The Great Tribulation: Battleground Earth

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

It seems to be teaching us about a relatively short time period. About 3.5 years. Daniel mentions it. John mentions it. I dont see Revelation as entirely literal or entirely symbolic. Its like with Jesus other teachings. Some of both.

Jesus has not yet come. His coming is wrapped up in the events in Revelation. Thats the short explanation of why I am what you call "a futurist".

But why does it "seem" to you to be teaching a relatively short period? That's the question. "Why is is a short period in the future?" "Well, because it seems like a short period in the future." That doesn't really explain anything.

3.5 years, from Daniel? Where? Please explain, and why you think that refers to Revelation's events, and why you think it's all still future.

His "coming"? Did you read my thread on the Son of Man where I showed the "coming of the Lord" is a term that does not refer to just one, final event? How does that figure into things?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I put a difference between Peterist/historist when I said:



Indeed up to this point neither you or Dom has set forth an answer to what is meant by the opening of the 5th seal. He is the Preterist. You are the Historist.

I made a video about it years ago. I said what I believe. It is now being examined. Good. I am glad anyone would take the time to watch it. I am now simply agreeing with what I said then. I'm open about it. I'm not trying to hide anything.

When I see you all put an explanation into the thread I will have the same opportunity to examine it.

We are trying to examine your doctrine but you aren't actually answering the questions, at least not mine: Why should we believe the Revelation concerns ONLY a future end time scenario? Covering a short period of time at the end, still in the future?

I have a thread on the historicist approach, I linked to it here in either this thread or the other, your welcome to examine and ask whatever questions you want.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Esaias

His "coming"? Did you read my thread on the Son of Man where I showed the "coming of the Lord" is a term that does not refer to just one, final event? How does that figure into things?

In case it was missed, here's a repost of it:

Originally Posted by Esaias

Therefore the term "coming of the Lord" is a reference to a TYPE of event and NOT to a specific occurrence of an event.

Some Biblical proof of the assertion:

The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see. Lift ye up a banner upon the high mountain, exalt the voice unto them, shake the hand, that they may go into the gates of the nobles. I have commanded my sanctified ones, I have also called my mighty ones for mine anger, even them that rejoice in my highness. The noise of a multitude in the mountains, like as of a great people; a tumultuous noise of the kingdoms of nations gathered together: the LORD of hosts mustereth the host of the battle. They come from a far country, from the end of heaven, even the LORD, and the weapons of his indignation, to destroy the whole land. Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty. Therefore shall all hands be faint, and every man's heart shall melt: And they shall be afraid: pangs and sorrows shall take hold of them; they shall be in pain as a woman that travaileth: they shall be amazed one at another; their faces shall be as flames. Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it. For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible. I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir. Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger. And it shall be as the chased roe, and as a sheep that no man taketh up: they shall every man turn to his own people, and flee every one into his own land. Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword. Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished. Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, which shall not regard silver; and as for gold, they shall not delight in it. Their bows also shall dash the young men to pieces; and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eye shall not spare children. And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.
(Isaiah 13:1-19)

Here, God pronounces the downfall of Babylon at the hands of the Medes. The event is called "the day of the Lord", filled with His "wrath and indignation". The coming of the Medes with their armies is said to be the coming of the Lord Himself: "They come from a far country, from the end of heaven, even the LORD, and the weapons of his indignation, to destroy the whole land." Cosmic disturbances are spoken of: the sun, moon, and stars being darkened and put out. The heavens would be shaken, the earth moved out of its place (as in a global earthquake).

This is language used in Scripture concerning the destruction of the Babylonian empire at the hand of the Medes, not the "second coming" or the end of the world. Also, it should be noted that this day of the Lord was said to be "at hand". Isaiah gave this prophecy approximately 250 years before Babylon fell to the Medes, yet it was "at hand" when the prophecy was spoken.

