ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Preterists and Futurists

There is debate between preterists and futurists in how they read Revelation.

I see Revelation as an allegory about the struggle of the Christian against the devil.

No matter how bad things get, God is still on the throne, and His purposes will not be frustrated.

What do you think?

Join Our Free Dating and Take The End Times Signs Bible Quiz
 ---Cluny on 11/2/17
     Helpful Blog Vote (3)

Post a New Blog



Revelation 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
Notice God says HIM, and not THEM...again showing individual relationships.


Jesus also said in John,...MY SHEEP HEAR MY VOICE, AND A STRANGERS VOICE THEY DO NOT HEAR. God HIMSELF said He uses His own voice and that we CAN hear.

It's so dangerous for people to use their own experience OR LACK THEREOF to judge other people's relationship with the Lord.

Those again who belong to the Lord, Baptized INTO HIS BODY, where He is the HEAD..don't hear or follow strange voices John. God made that perfectly clear. We hear only GODS voice.
---kathr4453 on 11/21/17


kathr states, "We were not saved in BATCHES. We were individually saved through individual,faith in Jesus Christ."

But according to "Scripture." yes or no Faith in Jesus Christ is it "Universal." or "Personal." yes or no. Please according to "Scripture." answer this question

Also, you haven't address Eph 4:5??

Do so instead of the name calling as though that is helping your credibility here.
---john9346 on 11/21/17


2 Peter 1:20-21

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.


These verses say NOTHING about individuals not being able to have a personal relationship with the Lord. Now THAT was of PRIVATE INTERPRETATION John, putting your own spin on scripture. It happens all the time. But these verses are talking about PROPHECY..not a personal relationship.
---kathr4453 on 11/21/17


John, you're talking about ORGANIZED RELIGION, not a personal relationship with the Lord. I believe in the INDIVIDUAL PRIESTHOOD OF THE BELIEVER. And I also believe Jesus Christ is made unto us Wisdom and understanding....not the Pope, Calvin, church fathers,a group....I also believe the Holy Spirit is our teacher, as scripture clearly states.

Having been saved for nearly 40 years....I KNOW whom I believed, what I believe and WHY I believe it.

Your comments here only show a carnal baby Christian who knows NOTHING except what others tell him to think and believe, called a head Christian.

How can you possibly live by the faith of Christ, Gal 2:20 and not personally know Christ?...THAT I MAY KNOW HIM....PHIL 3.
---kathr4453 on 11/20/17


It's a shame John is so steeped in cults that he has denied the very scriptures. All prophecy today concerning Jesus Christ is made KNOWN today. And NOW in the NT Prophesy is REITERATING that which is already known.....it's not about coming up with something NEW and different. So this idea that 1Peter is about prophecy not being of personal interpretation is NOT the same as personal faith. Just another WORD TWISTING HERE TO TRY TO ROB Christians of their faith...I call demonic.

We were not saved in BATCHES. We were individually saved through individual,faith in Jesus Christ. And my individual personal faith in Jesus Christ cannot be transferred to another. Oh how I wish it could be. But it can't.
---kathr4453 on 11/20/17




Kathr states, "The term "UNIVERSAL FAITH" is a term that has negative references."

Not in its "Historical." meaning, "Catholic." that speaks of the entire Body of Christians.The word 1 in Scripture like in Eph 4:5 and 1 Cor 1:10 does salitify this understanding.

Peter does reject your idea of a "Personal Faith." 2 Pet 1:19-20.

Peter also rejects your idea of hearing the supposed Voice of God which is another excuse for "Personal Faith."
---john9346 on 11/20/17


Kathr,

You keep bringing up Calvinists suppose murders, but what about you who excuse, "Abortion?" and excuse blacks being slaves??

You and those Calvinists have a lot in common because you both approve of State Justified Genocide.

What I find contradictory about you is you approve of abortion and slavery,yet, the same ideaology that enslaved blacks and has murdered about 60 million babies also was used to murder millions of Jews.

Listen to the words of the Messiah, "3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
---john9346 on 11/20/17


The term "UNIVERSAL FAITH" is a term that has negative references. One= universalism, and another, a universal or one world church, of which we should be totally opposed to both ideas. The term is NOT used in scripture, however, I find it just another term not use in scripture the Calvinists can add to their many terms..TULIP, with non biblical definitions In order to spread more false doctrine, thinking they sound Sooooo intelligent and scholarly. WRONG.

