Announcement

Collapse

Eschatology 201 Guidelines

This area of the forum is primarily for Christian theists to discuss orthodox views of Eschatology. Other theist participation is welcome within that framework, but only within orthodoxy. Posts from nontheists that do not promote atheism or seek to undermine the faith of others will be permitted at the Moderator's discretion - such posters should contact the area moderators before posting.


Without turning this forum into a 'hill of foreskins' (Joshua 5:3), I believe we can still have fun with this 'sensitive' topic.

However, don't be misled, dispensationalism has only partly to do with circumcision issues. So, let's not forget about Innocence, Conscience, Promises, Kingdoms and so on.

End time -isms within orthodox Christianity also discussed here. Clearly unorthodox doctrines, such as those advocating "pantelism/full preterism/Neo-Hymenaeanism" or the denial of any essential of the historic Christian faith are not permitted in this section but can be discussed in Comparative Religions 101 without restriction. Any such threads, as well as any that within the moderator's discretions fall outside mainstream evangelical belief, will be moved to the appropriate area.

Millennialism- post-, pre- a-

Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and Preterism, or just your garden variety Zionism.

From the tribulation to the anichrist. Whether your tastes run from Gary DeMar to Tim LaHaye or anywhere in between, your input is welcome here.

OK folks, let's roll!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Martyrdom of Antipas

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
    No, I think it's just that most people can recognize instinctively that the mentions of a time, times, and half a time as described in Revelation 11, 12, and 13 don't have anything to do with Masada.
    Well, I can see your problem...your interpreting Scripture "instinctively".
    Masada was the final death nail in the Jewish War. It marked the end of Israel as a Nation and as God's "chosen people". That paved the way for the Church "whether Jew or Greek". I think that's a pretty important reason

    Nor is there any logical reason why the millennium would start at the end of Masada.
    What do you mean by "logical reason"? I haven't seen anywhere in Scripture that God's timing requires "logic"...at least logic we always understand.
    One, there is no indication that God ever remarried Israel after the Assyrian/Babylonian captivity, so there could be no possible adultery.
    I agree, because couldn't remarry Israel.
    Two, remarrying the same woman that you previously divorced is not considered adultery.
    Incorrect. The Law was very clear on this point. If a man divorced his wife and she went in to another man, he was forbidden to remarry her.

    Deuteronomy 24:1-4:
    1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.
    2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.
    3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;
    4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

    The only way the" wife" (Israel) could be freed from the stain of having been "put away" (divorced) by God was for God (her husband) to die which would annul and dissolve original marriage contract. Paul understood that when, using the law to explain, he reminded the Jews that the law only has jurisdiction over a person until their death. When the person dies, any judgments, contracts, or obligations are then made moot/void.

    Romans 7:1-3:
    1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?
    2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
    3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.


    Your idea that "spiritual Israel" is somehow different from national Israel is completely unjustified.
    No...not really. The original covenant was with the Nation of Israel.

    Hosea 2:19-20

    19 And I will betroth thee unto me for ever;
    yea, I will betroth thee unto me in righteousness,
    and in judgment, and in lovingkindness, and in mercies.
    20 I will even betroth thee unto me in faithfulness:
    and thou shalt know the Lord.
    Right? The promise is fulfilled in the Church.
    "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

    "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
      Except they don't. The entirety of Andrew of Caesarea's commentary on Antipas (found in his commentary on Revelation) is "Antipas, whose name had become known as the bravest martyr in Pergamum, whose martyrdom I hâve read, the Evangelist now mentioned to point to both their patience and the cruelty of those who had been led astray." Andrew gives absolutely no details whatsoever that could be used to match it up with what Symeon writes.

      The point is that he "read an account", meaning an account existed. Symeon later records an account of Antipas dying under Domitian. With no mention of even the possibility that he died under Nero. Are we to believe that this "well known" account had become so corrupted that all association with Nero had become obliterated? Nonsense. Occam's Razor, silly preterists.

      Your argument that Antipas being "delivered from the last trial" indicates clear knowledge of what Metaphrastes wrote about is already quite speculative and a stretch, but even that is ruined by the fact you're misreading what Tertullian wrote. The "delivered from the last trial" isn't even being used to refer to Antipas. It certainly wasn't in the original Revelation, as Revelation 3:10 is completely unrelated to the mention of Antipas. But even if we ignore the original context of Revelation, the fact Tertullian clearly switches which church he's referring to shows he's also not referring to Antipas with that "delivered from the last trial."

