Author Topic: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal  (Read 8422 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

larry2

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #15 on: February 01, 2012, 10:02:34 AM »

Signify is also to make known by Jesus' angel; Who was that angel, and how did this angel do this? Did Josephus say? This should be easy for someone that has had 2000 years of history to tell them.
Irrefutable? What a bunch of horse manure.
 


Hi larry2,

I believe signify, in every other instance it is used is just as you say, to make known or to indicate. Personally, this is how I believe it is used here as well.

But thinker listed the irrefutable example in blue. I believe he's saying both statements cannot be true in a literal sense. They must be symbolic. What do you believe?



Raggthyme,

Exactly! Both statemets CANNOT be true in a literal sense. Only one can be literally true. Christ cannot be literally sitting on a cloud judging and riding on a horse judging at the same time.[/b] Literally He is either sitting on a cloud or riding on a horse. But spiritually speaking He may judge both ways.

Many Futurists fail to see that the events in the Revelation are REPEATED in seven cycles. Each cycle presents the SAME events with a different vision.

thinker



Ah, the rational of 70 AD'ers? They think all has passed of Revelation. So Jopsephus didn't reveal Jesus' angel to you huh? Was it Michael sitting on a cloud also? You've got to watch those fable tellers, they'll get you to believing anything. You'd think at least one of your united front of those living in the past (The party is over) would think to know this since it was the angel giving John all this information. Maybe you can ask the angel since he is here now, or have I got that right? He does tell us in the word who he is, but if you believe Josephus, personal contact with him might have greater impact on you.

Ever heard of a cloud of witnesses? Are they imaginary or symbolic of some 70 AD trickery? Oh it must be symbolic because how could even God sit in a cloud? Heaven forbid they be saints of God and Him being with them huh? Them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him (Where are they and did Christ bring them with Him?). Know ye not that we shall judge angels?  Going to have a part in that Thinker, or have you been passed by and you think that was only for them at Jerusalem as a part of that temptation that shall come upon all the world?

Just exactly what do you hope for now Thinker, or for that matter all these others that answer for you? Is it to tell a story told a thousand different ways? How are those Ravens doing my friend? Are they also getting you to believing in them for next year?


 ::smile::

larry2

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #16 on: February 01, 2012, 10:35:34 AM »

   ::idea::  I was just reading the thread of Brother Jeremiah7 from India as he related the story of Jesus walking on the water. Do you (The party is over gang of 70 AD'ers) think that may also have been symbolic only, somewhat like Jesus coming in the clouds?

raggthyme

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #17 on: February 01, 2012, 12:37:28 PM »

   ::idea::  I was just reading the thread of Brother Jeremiah7 from India as he related the story of Jesus walking on the water. Do you (The party is over gang of 70 AD'ers) think that may also have been symbolic only, somewhat like Jesus coming in the clouds?


I can't speak for everyone, but I personally believe Jesus literally walked on the water. To my knowledge there is no prophetic grounds in the Hebrew Scriptures for believing otherwise. The reason I question the nature of the coming in clouds is that the prophets at times used the same sort of terms to describe the judgment of God upon His enemies and the deliverance of His chosen. For instance, Psalm 18, Isaiah 19, Nahum 1, Jer 4... but I see what you are saying about the cloud of witnesses as well, I've thought of that myself. I'm still searching all that out.

« Last Edit: February 01, 2012, 01:02:28 PM by raggthyme »

inthenow

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #18 on: February 01, 2012, 04:55:27 PM »
thethinker:
To "signify" means "to indicate in signs."

no it dosn't , you add or take away words from the bible and even the dictionary to try and make sense of your doctrine.
signified in rev 1:1 means "indicated" - "made known"
You keep saying the same things over and over even after being shown wrong.
rev 1:1 is as clear as the bible gets, you must really have some whopping interpertations for some other verses, and I don't want to hear them, one thing I do not need to know is if preterism is true or not, you and some others are the best reasons for being against it.


thethinker;
You did not answer my entire op.

No I didn't, and as you are most certinally not my teacher, and your post does not make sense, I won't be.

Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • Legendary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #19 on: February 01, 2012, 05:03:19 PM »
I don't know if I'm a futurists but anybody got record of a seven-headed ten-horned bear-feet lion-mouth leopard-body sea monster rising out of the Aegean or Mediterranean in the first century?