So actually John is WRONG.....again!
---kathr4453 on 11/20/17


Another example is the story of Anne Hutchinson, who believed in GRACE not WORKS, and was prosecuted sentenced and expelled by the Puritan Calvinists for sharing and teaching other women in home Bible Studies. Now the issue here is not whether you agree with Anne, but she went down in our history as the perfect example of FREEDOM OF RELIGION. See, she did not believe in the "Supposed UNIVERSAL BELIEFS OF THE PURITANS, who believed their beliefs were universal truth,FORCING OTHERS TO SUBMIT TO, making the very same mistake they came to America for in the first place.

So John, your definition of universal vs personal is what is not found in scripture. Only in the Calvin reformed and RCC...who don't even agree with one another.
---kathr4453 on 11/20/17


John, Personal faith is individual faith, not groupfaith. If you actually understood what I wrote, you would have understood. Many individuals stood alone in the face of organized religion telling them what they had to believe or die. Many chose death. And although many broke away from the RCC becoming MANY DIFFERENT Protestant groups who murdered each other (Calvin murdered the Anabaptists) over infant vs adult baptism....I personally believe in adult baptism, And I personally have that right. Do or die. INFANT BAPTISM IS NOT UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED. Yes even Calvinism can be compared to John's list of personal faith leading to cults. I personally reject Calvinism. I along with so many (NOT just RCC) Christians believe Calvinism is a CULT.
---kathr4453 on 11/19/17




Kathr:.....Remember, Jim Jones, David Koresh, The Heaven Gate Cult, etc.
---john9346 on 11/18/17

You forgot Joseph Smith. Also those who were burned as witches by Calvinists in Salem....horrible CULT ACTIVITY THERE.

1) there is only ONE GOSPEL. 2) Those who are truly saved by the Gospel and are Crucified with Christ DO NOT JOIN CULTS. They have the Indwelling Christ in them who directs their path and steps. If they are truly saved John, and ignorantly involved in a cult..the Lord will bring them out as we have seen those leaving the LFS, Calvinism, RCC ect, and believe me...THAT TAKES TREMENDOUS PERSONAL CONVICTION which leads to personal action. If they are NOT hearing Gods voice...they simply are not saved.
---kathr4453 on 11/19/17


brendan states, "However, when Martin Luther wrote his 95 Theses, he was, in effect, setting up his own hierarchy, with himself as the pope."

Sir, Please cite where in the 95 Theses where this is as you state my friend??

brendan states, "and I've also read that when someone asked him a question, he answered, "Because Dr. Luther will have it so."

Sir, you and I dialogged on an entire post regarding this statement. You stated to me that you had not read the entire letter where Luther made this statement.
---john9346 on 11/18/17


Kathr states, "See this is what I object to. Hebrews 11 talk about PERSONAL FAITH."

Heb 11 makes no mention of someone having, "Personal Faith.", but explains how individuals triumph through "Universal Faith.", faith that was public not private.

Kathr, keep in the mind the "Faith." in "Scripture." do not mean the same thing when used always, the convictions that 1 had in "Scripture." was common to all and by all.
---john9346 on 11/18/17


Kathr:

Your argument against "Universal Faith." is a Logical Fallacy because those believing and holding to a "Personal Faith." is extremely dangerous do to no accountability. Remember, Jim Jones, David Koresh, The Heaven Gate Cult, etc.

See, Heb 13:17 and 1 Pet 5:5-6,
---john9346 on 11/18/17


John 9346 said, "You'll find below the "Fundamentals." that guided the reformers also have you ever read Luther's 95 Theses:

First of all, thanks for the greetings from you and others. I appreciate it.

However, when Martin Luther wrote his 95 Theses, he was, in effect, setting up his own hierarchy, with himself as the pope.