      This is made even more obvious if we examine the fuller context:
      John, in fact, exhorts us to lay down our lives even for our brethren, 1 John 3:16 affirming that there is no fear in love: For perfect love casts out fear, since fear has punishment; and he who fears is not perfect in love. 1 John 4:18 What fear would it be better to understand (as here meant), than that which gives rise to denial? What love does he assert to be perfect, but that which puts fear to flight, and gives courage to confess? What penalty will he appoint as the punishment of fear, but that which he who denies is about to pay, who has to be slain, body and soul, in hell? And if he teaches that we must die for the brethren, how much more for the Lord, — he being sufficiently prepared, by his own Revelation too, for giving such advice! For indeed the Spirit had sent the injunction to the angel of the church in Smyrna: Behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that you may be tried ten days. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you a crown of life. Revelation 2:10 Also to the angel of the church in Pergamus (mention was made) of Antipas, Revelation 2:13 the very faithful martyr, who was slain where Satan dwells. Also to the angel of the church in Philadelphia Revelation 3:10 (it was signified) that he who had not denied the name of the Lord was delivered from the last trial. Then to every conqueror the Spirit promises now the tree of life, and exemption from the second death.

      Tertullian is simply rattling off examples of biblical passages that allude to his point, with the Antipas reference being clearly distinct from what comes immediately before and immediately afterwards. The "he who had not denied the name of the Lord was delivered from the last trial" is being used as a more general statement and is not a specific reference to Antipas.
      Tertullian's "point" is the necessity of being willing to be martyred for the brethren and it clearly hinges on the historical fact of Antipas doing so and the further argument that the Lord's promise to "deliver from the last trial" had been kept in Antipas. Rev 3:10 says I will keep you from the last trial, whereas Tertullian--referring to a singular "he"--applies it in the past to "he" who had not denied the Lord. It's ridiculous to say none of what comes before or after applies to Antipas. Did Antipas not die for the brethren? Did his love not cast out his fear? Was he not faithful unto death?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
        Since you insist history is being distorted, I find your obsession with historical details strange since you have no proof they are being altered - what proof can YOU show of Antipas is not corrupt?

        Huh??? First you mock me for affirming the Mandela Effect and then you suggest that my argument is not that persuasive because of the possibility of it being Mandela effected? Get your logic straight, lady.

        But I will offer a couple of scriptures I was reminded of recently,

        2 Cor 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

        And

        Phil. 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death

        Rather than focusing on something about a plot to trick and deceive believers... focus on the power of the power of Christ and his resurrection. Since even death could not hold Christ, pursue him and not speculation that leads away from such single minded worship and pursuit.
        Christ came so that we could have life, not so that we could try to escape punishment for our sins by regurgitating trite catchphrases about Him and what He came to do. He also said that the only worshippers He and His Father seek are truth seekers. If you have no concern about reality being altered contrary to God's decree, you are not a truth seeker and your worship of God is merely rules made up by men, as it was for the people Jesus condemned when He came the first time. I witness the power of Christ in my life everyday by my improved ability to discern, expose and avoid lies and wickedness. Do you?

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
          That doesn't show Partial Preterism wrong at all... The covenant wasn't just with Jerusalem, it was with the Nation of Israel. Jerusalem and the Temple (although huge events no doubt) weren't the only thing. God divorced Israel for her continued unfaithfulness.
          It's weird that you underline Israel here, but later try to pass off "the church" as Israel. Why are you selectively literal with what Israel means?

          Scripture Verse: Jeremiah 3:1


          “If a man divorces his wife
          and she leaves him and marries another man,
          should he return to her again?
          Would not the land be completely defiled?
          But you have lived as a prostitute with many lovers—
          would you now return to me?”
          declares the Lord.
          2
          “Look up to the barren heights and see.
          Is there any place where you have not been ravished?
          By the roadside you sat waiting for lovers,
          sat like a nomad in the desert.
          You have defiled the land
          with your prostitution and wickedness.
          3
          Therefore the showers have been withheld,
          and no spring rains have fallen.
          Yet you have the brazen look of a prostitute;
          you refuse to blush with shame.
          4
          Have you not just called to me:
          ‘My Father, my friend from my youth,
          5
          will you always be angry?
          Will your wrath continue forever?’
          This is how you talk,
          but you do all the evil you can.”

