vision, it was part of the vision.
You have no idea what was in it.
Linda Lee
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 23:46:52 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee wrote:
> > On Jan 7, 1:36 am, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 21:38:23 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee wrote:
> >>> On Jan 6, 7:30 pm, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 14:21:52 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 6, 3:58 pm, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 10:47:17 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jan 6, 12:21 pm, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> BTW, for your info, "and Judas went and hung himself."
>
> >>>>>>> What does that have to do with the seven churches?
>
> >>>>>> It had to do with his "point" which is out of context.
>
> >>>>> Still don't get it; he said nothing about the twelve apostles.
>
> >>>> He was using a verse out of context. The seven trumpets were part of that
> >>>> verse and cannot modify Gods word even if they wished. My comment just
> >>>> emphasized his error.
The error is yours.
>
> >>> Your off the wall comment did not emphasize his error. If you think
> >>> something was taken out of context, you should say that; not just
> >>> throw in some totally unrelated comment that just makes you look
> >>> confused.
>
> >> It should have caused thought, but I will consider that next time.
>
> > Thought for what? I still don't know what verse you think he took out
> > of context because you never said what it was as he never mentioned
> > the seven trumpets you brought up. There's enough confusion going on
> > without people throwing in some bizarre statement that makes
> > absolutely no sense. It certainly didn't make one see what verse you
> > thought he took out of context or that he had done that at all. It
> > would have made more sense if you'd said something like - 'since you
> > like things taken out of context, Judas hanged himself'.
>
> I already commented on it. The verse near the beginning of Rev with the
> seven trumpets in it You snipped it out. so here it is.
>
> >>>>> "John TO THE SEVEN ASSEMBLIES IN ASIA:
> >>>>> Grace to you and peace, from the One who
> >>>>> is and who was and who is coming, and from
> >>>>> the seven spirits which are before His throne;"
> >>>>> - Revelation 1:4
>
> You can see my comments above.
I see them, and Rev. 1:4 says nothing about the seven trumpets, and
neither is it true that it is "near the beginning of Rev with the
seven trumpets in it", as you said. The seven angels don't begin to
sound the seven trumpets until Chapter EIGHT.
Rev 8:1 And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in
heaven about the space of half an hour.
Rev 8:2 And I saw the seven angels which stood before God; and to
them were given seven trumpets.
Rev 8:3 And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a
golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he
should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar
which was before the throne.
Rev 8:4 And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of
the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand.
Rev 8:5 And the angel took the censer, and filled it with fire of the
altar, and cast it into the earth: and there were voices, and
thunderings, and lightnings, and an earthquake.
Rev 8:6 And the seven angels which had the seven trumpets prepared
themselves to sound.
Rev 8:7 The first angel sounded
>
> That was his excuse for why he could modify REV however he wanted.
IT IS WRITTEN TO THE SEVEN ASSEMBLIES/CHURCHES; ***WHY do you
repeatedly ignore and reject Rev. 1:4?***
>
> If you like go back up the thread and start over
You should "start over" reading the Book of Revelation; you have it
all messed up, who it's to, who is blessed for reading it, and what it
is about.
Peter B.
The other churches are raptured. (meaning the believers in them)
Peter B.
That goes against everything I have said here.
I don't remember if she said she was or not.
You could have proven yourself different than what Bear had said, but in
spite of him telling me how you are you were honest to yourself by not
changing one thing. You are exactly as he described.
r m
Having not read the Left Behind series, I started to see the first few
scenes of the film to find folk raptured leaving all their clothes
behind where they stood. [will need to watch more of it to see what's
happening].
r
Linda Lee
I can't say Dave doesn't tend to complain and lecture needlessly a
lot, but you haven't been behaving entirely innocently yourself lately
and have obviously been reacting angrily for about a week to things he
said in the past, so you can drop the hypocritical "I dust off my
shoes" innocence. I'm sure he'll really miss you 'sharing' by calling
him "Dragon Breath" when he's posting to me. ("Dragon Breath" is kind
of funny though, IF you're not the object of it.)
Linda Lee
> On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 07:17:51 -0500, Pastor Dave wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Jan 2011 00:32:13 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee
>
> >>On Jan 7, 2:57 am, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 01:38:09 -0500, Pastor Dave wrote:
> >>> > On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 22:32:17 -0800, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> spake thusly:
>
> >>> >>I said, "The Laodicean is the only church to go through the GT. Rev speaks
> >>> >>to that,
> >>> >>it speaks to being prepared and escaping, it speaks to all the heathen that
> >>> >>are left warning, especially about 666 it speaks to the Jew to get out!
> >>> >>While the gettin is good, many do, many are left, they stayed. It speaks to
> >>> >>the defiling of the Temple. It speaks to the biblical book not yet written.
> >>> >>It encompasses much. As always God speaks to all. It ties a lot of the OT
> >>> >>prophesies together. You do not want to go through that, you must die for
> >>> >>your sins, there is no NT covenant operating."
>
> >>> >>This is the temple of the Great Tribulation. Why are you so confused.