I have read all 95 of them, and I've also read that when someone asked him a question, he answered, "Because Dr. Luther will have it so." This statement is trying to place Luther above even the Holy Spirit.
---Monk_Brendan on 11/18/17


Kathr is wrong because what ultimately happens is people subject the "Scriptures." to their "OPersonal Faith." instead of the other direction. This is foreign to "Scripture." itself and it was foreign to the Reformers.
---john9346 on 11/16/17

See this is what I object to. Hebrews 11 talk about PERSONAL FAITH. And INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE, no organizations are listed. Thank goodness Noah was not affiliated with any ORGINIZATION, or Abraham for that matter to decide if they should obey God or not. We even see JOB, who did have those consulting him.....God said WERE WRONG. Job stood alone on his faith and convictions.....thank you Noah, Abraham and Job for being an example of PERSONAL OBEDIENCE OF FAITH.
---kathr4453 on 11/18/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


Sola Fide. Question : are we declared Righteous by God through PERSONAL FAITH, or UNIVERSAL GROUP ORGANIZED Faith?

The Puritans who came to America , after leaving England so they could find liberty and freedom in their faith, still wanted to CONTROL the faith and beliefs of others, making AGAIN the very mistake the RCC and Church of England made as well as scripture saying NO ONE is to LORD it over anyone, but only to be an EXAMPLE.

If my PERSONAL faith is what God is looking for and I will be PERSONALLY held accountable by what I PERSONALLY believe, then I will stick with the Holy Spirit as my Teacher, and draw from those IN THE BODY OF CHRIST who are given GIFTS of the Spirit for our EDIFICATION, not CONTROL.
---kathr4453 on 11/18/17


Brendan,

You'll find below the "Fundamentals." that guided the reformers also have you ever read Luther's 95 Theses:

A. Sola Scriptura - The Bible is the complete, closed and clear authority in all matters of faith.
B. Solus Christus - Our confidence is in Jesus Christ alone for salvation.
C. Sola Gratia - Grace secured redemption without reference to works.
D. Sola Fide - We are declared righteous by God through faith alone (1).
E. Soli Deo Gloria - Goal of creation and redemption is Gods praise.
---john9346 on 11/17/17


Brendan,

It's good to see you back again. I hope you are well.

Jerry
---Jerry6593 on 11/17/17


Brendan,

Before responding to you my friend how are you doing good sir!

How is your health has it gotten better?

Did strongaxe give you my message?

I've always enjoyed our deep dialogs/discussions/debates... We certainly didn't agree, but the spirit of respect for each other guided the communication.

Brendan, just want you to know I appreciate you my friend and have learned a lot from you sir...

Well Wishes,

John

Ps., Its good to see you back on here...
---john9346 on 11/16/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


Monk Brendan states, "Given that 2 Pet 1:20 is true, that simply means that the Reformers had it WRONG when they told the people of their time that they could interpret Scriptures without the help of than nasty old pope fellow, or the Catholic Church."

Sir, the reformers taught that if the laity could read the "Scriptures." they wouldn't just accept what anyone told them. Have you ever read Luther's 95 Theses?

Kathr is wrong because what ultimately happens is people subject the "Scriptures." to their "OPersonal Faith." instead of the other direction. This is foreign to "Scripture." itself and it was foreign to the Reformers.
---john9346 on 11/16/17


John 9346 said, "This is false The "Scriptures." do not teach, "Personal Faith.", but "Universality. of belief...

Remember what the Holy Spirit states through Peter, "20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." 2 Pet 1:20."

No, John. I hate to have to say it, but kathr is correct. Given that 2 Pet 1:20 is true, that simply means that the Reformers had it WRONG when they told the people of their time that they could interpret Scriptures without the help of than nasty old pope fellow, or the Catholic Church.
---Monk_Brendan on 11/15/17


questions that have not been answered:

1. I am still waiting for strongaxe to provide us with just 1 Credible scholar who believe the gospels were written after 70 AD.

2. I am still waiting for Loony1 to provide proof and evidence C "Chapter and verse." that the gospels were written after 70 AD?

3. I am waiting for Loony1 to show historically that There is, "No unanimous agreement." that the Apostle John wrote the Book of Revelation?

Just making assertions is illogical...
---john9346 on 11/13/17


kathr states, "So John, I know how you are into scholars etc holding so much weight in deciding what is truth or fact or relevance.....however, that holds NO WEIGHT when it comes to personal faith as we see all through out scripture."

