PDA

View Full Version : Oneness And Pre Incarnate Logos


Pages : [1] 2

Michael The Disciple
10-16-2018, 08:22 PM
This is a thread taken from Facebook by Apostolic Pastor Mark August. He is leading the charge to bring the Oneness movement closer to Biblical Oneness and exposing the origin of the Trinity to Trinitarians.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/377116779310914/permalink/698000103889245/

A long read but worthwhile to seekers of truth.

Scott Pitta
10-16-2018, 08:49 PM
He mentions early Pentecostal thinkers, but he does not quote them or reference their writing.

It should be interesting.

Michael The Disciple
10-17-2018, 04:03 AM
I will post some excerpts from this article.

Introduction:

I am Mark August of A.C.T.S. College, a Oneness Pentecostal think-tank and I am a leader in the minority isle of my movement. What I mean by minority is, my wing affirms a manifested pre-incarnate Logos begotten (manifested) in the beginning, before the creation of the world and "through whom" YHWH made the worlds.

Michael The Disciple
10-17-2018, 05:51 AM
Excerpt:

We do not, however, view Logos/Memra as a distinct person than the original Deity source from which Logos is radiated. Rather, we view Logos as the manifested visible image (body) of the invisible One True and Living God and present with YHWH (“face to face with God”) in the beginning and being of the same substance as The Father.

We also do not accept the 3rd Century Origenian theory of an "eternally generated Son", though we do acknowledge that Logos was resident in the mind of YHWH as Wisdom before the beginning in eternity.

Michael The Disciple
10-17-2018, 05:55 AM
Excerpt:

Dr. Irvin Baxter Jr. (UPCI) of EndTime Ministries (as seen on TBN and Daystar) is currently our side of the isle’s most well known advocate.

As you may know, the majority of Oneness Pentecostals today teach that Logos was resident in the mind only of YHWH until being begotten at the incarnation.

The most well known proponent of this theory, which I term "mind word only" theory, is Dr. David K. Bernard (UPCI).

This error is largely sourced, from a doctrinal overreach by Marcellus of Ancyra (Monarchian Bishop) against Arius in the 4th century and was quickly rejected.

Michael The Disciple
10-17-2018, 06:00 AM
Excerpt:

JESUS made the throne, built to be sat in. Wouldn't HE have made a Body to utilize it?

For by HIM were ALL THINGS created, that are in HEAVEN, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be THRONES [ !!! ] or dominions, or principalities, or POWERS: all things were created BY HIM, and FOR HIM:
-Colossians 1:16

The Logos was:

"The Amen,...... The beginning of the creation of God;"
-Revelation 3:14

“The Lord brought me forth as the first of his works, before his deeds of old; I was formed long ages ago, at the very beginning, when the world came to be.”
-Proverbs 8:22-23

TakingDominion
10-17-2018, 07:05 AM
Interesting stuff. I didn't know there were any Oneness people that believe this way. It would seem at first glance confusing to think of the Logos as present with Gof from the beginning. Seems like that would be a 2 person Godhead.

Michael The Disciple
10-17-2018, 08:17 AM
Interesting stuff. I didn't know there were any Oneness people that believe this way. It would seem at first glance confusing to think of the Logos as present with Gof from the beginning. Seems like that would be a 2 person Godhead.

The Logos was with God as his PERSON...AL image, not another PERSON. The visible with the invisible.

TakingDominion
10-17-2018, 08:53 AM
The Logos was with God as his PERSON...AL image, not another PERSON. The visible with the invisible.

So, are you saying that you believe God was VISIBLE in the beginning?

Michael The Disciple
10-17-2018, 09:24 AM
So, are you saying that you believe God was VISIBLE in the beginning?

Thats the whole issue IMO.

Modern Oneness teacher Jason Dulle wrote:

http://www.onenesspentecostal.com/trinoneness.htm

This form was at least visible to the heavenly host, for they presented themselves before God in some manner (I Kings 22:19; Job 1:6). Since God is omnipresent, there could not be any specific location at which to gather, unless, that is, God appeared in some type of visible, albeit spirit form. So the logos was the visible expression of God’s invisible essence. "The Word was not merely an impersonal thought existing in the mind of God but was, in reality, the Eternal Spirit Himself clothed upon by a visible and personal form..."28

This is Bible truth!

Nonetheless in a discussion I had with Jason on the forum he would not fully commit to this position tho he had written these very words himself. Perhaps he feared consequences from UPCI circles.

TakingDominion
10-17-2018, 10:02 AM
Thats the whole issue IMO.

Modern Oneness teacher Jason Dulle wrote:

http://www.onenesspentecostal.com/trinoneness.htm
tations?

This is Bible truth!

Nonetheless in a discussion I had with Jason on the forum he would not fully commit to this position tho he had written these very words himself. Perhaps he feared consequences from UPCI circles.


I certainly agree there were times in the OT where God appeared visibly; even as early as the garden. My question would be, where is the connection to Logos made in scripture to these old testament manifes

Pressing-On
10-17-2018, 10:04 AM
How would Genesis 3:8 be explained - God walking in the "cool" of the day.

Here is the Interlinear - they "heard" God walking in the "breeze". It doesn't say that they saw Him.

https://biblehub.com/text/genesis/3-8.htm

Esaias
10-17-2018, 10:12 AM
I certainly agree there were times in the OT where God appeared visibly; even as early as the garden. My question would be, where is the connection to Logos made in scripture to these old testament manifes

John says the Logos was "in the beginning." Thus, the Logos or Word was present back in Genesis 1:1. If we understand the Logos to be the personal subsistence of God, then it becomes clear that any OT manifestation of God's Presence is the Logos. The concept of The Angel (Messenger) of Jehovah as theophany (appearing of God) is an OT equivalent to the concept of the Logos or Word (Expression) of God in the New.

What in the OT is The Angel of Jehovah, the Word (Heb. "dabar", Aramaic "memra"), the Spirit of Jehovah that came upon and moved the prophets and which is " the breath of Jehovah", the Wisdom by which God made all things, is in the New Testament applied to Jesus Christ Who is the incarnation or enfleshment of the Logos.

Esaias
10-17-2018, 10:15 AM
How would Genesis 3:8 be explained - God walking in the "cool" of the day.

Here is the Interlinear - they "heard" God walking in the "breeze". It doesn't say that they saw Him.

https://biblehub.com/text/genesis/3-8.htm

I think I wrote about this not too long ago in another thread. I'll have to search for it. Short version is they heard the voice (sound) of Jehovah walking in the cool of the day in the Garden = the Logos was present. Heard/sound/voice = Word = manifestation of breath/Spirit in a perceptible and intelligent manner.

Pressing-On
10-17-2018, 10:26 AM
I think I wrote about this not too long ago in another thread. I'll have to search for it. Short version is they heard the voice (sound) of Jehovah walking in the cool of the day in the Garden = the Logos was present. Heard/sound/voice = Word = manifestation of breath/Spirit in a perceptible and intelligent manner.

http://www.onenesspentecostal.com/trinoneness.htm

Quote:
This form was at least visible to the heavenly host, for they presented themselves before God in some manner (I Kings 22:19; Job 1:6). Since God is omnipresent, there could not be any specific location at which to gather, unless, that is, God appeared in some type of visible, albeit spirit form. So the logos was the visible expression of God’s invisible essence. "The Word was not merely an impersonal thought existing in the mind of God but was, in reality, the Eternal Spirit Himself clothed upon by a visible and personal form..."28

I believe it is all speculation as to how we think God presented Himself as visible to the "heavenly host".

I'll have to think about it.

Esaias
10-17-2018, 10:27 AM
I think I wrote about this not too long ago in another thread. I'll have to search for it.


I found the post I was looking for. Here's the relevant part:

As for what is the Word in John ch 1, the Word is the word of God. The Word created all things, that is to say, all things were made by God who spoke them into existence. God made all things by His Word, that is, God made all things by speaking, and thus they came to be.

The Word is thus God actively doing something, creating, making, etc. All things were made by the "breath of His mouth", that is to say, "by the spirit of His mouth". So the Word and the spirit of God are identified with one another. And thus we read about the Holy Spirit moving upon the prophets being described as "the Word of the Lord came to" the prophets.

So then the Word is the Spirit of God interacting and communicating. Thus, the Scriptures are called "the Word of God" because they are the written record of the Word that came to the prophets. The Word, then, is the Spirit of God revealing Himself to mankind.

The Word is therefore God revealing himself, or making Himself known. It is God's Self-Revelation.

When the Word was made flesh, that means God's Self-Revelation was made flesh (became human). Thus, God was manifested in the flesh, and thus Christ is said to be God (because He is God revealing Himself in human nature).

Since the Word is the Self-Revelation or "appearing" of God to man, it is naturally connected to the Angel of the LORD. There are many angels of God, but there is also "THE Angel of Jehovah" which is also said to be God Himself. This Angel of the Lord is God's Self-Revelation, it is God's means of appearing to man in a visible form of some kind (often as a man, actually).

So the Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament is in fact an appearing of the Word or logos of God, that is, God's active Spirit revealing Himself to His creatures.

In Genesis it speaks of God walking in the garden, and Adam and Eve hearing the voice of the Lord God walking in the Garden". Now, the word "voice" can mean simply a sound or noise, but obviously God's presence is indicated by a sound, or voice, and thus is properly called "the logos" or WORD of God. God walked in the Garden with Adam, and this was the logos, as the Angel of Jehovah (that is to say, God's manifest presence).

And, this is also why when the Holy Ghost comes into a person they speak with other tongues. Those who are born of the Spirit are like the wind, which cannot be seen, but it can be heard. Receiving the Spirit is nothing less than Christ himself taking up residence in a person. So the Word comes into the person's heart, that is to say Christ comes in, and this is "by His Spirit". Also, we are born of the Word, yet we are born of the Spirit. The reason is because Word and Spirit are different terms referring to essentially the same thing - God revealing Himself and interacting with His creation.

Pressing-On
10-17-2018, 10:38 AM
I found the post I was looking for. Here's the relevant part:

As for what is the Word in John ch 1, the Word is the word of God. The Word created all things, that is to say, all things were made by God who spoke them into existence. God made all things by His Word, that is, God made all things by speaking, and thus they came to be.

The Word is thus God actively doing something, creating, making, etc. All things were made by the "breath of His mouth", that is to say, "by the spirit of His mouth". So the Word and the spirit of God are identified with one another. And thus we read about the Holy Spirit moving upon the prophets being described as "the Word of the Lord came to" the prophets.

So then the Word is the Spirit of God interacting and communicating. Thus, the Scriptures are called "the Word of God" because they are the written record of the Word that came to the prophets. The Word, then, is the Spirit of God revealing Himself to mankind.

The Word is therefore God revealing himself, or making Himself known. It is God's Self-Revelation.

When the Word was made flesh, that means God's Self-Revelation was made flesh (became human). Thus, God was manifested in the flesh, and thus Christ is said to be God (because He is God revealing Himself in human nature).

Since the Word is the Self-Revelation or "appearing" of God to man, it is naturally connected to the Angel of the LORD. There are many angels of God, but there is also "THE Angel of Jehovah" which is also said to be God Himself. This Angel of the Lord is God's Self-Revelation, it is God's means of appearing to man in a visible form of some kind (often as a man, actually).

So the Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament is in fact an appearing of the Word or logos of God, that is, God's active Spirit revealing Himself to His creatures.

In Genesis it speaks of God walking in the garden, and Adam and Eve hearing the voice of the Lord God walking in the Garden". Now, the word "voice" can mean simply a sound or noise, but obviously God's presence is indicated by a sound, or voice, and thus is properly called "the logos" or WORD of God. God walked in the Garden with Adam, and this was the logos, as the Angel of Jehovah (that is to say, God's manifest presence).

And, this is also why when the Holy Ghost comes into a person they speak with other tongues. Those who are born of the Spirit are like the wind, which cannot be seen, but it can be heard. Receiving the Spirit is nothing less than Christ himself taking up residence in a person. So the Word comes into the person's heart, that is to say Christ comes in, and this is "by His Spirit". Also, we are born of the Word, yet we are born of the Spirit. The reason is because Word and Spirit are different terms referring to essentially the same thing - God revealing Himself and interacting with His creation.

Forgive me, and maybe I am just dense, but all of the bold seems rather contradictory. Either you see Him or you do not. His "voice", your "voice" and my "voice" are not visible.

Esaias
10-17-2018, 10:41 AM
Forgive me, and maybe I am just dense, but all of the bold seems rather contradictory. Either you see Him or you do not. His "voice", your "voice" and my "voice" are not visible.

By "appearing" I meant "perceiving", being perceived in some sense. I should have been more clear.

Pressing-On
10-17-2018, 10:42 AM
By "appearing" I meant "perceiving", being perceived in some sense. I should have been more clear.

Thank you. That makes more sense.

Michael The Disciple
10-17-2018, 10:44 AM
This does not seem like speculation.

1 Kings 22:19-22

19And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left. 20And the LORD said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner. 21And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him. 22And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.

The Lord is on the throne. He is having a conversation with angels. We are made to think this is not unusual.

The truth we are getting at is that if no one has seen God at any time per 1 John 4:12 what were the angels talking to?

The answer is the LOGOS "expression" of his person. The angels themselves did not and could not see God as omnipresent. They saw his visible image. From IT the invisible Spirit communicated with them.

Esaias
10-17-2018, 10:56 AM
By "appearing" I meant "perceiving", being perceived in some sense. I should have been more clear.

Also, God has manifested or revealed Himself in several ways: visibly, audibly, and intellectually (that is, by means of "ideas" or concepts perceived by the intellect).

An example of the first is the pillar of fire, or the Man talking with Abraham, or He Whom Jacob wrestled.

An example of the second is God calling Samuel, God speaking from Sinai, the messages given to the prophets in which they heard God speaking.

An example of the third are the prophets' messages themselves (the content of the messages), Joseph's and Daniel's interpretations of divinely sent dreams, those dreams themselves, the content of most of the Scriptures, etc.

All of these can be thought of as variations on the same theme: the LOGOS. The term logos includes two essential, grammatical elements. 1) the idea or thought that serves as the "meaning" expressed by a word, and 2) the word itself that expresses a corresponding thought or idea or meaning. By extension, the term comes to mean a speech or discourse (as a unitary body of connected ideas expressed by words), and also a "matter" or "issue" (as an idea or collection of ideas that is spoken of, thought about, talked about, debated, etc). And by further extension, it becomes a science or collective body of knowledge on a subject (biology, zoology, theology, etc) as a unified collection of ideas expressed by words and discourses.

At it's furthest extension, metaphysically, it becomes any expression or revealing of a rational source or idea or intelligence. As in the "logos" of philosophy as used by Philo, the pagan Greeks, and ultimately by John (not saying they all had the same understanding, but all three used logos in a metaphysically extended sense).

Esaias
10-17-2018, 11:23 AM
This does not seem like speculation.

1 Kings 22:19-22

19And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left. 20And the LORD said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner. 21And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him. 22And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.

The Lord is on the throne. He is having a conversation with angels. We are made to think this is not unusual.

The truth we are getting at is that if no one has seen God at any time per 1 John 4:12 what were the angels talking to?

The answer is the LOGOS "expression" of his person. The angels themselves did not and could not see God as omnipresent. They saw his visible image. From IT the invisible Spirit communicated with them.

Interesting that this recounted vision is called "The WORD of Jehovah".

Esaias
10-17-2018, 11:29 AM
Nonetheless in a discussion I had with Jason on the forum he would not fully commit to this position tho he had written these very words himself. Perhaps he feared consequences from UPCI circles.

Or perhaps he's just not entirely sure and doesn't want to have to issue later corrections to what might have been a flimsy presentation of doctrine?

Pressing-On
10-17-2018, 03:54 PM
This does not seem like speculation.

1 Kings 22:19-22

19And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left. 20And the LORD said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner. 21And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him. 22And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.

The Lord is on the throne. He is having a conversation with angels. We are made to think this is not unusual.

The truth we are getting at is that if no one has seen God at any time per 1 John 4:12 what were the angels talking to?

The answer is the LOGOS "expression" of his person. The angels themselves did not and could not see God as omnipresent. They saw his visible image. From IT the invisible Spirit communicated with them.

I would say that it was a symbolic reference to our earthly understanding.

I had a vision or dream of kneeing before God at the Judgment Seat. I saw his white, linen robe, He was not wearing shoes, I did not see his face, and he was very, very large (probably, in my mind, how great I perceive Him to be). I was going to reach out and grab his ankles, but I drew back, covered my face with my hands and began to cry - "Thank you for letting me come and live here. Thank you for letting me come and live here."

So, did I see, Jesus? No, it was a symbol of what I know here on earth. I believe that is the same with Micaiah.

Pressing-On
10-17-2018, 03:56 PM
Or perhaps he's just not entirely sure and doesn't want to have to issue later corrections to what might have been a flimsy presentation of doctrine?

Because I have read a lot of his writings, I agree this is most probable.:thumbsup

1ofthechosen
10-21-2018, 07:16 PM
This does not seem like speculation.

1 Kings 22:19-22

19And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left. 20And the LORD said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner. 21And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him. 22And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.

The Lord is on the throne. He is having a conversation with angels. We are made to think this is not unusual.

The truth we are getting at is that if no one has seen God at any time per 1 John 4:12 what were the angels talking to?

The answer is the LOGOS "expression" of his person. The angels themselves did not and could not see God as omnipresent. They saw his visible image. From IT the invisible Spirit communicated with them.


When the scripture says no one has seen God at anytime that has nothing to do with Angels. No one is talking about human beings. Because what does He tell Moses in Exodus 33:20 "And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live." Which the angels are already in the Spiritual realm already, as they are celestial beings. We being terrestrial would be a different thing. I don't believe we can use the word no one in the context of angelic beings though. I believe that is a term that deals with only human beings.

Originalist
10-21-2018, 07:19 PM
When the scripture says no one has seen God at anytime that has nothing to do with Angels. No one is talking about human beings. Because what does He tell Moses in Exodus 33:20 "And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live." Which the angels are already in the Spiritual realm already, as they are celestial beings. We being terrestrial would be a different thing. I don't believe we can use the word no one in the context of angelic beings though. I believe that is a term that deals with only human beings.

We agree !!

1ofthechosen
10-21-2018, 07:31 PM
We agree !!

Well thank you Jesus!! Lol :highfive

Michael The Disciple
10-22-2018, 02:59 AM
When the scripture says no one has seen God at anytime that has nothing to do with Angels. No one is talking about human beings. Because what does He tell Moses in Exodus 33:20 "And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live." Which the angels are already in the Spiritual realm already, as they are celestial beings. We being terrestrial would be a different thing. I don't believe we can use the word no one in the context of angelic beings though. I believe that is a term that deals with only human beings.

Obviously the angels saw God. But what they saw of him was also the Logos image, not his essence. How do we know? This speaks of his essence.

1 Kings 8:27

27But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?

The eternal Spirit that we call God fills the Heaven and the Heaven of Heavens. He is as much present in some other Galaxy as he is in this one. Angels are not so. No created being can see the omnipresent spirit of YAH.

He created his image before the Angels. That way when he made them they had something of him to see.

His image was/is the firstborn of every creature, the beginning of the creation of God. A place where the omnipresent, invisible, eternal Spirit would dwell locally with Angels and men.

There is more to God than any created being has seen.

Scott Pitta
10-22-2018, 05:21 AM
He was with God in the beginning.

John. 1:2

Interesting stuff.

Esaias
10-22-2018, 09:35 AM
He created his image before the Angels.

This is where I think your understanding of the Logos, and my understanding of the Logos, may differ. I do not believe the Logos was "created". I believe "in the beginning was the Logos... and the Logos was God". Which I understand to mean the Logos was (and is and will be) an intrinsic aspect of God's existence. The Logos exists because God exists, not because God "created" or "made" the Logos. For example, God did not "create" His wisdom in the literal sense, because that would imply there was a time when God did not have wisdom - which would make it impossible for Him to create it. Rather, wisdom always was a part of God's existence, it is a "by product" if you will of His nature.

I believe the same is true of the Logos. If there is God, there is the Logos, regardless of whether anything else exists.

I also believe that early Christian speculation concerning the origin of the Logos is what lead to Tertullian's ideas concerning the creation, making, forming, or "emanation" of the Logos, making it a distinct person from the Father. This in turn led to more speculation which resulted in the trinitarian view and the "eternal generation/begetting of the Logos".

Michael The Disciple
10-22-2018, 12:16 PM
Esaias

This is where I think your understanding of the Logos, and my understanding of the Logos, may differ. I do not believe the Logos was "created". I believe "in the beginning was the Logos... and the Logos was God". Which I understand to mean the Logos was (and is and will be) an intrinsic aspect of God's existence.

Agreed that the Logos was and is an intrinsic aspect of Gods existence. However I believe the Logos (as the image) was created.

Col. 1:15-19

15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 18And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 19For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

God created, or formed an image in which he would dwell.

Rev. 3:14

14And 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;

The Logos was in the beginning with God as his image. That is what I believe John is stating in John 1:1. Before the beginning (creation) there was no need for him to have an image.

No one else existed.

I also believe that early Christian speculation concerning the origin of the Logos is what lead to Tertullian's ideas concerning the creation, making, forming, or "emanation" of the Logos, making it a distinct person from the Father. This in turn led to more speculation which resulted in the trinitarian view and the "eternal generation/begetting of the Logos".

True. Did you read the study I posted in the first post of the thread? That is what Mark August, the author is trying to point out.

God IMO inspired John to write:

John 1:1

In the beginning was the logos and the logos was with God and God was the logos.

This was done to clear up the confusion of mens ideas that were circulating around Israel and the Roman empire.

God was referring us back to the OT when he existed as the angel of the Lord, his image. He did not want us to believe his Logos was simply a thought in Gods mind. Neither an "eternal son". Neither a begotten son that was another God person.

John taught the logos was GOD.

The Greek literally says "God was the logos".

It was PERSONAL.

John 1:3

All things were made by him and without him was anything made that was made.

Mark August

We also do not accept the 3rd Century Origenian theory of an "eternally generated Son", though we do acknowledge that Logos was resident in the mind of YHWH as Wisdom before the beginning in eternity.

Esaias
10-22-2018, 12:32 PM
Esaias



Agreed that the Logos was and is an intrinsic aspect of Gods existence. However I believe the Logos (as the image) was created.

Col. 1:15-19

15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 18And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 19For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

God created, or formed an image in which he would dwell.

Rev. 3:14

14And 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;

I don't see where those passages are saying the Logos was created, though. If all things were made by the Word, then the Word cannot have been created or made.


John taught the logos was GOD.

The Greek literally says "God was the logos".

It was PERSONAL.

John 1:3

All things were made by him and without him was anything made that was made.