> >>> >>Sort of renders your arguments moot, eh?
>
> >>> > More assumptions by Peter of things that the Bible does not say.
>
> >>> > Unless he can show us where the Bible says;
>
> >>> > "The Laodicean is the only church to go through the great tribulation."
>
> >>> > Why would only one church go through it? :)
>
> >>> Read revelations to find out.
>
> >>The Book of Revelation says nothing about the Laodicean church having
> >>to suffer the great tribulation, but the other six churches don't.
>
> > Don't you understand, Linda? You're just not saved
> > if you don't agree with Peter!
>
> That goes against everything I have said here.
I think he's referring to you telling me I don't have salvation (which
you said several times) during our first discussion of you commanding
God and whether the Scriptures support that. Don't worry about it; I
don't, since I know you're wrong about your claim I don't have
salvation.
>
> I don't remember if she said she was or not.
The point is that YOU said I wasn't saved, and you said that when I
said I thought you were wrong to command God and wrong that God wants
us to command Him, IOW, when I disagreed with you.
Linda Lee
Where are you getting these ideas? They are not in the Scriptures.
You have not shown anything to exclude only the *church* in Laodicea,
or that the other churches are "raptured" before the tribulation, so
your claims remain totally unconvincing.
The church in Ephesus is threatened with having their candlestick
removed, if they don't repent (the candlestick being the church - Rev.
1:20, "the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven
churches").
Rev. 2:5 "Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent,
and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and
will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent."
And the church in Smyrna is one of the least criticized (and isn't
even told to repent), and it is specifically told they will ***suffer
tribulation, implying it may be till their death:***
Rev 2:8 And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These
things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive;
Rev 2:9 I know thy works, and **tribulation,** and poverty, (but thou
art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews,
and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.
Rev 2:10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold,
the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried;
and ***ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto
death, and I will give thee a crown of life.***
The church in Pergamos is threatened to have Christ fight them (i.e.
destroy them), if they don't repent and cease sinning:
Rev 2:12 And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These
things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges;
Rev 2:13 I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where
Satan's seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my
faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who
was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.
Rev 2:14 But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast
there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast
a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things
sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.
Rev 2:15 So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the
Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.
Rev 2:16 Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will
fight against them with the sword of my mouth.
And the church in Thyatira is threatened with tribulation if they
don't repent and cease eating idol sacrifices and fornicating:
Rev 2:18 And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These
things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of
fire, and his feet are like fine brass;
Rev 2:19 I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and
thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the first.
Rev 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because
thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess,
to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat
things sacrificed unto idols.
Rev 2:21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she
repented not.
Rev 2:22 Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and ***them that commit
adultery with her into GREAT TRIBULATION, except they repent of their
deeds.***
And the majority in the church in Sardis is told to repent or else
Christ will come upon them like a thief:
Rev 3:1 And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These
things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven
stars; I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and
art dead.
Rev 3:2 Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are
ready to die: for I have not found thy works perfect before God.
Rev 3:3 Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold
fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on
thee as a thief
The church in Philadelphia is the only church told they WILL _NOT_ BE
TRIED I.E. SUFFER TRIBULATION:
Rev 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These
things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of
David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man
openeth;
Rev 3:8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open
door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and
hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.
Rev 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say
they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to
come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
Rev 3:10 Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, ***I also
will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all
the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.***
And the Laodecian church is told to repent or be found naked (without
marriage clothes for the marriage to the Lamb of God - Rev. 19:8 & ):
Rev 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write;
These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the
beginning of the creation of God;
Rev 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I
would thou wert cold or hot.
Rev 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot,
I will spue thee out of my mouth.
Rev 3:17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods,
and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and
miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
Rev 3:18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that
thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed,
and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine
eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
Rev 3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous
therefore, and repent.
r m
Perhaps the Jews will be Tribulized before anyone else, even the
Laodieans.
"Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of
the Jew first, and also of the Gentile" - Rom 2:9
Linda Lee
The Laodecians are NOT singled out as the only church to undergo the
tribulation.
>
> "Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of
> the Jew first, and also of the Gentile" - Rom 2:9
That just singles out evil people, no matter whether they're Jew or
Gentile, not all Jews.
r m
I'm with on that. It's the 1st time I've heard the Laodecians go so
short listed.
> > "Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of
> > the Jew first, and also of the Gentile" - Rom 2:9
>
> That just singles out evil people, no matter whether they're Jew or
> Gentile, not all Jews.
Aye ..... it certainly starts with those who doeth evil.
It said that such evil is characterized by contention, disobedience to
the truth, unrighteous, indignant, and wrath (v.8) which would cover
most of us IMHO.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
>On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 01:25:04 -0500, Pastor Dave wrote:
>
>> Peter, out of his hatred for me, likes to jump on Bear's
>> bandwagon. Bear likes to lie and claim that I keep
>> running from his supposed "question" about Ezek 38-39.
>
> You poor baby. I don't hate you, never did.
Yes, we can all see that.