I think its safe and sound to say that Revelation is not literal.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #19 on: February 01, 2012, 05:03:19 PM »



thethinker

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #20 on: February 01, 2012, 05:17:29 PM »
Larry2 wrote:
Quote
Them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him (Where are they and did Christ bring them with Him?). Know ye not that we shall judge angels?  Going to have a part in that Thinker, or have you been passed by and you think that was only for them at Jerusalem as a part of that temptation that shall come upon all the world?

So what does this prove? Those who sleep in Jesus and those who are AFTERWARDS caught up will meet the Lord IN THE AIR. So you still have NOTHING that says that Jesus is to return to the earth.

BTW, futurists say that the word "epeita" (afterwards) suggests a long interval between two events. They argue this from its use in 1 Corinthians 15:23 where Paul said,

"Each man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, AFTERWARDS (epeita) they that are Christ's at His coming."

They say that the long interval between Christ's resurrection and the resurrection of christians is proof that "epeita" suggests a "long interval."

Guess what my man?  Paul used the same word in 1 Thessalonians 4:17.

"AFTERWARDS (epeita), we who are living and remaining shall be cuaght up to be with them...."

The Futurists say that "epeita" means a "long interval."

So chew on that for a while before you spout off again.

thinker


daq

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #21 on: February 01, 2012, 05:32:22 PM »
Larry2 wrote:
Quote
Them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him (Where are they and did Christ bring them with Him?). Know ye not that we shall judge angels?  Going to have a part in that Thinker, or have you been passed by and you think that was only for them at Jerusalem as a part of that temptation that shall come upon all the world?

So what does this prove? Those who sleep in Jesus and those who are AFTERWARDS caught up will meet the Lord IN THE AIR. So you still have NOTHING that says that Jesus is to return to the earth.

BTW, futurists say that the word "epeita" (afterwards) suggests a long interval between two events. They argue this from its use in 1 Corinthians 15:23 where Paul said,

"Each man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, AFTERWARDS (epeita) they that are Christ's at His coming."

They say that the long interval between Christ's resurrection and the resurrection of christians is proof that "epeita" suggests a "long interval."

Guess what my man?  Paul used the same word in 1 Thessalonians 4:17.

"AFTERWARDS (epeita), we who are living and remaining shall be cuaght up to be with them...."

The Futurists say that "epeita" means a "long interval."

So chew on that for a while before you spout off again.

thinker



In support of thinker the original Strong's entry goes a step further:

Original Strong's Ref. # 1899
Romanized  epeita
Pronounced ep'-i-tah
from GSN1909 and GSN1534; thereafter:
KJV--after that(-ward), then.

1 Corinthians 15:23
23.
   |1538| each
   |1161| But
   |1722| in
   |3588| the
   |2398| own
   |5001| order.
   |0536| The firstfruit
   |5547| Christ,
   |1899| epieta-thereafter
   |3588| those
   |5547| of Christ
   |1722| in
   |3588| the
   |3952| parousia-coming-nearness-presence
   |0846| of him.

As the coming of the Ancient of Days on the clouds of heaven, Daniel 7:13.
Who's garment was white a snow; and Nazarite hair as pure wool.
It all began at Pentecost in Acts 2 and continues ~
Each in his or her appointed time …

inthenow

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #22 on: February 01, 2012, 05:33:03 PM »
To signify, indicate, make known, can be done in various ways, by mouth (most commonly) by signs (the deaf and dumb) by showing, in revelations case (visions)
Some take that as an excuse to make any scripture say something else, but it's clear to some what scriptures are literal and what are synbolic or figurative, which also point to a literal meaning, and is often revealed in near by verses.
example "out of the sea" means out of the nations.
"the whore of babylon" is a religious identity, they are easy to assertain.
But heaven and earth being people in verses that are clearly saying about people, is just one little example of changing the meaning of scripture.

inthenow

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #23 on: February 01, 2012, 05:40:52 PM »
I don't know if I'm a futurists but anybody got record of a seven-headed ten-horned bear-feet lion-mouth leopard-body sea monster rising out of the Aegean or Mediterranean in the first century?