This is false The "Scriptures." do not teach, "Personal Faith.", but "Universality. of belief...

Remember what the Holy Spirit states through Peter, "20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." 2 Pet 1:20.
---john9346 on 11/13/17


Send a Free Missing You Ecard


strongaxe states, "When Jesus spoke has nothing to do with when the Apostles wrote about it,"

This is utterly false, and shows you obviously have not read Deut 18:20-22??

The Upper Limit you state in questioning is correlated with 70AD and Deut 18:20-22.

strongaxe states, "Who is credible and who is not is also a matter of subjective opinion."


Not if it is based on facts evidence and data... You still haven't cited 1 credible scholar sir are you able to do so??
---john9346 on 11/13/17


Cluny said, "After all, which letter of the alphabet is the least important?"

X
---Monk_Brendan on 11/9/17


Nicole_Lacey:

So when did all life in the sea die? I totally missed that.


john9346:

You wrote: Example, you stated that the gospels were written after 70 AD, but In Matt 24:1-4 the Lord Jesus prophecies thedestruction of the temple.

So what? When Jesus spoke has nothing to do with when the Apostles wrote about it, other than that they couldn't have done so BEFORE he spoke. This puts a lower limit on the gospels (i.e. they could NOT have been written before 30AD), but no upper limit.

All Credible Scholars recognize that 70 AD was the Turningpoint.

Who is credible and who is not is also a matter of subjective opinion.
---StrongAxe on 11/7/17


Were my history lessons deficient?
---StrongAxe on 11/6/17

I do not think so.

There are many things that have not been seen.

Such as the whole world watching the two witnesses being tried, every green plant on the world being burnt up, and 100 pound hailstones.

If you read The Revelation literally, one concludes that it must be prophesy. None of these events have happened.

But read as allegory, none of these events has to happen.
---Mark_Eaton on 11/7/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


Kathr

Whatever you want to believe in good faith is fine with me. I have no argument with you personally about any issue.

I hope you're having a very pleasant day!
---Loony1 on 11/7/17


Loony 1, there's no unamious agreement that Paul or even Peter wrote their books as well. That kind of nonsense means nothing to me.

The Holy Spirit has ways to authenticate its author. For instance Revelation.....the Author calls himself John, not John of This or That or John THE This or That.

But also ONLY JOHN referred to Jesus in Title as THE WORD OF GOD. John 1:1, 1John 1:1 and through out and Revelation....AND HIS NAME IS CALLED THE WORD OF GOD. Revelation 19:13.

Revelation 1:1-2 closely resemble also the opening of 1John 1:1-2

Sorry Loony1 but doubting the authorship, as so many have even Paul and Peters epistles don't get anyone off the hook who don't heed its warnings.
---kathr4453 on 11/7/17


Nicole

The NAB and the RSV are both good versions, and I have copies of both of my library.

Regarding 200 million soldiers, there were no more then 50 or 60 million people living and the entire Roman Empire at the time that the Book of Revelation was written. But in any case, I don't think the 200 million represents an exact number. It is somehow symbolic of a very large number.
---Loony1 on 11/6/17


Kathr

There is no unanimous agreement that the Apostle John wrote the Book of Revelation. Perhaps he did, perhaps he didn't. I do enjoy reading it. It is part of my daily reading this month.
---Loony1 on 11/6/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


Loony, it depends on how I wish to read the Bible.

The New American Bible for our Sunday Masses

RSV-CE (Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition and Ignatius Bible are goods


StongAxe: I totally missed the part where nobody anywhere could buy anything without a mark. Or the comet that fell into the sea, destroyed all sea life, and destroyed 1/3 of life on earth. Or the 200 million troops that marched dryshod over the Euphrates. Or the giant locusts with long hair. Were my history lessons deficient?//

The 200 million troops did occur by the Romans. I will try to get you more info.

Your history is okay, but if your Teachers are clueless how can they teach you?
---Nicole_Lacey on 11/6/17


strongaxe states, "I didn't say no EVIDENCE. Except for references like "In the year King Uzziah died", no Bible book STATES when it was written. Scholars only DEDUCE that based on various evidence,"

Sir, respectfully, your Emphatically Wrong...