--
Pastor Dave
We are born wet, naked and hungry. Then things get worse.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
Are you really stupid enough to deny it,
when you have said it repeatedly to me
and to others, including Linda?!
Wait, never mind, yes, you are stupid enough!
--
Pastor Dave
"Education is a state-controlled manufactory of echoes."
-Norman Douglas
Peter B.
I know he was, but it still goes against everything. I am not the key to
salvation.
Dave, because he pretends to be a pastor started his tirade about me when I
said I spoke to God and He has spoken to me. At the time I thought he was
possibly a real pastor albiet one with a filthy mouth.
>>
>> I don't remember if she said she was or not.
>
> The point is that YOU said I wasn't saved, and you said that when I
> said I thought you were wrong to command God and wrong that God wants
> us to command Him, IOW, when I disagreed with you.
>
No, I would never have said something like that just because you disagreed
with me. I am not the ajudicator. I would only say something like that is I
was told by someone that Jesus is not the son of God, not deity, or
similar.
I know you disagreed, I thought you were wrong then and I know you are
wrong now. You will need to provide the link that I said you were not saved
based on your behavior to me.
Peter B.
I never saw them, if there are more than one. I hope to be alive when it
happens, The Bible says our bodies will be transformed in a twinkling of an
eye. That is fast.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
>>>> Don't you understand, Linda? You're just not saved
>>>> if you don't agree with Peter!
>>>
>>> That goes against everything I have said here.
>>
>> I think he's referring to you telling me I don't have
>> salvation (which you said several times)
>
> I know he was, but it still goes against everything I said.
How is that possible, when you said it?!
No you're admitting that you go against even yourself!
>> The point is that YOU said I wasn't saved,
>
> No, I would never have said something like that
> just because you disagreed with me.
That's a load of crap! That's exactly when you say it!
You make a claim, someone asks you to back it up,
or tells you that those words are not there in the Bible
and you tell them they're not saved! You're a liar!
--
Pastor Dave
The Last Days were in the first century:
"A LITTLE WHILE, and ye shall not see me:
and again, A LITTLE WHILE and ye shall
see me, because I go to the Father."
- John 16:16
Peter B.
And Just what do you think that entails? Who is the False Prophet
> Rev 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write;
> These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the
> beginning of the creation of God;
> Rev 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I
> would thou wert cold or hot.
> Rev 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot,
> I will spue thee out of my mouth.
> Rev 3:17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods,
> and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and
> miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
> Rev 3:18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that
> thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed,
> and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine
> eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
> Rev 3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous
> therefore, and repent.
There will be some of the church of Laodicea
r m
I watched a bit more: The Temple in Jerusalem will be rebuilt wherein
the AntiChrist will rule for 7 years peace.
[the new temple will sit side-by-side with the Dome on the Rock]
r
Linda Lee
Properly translated, it doesn't "cover most of us", but refers to
wolves among the sheep of God.
Original in the KJV:
Rom. 2:8, "But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the
truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath".
The following is a more accurate translation of the Greek words (see
below for individual definitions):
Rom. 2:8, But unto them that create factions in the church by
intrigue, and perversely disbelieve the truth, and rely on wicked
treachery, murderously sacrificing people when passionately punishing
with abhorrence and a desire for vengeance.
Rom. 2:8, "But unto them that are contentious [creating factions in
the church by intrigue], and do not obey [perversely disbelieve] the
truth, but obey [rely on] unrighteousness [wicked treachery],
indignation [murderous, sacrificing people] and wrath [passion
punishment abhorrence and vengeance]".
Contentious - Gk. 2052 - "properly INTRIGUE, that is, (by implication)
FACTION": rendered in the KJV Bible as contention (contentious),
strife.
Not obey - GK. 544 - "From G545; to DISBELIEVE (wilfully and
perversely)": rendered in the KJV Bible as not believe, disobedient,
obey not, unbelieving.
Obey - Gk. 3982 - "A primary verb; to CONVINCE (by argument, true or
false); by analogy to PACIFY or CONCILIATE (by other fair means);
reflexively or passively to ASSENT (to evidence or authority), to RELY
(by inward certainty)".
Unrighteousness - Gk. 93 - "From Gk. 94; (legal) injustice (properly
the quality, by implication the act); moral WRONGFULNESS (of
character, life or act): rendered in the KJV Bible as iniquity,
unjust, unrighteousness, wrong. Gk. 94 - "From G1 (as a negative
particle) and G1349; UNJUST; by extension WICKED; by implication
TREACHEROUS; specifically HEATHEN": rendered in the KJV Bible as
unjust, unrighteous.
Indignation - Gk. 2372 - "From Gk. 2380; PASSION (as if BREATHING
hard)": rendered in the KJV Bible as fierceness, indignation, wrath.
Gk. 2380 - A primary verb; properly to RUSH (BREATHE hard, BLOW,
SMOKE), that is, (by implication) to SACRIFICE (properly by fire, but
generally); by extension to IMMOLATE (SLAUGHTER for any purpose)":
rendered in the KJV Bible as kill, (do) sacrifice, slay.