Which would mean the Logos always was, right?

1ofthechosen
10-22-2018, 01:42 PM
Esaias



Agreed that the Logos was and is an intrinsic aspect of Gods existence. However I believe the Logos (as the image) was created.

Col. 1:15-19

15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 18And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 19For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

God created, or formed an image in which he would dwell.

Rev. 3:14

14And 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;

The Logos was in the beginning with God as his image. That is what I believe John is stating in John 1:1. Before the beginning (creation) there was no need for him to have an image.

No one else existed.


True. Did you read the study I posted in the first post of the thread? That is what Mark August, the author is trying to point out.

God IMO inspired John to write:

John 1:1

In the beginning was the logos and the logos was with God and God was the logos.

This was done to clear up the confusion of mens ideas that were circulating around Israel and the Roman empire.

God was referring us back to the OT when he existed as the angel of the Lord, his image. He did not want us to believe his Logos was simply a thought in Gods mind. Neither an "eternal son". Neither a begotten son that was another God person.

John taught the logos was GOD.

The Greek literally says "God was the logos".

It was PERSONAL.

John 1:3

All things were made by him and without him was anything made that was made.

Mike the Colossians passages and the Revelation 3 passages are referring to the man Christ Jesus. He was begotten, thats the only form of God that was ever begotten anywhere in scripture. That is referring to the humanity only. And even before He was begotten He was the reasoning behind every thing that was created and the blueprint of all things created. At that point the Logos was only God's visual manifestation or the Angel of the Lord, the Lord of Hosts. Who was only a terrestrial manifestation of a totally celestial being. But there would come a day where it was planned from the beginning that God would become a terrestrial being. And the reasoning behind this whole form of creation.

.

Michael The Disciple
10-22-2018, 01:46 PM
Mike the Colossians passages and the Revelation 3 passages are referring to the man Christ Jesus. He was begotten, thats the only form of God that was ever begotten anywhere in scripture. That is referring to the humanity only.

So you think...as a man...Jesus Christ created the Universe?

1ofthechosen
10-22-2018, 02:08 PM
So you think...as a man...Jesus Christ created the Universe?

No you missed what I'm saying. How bout this Mike go do a word for word study of those passages in the Greek and tell me what it's saying.

First off it is saying in Colossians 1:16 also in 20 read what the Bible is saying where it says "by Him". The first one is the Greek Word "en" the second "by" is the Greek Word "dia" which is defined as "through

the ground or reason by which something is or is not done, by reason of, on account of,
because of for this reason, therefore, on this account." Which is showing also the same thing as what Most Oneness people say about John 1:1-4. Which I believe is correct. But at the same time I believe this pre existant Logos is correct too, neither conclusion is complete without the other.
John 1:1-14 "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father." But God's terrestrial nature which the man Christ Jesus was made as a human version of, having flesh and blood as us, was one and the same with that. Just the Son was a relational term due to the humanity.

We can't separate them as person's but only separate the two because of nature's. They are one and the same besides for that.

Apostolic1ness
10-22-2018, 02:53 PM
No you missed what I'm saying. How bout this Mike go do a word for word study of those passages in the Greek and tell me what it's saying.

First off it is saying in Colossians 1:16 also in 20 read what the Bible is saying where it says "by Him". The first one is the Greek Word "en" the second "by" is the Greek Word "dia" which is defined as "through

the ground or reason by which something is or is not done, by reason of, on account of,
because of for this reason, therefore, on this account." Which is showing also the same thing as what Most Oneness people say about John 1:1-4. Which I believe is correct. But at the same time I believe this pre existant Logos is correct too, neither conclusion is complete without the other.
John 1:1-14 "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father." But God's terrestrial nature which the man Christ Jesus was made as a human version of, having flesh and blood as us, was one and the same with that. Just the Son was a relational term due to the humanity.

We can't separate them as person's but only separate the two because of nature's. They are one and the same besides for that.

?

Michael The Disciple
10-22-2018, 08:41 PM
I don't see where those passages are saying the Logos was created, though. If all things were made by the Word, then the Word cannot have been created or made.

Col. 1:15

15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

The Logos is the IMAGE of the invisible God the FIRSTBORN OF EVERY CREATURE.

Logos is firstborn of every CREATION/CREATURE.

The word was made, formed, begotten to be the place from which God created all things. From his image he spoke "let there be". The first thing God ever made was an image for some of his eternal Spirit to dwell.

Then he made all things.

1ofthechosen
10-22-2018, 08:51 PM
Col. 1:15

15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

The Logos is the IMAGE of the invisible God the FIRSTBORN OF EVERY CREATURE.

Logos is firstborn of every CREATION/CREATURE.

The word was made, formed, begotten to be the place from which God created all things. From his image he spoke "let there be". The first thing God ever made was an image for some of his eternal Spirit to dwell.

Then he made all things.

His own image didn't have to be Created. All of that whole passage is talking about the Logos as the plan and the purpose. Before anything was made The purpose was already in God's mind and reasoning that He would come in flesh. He didn't create a image so that Angels could manifest a bodily form, so neither did He have to create a body for Him to manifest one either.

The only one ever begotten was the Son! Otherwise God Himself would be begotten, and He's the Self Existant One.

Michael The Disciple
10-22-2018, 09:30 PM
His own image didn't have to be Created. All of that whole passage is talking about the Logos as the plan and the purpose. Before anything was made The purpose was already in God's mind and reasoning that He would come in flesh. He didn't create a image so that Angels could manifest a bodily form, so neither did He have to create a body for Him to manifest one either.

The only one ever begotten was the Son! Otherwise God Himself would be begotten, and He's the Self Existant One.

Go back to post 1 and click the link to Mark August study.

1ofthechosen
10-22-2018, 10:01 PM
Go back to post 1 and click the link to Mark August study.

I read some of it. But a lot of that was mere speculation at best.

Michael The Disciple
10-22-2018, 10:05 PM
I read some of it. But a lot of that was mere speculation at best.

As many might say about your beliefs.:highfive

I guess you dont have the interest to read it. To bad you could learn some things. But I understand some things I dont have much interest in reading.

Esaias
10-22-2018, 10:42 PM
Col. 1:15

15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

The Logos is the IMAGE of the invisible God the FIRSTBORN OF EVERY CREATURE.

Logos is firstborn of every CREATION/CREATURE.

The word was made, formed, begotten to be the place from which God created all things. From his image he spoke "let there be". The first thing God ever made was an image for some of his eternal Spirit to dwell.

Then he made all things.

Firstborn of every creature does not mean the Logos was the first thing created. If it does, then the Logos is a creature rather than the Creator.

All things were made by the Logos, and without (apart from) Him was not anything made that was made.

Therefore, if the Logos was made, it was made by the Logos. Which is impossible. Therefore the Logos was not made, it simply always was. As John says, "in the beginning was the Logos". It just was, because He is God, who just was.

The Logos was God, yet besides Jehovah there was no God formed (made, or created). I definitely do not agree that God made the Logos. I think that idea leads directly to Arianism and trinitarianism. Both doctrines maintain "the first thing Father did was create/make the Logos, who then created/made everything else". Jehovah becomes Creator by proxy (via the Logos), who is the agent of God creating everything (else).

I believe this is contrary to the Scriptures which teach Jehovah created everything by Himself alone. The Logos is the Self Revelation or Self Expression of God. God always was the Logos, just as God always was the Holy Spirit.

Colossians ch 1 is teaching that Christ is the firstborn of every creature. Verse 13 specifies that it is the SON who is the firstborn of every creature. Therefore the doctrine concerns the MAN, it is in reference to the Incarnation. Firstborn means Jesus - the MAN - is the firstborn, He occupies the position of the Heir entitled to the double portion, He is the head of God's family and the Primary heir.

It does not mean the Logos was "begotten first".

houston
10-22-2018, 11:42 PM
MTD the binitarian.

Esaias
10-28-2018, 03:46 AM
Firstborn of every creature does not mean the Logos was the first thing created. If it does, then the Logos is a creature rather than the Creator.

All things were made by the Logos, and without (apart from) Him was not anything made that was made.

Therefore, if the Logos was made, it was made by the Logos. Which is impossible. Therefore the Logos was not made, it simply always was. As John says, "in the beginning was the Logos". It just was, because He is God, who just was.

The Logos was God, yet besides Jehovah there was no God formed (made, or created). I definitely do not agree that God made the Logos. I think that idea leads directly to Arianism and trinitarianism. Both doctrines maintain "the first thing Father did was create/make the Logos, who then created/made everything else". Jehovah becomes Creator by proxy (via the Logos), who is the agent of God creating everything (else).

I believe this is contrary to the Scriptures which teach Jehovah created everything by Himself alone. The Logos is the Self Revelation or Self Expression of God. God always was the Logos, just as God always was the Holy Spirit.

Colossians ch 1 is teaching that Christ is the firstborn of every creature. Verse 13 specifies that it is the SON who is the firstborn of every creature. Therefore the doctrine concerns the MAN, it is in reference to the Incarnation. Firstborn means Jesus - the MAN - is the firstborn, He occupies the position of the Heir entitled to the double portion, He is the head of God's family and the Primary heir.

It does not mean the Logos was "begotten first".

Well, that's that, then, I guess.

:heeheehee

Michael The Disciple
10-29-2018, 01:53 PM
The Logos was God, yet besides Jehovah there was no God formed (made, or created). I definitely do not agree that God made the Logos. I think that idea leads directly to Arianism and trinitarianism. Both doctrines maintain "the first thing Father did was create/make the Logos, who then created/made everything else". Jehovah becomes Creator by proxy (via the Logos), who is the agent of God creating everything (else).

This thread points to the link by Mark August in the 1st post. He is pointing out where Arianism and Trinitarianism came from. The early Church believed the Logos was both WITH GOD and WAS GOD simultaneously.

As to being WITH GOD the Logos was born, created, and formed.

Formed:

Phil. 2:5

5Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

Born:

Col. 1

15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

Created:

Rev. 3:14

14And 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;

So the Logos was all of this. The distinction never was as Trins teach another God person. Or as Arians teach a begotten Son who was NOT God.

The Logos was YAH HIMSELF in a visible form.

This Logos later became Jesus Christ.

As to Logos BEING GOD consider this.

John 1:1

In the BEGINNING was the word (logos) and the word was with God and the word was God.

The literal Greek is:

In the BEGINNING was the word and the word was with God and GOD was the word.

God himself was the Logos. In the beginning he formed, created, gave birth to a visible image of himself.

Before the beginning no image was needed. There was no one, or nothing else to see God. God was simply omnipresent spirit. This essence was /is to large to be contained by the Galaxies.

1 Kings 8:27

27But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?

That is why God needed a form. So he could be seen by his creation.

Col. 1:17

17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 18And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 19For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

God used this form as it were himself. His fullness dwelled there in visibility. So it was WITH HIM but it was not ALL OF HIM.

The rest of him was still everywhere there was anywhere to be.

Jeremiah 23:24

24Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the LORD. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the LORD.

This doctrine only leads to Arianism or Trinitarianism when one tears it away from the doctrine of:

Hear Israel the Lord our God is one Lord. Duet 6:4

It actually WAS the doctrine taught by the Apostles. But unlearned men rose up and began distorting the truth and inventing a Logos who was not formed from God himself but had been a created Son who was NOT YAH as in the case of Arians.

Or as in the case of Trins and Twins making the Logos into another distinct God person.

It was when this revelation was perverted that other groups began to arise in history. The link to Mark August teaching on this explains this connection quoting what are called the "early church fathers".

Paul taught God made all things by Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 3:9

9And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ

Isaiah said YHWH created all things alone and by himself.

24Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Both of these truths are true when we realize the first thing God ever made was a form, image, spiritual body to manifest himself through.

That was the Logos later revealed by the name Jesus Christ!

Michael The Disciple
10-29-2018, 02:02 PM
I believe this is contrary to the Scriptures which teach Jehovah created everything by Himself alone. The Logos is the Self Revelation or Self Expression of God. God always was the Logos, just as God always was the Holy Spirit.

So what is meant by the "self expression" of God if it is not what I have described?

Michael The Disciple
10-29-2018, 02:15 PM
Colossians ch 1 is teaching that Christ is the firstborn of every creature. Verse 13 specifies that it is the SON who is the firstborn of every creature. Therefore the doctrine concerns the MAN, it is in reference to the Incarnation. Firstborn means Jesus - the MAN - is the firstborn, He occupies the position of the Heir entitled to the double portion, He is the head of God's family and the Primary heir.

Do you believe the "firstborn" created all things? Jesus as a MAN created all things?

So Son and Man are always synonomous?

Did Paul believe it was a MAN who made the worlds?

Heb 1:1-3

1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Paul said God made the world BY HIS SON. I cant see the Son being identified as a human being in this verse.

Rather Paul describes the Son....the one who God created all things through as the brightness of his glory and the EXPRESS IMAGE OF HIS PERSON.

So it seems a mistake for we as Oneness to say "Son" only refers to humanity.

It DOES refer to his humanity but not EXCLUSIVELY to it.

houston
10-29-2018, 03:54 PM
2 gods!?

Evang.Benincasa
10-29-2018, 04:13 PM
2 gods!?


He thought so.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/C.T._Russell.gif/220px-C.T._Russell.gif

Esaias
10-29-2018, 05:52 PM
Both of these truths are true when we realize the first thing God ever made was a form, image, spiritual body to manifest himself through.

That was the Logos later revealed by the name Jesus Christ!

If the Logos was made then God made God. Unless the Logos is just a form or body, in which case the Logos is not God, and Jesus is only the incarnation of a divine body, rather than the incarnation of God.

I already refuted the idea that the Logos was made, and it seems you did not touch anything I said about that.

Trinitarians and Arians believe the first thing God did was generate the Logos, either by an eternal begetting (current view) or by actually making the Logos. Then, they both say, the Logos "made everything else". Which is contrary to Scripture.

None of the verses you provided say the Logos was formed, made, or created. YOU however have said the Logos was formed, made, and created. So YOU have a formed, made, and created God in addition to the Father. This is Arianism, JW theology, and early trinitarian thinking.

Jesus did not "reveal the Logos", He revealed the Father. This was possible because Jesus is the Logos, and the Logos reveals the Father. You have Jesus revealing the Logos, which is closer to trinity teaching than Oneness, to be honest.

Evang.Benincasa
10-29-2018, 06:01 PM
If the Logos was made then God made God. Unless the Logos is just a form or body, in which case the Logos is not God, and Jesus is only the incarnation of a divine body, rather than the incarnation of God.

I already refuted the idea that the Logos was made, and it seems you did not touch anything I said about that.

Trinitarians and Arians believe the first thing God did was generate the Logos, either by an eternal begetting (current view) or by actually making the Logos. Then, they both say, the Logos "made everything else". Which is contrary to Scripture.

None of the verses you provided say the Logos was formed, made, or created. YOU however have said the Logos was formed, made, and created. So YOU have a formed, made, and created God in addition to the Father. This is Arianism, JW theology, and early trinitarian thinking.

Jesus did not "reveal the Logos", He revealed the Father. This was possible because Jesus is the Logos, and the Logos reveals the Father. You have Jesus revealing the Logos, which is closer to trinity teaching than Oneness, to be honest.

All Sacred Name groups in Dade and Broward counties that I know of believe the bolded. Yah and Yahshua, Yah created the Divine Body and placed the preexisting Yahshua into the virgin. That's why they alway speak as God as two individuals working together as Yahweh and Yahshua.

Esaias
10-29-2018, 07:06 PM
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=52913

Esaias
10-29-2018, 07:10 PM
An old post I made on Phil. 2 showing it has nothing do with any preincarnate logos becoming human, as Mike, the trinitarians, and the JWs think:

Hi, TB. I do not believe this passage is referring to any pre-incarnate state at all!

Rather, it is s specimen of Paul's Adam-Christology.

Paul presents several Christologies, meaning that Paul views Christ in several ways, or from several different perspectives. One of those perspectives concerns His role as the Second Adam. He speaks of this in his letter to the Romans, as well, and hints of it in several other places.

Here, Paul expresses Adam Christology and its practical application to the believer.

He begins with 'let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.' This sets the context, Christ's attitude and state of mind. Notice that Paul is speaking of the mind which was in 'Christ Jesus', literally 'The Anointed One, Jesus'. Thus, Paul is speaking of the post-incarnate Jesus, Jesus considered as the Messiah, a human being, the Son of God, anointed by God to be the vessel of Redemption and Salvation for all mankind, sent to reverse the curse brought upon Adam's kin, brought upon us by Adam's disobedience in the Garden. So we are not speaking of the mentality or attitude possessed by the pre-incarnate Logos, but of the human Son of God.

He then says "Who being in the form of God..." Here Paul recalls the words of Moses who described the first Adam as being made in the image of God. Paul will begin a comparison and contrast between the first Adam and the second Adam (Christ). Whereas BOTH were in the form of God, they followed two very different paths, because of their different attitudes or 'minds'.

'...thought it not robbery to be equal with God'. Some translators render this along the lines of '...did not think equality with God was something to be grasped.' This is precisely the opposite of the first Adam's inclination, who being in the form of God was not content to merely be a microcosm of God but chose to 'be as God'. Christ however did NOT pursue that path.

'But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men...' The first Adam attempted by his disobedience to make himself of quite some reputation, in attempting to usurp God's role and position for himself, and taking upon himself the form of a god, but was rendered mortal by the judgement of God. The second Adam, however, did just the opposite, in that He voluntarily took upon himself the form (appearance) of a servant (instead of a master, as He himself so declared several times). He was voluntarily reduced to the likeness or sameness of mortal man, whereas the first Adam was involunatrily reduced to such a state.

'And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.' Here Christ is said to have humbled himself, having taken the path of servanthood and mortality, and submitted to the death of the cross. This is in stark contrast to the first Adam, who being found in fashion as God (in the image and likeness of God) was disobedient (because of his grasping at being equal with God) and was forced into the path of lowly servanthood and mortality, weakness and death.

'Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name...' The first Adam was demoted and cast down, because of his disobedience in attempting to be equal with God, whereas the second Adam was exalted and lifted up and placed on an equal footing with God because of His obedience and submission.

'That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.' Jesus (the man, the Son of God, the second or 'last' Adam) was exalted into a place of equality with God so that the prophetic declaration of Isaiah concerning YHVH would be fulfilled in Christ, and this is the method by which glory is given to YHVH (God, the Father). This is a wonderful statement of the Oneness doctrine, by the way, in that the only acceptable way of glorifying God is to glorify Jesus Christ.

Whereas the first Adam was made in the image or form of God, and chose to grasp equality with God, and was punished by being demoted to the lowly state of mortal and weak humanity, made a servant of death, the second or last Adam, Jesus Christ, chose a different path. He chose a path of obedience, choosing not to step upon the stage as the equal of God but rather as a lowly, mortal servant. And this submission of the Son of God resulted in His exaltation to equality with God, meaning that the worship and honour due to God is now due to Jesus Christ. Christ's re-enactment of the fall of man, with the key elements reversed by His obedience, resulted in His exaltation and the redemption and salvation of mankind.

Trinitarians have for a long time seen this passage as a declaration of the pre-existence of Christ, and as referring to his 'kenosis' in incarnating and becoming human. There are however serious problems with this interpretation.

1. First and foremost, it inserts into Paul's theology what is everywhere else missing - the idea of a pre-incarnate divine intermediary being. The only New Testament passages which could even be supposed to so much as suggest or hint at such an idea are found much later, in the apostle John's writings, and even those are not wholly supportive of the 'intermediary divine being' hypothesis which is the foundation of Trinitarian and Arian theology.

2. Secondly, if the preincarnation interpretation be accepted, it requires us to believe that Jesus Christ (the man) was indeed a distinct personage from God prior to incarnation, yet at the same time LESS than God Himself and someone distinct from GOD (not merely distinct from 'God the father' but from GOD in toto.) This is nothing else than Arianism. If this is preincarnation doctrine, then Christ is simply a second God-like being, not God Himself, contrary to both trinitarian and Oneness theology.

3. The Adamic Christology interpretation is consistent with Paul's theology everywhere else, in presenting Christ as (among other things) a God-sent Saviour who recapitulates not only Israel's spiritual history, but all mankind's, yet in such a way as to reverse the fall of man and secure Redemption and immortality instead of death and mortality (as the first Adam did).

Moreover, the idea of Christ as being a pre-existent divine intermediary being is simply repugnant to the whole tenor of the rest of Scripture, ESPECIALLY the old testament scripture which was familiar to Paul and upon which he relied for teaching material.

Michael The Disciple
10-29-2018, 07:25 PM
All Sacred Name groups in Dade and Broward counties that I know of believe the bolded. Yah and Yahshua, Yah created the Divine Body and placed the preexisting Yahshua into the virgin. That's why they alway speak as God as two individuals working together as Yahweh and Yahshua.

But thats NOT what I have said is it? Or did you read what I actually said?

Michael The Disciple
10-29-2018, 08:49 PM
If the Logos was made then God made God. Unless the Logos is just a form or body, in which case the Logos is not God, and Jesus is only the incarnation of a divine body, rather than the incarnation of God.

God never made another God. He made an image or form for himself to interact with creation. The Logos is Gods self expression as you have stated.

I already refuted the idea that the Logos was made, and it seems you did not touch anything I said about that.

Thats strange I thought I posted several verses showing the Logos was formed, created, and born. I guess you reject it but I did respond.

Trinitarians and Arians believe the first thing God did was generate the Logos, either by an eternal begetting (current view) or by actually making the Logos. Then, they both say, the Logos "made everything else". Which is contrary to Scripture.

Yes I explained the same thing earlier. This was the point of the thread. The link in post 1 tells the story of how Arians, Trins, and Twins corrupted the original Logos doctrine taught by John.

I hope you are not implying that what I am teaching is that the Logos is another co equal God person, or a begotten Son that was NOT Gods person, but rather a distinct junior God.

The intermediary being you are attempting to refute was a distortion by Arians, Trins, and Twins of something that ACTUALLY EXISTED, just not in the way they believed.

That is the point made by Mark August in his study.

I quoted several verses earlier that you seemed to miss.

Eph 3:9

9And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ

Hebrews 1:1-3

1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

The intermediary is shown in both places. It may not fit your theology but it isn't going away. So the intermediary must be either what they Arians, Trins, and Twins believe or Oneness could have the answer.


John adds another one into the mix.

John 1:1

In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God
All things were made by him and without him was nothing made that was made.

So we have as the intermediary:

Jesus Christ
The Son
The Logos

For Oneness.....or the scriptures for that matter to work the intermediary has to be the God who said he made all things alone and by himself. Isaiah 44:24

So there must be a way where God has a mediator......that is himself in another mode of being.