Example, you stated that the gospels were written after 70 AD, but In Matt 24:1-4 the Lord Jesus prophecies thedestruction of the temple.

All Credible Scholars recognize that 70 AD was the Turningpoint.
---john9346 on 11/6/17


strongaxe states, "Also, while Jesus and the Apostles authoritatively quote OT scriptures and make it clear that they regard them as such, there are no such references that show that during the time the NT was written any of the Apostles regarded any parts of the NT itself as scripture."

This is patently False sir... 2 Pet 3:2, 15-17, 1 Cor 14:37-38, 1 Thes 2:13

This is the same in Revelation as stating Divine Authority.

Its illogical to argue against Self Authentication if someone claims they believe in that which is Self Authenticating itself.

Sir, respectfully, do you take the time to read and study before you post?
---john9346 on 11/6/17


IF Revelation was written by an unknown, I could see and understand any skepticism. We already have the fact that John was the youngest apostle, already wrote St John, and John 1,2 and 3 which no one has ever doubted or said those books don't belong, or questioned its truths or authenthticity. IT testified to Jesus Christ, as all the Apostles were actually chosen to do. No one ever doubted the author as they also had his other letters to validate the authenticity.

Whether in red or just plain black and white was not the main issue....but the very record of quoting Jesus is, by who recorded it, An AUTHENTIC APOSTLE. Written in 95 ad, long after 70ad,( GOD'S PERFECT PLAN) was no mistake or afterthought on Gods part.
---kathr4453 on 11/6/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol


Nicole_Lacey:

You wrote: many people don't know this but most of the things that occurred in the book of Revelation happened in the year 70 A.D.

I totally missed the part where nobody anywhere could buy anything without a mark. Or the comet that fell into the sea, destroyed all sea life, and destroyed 1/3 of life on earth. Or the 200 million troops that marched dryshod over the Euphrates. Or the giant locusts with long hair. Were my history lessons deficient?
---StrongAxe on 11/6/17


Nicole

Which Bible translation in English do you prefer?
---Loony1 on 11/6/17


Loony, many people don't know this but most of the things that occurred in the book of Revelation happened in the year 70 A.D.

Another part speaks about events that occurs during Holy Mass and the rest at the end of the world.

Jeff Calvins and Scott Hahn explain the Book of Revelation very well.

As you said earlier the Bible were written by humans, but I would add to your word that they were protected/guided by the Holy Spirit from any errors.

Now that protection ONLY applied to the Original Texts. There are later translations of the Bible with purposely omitting, changing or adding words, sentences or it's books.
---Nicole_Lacey on 11/6/17


kathr4453:

Greek manuscripts were written in one color. The Original KJV was written in only one color. The use of red ink in some translations is a choice made by neither scripture authors nor translators, but by editors in the bible printing industry. Red ink is never used in the OT, even for words prefiguring Jesus (e.g. Psalm 22).

Many apocryphal books claim to speak words of Jesus or God. When a source speaks of its own authority, that proves nothing. It only matters when someone who is unknown is authenticated by someone else who already has authenticity. E.g. Jesus said the scriptures testified of him, but Pharisees did not believe him, yet believed false prophets who testified only of themselves.
---StrongAxe on 11/6/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


Kathr

If what you believe is based on your own faith and nothing else, then I have no argument with you. Everyone is free to believe whatever he or she wants to believe.
---Loony1 on 11/6/17


Revelation would have to be a SELF to authenticate "IT"SELF. So why was this question ONLY ASKED of Revelation and not ALL scripture? STRANGE! In my Bible, there are verses in RED, in Revelation, As we see in the Gospels, showing these are the very words of Jesus Christ, as recorded by the Apostles. The Word of God is LIVING AND POWERFUL AND SHARPER THAN A TWO EDGE SWORD.

Also, it is the RISEN CHRIST who is speaking...after the resurrection. And as Hebrews testifies...before God spoke to us through Angels, TODAY He speaks to us through His Son, WHICH he did. And again, we all know there are THINGS TO COME, as Paul too testified in Thesselonians 1-2....also backed up,in Revelations.