Wrath - Gk. 3709 - "From G3713; properly DESIRE (as a REACHING forth
or EXCITEMENT of the mind), that is, (by analogy) violent PASSION
(IRE, or [justifiable] ABHORRENCE); by implication PUNISHMENT": -
rendered in the KJV Bible as anger, indignation, vengeance, wrath.
Linda Lee
It's a movie, not backed up by the Scriptures.
r m
I know. I know. Mind you, there's lots of scripture quoted left
right and centre.
The scenario so far is that Rapture precedes Tribulation. I'm
assuming this storyline is that the Trib will follow after the 7 year
peace.
I'm watching it so see what the fuss was about when it came out. I got
it as 2nd-hand tape.
r
r m
How do we get wolves out of that passage?
I think of these animals as predators or false prophets. The Rom 2:8
descriptor doesn't quite fit IMHO.
> ...
>
> read more »
Peter B.
It was meant to be funny and harmless. Unlike his comments. I passed up
retorting in kind, but used terms like Pope for infallibility since he is
"all knowledgeable, smarter, wiser and.... thinks that because he calls
himself a pastor he commands respect" I'll not accept the term hypocrite at
this point as I don't see it.
Peter B.
> On Jan 7, 2:34�pm, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 23:46:52 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee wrote:
>>> On Jan 7, 1:36 am, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 21:38:23 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 6, 7:30 pm, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 14:21:52 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 6, 3:58 pm, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 10:47:17 -0800 (PST), Linda Lee wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 6, 12:21 pm, "Peter B." <p...@b.org> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>> BTW, for your info, "and Judas went and hung himself."
>>
>>>>>>>>> What does that have to do with the seven churches?
>>
>>>>>>>> It had to do with his "point" which is out of context.
>>
>>>>>>> Still don't get it; he said nothing about the twelve apostles.
>>
>>>>>> He was using a verse out of context. The seven trumpets were part of that
>>>>>> verse and cannot modify Gods word even if they wished. My comment just
>>>>>> emphasized his error.
>
> The error is yours.
>
I am not sure how I substituted trumpets for spirits. Especially the reason
for my comment was that they were before the throne, meaning in heaven and
thus would never modify Gods word.
No, you are right and somehow I substituted the trumpets, I might know why
if I think about what all is going on, but the point of trumpets is wrong.
However, with the seven spirits being in heaven my original point still
stands. They would never modify the book of Rev and Dave felt that
admonition was to the subjects in that verse. That is pretty obvious.
Dave was on the path of modifying time lines etc so I thought a caution was
in order.
So why are you defending him? Did you not see the discrepancy on your own?
Or did you just see my error of substituting a word?
> Rev 8:1 And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in
> heaven about the space of half an hour.
> Rev 8:2 And I saw the seven angels which stood before God; and to
> them were given seven trumpets.
> Rev 8:3 And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a
> golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he
> should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar
> which was before the throne.
> Rev 8:4 And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of
> the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand.
> Rev 8:5 And the angel took the censer, and filled it with fire of the
> altar, and cast it into the earth: and there were voices, and
> thunderings, and lightnings, and an earthquake.
> Rev 8:6 And the seven angels which had the seven trumpets prepared
> themselves to sound.
> Rev 8:7 The first angel sounded
>
>>
>> That was his excuse for why he could modify REV however he wanted.
>
> IT IS WRITTEN TO THE SEVEN ASSEMBLIES/CHURCHES; ***WHY do you
> repeatedly ignore and reject Rev. 1:4?***
>
Why do you? You just edited part of it out, why? Also why are you acting
ignorant that those seven churches apply to the believers today? You even
contradict yourself in that you have already stated that you thought more
than the Laodicean church will go through the tribulation.
>>
>> If you like go back up the thread and start over
>
> You should "start over" reading the Book of Revelation; you have it
> all messed up, who it's to, who is blessed for reading it, and what it
> is about.
My only error thus far is the substitution of the word Trumpet for spirits.
and the seven spirits would never modify the book of Rev.
Linda Lee
Don't start that garbage again; that verse in Isa. 45:11, taken in
context, obviously needed a question mark. God does not tell us to
command him; that is a ludicrous twisting of the Scriptures and an
extremely evil and prideful idea. As "Michael Christ" said of your
attempt to command God when you said you shook your fist at God and
commanded him to give you answers, "no one commands God! Peter you
have misinterpreted the verse, it is an act of the influence of a self-
serving fallen nature", not to mention a tendency to take verses out
of context. And you say your alleged proof you're correct is that God
"did not strike me dead, but filled me with His peace" after you
commanded God! - (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.bible/msg/
1606caf7d73ab84a ) You misinterpreted the verse by taking it out of
context with the surrounding verses, which says "Woe to" people that
ask/demand of God
and command God give them information.
You really should read Watchman Nee's 'The Power of the Soul', in
which he warns of such an attitude towards prayer, which he said is
your body and emotions deceiving you.
MKJV:
Isa 45:9 Woe to him who fights with the One who formed him, a
potsherd among the potsherds of the earth! Shall the clay say to its
former, What are you making? Or your work, He has no hands?