I think its safe and sound to say that Revelation is not literal.
Because some is not literal you say all is not??
Other scriptures tell what that 7 headed 10 horned beast is, there is a literal meaning to all  such symbolisms ( if that's the proper word for describing that language) and it comes from the bible not out of ones head.

inthenow

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #24 on: February 01, 2012, 06:01:34 PM »
Larry2:
Them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him (Where are they and did Christ bring them with Him?). Know ye not that we shall judge angels?  Going to have a part in that Thinker, or have you been passed by and you think that was only for them at Jerusalem as a part of that temptation that shall come upon all the world?

the thinker:
So chew on that for a while before you spout off again.

Larry's post was spouting off ?? they were good points, which thinker couldn't answer, so insult is what he gives.

larry2

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #25 on: February 01, 2012, 06:01:47 PM »

The Futurists say that "epeita" means a "long interval."

So chew on that for a while before you spout off again.

thinker



You still don't know who Jesus' angel is? Where was he or it, and where is it or he now? You can just dodge a question so long before it becomes apparent you "The party's over 70 AD'ers" crowd don't know what's in your future. Did those Ravens also die in 70 AD? Oh yeah, soon means a generation to you; maybe the Ravens will rise from the dead in that amount of time.
 ::smile::

thethinker

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #26 on: February 01, 2012, 06:02:24 PM »
To signify, indicate, make known, can be done in various ways, by mouth (most commonly) by signs (the deaf and dumb) by showing, in revelations case (visions)
Some take that as an excuse to make any scripture say something else, but it's clear to some what scriptures are literal and what are synbolic or figurative, which also point to a literal meaning, and is often revealed in near by verses.
example "out of the sea" means out of the nations.
"the wh*re of babylon" is a religious identity, they are easy to assertain.
But heaven and earth being people in verses that are clearly saying about people, is just one little example of changing the meaning of scripture.

The word "signify" means to communicate by symbols.

Quote
The manner of communication is brought out in 1:1c. The word “communicated

thethinker

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #27 on: February 01, 2012, 06:12:06 PM »

The Futurists say that "epeita" means a "long interval."

So chew on that for a while before you spout off again.

thinker



You still don't know who Jesus' angel is? Where was he or it, and where is it or he now? You can just dodge a question so long before it becomes apparent you "The party's over 70 AD'ers" crowd don't know what's in your future. Did those Ravens also die in 70 AD? Oh yeah, soon means a generation to you; maybe the Ravens will rise from the dead in that amount of time.
 ::smile::

He judges sitting on a white cloud. That judgment is also depicted as His riding a horse "in heaven." Paul said that those who are living and remaining shall meet the Lord "in the air." Jesus said that they will see the sign of the Son of Man "in the sky" (Matthew 24:30).

So where does the new testament say that he would return to earth?

BTW, I said that the Fututists say that "epeita" means a "long interval."

My understanding of a moderator is that you should be moderating the discussions and not participating in them. It is your job to make sure we behave ourselves and that should be the extent of your involvement. The moderators at CARM keep out of the discussions except to keep the peace.

thinker

larry2

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #28 on: February 01, 2012, 06:13:34 PM »

John HEARS the Lamb being announced. But he SEES the Lion of the tribe of Judah. He HEARS the number 144,000 from the twelve tribes of Israel. But he SEES a great multitude which no man can number from all peoples. He HEARS the Bride the Lamb's Wife be announced. But he SEES the New Jerusalem descending out of heaven.

Christ cannot literally judge while sitting on a white cloud and riding on a horse at the same time. Only one of the visions can be literally true. It's that simple.


thinker


 :onhorse:  Is anything hard for the Lord?


raggthyme

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #29 on: February 01, 2012, 06:22:19 PM »

John HEARS the Lamb being announced. But he SEES the Lion of the tribe of Judah. He HEARS the number 144,000 from the twelve tribes of Israel. But he SEES a great multitude which no man can number from all peoples. He HEARS the Bride the Lamb's Wife be announced. But he SEES the New Jerusalem descending out of heaven.

Christ cannot literally judge while sitting on a white cloud and riding on a horse at the same time. Only one of the visions can be literally true. It's that simple.


thinker


 :onhorse:  Is anything hard for the Lord?



larry2,
is this like one of those "can God make a rock so big that He cannot lift it" questions???