Michael The Disciple
10-29-2018, 09:15 PM
None of the verses you provided say the Logos was formed, made, or created. YOU however have said the Logos was formed, made, and created. So YOU have a formed, made, and created God in addition to the Father. This is Arianism, JW theology, and early trinitarian thinking.

You now distort my words. I have not added another God. What modern Oneness has done to weaken their Biblical position and credibility is to DENY there was an intermediary being, opening the door the Arians, Trins, and Twins which they routinely use to shame Oneness Apologists.

I have in this thread provided 3 scripture references to a personal intermediary who God used to create all things.

John 1:1
Eph. 3:9
Hebrews 1:1-3

Also taken as a whole these verses in Colossians teach the same thing.

13Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: 14In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

The intermediary is PERSONAL. Thats where modern Oneness goes astray. They teach what Mark August calls the "David Bernard model".

The Logos was not an intermediary being (personal) but rather a "thought" or a "plan".

So the Arians, Trins, and Twins, all can plainly see whats there. The intermediary being.

In this true and Biblical version of Oneness doctrine we have the answer.

John 1:1

In the beginning was the word and the word was WITH GOD and GOD WAS THE WORD!

Not two or 3 Gods but one God visible in one mode of being and invisible in another.

Peace and love.

1ofthechosen
10-29-2018, 09:29 PM
God never made another God. He made an image or form for himself to interact with creation. The Logos is Gods self expression as you have stated.



Thats strange I thought I posted several verses showing the Logos was formed, created, and born. I guess you reject it but I did respond.


Yes I explained the same thing earlier. This was the point of the thread. The link in post 1 tells the story of how Arians, Trins, and Twins corrupted the original Logos doctrine taught by John.

I hope you are not implying that what I am teaching is that the Logos is another co equal God person, or a begotten Son that was NOT Gods person, but rather a distinct junior God.

The intermediary being you are attempting to refute was a distortion by Arians, Trins, and Twins of something that ACTUALLY EXISTED, just not in the way they believed.

That is the point made by Mark August in his study.

I quoted several verses earlier that you seemed to miss.

Eph 3:9

9And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ

Hebrews 1:1-3

1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

The intermediary is shown in both places. It may not fit your theology but it isn't going away. So the intermediary must be either what they Arians, Trins, and Twins believe or Oneness could have the answer.


John adds another one into the mix.

John 1:1

In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God
All things were made by him and without him was nothing made that was made.

So we have as the intermediary:

Jesus Christ
The Son
The Logos

For Oneness.....or the scriptures for that matter to work the intermediary has to be the God who said he made all things alone and by himself. Isaiah 44:24

So there must be a way where God has a mediator......that is himself in another mode of being.

Sounds real good but what you have then is another created God. And a God can't be created. God could always manifest a body. He didn't have to create anything. Neither did the Angels. All this you are claiming is pure speculation and you are trying to take the passage in Colossians 1 and rationalize it all out. When what was being related was speaking of a forethought and a foretelling to come, firstborn of every creature has nothing to do with chronological order. But everything to do with a divine order that is out of space and time and was the reasoning, thought, plan and full intention of everything that would come. In that Jesus was the first born of all creation and everything was made in Him showing intention and purpose and for Him because He was the concept of human life. Before humans were God Himself was slain for our redemption that was the whole purpose of life. So that God would have the pre eminance. This is talking of forethought and a foretelling of things, not God made a body before anything else. That's not in the Bible nor alluded to.

1ofthechosen
10-29-2018, 09:38 PM
You now distort my words. I have not added another God. What modern Oneness has done to weaken their Biblical position and credibility is to DENY there was an intermediary being, opening the door the Arians, Trins, and Twins which they routinely use to shame Oneness Apologists.

I have in this thread provided 3 scripture references to a personal intermediary who God used to create all things.

John 1:1
Eph. 3:9
Hebrews 1:1-3

Also taken as a whole these verses in Colossians teach the same thing.

13Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: 14In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

The intermediary is PERSONAL. Thats where modern Oneness goes astray. They teach what Mark August calls the "David Bernard model".

The Logos was not an intermediary being (personal) but rather a "thought" or a "plan".

So the Arians, Trins, and Twins, all can plainly see whats there. The intermediary being.

In this true and Biblical version of Oneness doctrine we have the answer.

John 1:1

In the beginning was the word and the word was WITH GOD and GOD WAS THE WORD!

Not two or 3 Gods but one God visible in one mode of being and invisible in another.

Peace and love.


Please do a word study of Colossians 1 in the original language. What it is saying is exactly what classical Oneness people have said about John 1. It solidifies that in Greek, but you can't see it in English. It doesn't translate it in detail in English. There was never a pre incarnate mediary nor is there now, that intermediary is the Holy Ghost which is the Spirit of Jesus and the Father who are absolutely the same being, only different expressions of that same One being. It's the blood that stands as a intermediary, of the sacrifice on Calvary. And the Spirit that makes intercession for us that is with us in within us who is simply "Christ in you the hope of glory." These are all the same, you at least believe in 2 different person's. You lost one but it's time to lose another one cuz you got one too many!

Michael The Disciple
10-29-2018, 10:01 PM
The scripture in Colossians has exactly the same meaning as the one in Hebrews.

Heb 1:1-2

1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

God made the worlds BY HIS SON.

But who IS his Son at creation. Watch closely.

1:3

3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

A personal intermediary made the worlds according to Paul. Not merely a thought, plan or concept.

Paul here calls this intermediary his "Son".

Was Paul wrong? Did he forget to write that the worlds were made by a thought, plan, or concept?

Then he would have to explain how that impersonal thought, plan, or concept called HIS SON was the express image of HIS PERSON!

He didnt bother. He just said the Son was the brightness of his glory the EXPRESS IMAGE (not another person) of HIS person.

The Son that was used by God to make the worlds was a person. HIS PERSON. His visible image. Same thing Paul taught the Colossians.

1ofthechosen
10-29-2018, 10:21 PM
The scripture in Colossians has exactly the same meaning as the one in Hebrews.

Heb 1:1-2

1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

God made the worlds BY HIS SON.

But who IS his Son at creation. Watch closely.

1:3

3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

A personal intermediary made the worlds according to Paul. Not merely a thought, plan or concept.

Paul here calls this intermediary his "Son".

Was Paul wrong? Did he forget to write that the worlds were made by a thought, plan, or concept?

Then he would have to explain how that impersonal thought, plan, or concept called HIS SON was the express image of HIS PERSON!

He didnt bother. He just said the Son was the brightness of his glory the EXPRESS IMAGE (not another person) of HIS person.

The Son that was used by God to make the worlds was a person. HIS PERSON. His visible image. Same thing Paul taught the Colossians.

No Paul's not wrong just your understanding. Please do a word study it backs up John 1. The world was made in Him for Him with Him as the purpose. Tell me what the world dia in Greek is saying in 16 when it says "ALL THINGS WERE MADE "BY" (DIA)HIM AND FOR HIM."

And here in verse 20 "And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by (dia)him to reconcile all things unto himself; by (dia) him, I say, whether they be things in l earth, or things in heaven." This isn't the word "en" which is translated mostly as in every other time like the first time it's used in verse 16 where it says "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven." This word "DIA" IS DEFINED AS "THROUGH, THE GROUND OR REASON BY WHICH SOMETHING IS OR IS NOT DONE, BY REASON OF, ON ACCOUNT OF, BECAUSE OF FOR THIS REASON,THEREFORE,ON THIS ACCOUNT". Which completely lines up with John 1:1-3 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. [2] The same was in the beginning with God. [3] ALL THINGS WERE MADE BY (GUESS WHAT "DIA" USED AGAIN) HIM; and without him was not any thing made that was made".

Jesus pre incarnate was a concept, or a thought. But at that time that thought and plan was just the Almighty God who was, and is, and Is to come. The I am, He who will be what HE WILL be! While the man Christ Jesus was made of a woman, God always had a body He could manifest if needed. That's false doctrine that teaches that God was somewhere way away that He couldn't relate with man. All through my Bible He always had a way. That's false philosophy that has been given out throughout the ages that has no biblical backing. Rethink that idea its not biblical, because your using that fallacy as the building block to build this pre incarnate created image concept.

And guess what Mike I got to.looking at Hebrews 1:1-2 guess what I found again? "God, who at a sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by (en) the prophets, [2] Hath in these last days spoken unto us by (en) his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, BY (DIA) WHOM ALSO HE MADE THE WORLDS."

Mike all 3 passages are one and the same and show forethought and reasoning, that He was Master Architect but also the Master Plan, that awaited for the fullness of time to come. Before that He was God Almighty and we can see in the Book of Revelations after He was glorified He was just God Almighty. How it was after so it was before, for He is the God that is, that was, that is to come the Almighty! The Bible interpreted itself.

Michael The Disciple
10-30-2018, 09:24 AM
The most well known Oneness teacher in America teaches this great truth.

Irvin Baxter hits a portion of the Logos truth starting at 44:25

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2vgG2TRil0

1ofthechosen
10-30-2018, 10:16 AM
The most well known Oneness teacher in America teaches this great truth.

Irvin Baxter hits a portion of the Logos truth starting at 44:25

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2vgG2TRil0

Ok so the Logos was formed and created? Any rendering of Logos as anything but a thought, or reasoning is grammatical abuse. Especially in light of what I've shown the Bible Teaches in not only Colossians 1:16 also in 1:20 Hebrews 1:2 and again in John 1:3. Which by the use of word "dia" show forethought and preeminence not chronologically but in purpose and reason as a blueprint of sorts.

There is not one passage that supports God creating a finite form in the beggining so that He could create the worlds or interact with man, angels or anything else. All that is at best speculation, and is false doctrine the Bible never teaches that so it's extra biblical at it's core and I don't care who said it. Anyone saying God created a body besides for the man Christ Jesus as we see talked about in those terms in passages like Hebrews 10:5 which the text clearly says "Wherefore when he cometh into the world", so this is speaking of the incarnation not a pre existant Logo's, is wrong.

I'm going to keep my opinions to myself of this minister besides to say he's only the most well known Oneness preacher in America because of a Eschatology magazine he has been producing for close to 30 years. I would even venture and say most his followers are active trinitatarians,who don't pay any attention to this matter at all. He's well known for a whole different subject not like Elder David K. Bernard who is world renown as a scholar on the exact subject at hand. And what Elder Bernard teaches is backed up totally by scripture in the places I already covered. And I venture to say he's silent on certain things because scripture itself is silent so he sticks to that. The rest of that creating a body first before anything else Philosophy, is just that, ONLY A PHILOSOPY.

And btw I can see the pre existant Logos perfectly but not this aspect of it. I plead with you to look this over once again.

Michael The Disciple
10-30-2018, 10:26 AM
Ok so the Logos was formed and created? Any rendering of Logos as anything but a thought, or reasoning is grammatical abuse. Especially in light of what I've shown the Bible Teaches in not only Colossians 1:16 also in 1:20 Hebrews 1:2 and again in John 1:3. Which by the use of word "dia" show forethought and preeminence not chronologically but in purpose and reason as a blueprint of sorts.

There is not one passage that supports God creating a finite form in the beggining so that He could create the worlds or interact with man, angels or anything else. All that is at best speculation, and is false doctrine the Bible never teaches that so it's extra biblical at it's core and I don't care who said it. Anyone saying God created a body besides for the man Christ Jesus as we see talked about in those terms in passages like Hebrews 10:5 which the text clearly says "Wherefore when he cometh into the world", so this is speaking of the incarnation not a pre existant Logo's, is wrong.

I'm going to keep my opinions to myself of this minister besides to say he's only the most well known Oneness preacher in America because of a Eschatology magazine he has been producing for close to 30 years. I would even venture and say most his followers are active trinitatarians,who don't pay any attention to this matter at all. He's well known for a whole different subject not like Elder David K. Bernard who is world renown as a scholar on the exact subject at hand. And what Elder Bernard teaches is backed up totally by scripture in the places I already covered. And I venture to say he's silent on certain things because scripture itself is silent so he sticks to that. The rest of that creating a body first before anything else Philosophy, is just that, ONLY A PHILOSOPY.

If you want to remain in a modern Apostolic Pentecostal box its your choice. Plenty of scripture has been given. Just trying to help:highfive

houston
10-30-2018, 10:42 AM
Chosen,

The Logos was a thought? That’s it?


Don’t quote Greek to me. I know the Greek for Logos.

1ofthechosen
10-30-2018, 11:07 AM
Chosen,

The Logos was a thought? That’s it?


Don’t quote Greek to me. I know the Greek for Logos.

In the context of John 1:1-3 and the other passages like Colossians 1:16, and 20, and Hebrews 1:2 yes He was, God was the reasoning by which He created the worlds. In that He was the first born and pre eminant before all creation and the reasoning behind it. The blueprint. In context of The passages stated. But no He wasn't just a thought or plan because ethe plan became flesh and dwelt among us. But in the beginning the plan was with God because the plan was God. So anything that happened before the incarnation is just dealing with God Almighty Himself not the plan the Messiah. Which are One and the same the Messiah was the image of the invisible God that became flesh. But before that God could manifest a body that was not fully human because He wasn't born of a woman.

My problem with what MTD is saying is dealing totally with that before God created anything else He created a body to relate with creation.

But no He wasn't only a plan but in context of what is being spoken of, (Colossians 1:16, 20, John 1:1-3, Hebrews 1:2) at that point yes. At that point there was only the Almighty God no Messiah that became flesh and dwelt amongst us, which was God HIMSELF, and which was the blueprint by which HE Created the worlds.

1ofthechosen
10-30-2018, 11:18 AM
If you want to remain in a modern Apostolic Pentecostal box its your choice. Plenty of scripture has been given. Just trying to help:highfive

Did you do any research on what I even offered or are you going to let Irvin Baxter be the ultimate judge? I've showed much scriptural proof, even showed you by definition what the passages you are quoting are implying. Not something I feel or whatever but absolute facts. And you are going with a concept that is nowhere stated in the Bible about God creating a Body to relate with His creation before He created anything else?

If God is light, light is 2 fold. One part no one can see, and the reflection everyone can see. This is a perfect example of God considering this a biblical comparison. God didn't have to create anything to relate with creation, just be what He is He's the source of the light, nothing has to be created that's the premise I don't agree with. You and Irvin Baxter said it, and I refute that specifically.

John 1:1 totally refutes this, thinking it over just by Baxter's definition of Logo's. Let's look how that translates "In the beginning was the expression, and the expression was with God, and the expression was God." There is no room for the creation of the Expression when laid out and fully inspected. Because verse 2 says "The same was in the beginning with God." Which is saying there was never a point when the other didn't exist. So that in itself refutes this whole idea of yours and Baxter.

Scott Pitta
10-30-2018, 02:40 PM
Logos ??

He was with God in the beginning. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us.

Michael The Disciple
10-30-2018, 05:11 PM
Did you do any research on what I even offered or are you going to let Irvin Baxter be the ultimate judge? I've showed much scriptural proof, even showed you by definition what the passages you are quoting are implying. Not something I feel or whatever but absolute facts. And you are going with a concept that is nowhere stated in the Bible about God creating a Body to relate with His creation before He created anything else?

If God is light, light is 2 fold. One part no one can see, and the reflection everyone can see. This is a perfect example of God considering this a biblical comparison. God didn't have to create anything to relate with creation, just be what He is He's the source of the light, nothing has to be created that's the premise I don't agree with. You and Irvin Baxter said it, and I refute that specifically.

John 1:1 totally refutes this, thinking it over just by Baxter's definition of Logo's. Let's look how that translates "In the beginning was the expression, and the expression was with God, and the expression was God." There is no room for the creation of the Expression when laid out and fully inspected. Because verse 2 says "The same was in the beginning with God." Which is saying there was never a point when the other didn't exist. So that in itself refutes this whole idea of yours and Baxter.

One Of:

What you dont get is I have been researching this for 39 years. I have heard your view. It was the first one I studied coming out of Trinitarianism. It was enough to ignite my curiosity, but not enough to close the deal.

When in search I heard the version by John Eckstat of the UPC. I was amazed! Oneness doctrine taught where one did not have to deny the obvious. Yes The Trins, Twins, and Arians were right about there being an intermediary being. Multiple scripture backed it up.

But now I could see that the intermediary being was NOT another God person. It was the invisible form of the invisible God! God himself in another mode of being! I embraced the truth and saw the greatness of Jesus more than ever!

I have debated, discussed, taught many Trins and other groups. I have seen other oneness attempt it. The other groups LOVE IT when Oneness believers roll out the stail powerless "thought and plan" concept. Why? Because up til that point in the discussion the Oneness has them on the ropes.

When the scriptures are brought up where the Son or "Logos" is shown to be PERSONAL in creation, the Oneness responds with the very thick dodge about this was a mere "plan". The Trins rip the person to shreds with:

Colossians 1
Hebrews 1:1-3
Eph. 3:9
John 1:1-3
Rev. 3:14

It is painful to see. Dont ever try to go into word warfare with a hardened well studied Trin with the "thought, plan" model.

Yes I have researched the doctrine I teach. I use the plain scriptures that are there. Your posts seem mostly to be of rationalization philosophy. It seemed SHORT on scripture. No matter I have heard it before.

I was pleasantly surprised to have found out this year that Bro. Baxter believes this. He is one of a number of Oneness Ministers who apparently have held onto this great truth passed down from the Apostles.

Your point he was in the beginning fails. The beginning means the beginning of something. What? Creation. The Logos was with God in Creation because it was the first thing God created. From his OWN ETERNAL SPIRIT he formed a glorious spiritual body.

Then he POSSESSED it with his Spirit. With some of his eternal life.

1 John 1:1-2 That which was from the beginning which we have heard which we have seen with our eyes and our hands have handled of the WORD OF LIFE For the LIFE WAS MANIFESTED and we have seen, and bear witness and show unto you that eternal life which was WITH THE FATHER and was manifest to you.

Psalms 8:22-29

22The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.

23I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.

24When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.

25Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:

26While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.

27When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:

28When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:

29When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:

The word in John 1 is the same as the wisdom in Proverbs 8:22

Verse 22 Stearns Complete Jewish Bible

Adonai made me as the beginning of his way the first of his ancient works.

Verse 22 Holy Scriptures Jewish Publication Society

The Lord made me as the beginning of his way, the first of his works of old.

This "word of life" was more than a "plan". It was Gods eternal life possessing a form that was later named "Jesus Christ".

Eph. 3:9

And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery which from the beginning of the world has been hid in God who created all things by HIS THOUGHT AND PLAN?

Wait! Did you say that Paul?

WOOPS! No you did not.

You said God created all things by Jesus Christ!

Michael The Disciple
10-30-2018, 05:33 PM
Did Jesus think of himself as the "wisdom of God"?

Consider this.

Luke 11:49

Therefore also said the WISDOM OF GOD, I will send them prophets and apostles and some of them shall they slay and persecute:

But Jesus said in Matt 23:34

Wherefore I send unto you prophets and wise man and scribes and some of them you shall kill and crucify;

So yes Jesus considered HIMSELF to be the wisdom of God.

Did Paul believe Christ was the WISDOM OF GOD?

1 Cor. 1:24

But unto them which are called both Jews and Greeks CHRIST the power of God and the WISDOM of God.

The wisdom of God was no doubt in the mind of John when he wrote...In the beginning was the word.....

Praxeas
10-30-2018, 06:41 PM
So, are you saying that you believe God was VISIBLE in the beginning?

The Logos is Yahweh (person) manifested

After the Babylonish captivity the Jewish doctors combined into one view the theophanies, prophetic revelations and manifestations of Jehovah generally, and united them in one single conception, that of a permanent agent of Jehovah in the sensible world, whom they designated by the name Memra (word, λόγος) of Jehovah. The learned Jews introduced the idea into the Targums, or Aramæan paraphrases of the Old Testament, which were publicly read in the synagogues, substituting the name the word of Jehovah for that of Jehovah, each time that God manifested himself. Thus in Gen. 39:21, they paraphrase, “The Memra was with Joseph in prison.” In Ps. 110 Jehovah addresses the first verse to the Memra. The Memra is the angel that destroyed the first-born of Egypt, and it was the Memra that led the Israelites in the cloudy pillar.

WORD STUDIES
IN THE
NEW TESTAMENT
by
Marvin R. Vincent, D.D.

Praxeas
10-30-2018, 06:44 PM
Forgive me, and maybe I am just dense, but all of the bold seems rather contradictory. Either you see Him or you do not. His "voice", your "voice" and my "voice" are not visible.

In first century Judaism Memra/logos was used in place of Yahweh any time He was speaking

1ofthechosen
10-30-2018, 07:06 PM
The Logos is Yahweh (person) manifested

After the Babylonish captivity the Jewish doctors combined into one view the theophanies, prophetic revelations and manifestations of Jehovah generally, and united them in one single conception, that of a permanent agent of Jehovah in the sensible world, whom they designated by the name Memra (word, λόγος) of Jehovah. The learned Jews introduced the idea into the Targums, or Aramæan paraphrases of the Old Testament, which were publicly read in the synagogues, substituting the name the word of Jehovah for that of Jehovah, each time that God manifested himself. Thus in Gen. 39:21, they paraphrase, “The Memra was with Joseph in prison.” In Ps. 110 Jehovah addresses the first verse to the Memra. The Memra is the angel that destroyed the first-born of Egypt, and it was the Memra that led the Israelites in the cloudy pillar.

WORD STUDIES
IN THE
NEW TESTAMENT
by
Marvin R. Vincent, D.D.

So basically some physicians got together and had a council and agreed on this like the Trinity? That is reassuring.

Praxeas
10-31-2018, 12:45 AM
So basically some physicians got together and had a council and agreed on this like the Trinity? That is reassuring.

No. Jews believed God had a visible form they called Memra.

You can see him in scriptures like in Exodus. Or Isaiah 6 who John called Jesus

Pressing-On
10-31-2018, 10:04 AM
The Logos is Yahweh (person) manifested

After the Babylonish captivity the Jewish doctors combined into one view the theophanies, prophetic revelations and manifestations of Jehovah generally, and united them in one single conception, that of a permanent agent of Jehovah in the sensible world, whom they designated by the name Memra (word, λόγος) of Jehovah. The learned Jews introduced the idea into the Targums, or Aramæan paraphrases of the Old Testament, which were publicly read in the synagogues, substituting the name the word of Jehovah for that of Jehovah, each time that God manifested himself. Thus in Gen. 39:21, they paraphrase, “The Memra was with Joseph in prison.” In Ps. 110 Jehovah addresses the first verse to the Memra. The Memra is the angel that destroyed the first-born of Egypt, and it was the Memra that led the Israelites in the cloudy pillar.

WORD STUDIES
IN THE
NEW TESTAMENT
by
Marvin R. Vincent, D.D.