Isa 45:10 Woe to him who says to his father, What are you fathering?
Or to the woman, What are you laboring over?
Isa 45:11 So says Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and the One who
formed him, Do you ask Me of things to come? Do you give command to Me
about My sons, and about the work of My hands?
> You will need to provide the link that I said you were not saved
> based on your behavior to me.
You said it more explicitly to Dave:
"You obviously are not baptized in the Holy
Spirit and as to being Born Again I do not even know that as I've
never
heard you say it." - http://groups.google.com/group/alt.bible/msg/24d33b6526b379a0
You phrased it to me in the form of impudent insulting questions
ending with your claim I didn't "know the Lord" and so have trouble
understanding the Scriptures:
Peter B. to Linda Lee:
"Do you ever study scripture? Do you know it deeper than the words on
a printed page? Have you any clue as to the Spirit of the Lord? You
are going to have problems understanding until you know the Lord." -
from http://groups.google.com/group/alt.bible/msg/b7397cb3479df278
You really shouldn't have reminded me of what a self-righteous,
conceited, pretentious holier-than-thou prig you seemed like at first.
And it's really ironic because you show little evidence of
understanding much of the Scriptures, at least what you've discussed
with me so far.
Linda Lee
What does what entail?
> Who is the False Prophet
I am not sure - perhaps Muhammed who is called "The Prophet" of the
Islamic faith who denies the deity of the Messiah and elevates himself
to top prophet over Moses and the Messiah whom Islam claims to be
merely another prophet. The man is even called "The Prophet" by
Muslims, and he is obviously a false prophet, denying the Hebrew
Scriptures that prophesy the Messiah and denying the Messiah as the
Saviour and Messiah.
"the name “false prophet” would, better than any other, describe that
power, and would naturally suggest it in future times - for to no one
that has ever appeared in our world could the name be so properly
applied as to Muhammed" - Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible
>
>
>
> > Rev 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write;
> > These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the
> > beginning of the creation of God;
> > Rev 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I
> > would thou wert cold or hot.
> > Rev 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot,
> > I will spue thee out of my mouth.
> > Rev 3:17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods,
> > and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and
> > miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
> > Rev 3:18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that
> > thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed,
> > and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine
> > eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
> > Rev 3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous
> > therefore, and repent.
>
> There will be some of the church of Laodicea
Some what?
Linda Lee
Let us know if it is a good movie or hokey. The books are certainly
popular, but I have not read them.
Linda Lee
Because according to the Greek definitions Paul is talking about
people within the church who disbelieve the truth and who are
dangerous to the believers.
>
> I think of these animals as predators or false prophets. The Rom 2:8
> descriptor doesn't quite fit IMHO.
Did you read the definitions?
Linda Lee
It isn't obvious to me, and I still don't know what you're talking
about. Revelation is a letter addressed to the seven churches in Asia;
it was not sent to heathens and Jews.
>
> Dave was on the path of modifying time lines etc so I thought a caution was
> in order.
You're very unclear.
>
> So why are you defending him? Did you not see the discrepancy on your own?
No, I don't see any error in his original post. The errors were yours.
> Or did you just see my error of substituting a word?
That was not your only error. He was trying to point out to you the
letter was addressed and sent TO the assemblies/churches of God - to
believers.
>
>
>
> > Rev 8:1 And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in
> > heaven about the space of half an hour.
> > Rev 8:2 And I saw the seven angels which stood before God; and to
> > them were given seven trumpets.
> > Rev 8:3 And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a
> > golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he
> > should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar
> > which was before the throne.
> > Rev 8:4 And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of
> > the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand.
> > Rev 8:5 And the angel took the censer, and filled it with fire of the
> > altar, and cast it into the earth: and there were voices, and
> > thunderings, and lightnings, and an earthquake.
> > Rev 8:6 And the seven angels which had the seven trumpets prepared
> > themselves to sound.
> > Rev 8:7 The first angel sounded
>
> >> That was his excuse for why he could modify REV however he wanted.
>
> > IT IS WRITTEN TO THE SEVEN ASSEMBLIES/CHURCHES; ***WHY do you
> > repeatedly ignore and reject Rev. 1:4?***
>
> Why do you? You just edited part of it out, why?
I didn't edit out part of it; I didn't even quote it here. Dave
however quotes the entire verse above in this very post, which you
continue to ignore. The point we've been rehashing ad nauseum is who
the book is addressed TO, NOT who it was from (from Christ and the
seven Spirits)
Here it is once again from the KJV:
Rev. 1:4 "John ****TO the seven churches**** which are in Asia: Grace
be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is
to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne".
Also why are you acting
> ignorant that those seven churches apply to the believers today?
I don't. I say the WARNING written to the churches does not apply to
us today.
> You even
> contradict yourself in that you have already stated that you thought more
> than the Laodicean church will go through the tribulation.
I don't contradict myself; the seven churches already went through the
tribulation when Jerusalem was destroyed; some escaped, and we still
have our church of God. You are just confused.