          6 During the reign of King Josiah, the Lord said to me, “Have you seen what faithless Israel has done? She has gone up on every high hill and under every spreading tree and has committed adultery there. 7 I thought that after she had done all this she would return to me but she did not, and her unfaithful sister Judah saw it. 8 I gave faithless Israel her certificate of divorce and sent her away because of all her adulteries. Yet I saw that her unfaithful sister Judah had no fear; she also went out and committed adultery. 9 Because Israel’s immorality mattered so little to her, she defiled the land and committed adultery with stone and wood. 10 In spite of all this, her unfaithful sister Judah did not return to me with all her heart, but only in pretense,” declares the Lord.
          11 The Lord said to me, “Faithless Israel is more righteous than unfaithful Judah. 12 Go, proclaim this message toward the north:
          “‘Return, faithless Israel,’ declares the Lord,
          ‘I will frown on you no longer,
          for I am faithful,’ declares the Lord,
          ‘I will not be angry forever.
          13
          Only acknowledge your guilt—
          you have rebelled against the Lord your God,
          you have scattered your favors to foreign gods
          under every spreading tree,
          and have not obeyed me,’”
          declares the Lord.
          14 “Return, faithless people,” declares the Lord, “for I am your husband. I will choose you—one from a town and two from a clan—and bring you to Zion.

          © Copyright Original Source



          God directly refutes your crap argument about not marrying the same woman you've sent away and who has been unfaithful to you. All through Scripture, God states that He is faithful even when we are faithless. You would make a liar of Him to avoid having to prove your faith in the coming tribulation.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by LittleJoe
            Well, I can see your problem...your interpreting Scripture "instinctively".
            Masada was the final death nail in the Jewish War. It marked the end of Israel as a Nation and as God's "chosen people". That paved the way for the Church "whether Jew or Greek". I think that's a pretty important reason
            No, the end of Israel as a "nation" was the Assyrian captivity. The end of Judea as a "nation" was the Babylonian captivity. Masada had little to do with anything.

            Incorrect. The Law was very clear on this point. If a man divorced his wife and she went in to another man, he was forbidden to remarry her.
            . . . .
            The only way the" wife" (Israel) could be freed from the stain of having been "put away" (divorced) by God was for God (her husband) to die which would annul and dissolve original marriage contract. Paul understood that when, using the law to explain, he reminded the Jews that the law only has jurisdiction over a person until their death. When the person dies, any judgments, contracts, or obligations are then made moot/void.
            One, that law only applied when the wife remarried, and two, you are completely changing your arguments from what you said above. Above you said that "National Israel" needed to be killed in order to let God/Jesus remarry someone else. Now you are saying that Jesus needed to be killed in order for him to remarry the very same woman. Even assuming that your latter point is correct (it is not) about Jesus needing to die in order to remarry the same wife, what could that possibly have to do with Revelation?

            And the church, without any separation of Jews and Greeks, was already in effect starting with the crucifixion.

            Comment


            • #51
              @Darfius

              The book's reference to making the Jews come and worship at Christians' feet (Revelation 3:9) and the command to measure the temple in Jerusalem (Revelation 11:1) both make it fairly clear that Revelation was written before the Jewish War. Any writers who made comments to the contrary could simply be mistaken.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
                @Darfius

                The book's reference to making the Jews come and worship at Christians' feet (Revelation 3:9) and the command to measure the temple in Jerusalem (Revelation 11:1) both make it fairly clear that Revelation was written before the Jewish War. Any writers who made comments to the contrary could simply be mistaken.
                Not the Jews, but "those who say they are Jews." And the command to measure the temple is in parallel to Ezekiel 40, because the temple will be rebuilt "in times of trouble" = tribulation

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Darfius View Post
                  Huh??? First you mock me for affirming the Mandela Effect and then you suggest that my argument is not that persuasive because of the possibility of it being Mandela effected? Get your logic straight, lady.
                  Exactly my point....your logic doesn't work when applied, does it?
                  Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
                    Exactly my point....your logic doesn't work when applied, does it?
                    "My" logic is that despite the fact that the devil is being allowed to alter reality to a limited extent, he does not have carte blanche to do so and it is still our responsibility to pursue and discern truth.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
                      Masada was the final death nail in the Jewish War. It marked the end of Israel as a Nation and as God's "chosen people".
                      Hi Littlejoe,

                      The entire chapter of Romans 11 indicates there will be no end to the nation of Israel, or Israel as God's "chosen people":

                      1 I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means!

                      11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!

                      25 I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, 26 and in this way all Israel will be saved.

                      28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.