The burden of Egypt. Behold, the LORD rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it. And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians: and they shall fight every one against his brother, and every one against his neighbour; city against city, and kingdom against kingdom. And the spirit of Egypt shall fail in the midst thereof; and I will destroy the counsel thereof: and they shall seek to the idols, and to the charmers, and to them that have familiar spirits, and to the wizards. And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord, the LORD of hosts.
(Isaiah 19:1-4)

Here is a prophecy against Egypt which was fulfilled when that country was torn apart by civil war, resulting in twelve kingdoms (known historically as the "Dodekarchy"). This took place in 695 BC. The Egyptians rose up against their Ethiopian overlords, overthrew them, and dissolved the kingdom into civil war between 12 smaller kingdoms that arose. Eventually, the war was resolved by the rise to power of Psammeticus in 670 BC, the ruler of Sais (one of the 12 kingdoms), who conquered the rest and forged them back into a single monarchy. His son, Pharoah Necho, soon established himself as the "cruel lord" with his plan to build a canal in the Suez region: "Necho (616-597), the son and successor of Psammetichus, renewed the project of Ramses-Miamun, to construct a Suez canal, and tore away 120,000 of the natives of the land from their homes, sending them to wear out their lives in forced labour of the most wearisome kind. A revolt on the part of the native troops, who had been sent against the rising Cyrene, and driven back into the desert, led to the overthrow of Hophra, the grandson of Necho (570), and put an end to the hateful government of the family of Psammetichus." - Keil and Delitzsch Commentary.

Yet, in this prophecy concerning Egypt which came to pass in the early 7th century BC, it is described as a coming of the Lord upon the clouds.

The word of the LORD that came to Micah the Morasthite in the days of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, which he saw concerning Samaria and Jerusalem. Hear, all ye people; hearken, O earth, and all that therein is: and let the Lord GOD be witness against you, the Lord from his holy temple. For, behold, the LORD cometh forth out of his place, and will come down, and tread upon the high places of the earth. And the mountains shall be molten under him, and the valleys shall be cleft, as wax before the fire, and as the waters that are poured down a steep place. For the transgression of Jacob is all this, and for the sins of the house of Israel. What is the transgression of Jacob? is it not Samaria? and what are the high places of Judah? are they not Jerusalem? Therefore I will make Samaria as an heap of the field, and as plantings of a vineyard: and I will pour down the stones thereof into the valley, and I will discover the foundations thereof.
(Micah 1:1-6)

Here, doom is prophesied against both Samaria and Jerusalem. Samaria was destroyed by Assyria in 722 BC (I believe, I might be off by a year or so), and Jerusalem later in the 600s by Babylon. Yet, the prophesied destruction of the two cities is described as the Lord "coming out of His place... coming down to earth... treading upon the mountains... which will be melted..."

In other words, the concept of the Lord "coming" is clearly used in the Old Testament as a descriptive term for God visiting , usually in judgment against nations and cities. The point being, there is clearly more than one "coming of the Lord".

There's more proof on the other thread, including from Revelation itself.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I dont have a video about a third temple. The more I see all this preterism being taught the more I am leaning to think there will be one.

Awesome, can you do it tonight? I will show it to the group in front of Whole Foods. Please do it soon. My lands, you can't even say as much as boo devil boo about it here, yet you will shuck out a hour in change for the YouTubes.
You are an apostle to the people.

[diakonos]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I dont have a video about a third temple. The more I see all this preterism being taught the more I am leaning to think there will be one.

Dumbest thing I’ve read all week.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I won't say you are "ashamed" of what you believe. I will however say you don't really know why you believe what you believe, and THAT'S why you won't explain the foundations of your doctrine.

[diakonos]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I have to assume they are ashamed to post their beliefs on a public forum to be examined.

BWAHAHAHA

LOL LOL LOL

Are you serious?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by diakonos

Dumbest thing I’ve read all week.

Don't worry my brother.

Me thinks there is more to come.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by diakonos

BWAHAHAHA

LOL LOL LOL

Are you serious?

Psychological projection is a defense mechanism people subconsciously employ in order to cope with difficult feelings or emotions. Psychological projection involves projecting undesirable feelings or emotions onto someone else, rather than admitting to or dealing with the unwanted feelings.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Well, that is MTD. He makes his statements but is very limited on the Q&A.
If you dig through our eschatology section Elder LeDeay and Mike Wiltcher were the champions concerning Dispensationalist Pre Tribulation Rapture. But Michael the Disciple is barely a blip on the radar. You would think for how much smack he talks about Pre Tribbers (forget even Preterists, Mike has been chewing on Pre Tribbers way longer) you would think he had literal tomes in the eschatology section. But alas he is lacking. One of the brothers here in FLA pointed out that Mike makes a lot of “I don’t know” statements. So, if a guy doesn’t know, then you would think he would cut others a lot of slack. My lands he reads VoM magazine. Those guys don’t believe fat meat is greasy. So there is a lot of confliction in Mike's ideology. If he wants others to do a dog and pony show, then he needs to answer some hard questions.

Because it is exactly what is going on here.