>
>
>
> >> If you like go back up the thread and start over
>
> > You should "start over" reading the Book of Revelation; you have it
> > all messed up, who it's to, who is blessed for reading it, and what it
> > is about.
>
> My only error thus far is the substitution of the word Trumpet for spirits.
False.
> and the seven spirits would never modify the book of Rev.
Incredible.
Linda Lee
Look, Peter, the Messiah prophesied that Jerusalem would be destroyed,
and John was warning the churches of that destruction. I don't say ALL
of Revelation is about that, because the White Throne Judgment is
contained in it, but part of it applies only to those people then.
Luk 19:41 And when he [the Messiah] was come near, he beheld the
city, and wept over it,
Luk 19:42 Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this
thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid
from thine eyes.
Luk 19:43 For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall
cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on
every side,
Luk 19:44 And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children
within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another;
because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.
Mat 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon
this generation.
Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and
stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered
thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her
wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
bear
Gee Peter, I gave you more credit than that.
Bear
Linda Lee
Rev 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy
of this book: for the time is at hand.
Peter B.
Wortman and hort, an abomination.
I told you I had the understanding now, you are only misquoting and
convincing yourself. You started it again and I am not buying into it.
>> You will need to provide the link that I said you were not saved
>> based on your behavior to me.
>
> You said it more explicitly to Dave:
> "You obviously are not baptized in the Holy
> Spirit and as to being Born Again I do not even know that as I've
> never
> heard you say it." - http://groups.google.com/group/alt.bible/msg/24d33b6526b379a0
>
Based on his lack of understanding it was quite clear where he stands,
especially in things spiritual. He never claimed to be born again or
anything else either. Fact is he has always avoided answering my questions
on it.
> You phrased it to me in the form of impudent insulting questions
> ending with your claim I didn't "know the Lord" and so have trouble
> understanding the Scriptures:
>
> Peter B. to Linda Lee:
> "Do you ever study scripture? Do you know it deeper than the words on
> a printed page? Have you any clue as to the Spirit of the Lord? You
> are going to have problems understanding until you know the Lord." -
> from http://groups.google.com/group/alt.bible/msg/b7397cb3479df278
>
> You really shouldn't have reminded me of what a self-righteous,
> conceited, pretentious holier-than-thou prig you seemed like at first.
> And it's really ironic because you show little evidence of
> understanding much of the Scriptures, at least what you've discussed
> with me so far.
It is just as obvious from you your lack of understanding things spiritual
that you are no better off than Dave. You, like so many are quick to anger,
quick to calling names, quick to elevate yourself and hate to see anything
better in anyone else. With meekness I presented my testimony in various
ways mentioning also some of the times the Lord spoke to me in an audible
voice. You, just like Dave and one or two other got on your rocking horse,
mocking, saying such things do not happen and so forth. Had you any
spiritual insight you never would have jumped to such conclusions
especially so quickly. That you never had such an experience speaks to your
lack of understanding, knowledge and spiritual depth.
I understand the heathen mocking, but someone who on the surface appears to
be a person interested in the things of the Lord? Not, unless they are of
the self righteous and constipated religionists.
As to my understanding of the scriptures I told you and anyone else quite
freely that I was learning, studying. I made no bones about that. That does
not mean that what I have learned can be easily wrested from me, no, I make
fast that which I know to be true.
There is a phrase of ever learning and never coming to the understanding of
truth that some here are apt to do.
Out of the heart man speaks, women too. I believe I asked you if you were
born again and was stonewalled several times. Reason I asked was to have
some level of your understanding.
Neither you nor him when you get to name calling, jumping to conclusions
about other people without asking them first appear spiritual much less
Christians. Now feel free to mock some more.
Peter B.
that is my understanding too. but the anti-christ will have about 3 1/2
years of seeming peace. It will sit on the holy of holies mid way through
the 7 years which is called the abomination and if I remember correctly
Satan will be thrown out of heaven forever about that same time and he
comes back with a vengence.
How is the movie? Realistic?
Peter B.
> It's a movie, not backed up by the Scriptures.
His books were all backed up by scripture.
Odd, you never read the books, nor saw the movie but you have confident
comments to make about them.
Peter B.
The modification of the RCC to confority with the bible.
>
>> Who is the False Prophet
>
> I am not sure - perhaps Muhammed who is called "The Prophet" of the
> Islamic faith who denies the deity of the Messiah and elevates himself
> to top prophet over Moses and the Messiah whom Islam claims to be
> merely another prophet. The man is even called "The Prophet" by
> Muslims, and he is obviously a false prophet, denying the Hebrew
> Scriptures that prophesy the Messiah and denying the Messiah as the
> Saviour and Messiah.
>
> "the name “false prophet” would, better than any other, describe that
> power, and would naturally suggest it in future times - for to no one
> that has ever appeared in our world could the name be so properly
> applied as to Muhammed" - Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible
>
It is more than likely the Pope. The one that gives over his authority to
the anti-christ.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Rev 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write;
>>> These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the
>>> beginning of the creation of God;
>>> Rev 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I
>>> would thou wert cold or hot.