In first century Judaism Memra/logos was used in place of Yahweh any time He was speaking

Thanks! :thumbsup

mfblume
11-06-2018, 05:15 PM
Go back to post 1 and click the link to Mark August study.

Mark August is trying to reconcile trinity with oneness.

Michael The Disciple
11-06-2018, 09:52 PM
Mark August is trying to reconcile trinity with oneness.

His studies are bring Trinitarians to Oneness.

1ofthechosen
11-06-2018, 10:43 PM
His studies are bring Trinitarians to Oneness.

Bro I follow this guy on Facebook, and he posted these the other day. Anyone who is posting either one of these circus acts in a endorsing type of way, don't know the difference between shinola and granola. But if he's trying to build a bridge it makes sense. In the words of Elder Johnathan Alvear "the only bridge needing to be built to the trinitarians is Acts 2:38." If they reject that they are going to reject the rest anyway.

houston
11-06-2018, 10:47 PM
Bro I follow this guy on Facebook, and he posted these the other day. Anyone who is posting either one of these circus acts in a endorsing type of way, don't know the difference between shinola and granola. But if he's trying to build a bridge it makes sense. In the words of Elder Johnathan Alvear "the only bridge needing to be built to the trinitarians is Acts 2:38." If they reject that they are going to reject the rest anyway.

Why don’t you ask MTD to verify that people are coming to oneness.

1ofthechosen
11-07-2018, 05:17 AM
Why don’t you ask MTD to verify that people are coming to oneness.

Well that's a even better idea. Thanks bro, better yet is Kim Clement, and Benny Hinn leading them to Oneness? Could that be said ever?

But yeah MTD where is the proof? This guy just debates with people about things then when they make good points blocks them, and then proceeds to bash them. And his whole idea of drawing Acts 22:16 as a foundational point is at best like the trins saying the philipian jailer only confessed Christ and was saved. If God or the Apostles rather believed this so called doctrine the way he does, it would be before chapter 22. Before every account of this took place not in the last mention of it.

But please proof would be great, thanks for that. That's even better.

Michael The Disciple
11-07-2018, 04:08 PM
Why don’t you ask MTD to verify that people are coming to oneness.

I have seen testimonies on Marks Facebook of people saying they have renounced Trinity and accepted Oneness.

Michael The Disciple
11-07-2018, 04:30 PM
Well that's a even better idea. Thanks bro, better yet is Kim Clement, and Benny Hinn leading them to Oneness? Could that be said ever?

I dont endorse these men nor watched the videos or however they were speaking. I endorse Mark August view of the Oneness of God. I was teaching it about the time he was born. I endorse his view of the post tribulation rapture.

I dont have to agree with someone on every point of doctrine to agree with him if he teaches something or things I do agree with them on. Truth is truth no matter who believes it.

For instance I believe in the Oneness of God. Now because Evangelist Benincasa believes that Jesus came and resurrected the dead and took them to Heaven in 70ad....should I quit believing in Oneness because he also believes it?

So Mark August believes there will be an end time revival. I agree there will be a great restoration/revival myself. I dont believe it because any other man believes it.

The Lord COULD (not saying he did) speak through Hinn and Clement if he chose to. As we have heard many times he spoke through Baalams ass.

That in itself would not vindicate these men.

My point for the thread is I believe Yeshua is using Mark August to point Oneness believers to a better understanding of Oneness. One that once was widely accepted among them. He believes (so do I) that there may be Trins who hearing a more Biblical view of the doctrine may accept it.

As this has happened in my own teaching ministry where some have accepted this truth.

Apostolic1ness
11-08-2018, 06:20 AM
I dont endorse these men nor watched the videos or however they were speaking. I endorse Mark August view of the Oneness of God. I was teaching it about the time he was born. I endorse his view of the post tribulation rapture.

I dont have to agree with someone on every point of doctrine to agree with him if he teaches something or things I do agree with them on. Truth is truth no matter who believes it.

For instance I believe in the Oneness of God. Now because Evangelist Benincasa believes that Jesus came and resurrected the dead and took them to Heaven in 70ad....should I quit believing in Oneness because he also believes it?

So Mark August believes there will be an end time revival. I agree there will be a great restoration/revival myself. I dont believe it because any other man believes it.

The Lord COULD (not saying he did) speak through Hinn and Clement if he chose to. As we have heard many times he spoke through Baalams ass.

That in itself would not vindicate these men.

My point for the thread is I believe Yeshua is using Mark August to point Oneness believers to a better understanding of Oneness. One that once was widely accepted among them. He believes (so do I) that there may be Trins who hearing a more Biblical view of the doctrine may accept it.

As this has happened in my own teaching ministry where some have accepted this truth.

Off topic but is it your view that the rapture happens at REV 18:4?

Michael The Disciple
11-08-2018, 07:50 AM
Off topic but is it your view that the rapture happens at REV 18:4?

Not necessarily. Come out of her my people is one of the last warnings to the saints in Babylon before he comes.

Apostolic1ness
11-08-2018, 08:22 AM
Not necessarily. Come out of her my people is one of the last warnings to the saints in Babylon before he comes.

so the church is still here at that point. Just before the wrath of God is poured out on Babylon/world.

Michael The Disciple
11-08-2018, 08:32 AM
so the church is still here at that point. Just before the wrath of God is poured out on Babylon/world.

It would seem.

Apostolic1ness
11-08-2018, 08:37 AM
It would seem.

This is one of the scripture settings I use when defending my position on Post trib Rapture.

Michael The Disciple
11-08-2018, 09:17 AM
This is one of the scripture settings I use when defending my position on Post trib Rapture.

Glad to hear:highfive. Does your Pastor teach it?

Apostolic1ness
11-08-2018, 09:30 AM
Glad to hear:highfive. Does your Pastor teach it?

He does not teach on the subject.

houston
11-08-2018, 01:29 PM
He does not teach on the subject.

Another pan tribber?

Apostolic1ness
11-08-2018, 01:31 PM
Another pan tribber?

what is a pan tribber?

Michael The Disciple
11-08-2018, 09:11 PM
what is a pan tribber?

Those who say it does not matter. It will all work out in the end.

Michael The Disciple
11-08-2018, 09:14 PM
He does not teach on the subject.

Are you close enough to him to know what he believes? I know from asking that our Pastor is post trib. Yet in the 7 months now we have been attending he hasn't mentioned it once. Problem is, that's why I starting going there.

houston
11-09-2018, 12:34 AM
You’re attending only to hear him teach post trib?

houston
11-09-2018, 12:36 AM
My first pastor always said that he was pan trib. So, I asked his son. :lol
The pastor is pre trib. His wife is post trib.

Esaias
11-09-2018, 01:01 AM
Are you close enough to him to know what he believes? I know from asking that our Pastor is post trib. Yet in the 7 months now we have been attending he hasn't mentioned it once. Problem is, that's why I starting going there.

Perhaps there are other things that the church needs to hear and be taught about than "post trib eschatology", at this time? Has the teaching there been beneficial? Have you learned anything? Or at the very least, have you been reminded of and encouraged in things you perhaps already know (since we do, after all, need recurring reminders of the truths we have received)?

Michael The Disciple
11-09-2018, 05:31 AM
Perhaps there are other things that the church needs to hear and be taught about than "post trib eschatology", at this time? Has the teaching there been beneficial? Have you learned anything? Or at the very least, have you been reminded of and encouraged in things you perhaps already know (since we do, after all, need recurring reminders of the truths we have received)?

I guess it depends on where one thinks we are in point of time whether they would think teaching on end times is beneficial. If one thought we were at least generally close to the coming of Jesus it would become very important. It would mean that in their lifetime they would live to see perhaps millions of their fellow saints being led to the slaughter, and live on a planet devastated by nuclear war, earthquakes, famines, ect.

Have I learned anything there? Honestly nothing I could not have learned, or more accurately as you put it been reminded of at the UPC Church that is 12 miles from me. They teach almost exactly the same things.

So I have been driving 150 mile round trip to this Church on the basis of post trib truth. If it was taught or at least mentioned occasionally it could perhaps overcome the other issues of disagreement such as the teaching of immortal soul and the embracing of Christmas and Easter.

Apostolic1ness
11-09-2018, 07:01 AM
Are you close enough to him to know what he believes? I know from asking that our Pastor is post trib. Yet in the 7 months now we have been attending he hasn't mentioned it once. Problem is, that's why I starting going there.

He wants to believe pre trib, however his time preaching is spent on more important things.

Michael The Disciple
11-09-2018, 08:07 AM
He wants to believe pre trib, however his time preaching is spent on more important things.

To me at least, nothing is more important than the coming of Jesus Christ. I would say anytime any TRUTH is preached it is more important than pre trib since it has no truth in it.

Apostolic1ness
11-09-2018, 08:25 AM
To me at least, nothing is more important than the coming of Jesus Christ. I would say anytime any TRUTH is preached it is more important than pre trib since it has no truth in it.

My point was Pastor is focused more on living right, and walking in righteousness and having a relationship with God, to help save this generation of all ages rather than spend time on something that does not matter when your 55 65 75 85 years old and your kids are lost and health is failing. Pre post mid trib has no bearing on the youth struggling with lust and believing they are a replica of their "uneducated cant keep a job" parents. There are many more important relevant things and issues to focus on as a pastor than pre post mid.
IMAO

Michael The Disciple
11-09-2018, 08:46 AM
My point was Pastor is focused more on living right, and walking in righteousness and having a relationship with God, to help save this generation of all ages rather than spend time on something that does not matter when your 55 65 75 85 years old and your kids are lost and health is failing. Pre post mid trib has no bearing on the youth struggling with lust and believing they are a replica of their "uneducated cant keep a job" parents. There are many more important relevant things and issues to focus on as a pastor than pre post mid.
IMAO

Thats odd. Paul was preaching righteousness and having a relationship with God......and YET still preached about the coming of Jesus and the events leading up to it.

2 Thess 2:1-5

1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

Paul says whoever teaches the coming of Jesus will happen before the falling away and the man of sin be revealed is DECEIVING saints.

We should preach righteousness and relationship with God. At the same time we should stand with the doctrine of Christ in all aspects. If one was a deceiver in Pauls day for preaching anything other than the truth about the coming of Jesus they are still a deceiver for preaching it today.

BTW It matters to me and I AM 65!

Apostolic1ness
11-09-2018, 08:57 AM
Thats odd. Paul was preaching righteousness and having a relationship with God......and YET still preached about the coming of Jesus and the events leading up to it.



Paul says whoever teaches the coming of Jesus will happen before the falling away and the man of sin be revealed is DECEIVING saints.

We should preach righteousness and relationship with God. At the same time we should stand with the doctrine of Christ in all aspects. If one was a deceiver in Pauls day for preaching anything other than the truth about the coming of Jesus they are still a deceiver for preaching it today.

BTW It matters to me and I AM 65!

MTD your assuming too much about what my Pastor preaches or doesn't preach. We have only mentioned Pre Mid Post. nothing more such as events or fall away. Im just saying there are more pressing issues than pre post mid. Such as faithfulness to the house of God, having a right spirit and attitude etc.

houston
11-09-2018, 09:06 AM
MTD your assuming too much about what my Pastor preaches or doesn't preach. We have only mentioned Pre Mid Post. nothing more such as events or fall away. Im just saying there are more pressing issues than pre post mid. Such as faithfulness to the house of God, having a right spirit and attitude etc.

He just called your pastor a deceiver.

Apostolic1ness
11-09-2018, 09:18 AM
He just called your pastor a deceiver.

it appears so.

Michael The Disciple
11-09-2018, 10:22 AM
it appears so.

2 Thess 2:1-5

It is not me. It is the word.

1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

Michael The Disciple
11-09-2018, 10:33 AM
He just called your pastor a deceiver.

BTW aren't you a preterist?

Esaias
11-09-2018, 11:01 AM
Thats odd. Paul was preaching righteousness and having a relationship with God......and YET still preached about the coming of Jesus and the events leading up to it.



Paul says whoever teaches the coming of Jesus will happen before the falling away and the man of sin be revealed is DECEIVING saints.

We should preach righteousness and relationship with God. At the same time we should stand with the doctrine of Christ in all aspects. If one was a deceiver in Pauls day for preaching anything other than the truth about the coming of Jesus they are still a deceiver for preaching it today.

BTW It matters to me and I AM 65!

So celebrating Baal's birthday gets a pass but not preaching on post-trib in 7 months is just a bit too much?

Apostolic1ness
11-09-2018, 12:30 PM
2 Thess 2:1-5

It is not me. It is the word.

1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

The Word does not call my Pastor a deceiver. As I stated before my Pastor does not teach pre post or mid tribulation.
I do find it quite offensive to go from our original few statements of agreement concerning post trib, (which was off topic to the original thread) to you defending the premise that my Pastor is a deceiver by stating not you but "the word" is calling my Pastor a deceiver. What motivates you to do that?

Michael The Disciple
11-09-2018, 12:33 PM
Im just saying there are more pressing issues than pre post mid. Such as faithfulness to the house of God, having a right spirit and attitude etc.

Church attendance is more pressing than the doctrine of Jesus Christ? Right spirit and attitude?

TOWARD WHO?

Jesus Christ......or......"the man of God"?

I thought the Lord Jesus and his words were more important than anything?

Apostolic1ness
11-09-2018, 12:39 PM
Church attendance is more pressing than the doctrine of Jesus Christ? Right spirit and attitude?

TOWARD WHO?

Jesus Christ......or......"the man of God"?

I thought the Lord Jesus and his words were more important than anything?

your intentionally turning this conversation into an silly argument. Im done....

Michael The Disciple
11-09-2018, 12:47 PM
The Word does not call my Pastor a deceiver. As I stated before my Pastor does not teach pre post or mid tribulation.
I do find it quite offensive to go from our original few statements of agreement concerning post trib, (which was off topic to the original thread) to you defending the premise that my Pastor is a deceiver by stating not you but "the word" is calling my Pastor a deceiver. What motivates you to do that?

I also enjoyed our minutes of agreement. I asked about whether your Pastor preached it on the basis of the fact you believe it. I thought perhaps he did. Even when you said he wants to believe in pre trib I could move on appreciating the fact that you believe the truth.

It is when you said there are "more important" issues to focus on I felt to respond. My motivation is to point people to the fact the coming of Jesus Christ is WAY IMPORTANT!

It is more important for instance to take heed to what an APOSTLE of Jesus Christ said about it than todays Preachers. If they are pre trib they are deceivers. If they are preterists they are deceivers. You and I cannot change that fact in the courts of Heaven.

So it was the idea there are things MORE important than Christ's coming that brought a response. I dont believe living right or righteousness is not important.

Jesus said:

Be ye perfect, even as the Father in Heaven is perfect. Matt 5:48

I believe and teach that.

I also believe that the coming of the Lord is the greatest incentive to actually give ourselves to holiness. It is THEN that we will receive eternal life.

Michael The Disciple
11-09-2018, 12:54 PM
So celebrating Baal's birthday gets a pass but not preaching on post-trib in 7 months is just a bit too much?

Thank you for helping me make a tough decision.

houston
11-09-2018, 02:10 PM
MTD needs post trib to be reinforced every day!

Esaias
11-09-2018, 03:05 PM
Thank you for helping me make a tough decision.

I'm always the guy who makes things easier. :)

1ofthechosen
11-09-2018, 03:37 PM
Thats odd. Paul was preaching righteousness and having a relationship with God......and YET still preached about the coming of Jesus and the events leading up to it.



Paul says whoever teaches the coming of Jesus will happen before the falling away and the man of sin be revealed is DECEIVING saints.

We should preach righteousness and relationship with God. At the same time we should stand with the doctrine of Christ in all aspects. If one was a deceiver in Pauls day for preaching anything other than the truth about the coming of Jesus they are still a deceiver for preaching it today.

BTW It matters to me and I AM 65!

Mike the falling away happened from the 1st Century until a little over a century ago, and it's still happening. As we speak. Your better off saying that when the man of sin is revealed. That hasn't happened to my knowledge but I can see that fulfilled in Papalcy also, but if we're looking for a specific person I don't know of him yet.

Any teaching that is opposite of that the Lord's return was imminent just as the context of the writings of the Apostles is, is false. They wrote of the coming of the Lord as it could happen that very hour and that's how we should live our life also. Staying full of the Holy Ghost and the rest doesn't matter one way or the other.

Michael The Disciple
11-09-2018, 04:43 PM
Mike the falling away happened from the 1st Century until a little over a century ago, and it's still happening. As we speak. Your better off saying that when the man of sin is revealed. That hasn't happened to my knowledge but I can see that fulfilled in Papalcy also, but if we're looking for a specific person I don't know of him yet.

Any teaching that is opposite of that the Lord's return was imminent just as the context of the writings of the Apostles is, is false. They wrote of the coming of the Lord as it could happen that very hour and that's how we should live our life also. Staying full of the Holy Ghost and the rest doesn't matter one way or the other.

What verse teaches Jesus can come right now? Before the falling away and the man of sin is revealed?

Michael The Disciple
11-09-2018, 04:52 PM
Staying full of the Holy Ghost and the rest doesn't matter one way or the other.

It mattered to Paul who was an Apostle of Jesus Christ. I think he knew the mind of God better than you. So to YOU it may not matter but the Holy Spirit said:

2 Thess 2:1-3

1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

So the Lord says he will NOT come and gather together his elect until those 2 things happen.

He says to not let ANY MAN...DECEIVE us about this matter.

Just a word to the wise.

1ofthechosen
11-10-2018, 11:35 PM
What verse teaches Jesus can come right now? Before the falling away and the man of sin is revealed?

The falling away happened years ago in the 1st Century. You have not a leg to stand on there. But the Apostles seen all of this as 1 event. And they looked that it could happen any day. It's the same way we should look at it. Well if you want to be biblical. Because that's how the people that wrote your Bible looked at it. Everything else is a man made philosophy.

And you pulling one scripture out and building your basis on that is short sighted. Because there's many more scriptures that talk about the soon return of Jesus. And BTW the day of the Lord and the catching away are 2 whole different events entirely.

The only problem with your Eschatology view is it's built upon some trinitarian theologians time table. But don't feel bad I've yet to see a time table of events when it comes to Eschatology I do agree with. Truthfully Post trib and pre trib are a fallacy considering there is no such thing in the Bible as the Great Tribulation. "For we must all must go through tribulation to enter into the kingdom of Heaven." I agree with that scripture, but just using the title post, mid, or pre trib is a misnomer altogether. They are all built on a fallacy.

Michael The Disciple
11-11-2018, 05:39 AM
The falling away happened years ago in the 1st Century. You have not a leg to stand on there. But the Apostles seen all of this as 1 event. And they looked that it could happen any day. It's the same way we should look at it. Well if you want to be biblical. Because that's how the people that wrote your Bible looked at it. Everything else is a man made philosophy.

And you pulling one scripture out and building your basis on that is short sighted. Because there's many more scriptures that talk about the soon return of Jesus. And BTW the day of the Lord and the catching away are 2 whole different events entirely.

The only problem with your Eschatology view is it's built upon some trinitarian theologians time table. But don't feel bad I've yet to see a time table of events when it comes to Eschatology I do agree with. Truthfully Post trib and pre trib are a fallacy considering there is no such thing in the Bible as the Great Tribulation. "For we must all must go through tribulation to enter into the kingdom of Heaven." I agree with that scripture, but just using the title post, mid, or pre trib is a misnomer altogether. They are all built on a fallacy.

In other words this is what you WANT to believe. If there were ANY scriptures that said Jesus could come any minute you would have posted them. Nothing you said negates the truth and force of what Paul wrote.

Paul wrote to the saints of Jesus:

2 Thess 2:1-3

1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Read the teaching of Jesus in Matthew 24. This is where Paul gets his doctrine.

Note in 2 Thess 2:1 Paul mentions the coming of the Lord and our gathering together unto him.

Where did he get that?

Matt. 24:29-31

29Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Note the wording of Paul is the SAME as that of Jesus. Why? He got what he taught on end times from what Jesus taught in that chapter! He was merely a servant of Jesus. Passing on his doctrine. As we should also.

Nothing in Matthew 24 or 2 Thess 2 says Jesus can or will come any minute now.

I used to believe in pre trib. I know how you feel. You want to believe in it. So did I. But when I was pressed to look another view from scripture the pre trib collapsed in one night. I had to repent and move on. I had to understand that the pre trib Preachers were deceivers.

Maybe they were not INTENDING to be deceiving people. Nonetheless Paul, an APOSTLE OF JESUS would have told the disciples HE was feeding not to allow themselves to be deceived by their doctrine.

So perhaps your Preacher does not INTEND to be deceiving you....no more than a Trinitarian Preacher INTENDS to deceive those that he is deceiving.:highfive

1ofthechosen
11-11-2018, 04:45 PM
In other words this is what you WANT to believe. If there were ANY scriptures that said Jesus could come any minute you would have posted them. Nothing you said negates the truth and force of what Paul wrote.

Paul wrote to the saints of Jesus:

2 Thess 2:1-3

1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Read the teaching of Jesus in Matthew 24. This is where Paul gets his doctrine.

Note in 2 Thess 2:1 Paul mentions the coming of the Lord and our gathering together unto him.

Where did he get that?

Matt. 24:29-31

29Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Note the wording of Paul is the SAME as that of Jesus. Why? He got what he taught on end times from what Jesus taught in that chapter! He was merely a servant of Jesus. Passing on his doctrine. As we should also.

Nothing in Matthew 24 or 2 Thess 2 says Jesus can or will come any minute now.

I used to believe in pre trib. I know how you feel. You want to believe in it. So did I. But when I was pressed to look another view from scripture the pre trib collapsed in one night. I had to repent and move on. I had to understand that the pre trib Preachers were deceivers.

Maybe they were not INTENDING to be deceiving people. Nonetheless Paul, an APOSTLE OF JESUS would have told the disciples HE was feeding not to allow themselves to be deceived by their doctrine.

So perhaps your Preacher does not INTEND to be deceiving you....no more than a Trinitarian Preacher INTENDS to deceive those that he is deceiving.:highfive

There's no such thing as pre trib post trib or mid trib because the great tribulation is not in the Bible. I will post many scriptures later. But I just don't have the time right now. I believe in a rapture, but it at least takes place in Chapter 7 of Revelation. But this term pre trib post trib mid trib is a Theological term that is not based on Biblical wording. It's a fallacy. By the way my Pastor doesnt teach or preach none of the above. So he hasn't deceived anyone, but if your wrong and you teach it the wrong at all my friend you will be a false teacher, and a deceiver because of your stand you have taken on the subject.

Later tonight I'll demonstrate a bunch of holes in your argument and I want you to rectify them with more than 1 scripture. Because 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 is not even saying what you think it is. Break it down once again do a Original language study and you will find that the original is talking about a past tense situation and not a future tense situation in verse 2.

