Prophecy re-thinking?

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

> > Did the Pharisees in fact literally DO this?  Um...
Yes!

> Did God actually mean that?  No.

This is at the very best unresponsive.  I can't see how you
missed the point that continuity could indeed be preserved
by that FACT
that religious fanatics "misinterpret" the Scriptures. 
Does this add to or take away from my arguement?  Does it
add to or take away from yours?
 
> Similarly people mistaken Rev. 13 to be literal.

I assume that you know this is called begging the question
"it is wrong because it is incorrect."  I have asked for a
"reason" to believe your "assertions" and I keep getting
that you are not
"excited" about literal interpretation of prophesy.  You
make statements without listing ANY support Biblically or
otherwise and say that I should reject my views (which you
don't even know yet) because they are the ones everyone
else has.  They are NOT.  I would like to GIVE them but I
don't want to do this "piece mill" but start in the
beginning of the book and build from there.
 
> Think of it this way.   The world in sin already has a
mark on them.  

Oh really?  I haven't seen the Scripture on this.  What
does this have to do with the mark of the beast being
literal?  
 
> Regarding buying and selling, Jesus said to the
Laodiceans
> that they could buy of Him gold tried in the fire. 
Literal?
> No.  

So?  Is your point that because there is some synbolism
that it is ALL sysbolism?
 
> There is the MARK, NAME and IMAGE of the Beast.  Paul
spoke of the marks of the death of Christ on him.  

The scars from his beatings, perhaps?  Let's see, what was
he talking about that sets the context?  This is
continuity.

>He spoke of the NAME of Jesus and the image of God being
imprinted onto believers.  Anti-christ simply has a
counterfeit.  Image a computer?  No.  The image of satan -
self-worship. Independence.  

So it is self-worship and independance that is going to be
made to speak?  
 
> > >But we say the mark of the beast is literal?
> > 
> > Why not?
> 
> Continuity.  Counterfeitism.

Huh?  Satan has ALWAYS dealt in the physical realm: sex,
murder, war, IDOLS ... Do these ALSO have spiritual
implications?  Yes.  Is this ALL there is to them?  No.

> General revelation is a giving of what we should "know". 
There is a clear note sounded in the human spirit when
revelation is given by God.

I am not at all sure what you are saying here.  If you
don't "feel"
something when I speak then it can't be of God? 
 
> > > And when I corss referenced the thoughts of
Revelation
> > with the rest of the Bible - WOW! - things opened up!
> > 
> > This is true!  Think of the rapture in terms of the
Flood
> > and Enoch and the Tribulation in terms of Moses and
Aaron
> > (2 witnesses) before Pharoah!

> > I only read the Bible.
> 
> That is you.  Where did you get your thoughts about the
> two witnesses preaching to the 144,000?

Huh?  I missed that one.  I said "before *"PHAROAH"* or in 
Revelation, before the Anti-christ.
 
> Most think the book of Rev. is for one generation.

I think it is just what it SAYS it is: about the events
that will take place or aproximately 7 years.  Although you
can ADD interpretations that CHANGE the simple STATEMENTS
that it is 
about 7 literal years when you try to PROVE them
Scripturally you have at best only a tenuous relationship
that is truly "in the 
eye of the beholder." 

> Agreed.  But let us check out all the teachings with
openness
> as though we start from scratch and rethink everything
> we've been told.  Not accept anything for face value, as
> though, "Well, prophecy teachers know what they were
talking
> about."  Let's be "Berean" and search it for ourselves.

This is ALL I do.
 
> Believe me, I can rattle off each of the three pre- mid-
and post-trib arguments, for I once was in each of the
three camps of interpretation. But I really dug into it
myself.  Each argument can convince a person.

I don't know nor do I wish to know them.  The truth points
out the errors of all but the pre-trib rapture.
 

> Amen.  And I found taht all three of the above arguments
have holes where others have them filled, and vice versa. 
All three of them!