>>> Rev 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot,
>>> I will spue thee out of my mouth.
>>> Rev 3:17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods,
>>> and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and
>>> miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
>>> Rev 3:18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that
>>> thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed,
>>> and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine
>>> eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
>>> Rev 3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous
>>> therefore, and repent.
>>
>> There will be some of the church of Laodicea
>
> Some what?
Some believers that go to heaven.
Peter B.
Bear, I am willing to listen, and would appreciate your honest input.
I will put everything on hold lest I dig a lake.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
> Linda Lee wrote:
>
> ...you can drop the hypocritical "I dust off my shoes"
> innocence. I'm sure he'll really miss you 'sharing' by
> calling him "Dragon Breath" when he's posting to me.
>
> It was meant to be funny and harmless.
That is not true. It was meant to be mean, period.
> Unlike his comments. I passed up retorting in kind,
> but used terms like Pope for infallibility since he is
> "all knowledgeable, smarter, wiser and....
You love to make this claim and yet, I am not the one
who keeps telling people that they are not saved when
they disagree with you.
> thinks that because he calls himself a pastor
> he commands respect"
What I said is that you came in here and started
slamming a pastor, because he didn't bow to you
and you wouldn't dare treat one that way in real
life and we both know it! But here, like the rest
of the cowards, you get full of keyboard courage.
> I'll not accept the term hypocrite at this point
> as I don't see it.
Yes you do. You see it quite clearly. That is why
when cornered, you keep typing responses that
are designed to try to slither out from having to
admit to what you've clearly said and which btw,
don't even come close to accomplishing the task,
or we wouldn't keep tellin you that they don't!
But even then, you still just can't stop yourself
from continuing in the same evil practice.
I guess you just like to pretend in your head that
it went a whole different way. :)
Oh and Peter... You don't have to "accept it"
for it to be the truth and be guilty of it.
--
Pastor Dave
Why is it that we are permitted to state any truth about
any other nationality, religion, or group of people, but
to state an unhappy truth about Jews, even if it is the
absolutely proven truth and even if it is the same thing
that we know to be true of Gentiles, we are accused of
engaging in "Anti-Semitism"?
And the reader can rest assured that even for this statement,
this writer will be accused of being "Anti-Semitic"!
This is a form political correctness that destroys academia,
cripples the intellect and fosters tyranny!
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
> Peter B. wrote:
>
>> Linda Lee wrote:
>>
>>>> I don't remember if she said she was or not.
>>>
>>> The point is that YOU said I wasn't saved and
>>> you said that when I said I thought you were
>>> wrong to command God and wrong that God
>>> wants us to command Him, IOW, when
>>> I disagreed with you.
>>
>> No, I would never have said something like that
>> just because you disagreed with me.
>>
>> I know you disagreed, I thought you were
>> wrong then and I know you are wrong now.
>
> Don't start that garbage again; that verse in
> Isa. 45:11, taken in context, obviously needed
> a question mark.
Amen! :)
What's comical about Peter, is when he is shown
to be in obvious error, he comes out with things
like telling you that you're not saved, as if that's
somehow going to make an exclamation mark be
appropriate translation for Isaiah 45:11 and his
claims that he's the innocent, wounded lamb when
he gets caught doing it and demands an apology
to the whole news group from the other person
that he just finished judging the eternal state of. :)
>> You will need to provide the link that I said you
>> were not saved based on your behavior to me.
>
> You said it more explicitly to Dave: "You obviously
> are not baptized in the Holy Spirit and as to being
> Born Again I do not even know that as I've never
> heard you say it."
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.bible/msg/24d33b6526b379a0
Oh, he did better than that! He specifically said
that I am not saved.
And the "behavior" that prompts Peter to do this,
is for someone to simply not agree with him! (:
> You phrased it to me in the form of impudent,
> insulting questions ending with your claim
> I didn't "know the Lord" and so have trouble
> understanding the Scriptures:
>
> Peter B. to Linda Lee:
> "Do you ever study scripture? Do you know
> it deeper than the words on a printed page?
> Have you any clue as to the Spirit of the Lord?
> You are going to have problems understanding
> until you know the Lord."
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.bible/msg/b7397cb3479df278
>
> You really shouldn't have reminded me of what a
> self-righteous, conceited, pretentious holier-than-thou
> prig you seemed like at first. And it's really ironic,
> because you show little evidence of understanding
> much of the Scriptures, at least what you've discussed
> with me so far.
It's when he makes his ridiculous claims, such as when
he claimed that Genesis 1:1-2 says that the Earth was
"recreated" and when it was pointed out (not only by me)
that that word is simply not there, he again said something
similar and tried to obfuscate and claim that he didn't say
what he even quoted himself saying! :)
--
Pastor Dave
"Who's more foolish? The fool, or the fool
who follows him?" - Obi Wan Kenobe
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
>> And the Laodecian church is told to repent or
>> be found naked (without marriage clothes for
>> the marriage to the Lamb of God - Rev. 19:8
>
> And Just what do you think that entails?