                      This is one of the main reasons I cannot accept the Preterist view. They don't recognize the future destiny of Israel, which is separate from that of the Church.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
                        … and the command to measure the temple in Jerusalem (Revelation 11:1) both make it fairly clear that Revelation was written before the Jewish War.
                        Hi Obsidian,

                        You are assuming that the reference is to measuring the 2nd temple which was destroyed in 70 AD, but Daniel 9 speaks of a future 3rd temple which will be built after this which will be desecrated by the antichrist prior to Christ's 2nd Coming:

                        26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. 27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.

                        Note the order of events.

                        1) The Anointed One is put to death - a clear reference to Christ's crucifixion in 30 AD.
                        2) The people of a coming ruler will destroy the city and the sanctuary - Titus and his legions destroying Jerusalem and its temple in 70 AD.
                        3) A covenant is confirmed for one 7 of years - the remaining "week" of the prophecy. This takes place AFTER the destruction caused by the Roman legions, indicating a gap of time between the 69th and 70th week, otherwise the destruction of the temple takes place after the 490 years of the prophecy has run its course (There is no precedent of listing a future event outside the given timeframe, while there are precedents for gaps within prophecies - for example, the 2000 year gap between the "Year of the Lord's favour" and "The Day of Vengeance" - See Luke 4:16-21 where Jesus quotes Isa. 61:1, 2 but stops at a comma in the text, because while the year of God's favour was fulfilled that very day, the day of vengeance would wait until Armageddon at Christ's 2nd Coming)
                        4) In the middle of this last 7 years, an abomination will be set up in the temple and the sacrifices will cease - this indicates a 3rd temple will be rebuilt in the future, and THIS is the temple John was to measure in his vision.

                        We know this 3rd temple is built just prior to Christ's 2nd Coming because Jesus tells us in Matt. 24:

                        15 “So WHEN YOU SEE standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel - let the reader understand - 16 then let those who are in Judea FLEE to the mountains... 21 FOR THEN there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again...
                        29 “IMMEDIATELY AFTER the distress of those days... 30 “THEN will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven.

                        Again, note the order of events:

                        1) The Jews will see the abomination of the temple spoken of by Daniel the prophet.
                        2) There will be unparalleled distress.
                        3) Immediately after this period of distress, will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven.

                        The Apostle Paul also confirms the existence of a third Jewish temple in Jerusalem at the time of Christ's coming in 2 Thess. 2:

                        3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that HE SETS HIMSELF UP IN GOD'S TEMPLE, proclaiming himself to be God...
                        8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, WHOM THE LORD JESUS WILL OVERTHROW with the breath of his mouth and destroy BY THE SPLENDOR OF HIS COMING.

                        Again, note the order of events:

                        1) The Day of the Lord will not come until the man of lawlessness is revealed.
                        2) He sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God.
                        3) The Lord Jesus destroys him with the splendor of his coming.

                        So Paul puts the desecration of a future temple just prior to Christ's 2nd Coming, in agreement with Jesus' prophecy that the abomination will take place in the Jewish temple as stated by Daniel, which Jesus also puts in the future just prior to His return in glory.

                        So here we have Daniel, Jesus and Paul linking the desecration of a Jewish temple to a time just prior to Jesus' return, so this means there will be a future 3rd temple built in Jerusalem, and THIS is the temple which John was told to measure in his vision in Rev. 11:1 (the court of which is given to the Gentiles).
                        Last edited by xcav8tor; 04-26-2019, 12:58 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that HE SETS HIMSELF UP IN GOD'S TEMPLE, proclaiming himself to be God...
                          So where is this third temple? Paul died before the second temple was destroyed - and there is nothing in the text to show that he is referring to any temple other than the one that, should he visit Jerusalem, he would see.
                          1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                          .
                          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                          Scripture before Tradition:
                          but that won't prevent others from
                          taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                          of the right to call yourself Christian.

                          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                            So where is this third temple? Paul died before the second temple was destroyed - and there is nothing in the text to show that he is referring to any temple other than the one that, should he visit Jerusalem, he would see.
                            What is the rebellion Paul is speaking of? Rebellion by who against whom? Dissect the text a little more carefully, so you are not caught unaware on that day.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Darfius View Post
                              What is the rebellion Paul is speaking of? Rebellion by who against whom? Dissect the text a little more carefully, so you are not caught unaware on that day.
                              Your beliefs might have me looking south when the important events are happening in the north-east.
                              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                              .
                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                              Scripture before Tradition:
                              but that won't prevent others from
                              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                              of the right to call yourself Christian.

                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                                Your beliefs might have me looking south when the important events are happening in the north-east.
                                Don't speak in riddles, you aren't Christ. Say what you mean plainly.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X