Scripture authenticates Scripture.
---kathr4453 on 11/6/17


Here's a question....something along the line of Loony1 question.

Did Jesus authenticate Himself as the Son of God, also GOD. We again have so much prophecy in the OT that alone should have authenticated Him as the promised Messiah, YET look at all the scribes, Pharisees and learned men of Israel ...including Paul at one point who totally rejected...not words on a page, but the very Person of those words in their scriptures THEY REJECTED as being an imposter.

So John, I know how you are into scholars etc holding so much weight in deciding what is truth or fact or relevance.....however, that holds NO WEIGHT when it comes to personal faith as we see all through out scripture.
---kathr4453 on 11/6/17


Kathr

I'm a little slow sometimes in my old age. Thank you for your answer. I appreciate it. Blessings to you.

****

StrongAxe

I agree. Nothing can be self-authenticating.
---Loony1 on 11/5/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Bullion


Loony1:

Self-authentication isn't valid, because an inauthentic book can claim to be authentic, and lie about it. Jesus had this same complaint about false prophets - who came in their own name and testified about themselves.
---StrongAxe on 11/5/17


Looney1, Jesus authenticated the apostles. The Apostles were used to spread the Gospel and write the NT. John was clearly asked to WRITE DOWN things to come. Revelation did not write itself. John was carried away like Paul and given REVELATION , not by man, but by God.

Let me ask you, How are Pauls epistles authenticated? Do his epistles authenticate themselves? Maybe by your answer I may more fully understand your question.

Can a book without an author authenticate itself?

Let me give answer a different way. Do the writings of Joseph Smith authenticate themselves as Gods Word. Ans..ABSOLUTELY NOT....THEY CONTRADICT THE WRITTEN WORD AND COVENANT PROMISES. However Revelation does not.
---kathr4453 on 11/5/17


Looney1, you should have gotten the answer to your question by my answer. So I have to wonder if you understand your own question. The answer is YES, and I gave the reason why.....and actually amazed you didn't understand.

I looked up your question to see if it was even a real question,.....Something close...which says" Revelation attests to itself because it attests to supporting scriptures." So I gave you that already. Scripture attests to scripture, or scripture authenticates scripture.

But to be grounded here, Jesus said MY WORDS ARE SPIRIT... So one needs the Holy Spirit to illuminate that truth to our spirit. Jesus is made unto us wisdom and knowledge. The TRUTH is in Christ..and Revelation is ALL CHRIST.
---kathr4453 on 11/5/17


Hi Kathr

I did not quite understand your response.

I asked you if you thought that the Book of Revelation authenticated itself, but you did not give me an answer to my question.

All I was asking for was a yes or no, and why you think so or think not?
---Loony1 on 11/5/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause


john9346:

I didn't say no EVIDENCE. Except for references like "In the year King Uzziah died", no Bible book STATES when it was written. Scholars only DEDUCE that based on various evidence, and there is often some disagreement on that.

Also, while Jesus and the Apostles authoritatively quote OT scriptures and make it clear that they regard them as such, there are no such references that show that during the time the NT was written any of the Apostles regarded any parts of the NT itself as scripture. Revelation alone explicitly claims divine origin.
---StrongAxe on 11/5/17


Looney1, I believe the very same John who wrote St John, John 1,2 and three is the same John who wrote Revelation. Why would John LIE and deceive the Church?

Unless you can find other letters Paul wrote that somehow were disqualified as being Holy Spirit breathed..then maybe we can discuss WHY one sees any as not scripturally sound or authenticated. I gave you many scriptures backing up Revealtion that in fact authenticates Revelation. Scripture authenticates scripture. Or maybe you didn't know that?

And the Holy Spirit also our teacher witnesses to Scripture or the Word of God as being God breathed.
---kathr4453 on 11/5/17


strongaxe said, "Your use of "patently false" is overly strong."

Yes sir, because the vast majority of scholars never put the gospels pass 70 AD they're fairly early... The dating of the gospels after 70 AD is a later invention created by Liberal Scholars who some don't even believe Jesus ever existed. Your also erroneous in stating "Scripture." provides no evidence of dating since the vast majority of scholars use the NT Letters in classifying dates.