It does not entail YOUR claim that the Laodecian
church is the ONLY church that would go through
what you label the "Great Tribulation" and the text
simply does NOT say that, ANYWHERE!
--
Pastor Dave
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth
is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
thusly:
> Peter B. wrote:
>
>> r m wrote:
>>
>>> Having not read the Left Behind series, I started
>>> to see the first few scenes of the film to find folk
>>> raptured leaving all their clothes behind where
>>> they stood [will need to watch more of it to see
>>> what's happening].
>>
>> I never saw them, if there are more than one.
>> I hope to be alive when it happens, The Bible
>> says our bodies will be transformed in a twinkling
>> of an eye. That is fast.
>
> I watched a bit more: The Temple in Jerusalem
> will be rebuilt wherein the AntiChrist will rule for
> 7 years peace.
>
> [the new temple will sit side-by-side with the Dome
> on the Rock]
I believe that this entire doctrine is based on a really
bad interpretation of the texts involved.
--
Pastor Dave
"Unstable organic compounds and chlorophyll corpuscles do not
persist or come into existence in nature on their own account
at the present day and consequently, is it necessary to postulate
[guess] that conditions were once such that this did happen
although and in spite of the fact that our knowledge of nature
does not give us any warrant for making such a supposition...
It is simple dogmatism - asserting that what you wat to believe
did in fact happen." - Joseph H. Woodger, Professor of Biology
Ike E 1/1/11
[snippeth]
> On a personal note, it was very difficult reading Ezekiel knowing that
> Gods
> wrath was going to tear up the Israelites, especially the Levite.
No, it's not.
The REAL Israelites will be saved, just as prophesied...
Joe 2:32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name
of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be
deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the REMNANT whom the LORD shall
call.
The REMNANT and those who listen to them will be saved.
The FAKE Israelites, whom Jesus, Paul, and John all condemned as frauds
2,000 years or so ago won't.
The problem is you don't know who is and who is not "Israel," as it "was,"
as it "is," and as it is "yet to come."
[snippeth]
Ike
--
********
Which of the following is the correct way to read Bible prophecy?
A. Immediacy
B. Historicism
C. Dispensationalism
D. Preterism (Full or Partial)
E. Idealism
F. Realized/Sapiential Eschatology
G. All of the above
H. None of the above
Based on an examination of how (not just what) Jesus and the prophets
prophesied, "The Triune Hypothesis" is a guide to reading the Bible
prophetically in all three dimensions of interpretation-the horizontal axis
in time (what was, is, and/or is to come), the perpendicular axis in
application (literal, figurative, and/or spiritual), and the vertical axis
in context (thesis, generality, and/or antithesis).
Topics of discussion include the resurrections, the triune "Last Days," the
Pentecosts, the one-baptism-in-three-parts, the triple application of the
Elijah prophecies, the Temples in Jerusalem, the Abominations of Desolation,
the Triune Israel, the devolution of prophecy, and much more.
Kindle Version:
Print Version:
Facebook: (discussions enabled)
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657386473773
Web: (filtered blog comments enabled)
http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.html
Ike E 1/1/11
[snippeth]
> The Laodicean is the only church to go through the GT.
OH, the silly Dipsysensationalists.
First, the Word speaks of "tribulation" in TWO contexts--the tribulation of
the saints (through the Beginning of Sorrows and the rise and rule of the
unholy trinity), then the tribulation of the world for tribulating God's
holy ones. [both books of Thessalonians]
Second, the letter to Philadelphia is to the REMNANT church (it's the only
one that switches to Old Testament credentials for Christ rather than the
ones established in the introduction), while the letter to Laodicea prefaces
the apostate church.
But ALL the churches will go through the Beginning of Sorrows (the seven
seals) and the rise and rule of the unholy ones (the seven trumpets) until
no one is left except the Remnant. They'll either perish in the faith
(overcome), or join the apostasy (be overcome).
> Rev speaks to that,
> it speaks to being prepared and escaping, it speaks to all the heathen
> that
> are left warning, especially about 666 it speaks to the Jew to get out!
You have no idea what "Revelation speaks:" God gave prophecy to exhort the
would-be believers to keep the faith THROUGH the End of the Age, even to the
death, i.e. "Whoever shall endure to the end shall be saved" (as opposed to
the false modern "gospel" which says "whoever mutters some sayings or gets
dunked in a bathtub will be saved).
> While the gettin is good, many do, many are left, they stayed. It speaks
> to
> the defiling of the Temple. It speaks to the biblical book not yet
> written.
> It encompasses much. As always God speaks to all. It ties a lot of the OT
> prophesies together. You do not want to go through that, you must die for
> your sins, there is no NT covenant operating.
EVERYONE will "go through that." THAT'S the point of God giving Revelation
in the FIRST place. The only ones who WON'T be "tried" will be the Remnant
whom God will gather and remove at the last moment before He pours out His
wrath. (And that's ALL God was talking about where the "rapture" myth is
concerned.)
You really need to dump the Dipsysensationalist b.s and get with the
program.