This is because people confuse "rapture" with "revelation."
The church is "raptured" pre-trib (revelation of Christ),
the 144,000 'see' Jesus as their savior mid-trib
(revelation of Christ) and the sinners 'see' Jesus when he
comes back WITH his Church at the end of the Tribulation
(revelation of Christ).

This is what God must "reveal."  How to discern these
things.

> Salvation is not like that. Salvation MUST be explicitly
explained.  How could God save someone with veiled words? 
But words such as those found in Revelation are for the
Church.  And even then tehre is warning that one must be
sensitive for even the very elect ALMOST wil be deceived. 
Only those sensitive will recognize the true deal when it
occurs.  That requires more than "explicit-only" reading.

Again I am lost.  Are you saying that God only reveals
things to the saved?  We are not talking about
"explicit-only" reading but 
what is God trying to "impart" in the Revelation. 
  
> Sure.  There is no argument about these things.  But the
details
> of "locusts" and "the mark of the beast" are simply not
explicit.
> Blessed are they who "Hear" the sayings of the book.
"Comprehend".

This is, again unsupported.
 
> It is a far far cry to be able to spiritually discern the
truths of
> Revelation than to read explicit truths about salvation,
judgment
> and eternal hope.  It is like Nebuchadnezzar's draem that
must
> be interpreted.  Only God can reveal the interpretation
to a person.

Are you truing to say that since Nebuchadnezzar's dream had
no physical fulfillment that... No, that can't be it.  Um,
since the dream required Spiritual interpretation it had no
connection to the 
physical world... No, that can't be it either.  Ah... Since
the dream had no immediate bearing on the King and his
kingdom or Daniel
then it should be left to personal interpretation... No,
that's not it either.  How about that since the
interpretation had to come from God that no one would be
able to get more than the general view 
of events... No, it did have immediate as well as future
implications.  Let's try since this was revealed to his
servant Daniel, the king couldn't comprehend the meaning...
 

I think this makes my case better than yours.

>Rapture is explicit. 

You mean the Spiritual 'snatching away' (infilling of the
Holy Ghost) that occurs when we are "called" from the
"world of sin" (repentance) and our "old system" (past sin)
is "judged" (remission) and "left behind" (sanctification)
that we may be "lifted" (virtue/abitity to do good) into
the "presence of Jesus" with our "glorified flesh"
(cleansed through confession of sins) and are "with Him"
(Christian) to obtain the "victory" (Holiness) to establish
the "Kingdom" (witnessing) by enduring the "great
tribulation" (persecution) of "resisting sin" (endurance)
that leads to the "peaceful reign" (joy of the Lord) in our
lives or do you mean that old idea that God is going to
PHYSICALLY take people from the Earth? 

It really is the same story over and over.

>But not WHEN it occurs.

The date, no.  The season (conditions), yes.
 
> That shows my point in itself.

I missed this one.

You see my friend that these spiritual interpretations are
real but they do not excluded the physical.  The Spiritual
DEFINES the 
physical.  It was through OBSERVATION of the PHYSICAL 
that lead me to SEEK the SPIRITUAL.  This is what Paul
meant.
Don't think so? Cross reference Mars Hill.

God also USES the PHYSICAL to help us to UNDERSTAND the
SPIRITUAL.  Cross reference parables.  

This is the purpose of prophesy! 

If I "sound" flip in spots please forgive me.  I had three
brothers 
and a really intelligent but mostly wrong sister and
usually form my logical aurguments as well, arguments.  I
also assume a certain familiarity due to lack of a person
sitting in front of me and cannot see them "wince" or smile
and therefore continue to express my opinion.  This has
good and bad points.  

As some who have contacted me privately already know,
although I am VERY stubbornly opinionated and basically 
ignorant of protocol I am "plyable" when "properly"
rebuked. 

Timothy (starting to like this) Litteral
472 Grant St.
Marion Ohio 43302
trlitteral@usa.net
http://members.tripod.com/~trlitteral