Evang.Benincasa
11-11-2018, 04:52 PM
Break it down once again do a Original language study and you will find that the original is talking about a past tense situation and not a future tense situation in verse 2.

If you read it in English you will find is talking about a past tense situation and not a future tense situation in verse 2. Carry on. :)

1ofthechosen
11-11-2018, 05:40 PM
If you read it in English you will find is talking about a past tense situation and not a future tense situation in verse 2. Carry on. :)

That too, because it does say "as that the day of Christ is c at hand." And the c says "HAD COME." Big difference there and the whole second line in verse 3 is italic so it has been added, so theres that also.

Michael The Disciple
11-11-2018, 08:17 PM
There's no such thing as pre trib post trib or mid trib because the great tribulation is not in the Bible. I will post many scriptures later. But I just don't have the time right now. I believe in a rapture, but it at least takes place in Chapter 7 of Revelation. But this term pre trib post trib mid trib is a Theological term that is not based on Biblical wording. It's a fallacy. By the way my Pastor doesnt teach or preach none of the above. So he hasn't deceived anyone, but if your wrong and you teach it the wrong at all my friend you will be a false teacher, and a deceiver because of your stand you have taken on the subject.

Later tonight I'll demonstrate a bunch of holes in your argument and I want you to rectify them with more than 1 scripture. Because 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 is not even saying what you think it is. Break it down once again do a Original language study and you will find that the original is talking about a past tense situation and not a future tense situation in verse 2.

Chosen,

First off let me say convince me I am wrong. I hope you are right. Do you think I WANT to go through the great tribulation? Hit me with your best shot. And now you say there does not even exist such a thing.

Your Pastor does not teach pre, mid, or post. What DOES he teach?

And remember, you said the Apostles taught Christ could come anytime. Dont forget to post the scripture for that.

1ofthechosen
11-12-2018, 01:25 AM
I think by using the term pre trib, mid trib, or post trib that we are going off the supposition that there is a term called “the great tribulation”. But since that term is not in the Bible that’s not even biblical language. While we can see in a passage in Revelation 7:9-14 “After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb. And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God, Saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen. And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they? And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” This is only Chapter 7 of the book of Revelation, so this is not saying the same thing as you are claiming it to mean.

Ok we see in passages like Acts 14:22 Paul “Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.” Then we see passages like Matthew 24:21 (which more than likely is where this term came from.) the scripture says: “For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.” The only problem I have with all of that is, this in Matthew 24 is spanning 2 ages and times in history at once. Which I’ve found most prophecy does. While some of that has yet to happen, some of it in the same passage of Matthew 24 is yet to happen. While, this term in verse 21 is in the context of the things that precede it. So this goes with verse 15-20 “When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day.” So, what is this written about? This is written about the desolation of the temple in 70 A.D., because where, are they closing the gates at on the Sabbath? This is talking about an event in the near future, just about 36 years or so to be exact. (Don’t misunderstand me not the whole chapter of 24 or 25 of Matthew only certain parts!)

Now Jesus teaches of the imminent return more then anyone else. Just look at this passage from Luke 21:35-40 “Let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning; And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately. Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them. And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants. And this know, that if the goodman of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched, and not have suffered his house to be broken through. Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not.” And He uses this reference a couple more times comparing His coming to that of a thief. Just take Revelation 3:3 for example: “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, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.” When did that happen scholars would say somewhere between 65 A.D. and 96 A.D. This is 2018, and He was telling them He would "come upon them at a hour they didn't know of", once again solidifying a imminent soon return. That could even happen that very day! Then Peter and Paul both use this same verbage in their epistles. Just look at 1 Thessalonians 5:1-3 “But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.” Then we see Peter say in 2 Peter 3:10 “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” While what Peter and Paul are referencing are the day of the Lord, which is a different event altogether then the Coming of the Lord. The 1st time He does reference it in Chapter 4 Paul speaks about the coming of the Lord in verse: “For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” But then in Chapter 5 we see him refrence the day of the Lord in Chapter 5:1-10 (i'll start at 8) “But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation. For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, Who died for us, that, WHETHER WE WAKE OR SLEEP, we should live together with him.”

So he’s not saying that this day will catch them by surprise because “they know of the times and seasons.” That’s why he’s saying “Whether we wake or sleep”, because he’s saying they won’t be there at that time. Then notice the reference in Matthew 24:36-41: “of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.” Now, in the days of Noah was their any warning of the coming flood? The only warning was Noah building the Ark for a 100 years. Everything was business as usual, and then suddenly it started to rain, it came as a thief in the night! Once again look at verse 42-44 “Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up. Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.” Jesus is hammering that His coming shall be suddenly. Then we have Chapter 25:1-13 the parable of the ten virgins. Which the 5 wise kept their lamps trimmed, and full of oil. While the 5 didn’t. And they had not a chance to get extra oil, which is a type of being full of the Holy Ghost just like my Pastor preaches. Just look at verse 10-13 it solidifies this point “And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut. Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not. Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.”

Now we have the same account in Luke 17:26-30 “as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.” Now, if they are still selling, planting, and building just as in the days of Noah and Lot, what warning did they have? It was a surprise. I didn’t use this comparison but Jesus did. Even James the Lord’s fleshly brother says in verse 7-8 “Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain. Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.”

There is so much more I could reference that I could go on for hours. But I have not the time or the energy. I think where I don’t agree with you and scholars is on the time tables of all these events. While as I said Pre, Mid, and Post trib is a bad title, because it’s all Post Trib Just look at Acts 14:22! Although, the term the great tribulation is something coined from a quote of Jesus, that really isn’t even referencing that time period at all. But something that was in the near future. Although later great tribulation will come, but in Revelations Chapter 7 we see people all around the throne that have come out of great tribulation also. So even then that would be Post tribulation, when the Apostles were martyred that was Post Tribulation, for crying out loud. So I don’t believe in Pre Tribulation, because I don’t believe that’s a sound biblical term. I believe in a rapture, but I believe it will come just as Jesus, Paul, Peter, and James said it would quickly. That’s why I stay full of the Holy Ghost, and all the rest really doesn’t matter. While I do understand where you are coming from, I don’t believe the outlook you have is right. But don’t feel bad, I’ve never heard a eschatological view I agree with. I believe there is too much to this subject to truthfully wrap our mind around, until we see it live and in action. I’ve heard Irvin Baxter say, he understands prophecy. While he may understand somethings about prophecy, no one understand’s prophecy fully. The only way then that’s possible is if you can see it already fulfilled and in hindsight, but in foresight no one has it all the way right. That’s why I stay watchful, and on guard because Jesus told me when I don’t expect that is when the Son of Man cometh! So I’ll stick with that!

houston
11-12-2018, 02:04 AM
chosen the partial preterist :lol

Evang.Benincasa
11-12-2018, 06:04 AM
chosen the partial preterist :lol

That might not be Partial Preterism.

That's the thing with eschatology. We either label it, or come up with new labels. Take Dispensationalist Pre Tribulation Rapture, Charles Larkin's form differs from Scofield, slightly, but they can't be called the exactly the same. Same goes with all other forms of Eschatology. But as far as Dispensationalism goes it has Post Trib Dispensationalism (which is the wackiest) Pre Trib Dispensationalism which is the one which is wide held in Pentecostal and Baptist circles. Then Mid Tribulation Dispensationalist which borders of Pre Wrath Dispensationalism. All in all, when we come down to brass tacks we have so many forms of eschatology, which morph from one form to the other. Spend some time reading Elder James LeDeay in the Eschatology forum. Seriously, spend some time reading every post he has ever posted (except his one liners) you will get a bird's eye view of a custom made honed and chromed edition of a man's idea of Pre trib Dispensationalism. Also an observation of someone building clear contradictions within their own paradigm while defending those contradictions to the death. But alas, that is another story for another thread.

Michael The Disciple
11-12-2018, 07:17 AM
Chosen,

You wrote your Pastor teaches neither pre, mid, or post. What DOES he teach?

Michael The Disciple
11-12-2018, 07:25 AM
Dom

But as far as Dispensationalism goes it has Post Trib Dispensationalism (which is the wackiest) Pre Trib Dispensationalism which is the one which is wide held in Pentecostal and Baptist circles.

Post trib is the wackiest? The one YOU believed yourself....before you came to the revelation that the second coming of Jesus and the resurrection of the dead, and the eternal judgement all occured in 70ad?

Somehow THATS our blessed hope? I dont hear many saints saying anything like "I am SO GLAD Jesus came and resurrected the dead and took his people to Heaven in 70ad!"

Or:

"I am SO GLAD the mystery of God was finished in 70ad!"

The preterists blessed hope is one they can never have. It doesn't apply to THEM.

That's what I would call "wacky"!

Evang.Benincasa
11-12-2018, 08:12 AM
Post trib is the wackiest? The one YOU believed yourself....before you came to the revelation that the second coming of Jesus and the resurrection of the dead, and the eternal judgement all occured in 70ad?

Somehow THATS our blessed hope? I dont hear many saints saying anything like "I am SO GLAD Jesus came and resurrected the dead and took his people to Heaven in 70ad!"

Or:

"I am SO GLAD the mystery of God was finished in 70ad!"

The preterists blessed hope is one they can never have. It doesn't apply to THEM.

That's what I would call "wacky"!


Mike you are messed up.

All post trib is not the same.

Therefore it goes down the line for all other eschatological theories.

Learn how to read, I mentioned “Dispensationalist post trib” being wacky.

Are you a dispensationalist?

Mr Mike Perfect Love Christian.

Good God in Zion

1ofthechosen
11-12-2018, 09:57 AM
Chosen,

You wrote your Pastor teaches neither pre, mid, or post. What DOES he teach?


A imminent return, stay full of the Holy Ghost. Keep your lamps trimmed and full of oil. Which as I showed was rooted deeply in the teaching of Jesus, Paul, Peter, James, Matthew, and Luke.

Yesterday he preached on "the attitude for the rapture generation." Never once did he mention a time table of events, but he dealt with what matters to keep your heart clean, "stay watchful, and ready for when you when you least expect it the Son of Man cometh." Mike this is what matters because in the end when it all is said and done Eschatology buffs are going to be wrong about more then what they were right about. So we follow the common thread in the teaching of Eschatology which is predominantly exactly what I showed. And we stay ready and watchful. And as long as we are in a church that is God's church and lead of the Spirit, if something is imminent we have Prophecy from God Almighty through different channels. Not only prophecy but also tongues and Interpretations, God will keep His church ready. We dont need Irvin Baxter, or Ken Raggio (specifically with Eschatology the rest of his teaching is sound), Ravi Zecharias, or anyone else when we have the glory of God in our midst.

Michael The Disciple
11-12-2018, 11:10 AM
Chosen

I think by using the term pre trib, mid trib, or post trib that we are going off the supposition that there is a term called “the great tribulation”. But since that term is not in the Bible that’s not even biblical language.

Thats funny, Jesus said:

Matt 24:15-22

15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) 16Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: 17Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 18Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 19And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 20But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: 21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Jesus was referencing the prophecy of Daniel the prophet.

Daniel 12:1

1And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

So yes the term and concept of the GREAT TRIBULATION of the time just before the coming of Jesus and the resurrection is sound Bible doctrine.

Michael The Disciple
11-12-2018, 11:31 AM
The only problem I have with all of that is, this in Matthew 24 is spanning 2 ages and times in history at once.

But you get this pre supposition from mens theories not from Jesus. The proof is that when Paul teaches on the EXACT SAME THING in 2 Thess 2 he connects the falling away and the man of sin (abomination of desolation) into the same time frame.

Note the wording in Matthew 24 is the very same as 2 Thess 2:1-5

Matt 24:29-31

29Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

2 Thess 2:1-5

1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

In both contexts Jesus and Paul we see:

a. The coming of Jesus
b. Our Gathering together to him.

Paul is teaching Jesus words out of Matt. 24.

He does not split up Jesus words to cover several ages. He speaks of the time JUST BEFORE the coming of Christ. That is his reason for writing 2 Thess is to remind the saints that the coming of Jesus is NOT IMMINENT.

It will not be imminent until the 2 things he is describing taken from Matt. 24 happen.

A falling away and the man of sin being revealed.

Michael The Disciple
11-12-2018, 11:45 AM
Now Jesus teaches of the imminent return more then anyone else. Just look at this passage from Luke 21:35-40 “Let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning; And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately. Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them. And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants. And this know, that if the goodman of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched, and not have suffered his house to be broken through.

This by no means prove your case. Why? What does Jesus mean when he speaks of WATCHING for his coming?

Luke 21:25-28


25And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 27And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.

How do we WATCH for the coming of Jesus? By watching THE SIGNS.

Jesus said when you see THESE THINGS come to pass lift up your heads.....for your REDEMPTION DRAWS NIGH.

Until the signs happen the day of redemption is not imminent.

1ofthechosen
11-12-2018, 11:48 AM
Thats funny, Jesus said:

Matt 24:15-22

15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) 16Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: 17Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 18Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 19And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 20But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: 21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Jesus was referencing the prophecy of Daniel the prophet.

Daniel 12:1

1And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

So yes the term and concept of the GREAT TRIBULATION of the time just before the coming of Jesus and the resurrection is sound Bible doctrine.


Mike what Jesus was speaking of in that passage happened 36 to 37 years later. That's not what you mean when you use the term "the great tribulation". And also that passge is to the Jews, there is no gentile verbage in the whole statement.

While honestly the passage could be talking about 70 A.D. and a future event because it definitely was referencing 70 A.D. because the Sabbath reference there is no gate to the city to be locked on the Sabbath in Jerusalem for almost 2000 years, it could be also spanning a future event I'll say that because of the last 2 verses. But it has no gentile verbage in any of it, and that doesn't deal with me and you.

1ofthechosen
11-12-2018, 12:02 PM
But you get this pre supposition from mens theories not from Jesus. The proof is that when Paul teaches on the EXACT SAME THING in 2 Thess 2 he connects the falling away and the man of sin (abomination of desolation) into the same time frame.

Note the wording in Matthew 24 is the very same as 2 Thess 2:1-5

Matt 24:29-31

29Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

2 Thess 2:1-5

1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

In both contexts Jesus and Paul we see:

a. The coming of Jesus
b. Our Gathering together to him.

Paul is teaching Jesus words out of Matt. 24.

He does not split up Jesus words to cover several ages. He speaks of the time JUST BEFORE the coming of Christ. That is his reason for writing 2 Thess is to remind the saints that the coming of Jesus is NOT IMMINENT.

It will not be imminent until the 2 things he is describing taken from Matt. 24 happen.

A falling away and the man of sin being revealed.


Bro 2 Thessalonians 2:2 is talking about a past event it says "That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ HAD COME". Mike I don't know when this was written but this was past tense even in the day of Paul. And verse 3 says "Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition." That whole line that says "that day shall not come" is in italics. What does that mean? Its a Interpretation which means it's added. So to build a doctrine off this one scripture when Paul is very clear in Chapter 4 and 5 of 1 Thessalonians of what shall happen is at best having tunnel vision.

The people that wrote this Bible had certain biases toward their Interpretation, sort of how you are reading it. Instead of looking at the text and forgetting all of that, and looking into it and saying what was the text saying to me.

Mike you said Paul "That is his reason for writing 2 Thess is to remind the saints that the coming of Jesus is NOT IMMINENT."

That's not what it was it was written to let them know "it hadn't already come, that it hadn't happened yet."

Amanah
11-12-2018, 12:12 PM
Chosen, do you agree that the bible is saying the rapture will not take place until the man of sin is revealed?

2 Thessalonians Chapter 2
1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

1ofthechosen
11-12-2018, 12:17 PM
This by no means prove your case. Why? What does Jesus mean when he speaks of WATCHING for his coming?

Luke 21:25-28


25And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 27And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.

How do we WATCH for the coming of Jesus? By watching THE SIGNS.

Jesus said when you see THESE THINGS come to pass lift up your heads.....for your REDEMPTION DRAWS NIGH.

Until the signs happen the day of redemption is not imminent.

What about the Parable of the ten virgins, The Sodom reference, the Noah reference so many more? "If the day cometh that no man can work", and they continue on in marriage and marrying until the Coming of the Lord, and 2 are grinding in a mill and one is taken and the other left then that sounds like work to me! Bro and what Jesus is saying in Luke 21 many of those things happened and in no way is He telling them a time table. Hes only telling them what will take place What's being said by verse 28 is "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." He's saying when things like this come to pass (importantly verse 10-24) don't lose heart all these things will come to pass.

And verse 25-26 I've seen in my lifetime and some even daily "And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; [26] Men's hearts failing them for p fear, and for q looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken."

1ofthechosen
11-12-2018, 12:31 PM
Chosen, do you agree that the bible is saying the rapture will not take place until the man of sin is revealed?

I mean I guess so? But at the same time who's even sure what that means. The man of sin couldve already been revealed. I can think of many candidates I mean Nero, Constantine, The Papalcy in itself fits some of that to me. And if you go through Catholic Church history there was a time where they led the whole world.

I mean to say that hasn't happened or even that the book of Revelation takes place in Chronological order I think is presupposition. I mean take Chapter 12:3-4 for instance verse 3 and 4 up to the colon took place between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 is the way I see it.

So I would agree wholeheartedly there but the presupposition that there is A term called the great Tribulation and that the rapture happens in pre post or mid I don't agree there. I mean what about Revelation 7 he still hasn't answered that. And the reason why is it can't be answered. Not and make sense with the rest of his claims.

I'm not saying my understanding is perfect but what I get from it is all I'm speaking of. There will be a coming of the Lord it is imminent closer then ever before watch and pray for at a hour when you least expect it the son of man cometh! So we should keep our lamps trimmed and full of oil, and I didn't get this from myself Jesus said so. That was the biggest part of His teaching on Eschatology, while he did give insight he didn't go into great detail.

I means this is the greatest doctrine to MTD, he drives a 150 miles round trip (maybe that's wrong, but pretty far) to go to a church that teaches post trib. So I know he is set in his understanding. I just see this as the whole of Eschatology I can wrap my mind around for sure, and I'm a 100 % sure that this isn't wrong. It's written out plain and simple for everyone to understand. While these Bible Writers did foreshadow things to come, the common thread in all of it is what I'm trying to relate. And belief that isn't built on that Jesus is soon to come, is going to cause people to be lost. Not MTD specifically, but many will be because of it. It relates to people "oh we still have time to sort all of this out, so I'll be ok." All I can say "if it's good enough for the Apostles it's good enough for me!"

Michael The Disciple
11-12-2018, 12:45 PM
Chosen

Then Peter and Paul both use this same verbage in their epistles. Just look at 1 Thessalonians 5:1-3 “But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.” Then we see Peter say in 2 Peter 3:10 “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” While what Peter and Paul are referencing are the day of the Lord, which is a different event altogether then the Coming of the Lord.

When Paul wrote of the day of the Lord it was referring to the coming of the Lord.

1 Thess. 5:1-4

1But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 2For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. 3For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. 4But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.

The day of the Lord refers to the day HE COMES as a thief. Right?

If you read back just 2 VERSES from verse 2 where Paul mentions the "day of the Lord"......then we find the context of COMING OF THE LORD.

1 Thess 4:15-18

15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Paul by no means separated the coming of the Lord and the day of the Lord into two things! He's obviously writing about the same event. There is only one verse between the two thoughts.

As to Peters writing.

Did he believe the coming of the Lord was distinct from the day of the Lord?

2 Peter 3:3-4

3Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4And saying, Where is the promise of his coming?

Verse 4 the apostle mentions HIS COMING. That is in reference to his coming for his people in context. Scoffers would be mocking that he would return.

Verse10

10But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

If Jesus is COMING like a thief in the night it must be that his coming is the same thing as the DAY OF THE LORD.

Peter saw the two as THE SAME DAY. Same as Paul.

The context in what Peter writes is obviously in a post...meaning AFTER the tribulation setting.

Peter affirms the "day of the Lord" is post tribulation in Acts 2:20

Acts 2:20

20The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:

So the day of the Lord comes like a thief when he comes for the saints.

From Peters teaching we can say "Let no one deceive you by any means, for that day (of the Lord) shall NOT COME until the sun is darkened and the moon turned to blood.

At that time.....the coming of the Lord will be imminent!

Peter says the day of the Lord happens AFTER the sun is darkened and the moon turned to blood.

Amanah
11-12-2018, 12:46 PM
Good points!

I mean I guess so? But at the same time who's even sure what that means. The man of sin couldve already been revealed. I can think of many candidates I mean Nero, Constantine, The Papalcy in itself fits some of that to me. And if you go through Catholic Church history there was a time where they led the whole world.

1ofthechosen
11-12-2018, 01:18 PM
When Paul wrote of the day of the Lord it was referring to the coming of the Lord.

1 Thess. 5:1-4


1But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 2For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. 3For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. 4But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.

The day of the Lord refers to the day HE COMES as a thief. Right?

If you read back just 2 VERSES from verse 2 where Paul mentions the "day of the Lord"......then we find the context of COMING OF THE LORD.

1 Thess 4:15-18

15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Paul by no means separated the coming of the Lord and the day of the Lord into two things! He's obviously writing about the same event. There is only one verse between the two thoughts.

As to Peters writing.

Did he believe the coming of the Lord was distinct from the day of the Lord?

2 Peter 3:3-4

3Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4And saying, Where is the promise of his coming?

Verse 4 the apostle mentions HIS COMING. That is in reference to his coming for his people in context. Scoffers would be mocking that he would return.

Verse10

10But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

If Jesus is COMING like a thief in the night it must be that his coming is the same thing as the DAY OF THE LORD.

Peter saw the two as THE SAME DAY. Same as Paul.

The context in what Peter writes is obviously in a post...meaning AFTER the tribulation setting.

Peter affirms the "day of the Lord" is post tribulation in Acts 2:20

Acts 2:20

20The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:

So the day of the Lord comes like a thief when he comes for the saints.

From Peters teaching we can say "Let no one deceive you by any means, for that day (of the Lord) shall NOT COME until the sun is darkened and the moon turned to blood.

At that time.....the coming of the Lord will be imminent!

Peter says the day of the Lord happens AFTER the sun is darkened and the moon turned to blood.

MTD the return of the Lord is imminent. All these things you are saying have to happen many 1probably have been fulfilled. 2 could happen all at one time within a space of minutes. Or hours, or days of one another. That doesn't change that it's imminent right now.

