Author Topic: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal  (Read 9479 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

thethinker

  • Guest
Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 10:08:54 »
To our Futurist friends,

Here is CONCLUSIVE evidence that the Revelation is not literal. First, the opening statement of the book CLEARLY says that that Christ gave the Revelation through His messenger in SYMBOLS. It says that Jesus "SIGNIFIED" it through His messenger (vs. 1). I have said this many times here.

Second, I offer you one of several IRREFUTABLE examples that show that the Revelation cannot be literal.

The book says that Christ will judge by thrusting His sickle and sitting on a white cloud (14:14-16). This is the judgment at the end of the age.

The book also says that Christ will judge sitting on a white horse with a sharp sword in His mouth. This is also the judgment at the end of the age.


These visions CANNOT be taken literally. Christ cannot literally judge sitting on a cloud and on a horse at the same time.

Note that He is not on the earth in either vision. He is sitting "on a cloud" thrusting His sickle and sitting on a horse "in heaven" (the sky).

In both visions the judgment does NOT take place on the earth.

Jesus said that they would see the SIGN of the Son of Man "IN THE SKY" (Matthew 24:30).

Read it and weep our Futurist friends!

thinker

larry2

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #1 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 10:32:19 »

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.
    :onhorse:

raggthyme

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #2 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 11:47:57 »

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.
   :onhorse:


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?
« Last Edit: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 12:17:47 by raggthyme »

Offline asachild

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 170
  • Manna: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #3 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 12:14:55 »
Quote
thethinker
The book says that Christ will judge by thrusting His sickle and sitting on a white cloud (14:14-16). This is the judgment at the end of the age.
<...>
Note that He is not on the earth in either vision. He is sitting "on a cloud" thrusting His sickle and sitting on a horse "in heaven" (the sky).
<...>
In both visions the judgment does NOT take place on the earth.

In the same verse you reference above -
Rev 14: 16:
"So He who sat on the cloud thrust in His sickle on the earth, and the earth was reaped.

vs. 18-
"...Thrust in your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth, for her grapes are fully ripe."

Quote
thinker
These visions CANNOT be taken literally. Christ cannot literally judge sitting on a cloud and on a horse at the same time.

If you are sitting on a boat in a river, you are both on the water and on a boat.

Regards,
AsAChild

daq

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #4 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 13:48:48 »
To our Futurist friends,

Here is CONCLUSIVE evidence that the Revelation is not literal. First, the opening statement of the book CLEARLY says that that Christ gave the Revelation through His messenger in SYMBOLS. It says that Jesus "SIGNIFIED" it through His messenger (vs. 1). I have said this many times here.

Second, I offer you one of several IRREFUTABLE examples that show that the Revelation cannot be literal.

The book says that Christ will judge by thrusting His sickle and sitting on a white cloud (14:14-16). This is the judgment at the end of the age.

The book also says that Christ will judge sitting on a white horse with a sharp sword in His mouth. This is also the judgment at the end of the age.


These visions CANNOT be taken literally. Christ cannot literally judge sitting on a cloud and on a horse at the same time.

Note that He is not on the earth in either vision. He is sitting "on a cloud" thrusting His sickle and sitting on a horse "in heaven" (the sky).

In both visions the judgment does NOT take place on the earth.

Jesus said that they would see the SIGN of the Son of Man "IN THE SKY" (Matthew 24:30).

Read it and weep our Futurist friends!

thinker



Quote
thethinker
The book says that Christ will judge by thrusting His sickle and sitting on a white cloud (14:14-16). This is the judgment at the end of the age.
<...>
Note that He is not on the earth in either vision. He is sitting "on a cloud" thrusting His sickle and sitting on a horse "in heaven" (the sky).
<...>
In both visions the judgment does NOT take place on the earth.


In the same verse you reference above -
Rev 14: 16:
"So He who sat on the cloud thrust in His sickle on the earth, and the earth was reaped.

vs. 18-
"...Thrust in your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth, for her grapes are fully ripe."

Quote
thinker
These visions CANNOT be taken literally. Christ cannot literally judge sitting on a cloud and on a horse at the same time.


If you are sitting on a boat in a river, you are both on the water and on a boat.

Regards,
AsAChild



Christ Yeshua is not a "REAPER ANGEL"
Christ Yeshua does not have a sickle in his hand.

The one seated upon the white cloud is one SIMILAR TO or LIKE the Son of man: not the Son of man himself. Read the Parable of the Wheat and Tares. Who are "the reapers" and who commands them? Whichever messenger is giving commands in Revelation 14:14-20 always comes out from the Temple; and there are two Temples, and only one is in heaven. The Second Messenger from the Temple has power over FIRE, (to Baptize with it). The one seated on the cloud looking like the Son of man has two horns like a lamb; but speaks like a dragon...  ::crackup::
« Last Edit: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 14:16:12 by daq »

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #4 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 13:48:48 »



daq

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #5 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 15:09:46 »
Matthew 3:11-12 KJV
11. I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
12. Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

Matthew 13:24-30 KJV
24. Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
25. But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
26. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
27. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
28. He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
29. But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
30. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Matthew 13:36-43 KJV
36. Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
37. He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
38. The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
39. The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end (sunteleia-consummation) of the world; (aionos-AGE) and the reapers are the angels.
40. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end (sunteleia-consummation) of this world (aionos-AGE).
41. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42. And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Revelation 14:13-18 KJV
13. And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.
14. And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.
15. And another angel (messenger) came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.
16. And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.
17. And another angel (messenger) came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.
18. And another angel (messenger) came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.

thethinker

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #6 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 17:48:39 »

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.
   