Sir, with the utmost respect to you, have you really and truly studied this area I do recall on a prior posting I asked you for a scholar pertaining to this category and you fail to provide one.
---john9346 on 11/4/17


loony1 states, "The gospels had not yet been published at that time."

Sir, What is your proof? Where are your evidence please cite chapter and verse?

Sir, Respectfully, To be taken seriously don't cite google or wikkipedia lol
---john9346 on 11/4/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals


Kathr

Are you saying that the Book of Revelation authenticates itself?
---Loony1 on 11/4/17


Revelation 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:

The very first sentence( no such thing as chapter and verse back then) tells us exactly what the Revelation is. It's the Revelation OF Jesus Christ.....
Sooooo there is no way this was fulfilled in 1492??BC OR whatever. And these 7 churches were not established in 1492??BC. If that were true, there would be no reason for John to write it in the first place or to LIE and say it was THINGS TO COME. As one of Jesus 12 Apostles, the Revelation takes us all the way to looking forward to the NEW Heaven and Earth.
---kathr4453 on 11/4/17


john9346:

Your use of "patently false" is overly strong. Few of the books of the bible (and none in the NT) are dated, so their dates of authorship must be deduced by scholarship, and are thus open to debate, and not iron-clad inerrant scriptural fact.

Mark is believed to be from around 70 A.D. Matthew 70-100. Luke+Acts 60-90. John 80-95. Except Luke, none of these even existed in 66 A.D.

Yes, logic is based on facts. Unfortunately, we don't have facts on this, only educated opinions. The scripture manuscripts doesn't come with a table of contents or bibliography.
---StrongAxe on 11/4/17


I see Revelation the same way I see all scripture. Just as the Lord brought Paul up to the third heaven or paradise and showed Paul things, John also was carried up and shown things to come. I also believe this is the reason WHY the Lord kept John alive....written in 95ad AFTER the distraction of the temple in 70ad.

And just as we see in Matthew 24-25 along with Romans 11 as well as Zechariah 12-14, Isaiah 14, Isaiah 60-66 Ezekiel 36 ( and so many more) all pointing to Revelation , it's God showing us He has NOT forgotten or annulled any of his promises as we see will be fulfilled.
---kathr4453 on 11/4/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting


John9346

The gospels had not yet been published at that time.
---Loony1 on 11/4/17


strongaxe states, "At the time Paul was writing, the Old Testament books were generally accepted as scripture, but none of the New Testament (including the gospels or any of the epistles) were.

This is, "Patently False." when Paul inspired of the Holy Spirit pinned the words, "Theopneustos." this was about 66 AD by then all of the gospels and other NT Letters were known and circulating.

Logic is based on facts and evidence not mere opinion...
---john9346 on 11/3/17


Don't get me wrong.

I like the Book of Revelation and I do read it.

But I think it has caused a great deal of mischief in the church in recent years.
---Loony1 on 11/3/17


I think Revelation has things about what was going on, at the time, plus very helpful and useful things for how to live, now. And it has prophecy. And the principles of how things work can be seen by reading the prophetic parts, and this is how now things can be working, also.

So, Cluny, I would say it is not all preterist or all futurist. And there is plenty which can help us, now.

And Isaiah 55:11 says God's word will do all which God pleases. So, it does not matter how anyone makes it look like we can't understand His word. God knows all He means and intends, and how He in us and our lives will do all He means (c:
---Bill on 11/3/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers


Many people have a difficult time with correction.
---Loony1 on 11/3/17


I see Revelation as an allegory about the struggle of the Christian against the devil.
---Cluny on 11/2/17

I am on the fence about "revelations".

I once believed in the strict preterist interpretation, but I no longer do.

I agree with StrongAxe, many things in Revelation are too specific to be metaphor or allegory.

Also, John was told in Rev. 10 to not reveal the seven thunders and to eat the little book. I see both these items paralleling the experiences of Daniel which to me says they are prophesy.

But, this book is a Revelation of Jesus and the question must be asked, "how does this book increase my knowledge or trust in Jesus".

Personally, for me it does neither.
---Mark_Eaton on 11/3/17


As Cluny said...
...the last book of scripture is named REVELATION (and I was VERY, VERY wrong (shall I do penance, Cluny...or is simply waterboarding myself enough for you?).