I can see what your saying about the Coming of the Lord and the Day of the Lord not being 2 different events, because I just threw that out there. Lol but you better get that nailed down across the board because it's about a 50/50 chance. I know this thought isn't authentic with me, so someone may ask you this again. But the answer you are giving is not definitely right, nor is it definitely wrong. Just something to consider. Different writers refer to the events as synonymous some refer to them as 2 different events. My bet is that there's something lost in translation there. Or even biased translation, I would dig into it but when it comes to this topic it just stresses me out. And I hate when I can't get a total grasp on something. Just as soon as I get one part of it down, I find something else and it wiggles out of my grasp. I find this subject for me to be like a dog chasing it's tail. So what I do is look for the common thread and go with that, to the best of my ability until God opens up my understanding. Or reveals it fully.

I have one question if we wouldn't go to a Trinitarian church, knowing that they are deceived and blinded; Why would we follow trinitatarians scholar philosophy on end things? You don't have to answer, it's just something to consider.

Esaias
11-12-2018, 02:46 PM
While everyone is arguing about the rapture, America is literally descending into open, unabashed, unconcealed banana republic style lawlessness.

Hope you guys are stocked up, cause it's gonna be a rough ride. Especially now that the Hildebeast is running in 2020. She'll likely "win" (thanks, Broward County!) and then Americans are gonna discover, like so many others have, exactly what communists are made of.

Way too many people just have no clue, whatsoever. I think a lot of folks will be debating eschatology in the gulags?

Michael The Disciple
11-12-2018, 04:05 PM
I have one question if we wouldn't go to a Trinitarian church, knowing that they are deceived and blinded; Why would we follow trinitatarians scholar philosophy on end things? You don't have to answer, it's just something to consider.

Good question. You will have to ask your pre trib and preterists friends why they are.

And what about Apostolics who attend Churches that are blind and deceived in other areas of doctrine? Why do they follow the Trins in immortal soul? Pagan holidays? Not to mention the second coming?

houston
11-12-2018, 04:16 PM
That might not be Partial Preterism

Maybe not, but it’s difficult for me to follow his posts.

houston
11-12-2018, 04:21 PM
Way too many people just have no clue, whatsoever. I think a lot of folks will be debating eschatology in the gulags?
No, no. They’ll be singing 🎤

ONCE LIKE A BIRD IN PRISON I DWELT

NO FREEDOM FROM MY SORROWS I FELT...

Michael The Disciple
11-12-2018, 04:23 PM
While everyone is arguing about the rapture, America is literally descending into open, unabashed, unconcealed banana republic style lawlessness.

It is being transformed into Mystery Babylon. The Republicans held power for the last 2 years. They did not drain the swamp. Churches in general (not all) do not witness to the lost. The kids coming out of school are trained to love communism and hate freedom.

Hope you guys are stocked up, cause it's gonna be a rough ride. Especially now that the Hildebeast is running in 2020. She'll likely "win" (thanks, Broward County!) and then Americans are gonna discover, like so many others have, exactly what communists are made of.

We have stocked up what we were able. Yes it's gonna get rough. Think Russia from 1916 forward. Thanks be to God he did deliver them after about 75 years. To many teachers think the end is right now, and that tops we in America may suffer 7 years. For all we know it may be much longer than that.

Way too many people just have no clue, whatsoever. I think a lot of folks will be debating eschatology in the gulags?

Probably so. But not because the truth is not out there. Most reject it, many are ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Evang.Benincasa
11-12-2018, 04:45 PM
I mean I guess so? But at the same time who's even sure what that means. The man of sin could have already been revealed. I can think of many candidates I mean Nero, Constantine, The Papacy in itself fits some of that to me. And if you go through Catholic Church history there was a time where they led the whole world.

That is refreshing.

The Lord bless you, your family, your church family and your pastor.

P.S. Eschatology is a funny thing, while some have it all figured out, they usually are unable to want to discuss where they have problems. What you see here is a brother answering his sister with the words "I guess so?" While others would of stood like a wall and threw something out there hoping it would stick. That's basically eschatology rodeo, which sadly goes longer than 8 seconds.

Michael The Disciple
11-12-2018, 05:12 PM
Mike what Jesus was speaking of in that passage happened 36 to 37 years later. That's not what you mean when you use the term "the great tribulation". And also that passge is to the Jews, there is no gentile verbage in the whole statement.

While honestly the passage could be talking about 70 A.D. and a future event because it definitely was referencing 70 A.D. because the Sabbath reference there is no gate to the city to be locked on the Sabbath in Jerusalem for almost 2000 years, it could be also spanning a future event I'll say that because of the last 2 verses. But it has no gentile verbage in any of it, and that doesn't deal with me and you.

Chosen remember that Jesus was referring to Daniel the prophet when he spoke of the great tribulation.

Dan. 12:1

1And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

You say this happened 36 years after Christ spoke these things? Also that these things dont deal with you and me? How about THE NEXT VERSE in Daniel?

Daniel 12:2

2And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Since this is THE NEXT VERSE after the verse about the great tribulation, are you SURE it does not deal with you?

Or do you think like Dom and others that the resurrection of the dead DID HAPPEN 36 years after Jesus gave us his end time doctrine in Matt. 24?

Evang.Benincasa
11-12-2018, 05:28 PM
It is being transformed into Mystery Babylon. The Republicans held power for the last 2 years. They did not drain the swamp. Churches in general (not all) do not witness to the lost. The kids coming out of school are trained to love communism and hate freedom.

Where's that found in the Bible? It is being transformed INTO Mystery Babylon? Hence meaning, that the book of Revelation couldn't possibly be ever understood by anyone living during the First Century. Matter of fact it couldn't be understood for 2,000 years. But the writer of the book places a warning curse of misinterpretation at its end. Maybe if you understood just a tad bit of history before 1974 you would see that all empires are born and collapse all the same way. As far as witnessing to the lost how on earth do you do that locked in your home?



We have stocked up what we were able. Yes it's gonna get rough.

Especially when the ravagers, and scavengers find where you live. Point to be noted, some strangers may knock on your door looking for gas, food, ammo, water, a dry place to sleep. But as my mother use to say to us kids as my father was stockpiling the bomb shelter. 'When it all hits the fan, I'm going to find all the ones who stock piled goodies, take everything they got." That was her philosophy. Did I personally believe my mom would do that? No doubt in my mind, she would of networked with some plebes and worked out strategy on how to ravage, and skavage. She told my father over and over that stockpiling was grocery shopping for those who would beat down your door, Both parents could use firearms well, but my mother understood that you just couldn't kill them all. Sooner or later someone would get the brilliant idea to burn you all out. When I was seven, I asked my mom, "how would you get someone out of the bomb shelter? She said, "find the ventilation system and pour carbon monoxide into it, or just cut it off completely. I would just shake my head, and sigh wow.


Think Russia from 1916 forward.

Ah 1916, merely two years after the great eschatological date of 1914.



Thanks be to God he did deliver them after about 75 years.

Delivered them to what? Mass baptisms in Jesus name, widespread Holy Ghost infillings? Funny how some eschatology view the word "deliverance" :heeheehee


To many teachers think the end is right now, and that tops we in America may suffer 7 years. For all we know it may be much longer than that.

So, the baby with the bloated stomach looks at America and says "what suffering?" I deal with a lot of people from third world countries and you see some eyes roll when an eschatologist claims AMERICA SUFFERING to be the indicator of the end. Har dee har har. One brother stood up in a meeting and told a clueless individual who was making the comment of an American Yankee Doodle Downturn to be a rapture indicator, "Get over yourself already!" This brother came from Haiti. He could tell you stories that would curl your hair. But that is the consensus pretty much from a lot of third worlders. I had an old brother who was from Uganda. He was there during the jump and stop of Idi Amin Dada, he would just lift an eyebrow when a born and raised mom's apple pie and baseball American would talk about the U.S. blues and say it was the end of the world.



Probably so. But not because the truth is not out there. Most reject it, many are ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Like you. :heeheehee

Evang.Benincasa
11-12-2018, 05:43 PM
While everyone is arguing about the rapture, America is literally descending into open, unabashed, unconcealed banana republic style lawlessness.

Hope you guys are stocked up, cause it's gonna be a rough ride. Especially now that the Hildebeast is running in 2020. She'll likely "win" (thanks, Broward County!) and then Americans are gonna discover, like so many others have, exactly what communists are made of.

Sorry, I had nothing to do with it. It was Brenda Snipes' fault. :heeheehee


Way too many people just have no clue, whatsoever. I think a lot of folks will be debating eschatology in the gulags?

Thank you my dear brother for once again hitting the nail firmly on the head. :thumbsup

Actually, they are looking forward to it. Hence the name Doomsday Cults.

Rome and other dictatorships control through fear. Therefore the dispensationalist's "God builds the sandcastle, and the devil kicks it over," works pretty well. Each newspaper paper warning becomes an edition to the Bible. The year 999 sent everyone in Western Europe in a frenzy, awaiting the end of the world. Selling off valuables, forgiving debts, setting prisoners free. But as the year 1,000 dawn as the new year, people were trying to get back valuables and collect on debts. Those prisoners had to be rounded up.
In 1833 Millerites became Miller's folly. But that didn't stop the true believers, they just revamped the program and Millennial Dawn was born with the Seventh Day Adventists. All with dates remanufactured and new neophyte followers.

Evang.Benincasa
11-12-2018, 05:48 PM
Why in a MTD thread we always end up posting about Eschatology?

Good grief. :heeheehee

houston
11-12-2018, 07:16 PM
Why in a MTD thread we always end up posting about Eschatology?

Good grief. :heeheehee

That is all he discusses.

Evang.Benincasa
11-12-2018, 07:56 PM
That is all he discusses.

The plight of a shut in?

Esaias
11-12-2018, 07:58 PM
Sorry, I had nothing to do with it. It was Brenda Snipes' fault. :heeheehee


lol This (county's) not your home, you're just a-passin' thru...

:thumbsup

Evang.Benincasa
11-12-2018, 07:59 PM
That is all he discusses.

Actually, he was very limited in the Eschatology section.

In one thread it got a little too hot for him so he wee wee weed all the way back to the main forum. Where he could discuss real issues like to beard or not to beard. Thimble deep, thimble...deep.

Evang.Benincasa
11-12-2018, 08:00 PM
lol This (county's) not your home, you're just a-passin' thru...

:thumbsup


Thank you Jesus!!!!

Evang.Benincasa
11-12-2018, 08:02 PM
This morning everyone at breakfast (all the crew meets for breakfast) we all were discussing Mrs Snipes and how she has been taken to court not once but three times for election tampering.

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-who-is-brenda-snipes-20181109-story.html

Esaias
11-12-2018, 08:05 PM
Chosen, thanks for mentioning the gates being shut on Sabbath. For some reason, that never occurred to me even though I am very familiar with the OT precedent from Nehemiah/Ezra.

Esaias
11-12-2018, 08:13 PM
The problem I see with a lot of eschatology, and doctrine/theology in general, is much of the presentation has no real practical benefit.

Futurism, the way it is usually presented, seems to just motivate people to essentially give up on raising a family and doing much of anything positive for the future of their community. Plus, it numbs people to be constantly told doom is right around the corner. Most futurists don't actually live like they really expect the tribulation to start any moment. They still go to work, shop, pay bills, etc. You'd think the way most of them talk they'd be out establishing survivalist caches in the Ozarks and living off grid or high tailing it the Caribbean or something. Instead they get immune to the doom porn and then nothing is capable of shocking them into actually doing something when it counts. Just like the secular doomer gloomers predicting the end of the world and "The Big Economic Crash That Will Bring In Mad Max Road Warrior Anarchy"™. They predict it every year but it's become such a regular staple of their lives they don't even believe it themselves anymore. So it seems, anyway.

Esaias
11-12-2018, 08:17 PM
The problem I see with a lot of eschatology, and doctrine/theology in general, is much of the presentation has no real practical benefit.

Futurism, the way it is usually presented, seems to just motivate people to essentially give up on raising a family and doing much of anything positive for the future of their community. Plus, it numbs people to be constantly told doom is right around the corner. Most futurists don't actually live like they really expect the tribulation to start any moment. They still go to work, shop, pay bills, etc. You'd think the way most of them talk they'd be out establishing survivalist caches in the Ozarks and living off grid or high tailing it the Caribbean or something. Instead they get immune to the doom porn and then nothing is capable of shocking them into actually doing something when it counts. Just like the secular doomer gloomers predicting the end of the world and "The Big Economic Crash That Will Bring In Mad Max Road Warrior Anarchy"™. They predict it every year but it's become such a regular staple of their lives they don't even believe it themselves anymore. So it seems, anyway.

And yes, I DID know some families back in the 90s, who were working together to build a retreat in the Arkansas mountains. They planned on hiding out for the seven years of the tribulation. No idea what happened to those folks. Might still be up in Arkansas for all I know.

Evang.Benincasa
11-12-2018, 08:59 PM
The problem I see with a lot of eschatology, and doctrine/theology in general, is much of the presentation has no real practical benefit.

Futurism, the way it is usually presented, seems to just motivate people to essentially give up on raising a family and doing much of anything positive for the future of their community. Plus, it numbs people to be constantly told doom is right around the corner. Most futurists don't actually live like they really expect the tribulation to start any moment. They still go to work, shop, pay bills, etc. You'd think the way most of them talk they'd be out establishing survivalist caches in the Ozarks and living off grid or high tailing it the Caribbean or something. Instead they get immune to the doom porn and then nothing is capable of shocking them into actually doing something when it counts. Just like the secular doomer gloomers predicting the end of the world and "The Big Economic Crash That Will Bring In Mad Max Road Warrior Anarchy"™. They predict it every year but it's become such a regular staple of their lives they don't even believe it themselves anymore. So it seems, anyway.

And yes, I DID know some families back in the 90s, who were working together to build a retreat in the Arkansas mountains. They planned on hiding out for the seven years of the tribulation. No idea what happened to those folks. Might still be up in Arkansas for all I know.


"The Big Economic Crash That Will Bring In Mad Max Road Warrior Anarchy"™. Yes, to some they become desensitized, some look forward to it with bated breath, and actually become disappointed when the nuclear holocaust doesn't come. :kickcan

houston
11-12-2018, 09:25 PM
The problem I see with a lot of eschatology, and doctrine/theology in general, is much of the presentation has no real practical benefit.

Futurism, the way it is usually presented, seems to just motivate people to essentially give up on raising a family and doing much of anything positive for the future of their community. Plus, it numbs people to be constantly told doom is right around the corner. Most futurists don't actually live like they really expect the tribulation to start any moment. They still go to work, shop, pay bills, etc. You'd think the way most of them talk they'd be out establishing survivalist caches in the Ozarks and living off grid or high tailing it the Caribbean or something. Instead they get immune to the doom porn and then nothing is capable of shocking them into actually doing something when it counts. Just like the secular doomer gloomers predicting the end of the world and "The Big Economic Crash That Will Bring In Mad Max Road Warrior Anarchy"™. They predict it every year but it's become such a regular staple of their lives they don't even believe it themselves anymore. So it seems, anyway.

Probably over 90% are pre trib.

1ofthechosen
11-12-2018, 11:08 PM
Chosen, thanks for mentioning the gates being shut on Sabbath. For some reason, that never occurred to me even though I am very familiar with the OT precedent from Nehemiah/Ezra.

That's not original with me EB said that one time on this thread when I posted Elder Marvin Treece "Road On the Rooftop". But it brought those passages to life to me and I knew it was right.

On that thread we all went round the same mulberry Bush with MTD. Kind of like if it's not turning the thread to focus on beards, it gets turned to talking about Post Trib, and if not that, he starts talking about God creating a image to create Him a throne. And then repeat..

1ofthechosen
11-12-2018, 11:13 PM
https://media.makeameme.org/created/mike-the-beard.jpg

1ofthechosen
11-12-2018, 11:18 PM
Good question. You will have to ask your pre trib and preterists friends why they are.

And what about Apostolics who attend Churches that are blind and deceived in other areas of doctrine? Why do they follow the Trins in immortal soul? Pagan holidays? Not to mention the second coming?

Apparently that hit a soft spot. Your right everyone of those are categories created by Trinitarian scholars, but so is Post Trib...

I could do without the pagan holidays, but this immortal soul you speak of just like your Eschatology you can't prove that one way or the other. So guess what, it's irrelevant.

1ofthechosen
11-13-2018, 09:55 AM
MTD something came to me at work today.

Since Matthew 24:15-21 says "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) [16] Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: [17] Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: [18] Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. [19] And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! [20] But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: [21] For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."

Ok if we know that Luke 21:20-24 A "when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed j with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. k [21] Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. [22] For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. [23] But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. [24] And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations."

Ok I say and I believe you can see this gives a Sabbath warning, which means they lock the gate. But that hasn't been for over close to 1900 years, and when was the last time that was possible? That's right before 70 A.D.

Ok how if that be true Mike there is a huge problem with your belief in this being a future event. Why? Because Luke 21:4 B "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." Because what this is saying until the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled it will always be like this. How do you reconcile that? Don't divert from this question here, I need to know.

Apostolic1ness
11-13-2018, 10:50 AM
MTD something came to me at work today.

Since Matthew 24:15-21 says "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) [16] Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: [17] Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: [18] Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. [19] And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! [20] But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: [21] For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."

Ok if we know that Luke 21:20-24 A "when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed j with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. k [21] Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. [22] For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. [23] But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. [24] And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations."

Ok I say and I believe you can see this gives a Sabbath warning, which means they lock the gate. But that hasn't been for over close to 1900 years, and when was the last time that was possible? That's right before 70 A.D.

Ok how if that be true Mike there is a huge problem with your belief in this being a future event. Why? Because Luke 21:4 B "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." Because what this is saying until the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled it will always be like this. How do you reconcile that? Don't divert from this question here, I need to know.

May need to define what it means "times of the gentiles be fulfilled" If it means the end of gentiles that will believe. then there is a problem with the 70 AD theory because gentiles still believe and Jerusalem is not trodden down of the gentiles, unless of course you believe the "Jews" that inhabit Israel are not Jews but impostor Gentiles. If thats the case...gentiles still are coming into the faith and the event spoken of is a past event and continues. If the Jews are the Jews in Israel then there will be another war and the events spoken of in Luke 21 are future events as long as gentiles are being saved (that is if thats what the time of the gentiles being fulfilled means).
IMO

1ofthechosen
11-13-2018, 11:30 AM
May need to define what it means "times of the gentiles be fulfilled" If it means the end of gentiles that will believe. then there is a problem with the 70 AD theory because gentiles still believe and Jerusalem is not trodden down of the gentiles, unless of course you believe the "Jews" that inhabit Israel are not Jews but impostor Gentiles. If thats the case...gentiles still are coming into the faith and the event spoken of is a past event and continues. If the Jews are the Jews in Israel then there will be another war and the events spoken of in Luke 21 are future events as long as gentiles are being saved (that is if thats what the time of the gentiles being fulfilled means).
IMO

Bro the Romans Trod it underfoot, and the Muslims built a dome of the Rock there on the temple mount (which I believe to be the Abomination of Desolation), that is not going anywhere until the full number of Gentiles are fulfilled as far as will be saved.
According to what Paul is speaking of in Romans Chapter 9-11.

There are Palestinians which are Gentiles in that part of the city and I believe the scripture is saying they will be.

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 11:34 AM
Where does it say there is a time when 100% of the Gentile population are void of believers?

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 11:38 AM
Bro the Romans Trod it underfoot, and the Muslims built a dome of the Rock there on the temple mount (which I believe to be the Abomination of Desolation), that is not going anywhere until the full number of Gentiles are fulfilled as far as will be saved.

There are Palestinians which are Gentiles in that part of the city and I believe the scripture is saying they will be.


The Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque was built when?

The Roman legions desecrated the temple mount completely. So much so, that you couldn't find the exact spot of the Holy place if you had a flashlight and a laser beam.

So, we have two abominations, one making desolate way before the second one?

Hey? What's the name of this thread? :heeheehee

Amanah
11-13-2018, 11:48 AM
we have multiple according to some

Methodist theologian Adam Clarke and Anglican bishop Thomas Newton interpret the abomination of desolation as a proverbial phrase that could include multiple events "substituted in the place of, or set up in opposition to, the ordinances of God, his worship, his truth, etc."This allows for some or all of the examples in the following (incomplete) list to be viewed as partial fulfillments of this prophecy simultaneously:

the re-dedication of the Temple to Zeus by Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167 BC,
the worship of the Roman Standards on the Temple Mount under Titus in 70 AD and
the building of the Dome of the Rock by the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan in 691 AD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abomination_of_desolation

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 11:56 AM
we have multiple according to some

Methodist theologian Adam Clarke and Anglican bishop Thomas Newton interpret the abomination of desolation as a proverbial phrase that could include multiple events "substituted in the place of, or set up in opposition to, the ordinances of God, his worship, his truth, etc."This allows for some or all of the examples in the following (incomplete) list to be viewed as partial fulfillments of this prophecy simultaneously:

the re-dedication of the Temple to Zeus by Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167 BC,
the worship of the Roman Standards on the Temple Mount under Titus in 70 AD and
the building of the Dome of the Rock by the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan in 691 AD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abomination_of_desolation

Jesus was referring to one event in particular which THEY could look back on in THEIR history. Not ours. Because, He was speaking to...THEM. Judeans, the actual covenant people who were currently the ones He cursed with His saying of gathering them under His wing, but they refused. They, those guys, the ones He gives a scathing rebuke in Matthew 23. Hmm, let;s see what they would remember by reading Daniel the prophet? They would remember, Babylonian captivity, the head of gold. Where were they currently? The feet of potter's clay (Judeans) with Iron the hated Roman occupiers. Two things that just won't go together. Oh, they tried, they killed Jesus clay and Iron and became friends (Pontius and Herod) the priests (we have no other King but Caesar) But Jesus warns them that the temple and the city will be wiped out. Greater than the time Nebuchadnezzar did it.

Apostolic1ness
11-13-2018, 12:18 PM
Where does it say there is a time when 100% of the Gentile population are void of believers?

rev 18:23

Apostolic1ness
11-13-2018, 12:25 PM
Bro the Romans Trod it underfoot, and the Muslims built a dome of the Rock there on the temple mount (which I believe to be the Abomination of Desolation), that is not going anywhere until the full number of Gentiles are fulfilled as far as will be saved.
According to what Paul is speaking of in Romans Chapter 9-11.

There are Palestinians which are Gentiles in that part of the city and I believe the scripture is saying they will be.

What is "the time of the gentiles"?
To what group of people the voice from heaven speaking to in REV 18:4 and is this before or after the great tribulation?

1ofthechosen
11-13-2018, 12:26 PM
The Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque was built when?

The Roman legions desecrated the temple mount completely. So much so, that you couldn't find the exact spot of the Holy place if you had a flashlight and a laser beam.

So, we have two abominations, one making desolate way before the second one?

Hey? What's the name of this thread? :heeheehee


It was built 691 AD.

1ofthechosen
11-13-2018, 12:27 PM
What is "the time of the gentiles"?
To what group of people the voice from heaven speaking to in REV 18:4 and is this before or after the great tribulation?