Larry,

I take the fact that you did NOT answer the substance of my points as proof that my argument is irrefutable.

The Revelation was given in seven cycles with each cycle describing the events leading up to the judgment with different visions. Jesus cannot be literally judging while sitting on a white cloud and riding a white horse at the same time. Choose which one is literal and which is spiritual for they both cannot be literal at the same time. Or choose that they both are spiritual.

No matter your choice it is CLEAR that the judgment does NOT take place on an earthly throne in Jerusalem.

Christ's throne is IN HEAVEN (4:2). Give it up!

thinker

Online yogi bear

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11607
  • Manna: 736
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #7 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 18:02:33 »
 ::eatingpopcorn:

thethinker

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #8 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 18:12:07 »

larry2

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #9 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 18:30:29 »

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.
   


Larry,

I take the fact that you did NOT answer the substance of my points as proof that my argument is irrefutable.



You're just too wonderful for me thinker. Have you and Josephus considered what happened to the Ravens? Another sure thing? As far as pointing to your 70 AD as the temptation to come upon all the world I go along with Josephus' own words; "I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable." Yes I would believe that.

Offline lecoop

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1451
  • Manna: 25
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #10 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 18:38:12 »
To our Futurist friends,

Here is CONCLUSIVE evidence that the Revelation is not literal. First, the opening statement of the book CLEARLY says that that Christ gave the Revelation through His messenger in SYMBOLS. It says that Jesus "SIGNIFIED" it through His messenger (vs. 1). I have said this many times here.

Second, I offer you one of several IRREFUTABLE examples that show that the Revelation cannot be literal.

The book says that Christ will judge by thrusting His sickle and sitting on a white cloud (14:14-16). This is the judgment at the end of the age.

The book also says that Christ will judge sitting on a white horse with a sharp sword in His mouth. This is also the judgment at the end of the age.


These visions CANNOT be taken literally. Christ cannot literally judge sitting on a cloud and on a horse at the same time.

Note that He is not on the earth in either vision. He is sitting "on a cloud" thrusting His sickle and sitting on a horse "in heaven" (the sky).

In both visions the judgment does NOT take place on the earth.

Jesus said that they would see the SIGN of the Son of Man "IN THE SKY" (Matthew 24:30).

Read it and weep our Futurist friends!

thinker



From a futurist: you missed a good one:

And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion - with 7 heads and 10 horns!

Now this would be some strange beast indeed!! Literal? Of course not!

I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Is this literal? Absolutely it is!

11Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book,

Is this literal? Ha! We are reading this very book! OF COURSE it is literal!

So what is it? If the plain sense makes sense, don't look for any other sense, or you will end up with nonsense. If you don't follow this rule, you will end up with nonsense; exactly what many of the posts here are.

Much of this book is very literal and these verse are certainly meant to be taken literally. Many of the symbols can be found elsewhere. For example, the beasts in the book of Daniel, where we get an explanation of them.

Coop

inthenow

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #11 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 19:54:10 »
Rev 1:1  The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

G4591
σημαίνω
sēmainō
say-mah'ee-no
From σῆμα sēma (a mark; of uncertain derivation); to indicate: - signify.

He sent and indicated it by His angel

indicated:
to show, as by measuring or recording; make known: The thermometer indicates (makes known) air temperature.

He said and makes known it by His angel.

Offline n2thelight

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 764
  • Manna: 34
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #12 on: Tue Jan 31, 2012 - 23:13:02 »
To our Futurist friends,

Here is CONCLUSIVE evidence that the Revelation is not literal. First, the opening statement of the book CLEARLY says that that Christ gave the Revelation through His messenger in SYMBOLS. It says that Jesus "SIGNIFIED" it through His messenger (vs. 1). I have said this many times here.

Second, I offer you one of several IRREFUTABLE examples that show that the Revelation cannot be literal.

The book says that Christ will judge by thrusting His sickle and sitting on a white cloud (14:14-16). This is the judgment at the end of the age.

The book also says that Christ will judge sitting on a white horse with a sharp sword in His mouth. This is also the judgment at the end of the age.


These visions CANNOT be taken literally. Christ cannot literally judge sitting on a cloud and on a horse at the same time.

Note that He is not on the earth in either vision. He is sitting "on a cloud" thrusting His sickle and sitting on a horse "in heaven" (the sky).