Is this how much modern worshipers are filled with the Spirit?......This MUST CHANGE!!.
---faithforfaith on 11/3/17


StrongAxe

You may very well be right about that. You are certainly correct in saying that Paul was referring to the Hebrew scriptures.
---Loony1 on 11/3/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce


faithforfaith, the name of the last book of the NT is REVELATION--the singular, without the final S.

If you don't believe me, look at your own Bible.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 11/3/17


"God is still on the throne"

This is the best opinion I ever heard (it should become more common).

The fact is that the events of Revelations already happened in 1479 B.C. at the battle of Megiddo. In Hebrew, the battle is called Har-mageddon (Rev. 16:16 calls it Armageddon in Hebrew).

The Greek language IS much the same as Hebrew (the Greeks were genetic cousins/brothers.....RECENT discovery).

Revelations ends in the BRONZE AGE (also known as THE END OF CIVILIZATION back then).

Revelations was written to and for the Jews (they were "sons of the KINGDOM", not sons of GOD") and the book is for the slaves/servants of God (Rev. 1).

WE were ADOPTED as SONS OF GOD, NOT SLAVES.
---faithforfaith on 11/3/17


Loony:

Paul wrote a generic statement about books that are scripture, regardless of time or place. Whether or not any particular book actually counts as scripture is a different matter entirely. At the time Paul was writing, the Old Testament books were generally accepted as scripture, but none of the New Testament (including the gospels or any of the epistles) were.

Cluny:

Many of the predictions in Revelation are too specific to be allegory. For example, why beheading? It was not a common punishment at the time, nor at most times since then. It WAS used by Rome to execute Roman citizens, but most Christians were not Roman citizens, and were punished in other ways (crucifixion, fed to lions, etc.).
---StrongAxe on 11/3/17


FWIW, Loony1, the Armenian Church did not accept Revelation until the 1700's.

BTW, I would never say that one book of the Bible is less--or more--important than others. After all, which letter of the alphabet is the least important?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 11/2/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Jewelry


Loony1 said, "Paul said that all scripture is inspired by God. But he said that before the Book of Revelation was written. So it does not necessarily apply to the Book of Revelation."

So are you stating that the book of Revelation isn't "Scripture?"


---john9346 on 11/2/17


Cluny said, " I see Revelation as an allegory about the struggle of the Christian against the devil."

Hope you are aware this puts you in disagreement with Eastern Church Fathers.

Remember what happen to Origen?
---john9346 on 11/2/17


Jeremiah 30:1 - The Word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord saying.

Jeremiah 30:2 - Thus speaketh the Lord God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the Words that I have spoken unto thee in a Book,

Looney : Please- ReRead Revelation 22:20
---RichardC on 11/2/17


God did not sit down and write any of the books of the Bible. They were written with pen and ink but humans.

Paul said that all scripture is inspired by God. But he said that before the Book of Revelation was written. So it does not necessarily apply to the Book of Revelation.
---Loony1 on 11/2/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Furniture


Revelation 22:18 - For I testify unto every man that heareth words of the prophecy of this Book. If any man shall add unto these thing, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book.

Revelation 22:19 - And if any man shall take away from the words of this book of 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.

Revelation 22:20 - He which tesifieth these things saith, Surely I come Quickly, Amen, Even so , Come Lord Jesus.

( Questions ? - Does God let man Compile 66 Books ? Who The author of Revelations God or John ? )
---RichardC on 11/2/17


Cluny

That is also my view. I think it was the last book of the New Testament finally to be added to the canon, east and west. So for me, that means it is probably the least important book in the New Testament.
---Loony1 on 11/2/17


"What do you think? I think the most important concept of the book of revelation is the fact that the Lord is revealing Himself, and His plan for His Church. It's His witnesses of the true kingdom, (the reign of His Spirit within us). To demonstrate His method of operation, or His way. He has set His principles for life, our testimony is a life laid down and made new to test, prove and approve those principles, as a true testimony to the fact that The Fathers ways are true and just, thus best suited for his creation. This is our indictment against Satan, our standing in agreement with the Father decision to destroy him and his works.
---josef on 11/2/17


Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.