There is no great tribulation. Thats the Jews.

Apostolic1ness
11-13-2018, 12:37 PM
There is no great tribulation. Thats the Jews.

Matthew 24 are you and EB saying this has taken place?

Also to which group was the voice speaking to in REV 18:4

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 12:45 PM
It was built 691 AD.

When Abd al-Malik ibn Marwān built it, what Judean Temple did he tare down?
What inhabitants of Jerusalem did he capture, enslave, or send off to the four corners of the world? keep in mind that Jesus is relaying the information to "remind" the original covenant keeping Judeans and Israelis about the first time their temple was sacked. It wasn't a good situation, but this time it would make the previous time look like a weekend of light relaxation. It would be the greatest destruction ever to come upon them, upon those who were currently born into families who were covenant keepers, whose great grandfather taught by his great grandfather, how to get around God's law and teach it to their offspring. Heaping up their sins until they reached the nostrils of God.

In 691 A.D. there wasn't any of that going on.

Oh, by the way, a Roman Caesar (Hadrian) also built a temple to Jupiter so you can add that to the list.

1ofthechosen
11-13-2018, 12:52 PM
Matthew 24 are you and EB saying this has taken place?

Also to which group was the voice speaking to in REV 18:4

That's speaking about the Jews (maybe not, because I see that as speaking of a false church. Even seems to be speaking of the Catholic church if you ask me. So don't really know.) in Revelation 18. I can't say all of Matthew 24 has taken place but this all did get fulfilled in 70 A.D. especially of the prophecy He gave to the Apostles. Otherwise explain the Sabbath day reference, they can't lock the gates so that reference is irrelevant in future context.

Amanah
11-13-2018, 12:53 PM
AD 70

24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.

2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

" And as for those that are already dead in the war, it is reasonable we should esteem them blessed, for they are dead in defending, and not in betraying their liberty; but as to the multitude of those that are now under the Romans, who would not pity their condition? and who would not make haste to die, before he would suffer the same miseries with them? Some of them have been put upon the rack, and tortured with fire and whippings, and so died. Some have been half devoured by wild beasts, and yet have been reserved alive to be devoured by them a second time, in order to afford laughter and sport to our enemies; and such of those as are alive still are to be looked on as the most miserable, who, being so desirous of death, could not come at it. And where is now that great city, the metropolis of the Jewish nation, which vas fortified by so many walls round about, which had so many fortresses and large towers to defend it, which could hardly contain the instruments prepared for the war, and which had so many ten thousands of men to fight for it? Where is this city that was believed to have God himself inhabiting therein? It is now demolished to the very foundations, and hath nothing but that monument of it preserved, I mean the camp of those that hath destroyed it, which still dwells upon its ruins; some unfortunate old men also lie upon the ashes of the temple, and a few women are there preserved alive by the enemy, for our bitter shame and reproach. Now who is there that revolves these things in his mind, and yet is able to bear the sight of the sun, though he might live out of danger? Who is there so much his country's enemy, or so unmanly, and so desirous of living, as not to repent that he is still alive? And I cannot but wish that we had all died before we had seen that holy city demolished by the hands of our enemies, or the foundations of our holy temple dug up after so profane a manner. " - Josephus, The Wars Of The Jews, Book VII, Chapter 8, Section 7. The text is quoted from the The Works of Flavius Josephus, translated by William Whiston.



http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/e30.htm

Michael The Disciple
11-13-2018, 01:45 PM
https://media.makeameme.org/created/mike-the-beard.jpg

Mike turns the other cheek:smack

And says, Bless him Lord.

1ofthechosen
11-13-2018, 01:55 PM
Mike turns the other cheek:smack

And says, Bless him Lord.


Lol it was just a joke my bad bro. Just thought it was funny.

Michael The Disciple
11-13-2018, 01:59 PM
Lol it was just a joke my bad bro. Just thought it was funny.

Peace and love.

Michael The Disciple
11-13-2018, 02:12 PM
Chosen

Ok I say and I believe you can see this gives a Sabbath warning, which means they lock the gate. But that hasn't been for over close to 1900 years, and when was the last time that was possible? That's right before 70 A.D.

So do you agree with Dom that Jesus came for his people before or in 70ad? If the prophecy of Matt 24 ONLY was for the Jews of that generation doesnt that mean Jesus should have come at that time and gathered together his elect?

At least Dom is consistent. If Matthew 24 is only for THAT GENERATION of Jews the "rapture" should have taken place immediately after the great tribulation of those days.

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 02:21 PM
So do you agree with Dom that Jesus came for his people before or in 70ad? If the prophecy of Matt 24 ONLY was for the Jews of that generation doesnt that mean Jesus should have come at that time and gathered together his elect?

At least Dom is consistent. If Matthew 24 is only for THAT GENERATION of Jews the "rapture" should have taken place immediately after the great tribulation of those days.

If Mike was consistent he would speak English instead of taking Latin words to create a doctrine. :lol

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 02:23 PM
Mike stop putting words in my mouth.
I corrected you a few times concerning this, and your cheeks are going to get turned.

Peace and love, yeah coming from Mr Passive Aggresive. :lol

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 02:26 PM
What was this thread about?

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 02:29 PM
Hey! I have a great idea, let’s talk about something important! How shaving stops churches from having revival. How wearing rope sandals and having church online brings revival. :)

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 02:32 PM
This thread was about Oneness being 90% Pre Tribulation Rapture Pre Millenial Dispensationalist!!!! :yahoo

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 04:52 PM
That's speaking about the Jews (maybe not, because I see that as speaking of a false church. Even seems to be speaking of the Catholic church if you ask me. So don't really know.) in Revelation 18. I can't say all of Matthew 24 has taken place but this all did get fulfilled in 70 A.D. especially of the prophecy He gave to the Apostles. Otherwise explain the Sabbath day reference, they can't lock the gates so that reference is irrelevant in future context.


https://thumbs.gfycat.com/MealyRaggedAss-size_restricted.gif

1ofthechosen
11-13-2018, 06:28 PM
Hey! I have a great idea, let’s talk about something important! How shaving stops churches from having revival. How wearing rope sandals and having church online brings revival. :)

Lol

1ofthechosen
11-13-2018, 06:32 PM
So do you agree with Dom that Jesus came for his people before or in 70ad? If the prophecy of Matt 24 ONLY was for the Jews of that generation doesnt that mean Jesus should have come at that time and gathered together his elect?

At least Dom is consistent. If Matthew 24 is only for THAT GENERATION of Jews the "rapture" should have taken place immediately after the great tribulation of those days.

Your missing the point Matthew 24 does reference the coming of the Lord, although the whole of it is not talking about it at all. You have tried to make that passage out to say something it doesnt, all because preconceived notions.

No one I have ever heard of has ever said that we missed the coming of the Lord already so Mike will you please answer my post. I've neevr heard one person ever say the coming of the Lord already happened, not in tbe context your saying it.

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 06:36 PM
Yes, since we are so far off topic on this thread we can post about sober issues. Like weaving baskets for the Great Tribulation. Watching old Bob Ross (https://www.orientaltrading.com/bob-ross-stand-up-a2-13793755.fltr?sku=13793755&BP=PS544&ms=search&source=google&cm_mmc=GooglePLA-_-1338193093-_-53413208094-_-13793755&cm_mmca1=OTC%2BPLAs&cm_mmca2=GooglePLAs&cm_mmca3=PS544&cm_mmca4=FS39&cm_mmca5=Shopping&cm_mmca6=PLAs&cm_mmc10=Shopping&cm_mmca11=13793755&cm_mmca12=Bob-Ross-Stand-Up&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIx-S_4d7S3gIVkIjICh1QLwHXEAYYASABEgIVd_D_BwE) videos to learn how to paint Clarence Larkin Charts with really fluffy clouds and the Nebuchadnezzar image with those 2,000 years and counting really long toes.

Evang.Benincasa
11-13-2018, 06:38 PM
Hey Mike....










































































































https://media1.tenor.com/images/5fd80b3982e407585a275117a55dd029/tenor.gif?itemid=11271677

mfblume
11-13-2018, 07:35 PM
Yes, since we are so far off topic on this thread we can post about sober issues. Like weaving baskets for the Great Tribulation. Watching old Bob Ross (https://www.orientaltrading.com/bob-ross-stand-up-a2-13793755.fltr?sku=13793755&BP=PS544&ms=search&source=google&cm_mmc=GooglePLA-_-1338193093-_-53413208094-_-13793755&cm_mmca1=OTC%2BPLAs&cm_mmca2=GooglePLAs&cm_mmca3=PS544&cm_mmca4=FS39&cm_mmca5=Shopping&cm_mmca6=PLAs&cm_mmc10=Shopping&cm_mmca11=13793755&cm_mmca12=Bob-Ross-Stand-Up&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIx-S_4d7S3gIVkIjICh1QLwHXEAYYASABEgIVd_D_BwE) videos to learn how to paint Clarence Larkin Charts with really fluffy clouds and the Nebuchadnezzar image with those 2,000 years and counting really long toes.

Hahahaha!

Michael The Disciple
11-13-2018, 10:27 PM
Your missing the point Matthew 24 does reference the coming of the Lord, although the whole of it is not talking about it at all. You have tried to make that passage out to say something it doesnt, all because preconceived notions.

No one I have ever heard of has ever said that we missed the coming of the Lord already so Mike will you please answer my post. I've neevr heard one person ever say the coming of the Lord already happened, not in tbe context your saying it.

Well what context HAVE you heard then? If it did not include the coming of Jesus, the resurrection of the dead and the eternal judgement you have never heard the doctrine of preterism as believed by Dom.

preterist.org

“Preterist” means past in fulfillment, and “Futurist” means future in fulfillment. Preterist basically means the opposite of Futurist. Futurists believe most end-time prophecies (especially the big three events — the Second Coming, Resurrection, and Judgment) are yet to be fulfilled. Preterists believe that most or all of Bible Prophecy (especially the big three events) has already been fulfilled in Christ and the on-going expansion of His Eternal Kingdom.

Ask Dom if he believes the big 3 have already happened.

Second coming, resurrection, and judgement.

But maybe he would be ashamed to admit to believing such a thing. He seems to always deflect by way of personal attack.

Scott Pitta
11-13-2018, 11:14 PM
I don't think much of eschatology, but I do find those old prophecy charts to be fascinating. They are both an educational tool and art.

A book full of nothing but charts would be something I would find irresistible.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 05:06 AM
Well what context HAVE you heard then? If it did not include the coming of Jesus, the resurrection of the dead and the eternal judgement you have never heard the doctrine of preterism as believed by Dom.

preterist.org



Ask Dom if he believes the big 3 have already happened.

Second coming, resurrection, and judgement.

But maybe he would be ashamed to admit to believing such a thing. He seems to always deflect by way of personal attack.

Mike I have stated my beliefs on this forum from the very time Jim Yohe invited me to come to FCF for the SOLE purpose. Brother Michael Blume can vouch for me that I had done it back then, and to this day posters can search the eschatology forum and find a huge amount of my postings on THE BIG THREE EXPLAINED. Me going back and forth with Brothers LeDeay and Wiltcher, in detail. Yet, I started a thread in the eschatology section with just a few points of your customized Dispensationalist Post Trib beliefs. You refused, and when you finally came around you didn’t want to be questioned. Shame? That’s you Mike, and your personal fabricated hybrid you call Post Trib. My posts can still be found where I asked you to answer my questions. Teach me, spoon feed me. Hey, I’m wrong Mike, I’m shameful, but you are in perfect truth in everything, especially in eschatology. So, I should be asking you the questions “teacher.”

But my request is ignored?

You knew me when I was Post Trib, and when I discussed my findings you called me a PRETERIST and blew me off. Adios Dom, you heretic. You went from friend to talk to the hand fellowship. Religious self righteous jerk. I even apologized to you years later for slamming you on different posts only to find that apologies to you mean nothing because of your passive aggressiveness. Peace and love through gritted teeth? Good grief. You see Mike, people like me aren’t worth the time, to help in the very beginning of their findings. They are shut down like Charlie Brown by his teacher. Mike, personal attacks? What by pointing out your religious Zombisisms. How you walked around in wearing a burlap bag shirt to WITNESS? How you coerced a Fort Lauderdale housewife from South Florida to your house in Kentucky to baptize her in the name of Yeshua in your Jacuzzi? If I were her husband you would of got baptized that day.

Shame?

Seriously?

Mike, answer my questions, if I’m so screwed up YOUR truth should set me free?

So let’s start over answer my questions. :)

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 06:41 AM
What is the topic of this thread?

Oneness And Pre Tribulation Logos?

Oneness And the Pre Incarnate Beard?

Oneness And the Pre Gillette Razor?

Apostolic1ness
11-14-2018, 06:48 AM
What is the topic of this thread?

Oneness And Pre Tribulation Logos?

Oneness And the Pre Incarnate Beard?

Oneness And the Pre Gillette Razor?

I'll take Oneness and Pre Wrath Resurrection for a thousand Alex.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 06:52 AM
I'll take Oneness and Pre Wrath Resurrection for a thousand Alex.

:D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY7SBxVKo_Q&ab_channel=Only1trueGOD

Michael The Disciple
11-14-2018, 06:57 AM
Mike I have stated my beliefs on this forum from the very time Jim Yohe invited me to come to FCF for the SOLE purpose. Brother Michael Blume can vouch for me that I had done it back then, and to this day posters can search the eschatology forum and find a huge amount of my postings on THE BIG THREE EXPLAINED. Me going back and forth with Brothers LeDeay and Wiltcher, in detail.

Ok then its all their to be seen by anyone who wants more detail. In the meantime there's nothing wrong with me posting in general what the big three, (second coming, resurrection, judgement) means according to the preterist.org site.

You knew me when I was Post Trib, and when I discussed my findings you called me a PRETERIST and blew me off. Adios Dom, you heretic.

Hey Dom, lets get real here. I dont know which of these is true. Either you have a very bad memory, or you make things up. First off when we met on Paltalk I was glad. When I asked about your beliefs you told me we agreed on post trib, soul sleep, and annihilation.

The only thing we disagreed on was the dress code. But at no point in time when you were on Paltalk did you approach me asking questions about your new findings. I only discovered you had changed your beliefs when I found out on one of these Apostolic Forums. So what you just stated in the above quote is not the truth.

Religious self righteous jerk. I even apologized to you years later for slamming you on different posts only to find that apologies to you mean nothing because of your passive aggressiveness. Peace and love through gritted teeth?

I also apologized to you Dom. But your apology was short lived. It is a well known fact on this forum how you attack and try to bully people. I cant think of another Apostolic believer who is this mean to people.

Good grief. You see Mike, people like me aren’t worth the time, to help in the very beginning of their findings. They are shut down like Charlie Brown by his teacher. Mike, personal attacks? What by pointing out your religious Zombisisms.

You just cant stop yourself can you? "Zombisims"? I have put plenty of teaching on this forum over the years. Its there if one were serious to hear it.

How you walked around in wearing a burlap bag shirt to WITNESS? How you coerced a Fort Lauderdale housewife from South Florida to your house in Kentucky to baptize her in the name of Yeshua in your Jacuzzi? If I were her husband you would of got baptized that day.

Greater men than me have witnessed in sackcloth before me. Greater men will do it after me.

As far as the dear Sister in Florida, again your memory seems to have failed you.

My WIFE and I met her, at her request in Oneida Tennessee to baptize her in the name that she said the Lord specifically told her to be baptized in. I was happy to do this. This was not at my house, I dont have a Jacuzzi. Not even the same state.

Later on she came and stayed a few days with us. Then MY WIFE went to Florida and stayed for a week with her AND HER HUSBAND where she was treated very well.

You tried this before on one of the forums years ago. I remember it quite well.

I do care for you Dom. Many times I have turned the other cheek and tried to move on. Not that I respect preterism. No. But just peradventure the Dom I met that day on Paltalk awaken and come back to the truth.

1ofthechosen
11-14-2018, 07:02 AM
Well what context HAVE you heard then? If it did not include the coming of Jesus, the resurrection of the dead and the eternal judgement you have never heard the doctrine of preterism as believed by Dom.

preterist.org



Ask Dom if he believes the big 3 have already happened.

Second coming, resurrection, and judgement.

But maybe he would be ashamed to admit to believing such a thing. He seems to always deflect by way of personal attack.


So EB is this right? I know do Mike's bias and viewpoint of his Eschatology Theology philosophy he has total tunnel vision on this subject. Could you please start a thread and talk about in detail what you do believe here?

Because when it comes to Eschatology I find that every viewpoint has some validity. Now I've yet to see one that was right all the way, but somewhere between all these extremes is the truth. I just believe as humans in Western thought we get caught up in the extremes. I know we believe the same on the nature of God, soteriology (which If that differs we don't believe in the same God nor could we say we did), so as I've stated many times Eschatology as long as your staying full of the Holy Ghost and living a life holy unto God doesn't really matter anyway. All these Eschatology buffs are oneday going to be painfully wrong. But I am interested so could you please do that, if nothing else there is something I can glean from it.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 07:30 AM
Ok then its all their to be seen by anyone who wants more detail. In the meantime there's nothing wrong with me posting in general what the big three, (second coming, resurrection, judgement) means according to the preterist.org site.

Mike, the point is YOU won't answer THE questions? You are very sketchy in that area.



Hey Dom, lets get real here. I dont know which of these is true. Either you have a very bad memory, or you make things up. First off when we met on Paltalk I was glad. When I asked about your beliefs you told me we agreed on post trib, soul sleep, and annihilation.

Mike, I have a great memory, and you cut me off with one word "Preterist."



The only thing we disagreed on was the dress code. But at no point in time when you were on Paltalk did you approach me asking questions about your new findings. I only discovered you had changed your beliefs when I found out on one of these Apostolic Forums. So what you just stated in the above quote is not the truth.

Mike, you have the bad memory, Mike, it was on Paltalk, we were having a discussion on Israel, Matthew 24, Luke 21, and Mark 13. You didn't find out on FCF. You made your decision on Paltalk. You need to get real.




I also apologized to you Dom. But your apology was short lived.

Mike, sorry becomes a sorry word when the person you are dealing with keeps coming after you. Mike, you are passive aggressive. You don't want to help anyone but house wives.



It is a well known fact on this forum how you attack and try to bully people. I cant think of another Apostolic believer who is this mean to people.

Mike, there are those who love me and hate me. Perception is everything, and a man's own perception is his reality. It is like politics, some believe the president, and others see the same guy as a lair. People will always choose their own dog in a fight. While others will agree with you are usually those I've taken a chunk out of their rear end. But, it was never unwarranted. You want to play Mr Peace and Love, when you are no different, you just do it in another way. Wake up.




You just cant stop yourself can you?

The same could be said of you. If I am so screwed up, answer my questions?
Instead of poking me with a sharp stick.




"Zombisims"? I have put plenty of teaching on this forum over the years. Its there if one were serious to hear it.

Really? Where is all the eschatology? Mike you say two words more than peace and love. Post Trib, Post trib, Post Trib. Brother Wiltcher and Brother James LeDeay believe in Pre tribulation rapture and painted the entire eschatology forum with what they believe. You? How much have you posted there? Answer my questions, I'm the shameful one, I'm a messed up individual looking for redemption, and YOU have the answers!




Greater men than me have witnessed in sackcloth before me. Greater men will do it after me.

Name people in the New Testament who were APOSTLES who witnessed in a BURLAP BAG SHIRT. Mike, you are a religious hippy. :heeheehee




As far as the dear Sister in Florida, again your memory seems to have failed you.

No, memory serves quite well. She was coming to the Davie Church and I got to hear all angles.



My WIFE and I met her, at her request in Oneida Tennessee to baptize her in the name that she said the Lord specifically told her to be baptized in. I was happy to do this. This was not at my house, I dont have a Jacuzzi. Not even the same state.

Later on she came and stayed a few days with us. Then MY WIFE went to Florida and stayed for a week with her AND HER HUSBAND where she was treated very well.

Story seems to change over the years. Since I continued to bring it up. From what I got her husband wasn't so cute on her religious views. You baptized her without her husband? Why Mike? Usually their a reason for those happenings.



You tried this before on one of the forums years ago. I remember it quite well.

Then you should keep those posts handy to remember what you posted.



I do care for you Dom. Many times I have turned the other cheek and tried to move on. Not that I respect preterism. No. But just peradventure the Dom I met that day on Paltalk awaken and come back to the truth.

What? Mike, how horrible. The time on PalTalk was the time, are you that religiously blind? It was in the beginning, fresh. That was the prime time to slow down the wheels. ANSWER the questions, which I had. Brother Blume (Partial Preterist), Brother William Chalfant (Pre Tribulation Dispensationalist) Michael Brigmond (Post tribulation Rapture Historical Pre Millennium) were some of the men who took their time to go back and forth with me. No Mike, you are typically religious you say the words that all religious people are expected to say, peace and love, I really love you but hate your beliefs, I care about you. But start to burn you with ecclesiastical lit cigarettes, yet, killing you softly with passive aggressive behavior. Or use the title of your certain eschatology as if I was black and the title was the N word.

Mike, if you cared you would of allowed me to ask the questions, and you would of carpeted the eschatology forum just like you somether this place with your beard fetish.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 07:33 AM
So EB is this right? I know do Mike's bias and viewpoint of his Eschatology Theology philosophy he has total tunnel vision on this subject. Could you please start a thread and talk about in detail what you do believe here?

Because when it comes to Eschatology I find that every viewpoint has some validity. Now I've yet to see one that was right all the way, but somewhere between all these extremes is the truth. I just believe as humans in Western thought we get caught up in the extremes. I know we believe the same on the nature of God, soteriology (which If that differs we don't believe in the same God nor could we say we did), so as I've stated many times Eschatology as long as your staying full of the Holy Ghost and living a life holy unto God doesn't really matter anyway. All these Eschatology buffs are oneday going to be painfully wrong. But I am interested so could you please do that, if nothing else there is something I can glean from it.

Go to the eschatology section and read everything I posted. By the time you are done. You will know everything I believe. From the original languages of the Bible and New Testament to the Big Three. But, ask your PASTOR first.

1ofthechosen
11-14-2018, 09:04 AM
Mike the verse of the day on my app. Which is funny cuz I left this out the otherdat

Mark 13:35-37 "Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when THE MASTER OF THE HOUSE COMETH, AT EVEN, OR AT MIDNIGHT, or AT THE COCKCROWING, OR IN THE MORNING: [36] Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. [37] And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch."

Look it over good MTD especially that which is capitalized that is saying any time if not why all the references of different time periods? Food for thought..