In both visions the judgment does NOT take place on the earth.

Jesus said that they would see the SIGN of the Son of Man "IN THE SKY" (Matthew 24:30).

Read it and weep our Futurist friends!

thinker



What you say don't make sense,example

Revelation 17:7 "And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns."

Revelation 17:8 "The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is [shall come]."

What you imply means the angel is explaining something that has not and won't happen...
Illogical!

What Im trying to say is,yes most of the book is symbolic however when one searches the Word, the meaning can be found,and that meaning is something that has or will occure....


All one must do, is find the meaning of the symbols....So what's your point?Im not getting it!

thethinker

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #13 on: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 09:37:42 »

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

thethinker

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #14 on: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 10:32:34 »
Rev 1:1  The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

G4591
σημαίνω
sēmainō
say-mah'ee-no
From σῆμα sēma (a mark; of uncertain derivation); to indicate: - signify.

He sent and indicated it by His angel

indicated:
to show, as by measuring or recording; make known: The thermometer indicates (makes known) air temperature.

He said and makes known it by His angel.

To "signify" means "to indicate in signs." You did not answer my entire op. How can Christ judge while literally sitting on a cloud and riding a horse at the same time? Both cannot be literally true at the same time.

And what about the fact that neither of the visions indicate that Christ is to judge from a throne on the earth? He is sitting on a white cloud in the one vision and riding on a horse "in heaven" in the other vision.

thinker

larry2

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #15 on: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 11:02:34 »

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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 11:35:34 »

   ::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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 13:37:28 »

   ::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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 14:02:28 by raggthyme »

inthenow

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #18 on: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 17:55:27 »
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
  • *****
  • 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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 18:03:19 »
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.

thethinker

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #20 on: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 18:17:29 »
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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 18:32:22 »
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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 18:33:03 »
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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 18:40:52 »
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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 19:01:34 »
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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 19:01:47 »

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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 19:02:24 »
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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 19:12:06 »

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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 19:13:34 »

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: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 19:22:19 »

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???

larry2

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #30 on: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 19:29:08 »

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::


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


   rofl  Thinker, there you go again attempting to think.

BTW, since you put so much stock in what was told or shown to John in Revelation (Uh, what year was that?), don't you think it would help to know who that was? Is Josephus still around to see him riding around in a chariot?

Just a thought concerning those of 70 AD, what happened to them?   ::lookaround::

daq

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #31 on: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 19:44:08 »
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 …


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.

Like so?

Hosea 13:4-9 KJV
4. Yet I am the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for there is no saviour beside me.
5. I did know thee in the wilderness, in the land of great drought.
6. According to their pasture, so were they filled; they were filled, and their heart was exalted; therefore have they forgotten me.
7. Therefore I will be unto them as a lion: as a leopard by the way will I observe them:
8. I will meet them as a bear that is bereaved of her whelps, and will rend the caul (chestplate) of their heart, and there will I devour them like a lion: the wild beast shall tear them.
9. O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me is thine help.

Lamentations 4:1-7 KJV
1. How is the gold become dim! how is the most fine gold changed! the stones of the sanctuary are poured out in the top of every street.
2. The precious sons of Zion, comparable to fine gold, how are they esteemed as earthen pitchers, the work of the hands of the potter!
3. Even the sea monsters draw out the breast, they give suck to their young ones: the daughter of my people is become cruel, like the ostriches in the wilderness.
4. The tongue of the sucking child cleaveth to the roof of his mouth for thirst: the young children ask bread, and no man breaketh it unto them.
5. They that did feed delicately are desolate in the streets: they that were brought up in scarlet embrace dunghills.
6. For the punishment of the iniquity of the daughter of my people is greater than the punishment of the sin of Sodom, that was overthrown as in a moment, and no hands stayed on her.
7. Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire:

inthenow

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #32 on: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 20:13:44 »
thethinker:
The word "signify" means to communicate by symbols.

By their saying it many times they think they will be believed.

Rev 22:18  For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19  And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Rev 22:20  He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Rev 22:21  The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.


Nothing symbolic there but literal, plain and clear
.

Offline asachild

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 170
  • Manna: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #33 on: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 20:19:50 »
Quote
thinker:
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.

I haven't read the Scripture you are referencing, but your assertion fails on its face,

To reiterate:

If you are sitting on a boat in a river, you are both on the water and on a boat.

Regards,
AsAChild

« Last Edit: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 20:37:22 by asachild »

inthenow

  • Guest
Re: Hey Futurists! Proof that the Revelation is NOT Literal
« Reply #34 on: Wed Feb 01, 2012 - 20:25:45 »

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::


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


   rofl  Thinker, there you go again attempting to think.

BTW, since you put so much stock in what was told or shown to John in Revelation (Uh, what year was that?), don't you think it would help to know who that was? Is Josephus still around to see him riding around in a chariot?

Just a thought concerning those of 70 AD, what happened to them?   ::lookaround::

Keep posting to him and he might go back to CARM   rofl

 

     
anything