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 09:17 AM
Mike the verse of the day on my app. Which is funny cuz I left this out the otherdat

Mark 13:35-37 "Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when THE MASTER OF THE HOUSE COMETH, AT EVEN, OR AT MIDNIGHT, or AT THE COCKCROWING, OR IN THE MORNING: [36] Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. [37] And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch."

Look it over good MTD especially that which is capitalized that is saying any time if not why all the references of different time periods? Food for thought..

Matthew 21:33-46 King James Version (KJV)
33 Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country:

34 And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it.

35 And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.

36 Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.

37 But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.

38 But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.

39 And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.

40 When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen?

41 They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.

42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

44 And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.

45 And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.

46 But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet.

Michael The Disciple
11-14-2018, 10:06 AM
Mike the verse of the day on my app. Which is funny cuz I left this out the otherdat

Mark 13:35-37 "Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when THE MASTER OF THE HOUSE COMETH, AT EVEN, OR AT MIDNIGHT, or AT THE COCKCROWING, OR IN THE MORNING: [36] Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. [37] And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch."

Look it over good MTD especially that which is capitalized that is saying any time if not why all the references of different time periods? Food for thought..

Chosen,

Please dont forget the context in Mark 13. From verses 5-27 The Lord tells the signs that will PRECEDE his coming.

Then Jesus says:

28Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near: 29So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.

He now tells them when these things come to pass...THEN....the time is near. See? THEN the time is near.

He was by no means saying it is IMMINENT right now.

He was saying AFTER THE SIGNS HAPPEN.....then his coming is imminent! Then WATCH for his coming.

Then when he says:

Mark 5:32

32But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

What DAY AND HOUR IS HE TALKING ABOUT?

Count back just 4 verses. Your eyes will be opened.

The day and hour he speaks of is his coming to gather together his elect that he was just describing 4 verses earlier!


The coming that is immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 10:08 AM
Chosen,

Please dont forget the context in Mark 13. From verses 5-27 The Lord tells the signs that will PRECEDE his coming.

Then Jesus says:

28Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near: 29So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.

He now tells them when these things come to pass...THEN....the time is near. See? THEN the time is near.

He was by no means saying it is IMMINENT right now.

He was saying AFTER THE SIGNS HAPPEN.....then his coming is imminent! Then WATCH for his coming.

Then when he says:

Mark 5:32

32But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

What DAY AND HOUR IS HE TALKING ABOUT?

Count back just 4 verses. Your eyes will be opened.

The day and hour he speaks of is his coming to gather together his elect that he was just describing 4 verses earlier!

:highfive

Who or what does the fig tree represent?

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 10:14 AM
Matthew 24:32-35

Now learn a parable from the fig-tree. When her branch is now become tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that the summer is nigh. So also ye, when ye see ALL THESE THINGS, know that it is nigh, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, THIS GENERATION SHALL NOT PASS AWAY TILL ALL THESE THINGS BE ACCOMPLISHED. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away

Michael The Disciple
11-14-2018, 10:27 AM
Who or what does the fig tree represent?

It does not represent anything. He is just saying when a fig tree puts forth leaves the time of the fruit is near.

In the same way, when all these things happen his coming is near.

Simple.

1ofthechosen
11-14-2018, 10:29 AM
Chosen,

Please dont forget the context in Mark 13. From verses 5-27 The Lord tells the signs that will PRECEDE his coming.
Ok ok o
Then Jesus says:

28Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near: 29So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.

He now tells them when these things come to pass...THEN....the time is near. See? THEN the time is near.

He was by no means saying it is IMMINENT right now.

He was saying AFTER THE SIGNS HAPPEN.....then his coming is imminent! Then WATCH for his coming.

Then when he says:

Mark 5:32

32But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

What DAY AND HOUR IS HE TALKING ABOUT?

Count back just 4 verses. Your eyes will be opened.

The day and hour he speaks of is his coming to gather together his elect that he was just describing 4 verses earlier!


The coming that is immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days.

When He speaks to the Apostles In Luke 21:12-16 "before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake. [13] And it shall turn to you for a testimony. [14] Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before what ye shall answer: [15] For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist. [16] And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death." Since this is the same thing just another writer, and He talks about the encamoing of Israel and the fall of the Temple. And in Matthew 24:21-22 "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. [22] And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's h sake those days shall be shortened." There is your great tribulation it's exactly what you read about what happened to the Apostles. Even the man of sin, could be position and a succession that already came to be. That could be getting worse.

Now in that context Mark 13:28-29 then this could be imminent correct?"Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near: [29] So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors." Do you agree? Not that I'm right, but if what I'm saying would be correct under those circumstances would His coming be near? And by definition of what I said that would be a Post Tribulation rapture

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 10:30 AM
A generation, keep in mind that a generation would have to be associated with one found in the Bible. Like the group He is addressing would instantly understand what HE is talking about and referring to. Like the wilderness journey they wander around in. Numbers 14:34 they were given forty years to wander according to their rebellion in not holding faith with God. Therefore they understood the meaning of a generation which sinned. Also, lets take the Greek meaning of γενεά which has to do with genealogy, birth, same lineage in a family. Hence no one living could measure up to the genealogy standards found in the Ezra 2:59-62. By the Bar Kokhba uprising the men fighting with the Bar Kokhba were so Hellenized they couldn't read the war messages in Aramaic, but had to have them all written in Greek. Lineages of even the Talmudic rabbis can no longer be traced to anyone living today. While some say they can, they have huge gaps in their genealogy. Because the Bible itself has large gaps in Genealogy only wanting to showcase the most important people that the group would remember or recognize. They're not here right? No one can find them? So, who is the generation?

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 10:32 AM
It does not represent anything. He is just saying when a fig tree puts forth leaves the time of the fruit is near.

In the same way, when all these things happen his coming is near.

Simple.

So when Jesus curses the fig tree it was because he hated figs?

1ofthechosen
11-14-2018, 10:38 AM
A generation, keep in mind that a generation would have to be associated with one found in the Bible. Like the group He is addressing would instantly understand what HE is talking about and referring to. Like the wilderness journey they wander around in. Numbers 14:34 they were given forty years to wander according to their rebellion in not holding faith with God. Therefore they understood the meaning of a generation which sinned. Also, lets take the Greek meaning of γενεά which has to do with genealogy, birth, same lineage in a family. Hence no one living could measure up to the genealogy standards found in the Ezra 2:59-62. By the Bar Kokhba uprising the men fighting with the Bar Kokhba were so Hellenized they could read the war messages in Aramaic, but had to have them all written in Greek. Lineages of even the Talmudic rabbis can no longer be traced to anyone living today. While some say they can, they have huge gaps in their genealogy. Because the Bible itself has large gaps in Genealogy only wanting to showcase the most important people that the group would remember or recognize. They're not here right? No one can find them? So, who is the generation?


The word genea where we get the English word genetics from, so this isn't talking about a 20 or 40 year period, but the race and existance of man or in this case has spiritual implications referring to the Church.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 10:39 AM
Furthermore for all this to be rapture ready, someone needs a fully working temple. Legitimate priesthood, who are not only genealogically legit, but ritually pure. Because let's keep in mind the group who is going to get spanked, they aren't Americans, they aren't Russians. Because those countries while religious weren't EVER in covenant relationship like OT Judea and Israel.

Amanah
11-14-2018, 10:40 AM
the fig tree represented the Judeans who were not producing fruit.

Matthew 21:43 Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 10:41 AM
The word genea where we get the English word genetics from, so this isn't talking about a 20 or 40 year period, but the race and existance of man or in this case has spiritual implications referring to the Church.

Keep in mind who Jesus is explaining this all to, not Christians. But Judeans, living in Judea. Those with actual lineages. Not the Church, because in order to be the church you have to be as MTD put it spotless. The widow living in pleasure is dead while she liveth? Isn't talking about an unbaptized sinner or Jew, that is speaking of a saint gone wrong. No, there is only One Bride, and that one is Apostolic.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 10:47 AM
What's the difference between the generation in Matthew 23:36 and the one in Matthew 24:34 if any?

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 10:48 AM
the fig tree represented the Judeans who were not producing fruit.

Matthew 21:43 Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.

Thank you Michael the Disciple :heeheehee

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 10:50 AM
Therefore when the Fig tree Judeans, and all the other trees Gentiles would start to produce in their young tender fledgling church. Then would the closing of the age come.

1ofthechosen
11-14-2018, 10:50 AM
What's the difference between the generation in Matthew 23:36 and the one in Matthew 24:34 if any?

The first He is speaking to the Pharasees,the second the Apostles.

That's why I'm saying this had Spiritual implications of the church.

mfblume
11-14-2018, 10:52 AM
The word genea where we get the English word genetics from, so this isn't talking about a 20 or 40 year period, but the race and existance of man or in this case has spiritual implications referring to the Church.

No where is that word plainly used in that sense in the bible. To say it is there in that verse is therefore a circular argument. Matt 23 uses the term in Contrast to the Jews' ancestors, proving it can't be talking about a race.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 11:10 AM
The first He is speaking to the Pharasees,the second the Apostles.

That's why I'm saying this had Spiritual implications of the church.

Who is Jesus ultimately addressing in both chapters?

Also would you agree that the three chapters are dealing with the same time in Jesus' life? That the three chapters are dealing with the same people and same question and answers?

1ofthechosen
11-14-2018, 11:12 AM
No where is that word plainly used in that sense in the bible. To say it is there in that verse is therefore a circular argument. Matt 23 uses the term in Contrast to the Jews' ancestors, proving it can't be talking about a race.

So it couldn't be speaking of the Sons of God and the Sons of the devil? I mean we use a lot of words that have double meanings, but unless you are fluent in our native tongue you maybe confused about what we are speaking of.

Now I'm not saying this is correct but just only interjecting for the sake of being analytical. Because one-way or the other isn't effecting my salvation one bit. Just for the sake of the imploration of the scripture I want to "with all thy getting, get a understanding."

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 11:16 AM
No where is that word plainly used in that sense in the bible. To say it is there in that verse is therefore a circular argument. Matt 23 uses the term in Contrast to the Jews' ancestors, proving it can't be talking about a race.

Exodus 1:6
Joseph died, and all his brothers and all that generation.


ἐτελεύτησε δὲ ᾿Ιωσὴφ καὶ πάντες οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ πᾶσα ἡ γενεὰ

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 11:20 AM
What is this thread about?

Oneness And Pre Chewed Food.

mfblume
11-14-2018, 11:21 AM
So it couldn't be speaking of the Sons of God and the Sons of the devil? I mean we use a lot of words that have double meanings, but unless you are fluent in our native tongue you maybe confused about what we are speaking of.

Now I'm not saying this is correct but just only interjecting for the sake of being analytical. Because one-way or the other isn't effecting my salvation one bit. Just for the sake of the imploration of the scripture I want to "with all thy getting, get a understanding."

the key to understanding that is to read the context clear from Matthew chapter 21 on through. Because it's one solid theme. Israel lost the opportunity for the kingdom and it was going to somebody else. In fact in chapter 21 he says that they would see all of that Destruction come upon them after he spoke about the Lord of The Vineyard coming.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 11:22 AM
How about, Oneness And Prenatal Care.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 11:23 AM
the key to understanding that is to read the context clear from Matthew chapter 21 on through. Because it's one solid theme. Israel lost the opportunity for the kingdom and it was going to somebody else. In fact in chapter 21 he says that they would see all of that Destruction come upon them after he spoke about the Lord of The Vineyard coming.

Yes :thumbsup

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 11:49 AM
Kent Hovind changed from Dispensationalist Pre Trib to Non Dispensationalist Post Trib.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEXPe_bAgCU&ab_channel=KJVideoMinistries

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 11:59 AM
Kent Hovind is no longer a dispensationalist.

Michael The Disciple
11-14-2018, 01:29 PM
Chosen:

And in Matthew 24:21-22 "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. [22] And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's h sake those days shall be shortened." There is your great tribulation it's exactly what you read about what happened to the Apostles.

Remember Jesus is referring to Daniel the prophet.

Daniel 12:1

1And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

So this is what Jesus is talking about. Agreed? The time of great tribulation.

The next thing that happens is in the very next verse.

Dan. 12:2

2And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

In my opinion this did not happen in 70ad.

If the great tribulation climaxed in 70ad the resurrection of the dead should have also occured.

If the resurrection of the dead happened 2000 years ago the scriptures are not relevant for us today.

Obviously it did not happen then.

This is the difference between post tribulation futurism and what is called "full preterism.

The preterists believe Jesus came and resurrected the dead in Christ and caught away the living in 70ad.

The post trib believer believes this has not yet happened, that Jesus prophecy in Matt. 24 has dual fulfillment. Not all the things Jesus spoke of were fulfilled.

When you put the book of Revelation into the mix that IMO becomes very clear.

Michael The Disciple
11-14-2018, 01:43 PM
What is this thread about?

Oneness And Pre Chewed Food.

It was about deeper revelation of Oneness doctrine. I was not writing about the post trib coming of Christ.

Michael The Disciple
11-14-2018, 01:53 PM
Therefore when the Fig tree Judeans, and all the other trees Gentiles would start to produce in their young tender fledgling church. Then would the closing of the age come.

This is one of the reasons I cant accept this doctrine. If the Church age ended in 70ad we have no idea what God expects of us or even wants us to believe.

Case in point.

18And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

The end of the world here is the end of the "age".

If the end of the "age" happened in 70 ad maybe baptism IN THE NAME is no longer valid? Maybe the commandments Jesus wanted the apostles to teach have changed? Maybe he will not be with us always anymore?

How would we know ANYTHING about God and his will since the age of his coming passed long ago!

So then the big question becomes to the preterists:

WHO ARE WE? How is the Bible relevant to us?

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 01:57 PM
Remember Jesus is referring to Daniel the prophet.

Daniel 12:1

1And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

So this is what Jesus is talking about. Agreed? The time of great tribulation.

The next thing that happens is in the very next verse.

Dan. 12:2

2And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

In my opinion this did not happen in 70ad.

If the great tribulation climaxed in 70ad the resurrection of the dead should have also occured.

If the resurrection of the dead happened 2000 years ago the scriptures are not relevant for us today.

Obviously it did not happen then.

This is the difference between post tribulation futurism and what is called "full preterism.

The preterists believe Jesus came and resurrected the dead in Christ and caught away the living in 70ad.

The post trib believer believes this has not yet happened, that Jesus prophecy in Matt. 24 has dual fulfillment. Not all the things Jesus spoke of were fulfilled.

When you put the book of Revelation into the mix that IMO becomes very clear.

As clear as concrete.

Mike, you make the the book of Revelation a blank book to all generations who came before you. They were told to read and understand the book of Revelation because their (I emphasize THEIR) time was near, at hand, in reach.

Daniel is warning his PEOPLE who were the same people who were put into captivity. These people after 70 years still understood the great tribulation being what they went through 70 years ago. So, when Daniel tells them there would be a worse tribulation he is pointing to a time concerning them.
Christ comes to them, they choose to kill Him, and dump Him outside the vineyard. They would be asked by a pig eating paga ruler if he should kill their king. The reply, "WE have NO KING but CAESAR!" They also said allow His blood to be placed on our heads, and also on the heads of our children. They rejected God as their King with Samuel 1 Samuel 8:7, and with Jesus Christ they would seal their fate. Greatest ever? Since there was a nation? That is speaking of Jerusalem Judea, not New York Chicago and Wakanda. You love God Mike, well they didn't and they knew Him more intimately then you. Because they actually had relatives who personally saw the history of Israel and Judea unfold. To figure out when everyone who slept woke up you must first answer who the previous scriptures are speaking to. Whether it was 70 A.D., 1914 A.D. or 3995 A.D. you first need to tell us who it pertains.

Mike, how were Old Testament saints saved?

Michael The Disciple
11-14-2018, 02:00 PM
Chosen

Now in that context Mark 13:28-29 then this could be imminent correct?"Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near: [29] So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors." Do you agree? Not that I'm right, but if what I'm saying would be correct under those circumstances would His coming be near? And by definition of what I said that would be a Post Tribulation rapture

Absolutely!

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 02:16 PM
This is one of the reasons I cant accept this doctrine. If the Church age ended in 70ad we have no idea what God expects of us or even wants us to believe.

Who said that? When I said end of the age the age is the Old Covenant age. Hence we call it the OLD covenant? i will make a new covenant with Judea/Israel Jeremiah 31:31, Hebrews 8:8. The age was totally finished law keeping could no longer be practiced. Jesus' words were vindicated not one stone remained upon another and the priestcraft, the rituals, and the sacrifice was completed. No longer to ever be used again.The New Israel of God, the Church triumphant would go on to fill the earth.


Case in point.

18And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

The end of the world here is the end of the "age".

Mike, and they did. The apostles were assured of Jesus' guidance. The age is not the church age Mr Dispensationalist Post Tribber. It was the Old Age, the one which they preached to, the one that they baptized and taught. They laid the foundation, and we reap the benefits.


If the end of the "age" happened in 70 ad maybe baptism IN THE NAME is no longer valid?

https://media1.tenor.com/images/003b7b96aa4f912087145209a4c5ecae/tenor.gif?itemid=11867866


Maybe the commandments Jesus wanted the apostles to teach have changed? Maybe he will not be with us always anymore?

Maybe he will allow you to baptize more women in your jacuzzi?

Keep sticking the pointed stick Mike, keep it up. ;)




How would we know ANYTHING about God and his will since the age of his coming passed long ago!

Anyone notice how this guy doesn't ask me to clarify, but just runs with it? Like a kid with toilet paper stuck on his shoe. By the time he gets to the other side of the playground the roll is empty. :heeheehee




So then the big question becomes to the preterists:

WHO ARE WE? How is the Bible relevant to us?

Who are you? I'm glad you asked.

You are a passive aggressive sad old religious guy. Who hasn't done jack since the 80s. Who can't get anything going unless it is about slamming Pentecostals for not wanting to grow whiskers, or are Pre Tribbers.

Mike, teach me Mike. I'll ask you questions and you spoon feed me.

Simple?

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 02:27 PM
Mike, do you believe in a rebuilt temple? If not, why not?

Michael The Disciple
11-14-2018, 02:28 PM
Dom:

Who are you? I'm glad you asked.

You are a passive aggressive sad old religious guy. Who hasn't done jack since the 80s. Who can't get anything going unless it is about slamming Pentecostals for not wanting to grow whiskers, or are Pre Tribbers.

Mike, teach me Mike. I'll ask you questions and you spoon feed me.

Bless him Lord.

1ofthechosen
11-14-2018, 02:35 PM
Remember Jesus is referring to Daniel the prophet.

Daniel 12:1

1And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

So this is what Jesus is talking about. Agreed? The time of great tribulation.

The next thing that happens is in the very next verse.

Dan. 12:2

2And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

In my opinion this did not happen in 70ad.

If the great tribulation climaxed in 70ad the resurrection of the dead should have also occured.

If the resurrection of the dead happened 2000 years ago the scriptures are not relevant for us today.

Obviously it did not happen then.

This is the difference between post tribulation futurism and what is called "full preterism.

The preterists believe Jesus came and resurrected the dead in Christ and caught away the living in 70ad.

The post trib believer believes this has not yet happened, that Jesus prophecy in Matt. 24 has dual fulfillment. Not all the things Jesus spoke of were fulfilled.

When you put the book of Revelation into the mix that IMO becomes very clear.


I will go with that on Daniel 12 it does say that, but thats nothing more then Him speaking of what will come in 70 AD. And then speaking of what will happen in the end. Because He's telling Daniel what will befall the land of Israel and Judea. But oneday the rest would happen in the last days. But that was the greatest Tribulation that will ever come upon this Earth. That time period.

Because starting in verse 4 He goes into greater detail all those things have been fulfilled but verse 13.

Evang.Benincasa
11-14-2018, 02:36 PM
Bless him Lord.

No, Mike, that observation was unfair.

You are perfect, you are the Love pastor, and we are your sheep.

So, a rebuilt temple. Do you believe that it must be rebuilt? If not, then why not?

houston
11-14-2018, 05:13 PM
So when Jesus curses the fig tree it was because he hated figs?

ROFLOL! :lol

Michael The Disciple
11-14-2018, 07:53 PM
Evang.Benincasa;

So, a rebuilt temple. Do you believe that it must be rebuilt? If not, then why not? [/B]

Well it is a good possibility. After all for centuries there was not even a nation of Israel. They had been scattered by the Romans. Prophecy was seen in the light that the promises and prophecies to Israel were transferred to the Church.

And yet they were amazed when Israel once again became a nation. It could be that the temple will be rebuilt. Just as Israel could be reborn the Temple could be rebuilt. That by no means is saying that the Christians should be paying for it. It would have no value for believers other than it being a major prophetic fulfillment.

1ofthechosen
11-14-2018, 10:21 PM
Evang.Benincasa;

[/B]

Well it is a good possibility. After all for centuries there was not even a nation of Israel. They had been scattered by the Romans. Prophecy was seen in the light that the promises and prophecies to Israel were transferred to the Church.

And yet they were amazed when Israel once again became a nation. It could be that the temple will be rebuilt. Just as Israel could be reborn the Temple could be rebuilt. That by no means is saying that the Christians should be paying for it. It would have no value for believers other than it being a major prophetic fulfillment.

So where are the Palestinians going to go and what will come of the dome of the Rock? Especially since the word says in Luke 21:24 "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." Unless you can say the time of Gentiles has been fulfilled, that's scripturally impossible.

Esaias
11-15-2018, 12:31 AM
Israel was reborn on Pentecost, in the first century. 1948 has more to do with Obadiah than anything else.

Amanah
11-15-2018, 01:47 AM
gentiles trodding along

https://www.travelkatz.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/travelkatz-christian-tours.israel.jpg

Evang.Benincasa
11-15-2018, 04:40 AM
gentiles trodding along

https://www.travelkatz.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/travelkatz-christian-tours.israel.jpg

:lol

Evang.Benincasa
11-15-2018, 04:43 AM
Israel was reborn on Pentecost, in the first century. 1948 has more to do with Obadiah than anything else.

Amen! :highfive

Donald Trump isn't a fulfillment for Isaiah 45:1

Evang.Benincasa
11-15-2018, 04:51 AM
It would have no value for believers other than it being a major prophetic fulfillment.

OK, the above sounds like a contradiction, so the rebuilt temple MUST be completed.Please explain its rebuilding process and how the purification will happen. Who will be carrying it out? Not asking about a red heifer, because that isn't an issue. The issue will be that a priest must be ritually pure in order to purify anything, furniture, utensils, and ultimately, the holy of holies. Where is this individual? Where on earth is an anointed high priest who is in the lineage of Levitical Aaronic Zadokite high priests, who has been in a succession of anointings and purifications throughout history? You have a few problems Mike, but you are right and I am wrong So, please continue to spoon feed me. How do they find the holy of holies, and how do they get everything ritually pure?