Book of Daniel, the key to eschatology

[GraceAndTruth]

The key to eschatology is seeking to understand the phrase "last day". We are in the last time, it began when Christ said "it is finished" the beginning of the reformation,.(Hebrew 9). What will occur on the last day when the Sun and moon are no longer needed as time keepers?

Why not the Amil eschatology?

because history is not on he side of the Amil view

. For bible study I use the bible, of course, history, customs of the time, etc....read the communications of early saints and later theologians,....whatever will enhance my knowledge of a subject. I employ the Hermeneutic method as I find it give insight to a lot of questions that seem to come up again and again that often leads to apostate beliefs.

I am open to hear what others find in their study because I believe iron sharpens iron.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

The abomination of desolation. The time period when there were Kings in Israel ended when the time of reformation had come. The shadows seen the temporal... became the substance of our new faith, the eternal not seen .

You misunderstand what the abomination of desolation is.....it was the army of Rome. Compare Matt 24 and Luke 21 on Olivet Discourse

 

[GraceAndTruth]

REFORMATION began around the 14th to 17th centuries It became the time of Calvin, Zwengli, Augustine, Tyndale, :Wycliffe, and others. The forerunners of the Reformation were the Waldenses, persued and persecuted by Rome for their doctrine.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

Two or three walking together in agreement to the word of God means he is there . Two or three, a family make a denomination as part of the whole bride the church .

Safety in numbers? Perhaps but no law. When David numbered thousands died.

Our agreement is with God and not each other private interpretations. The Bible warns us of those who say we need a man seen to teach us a description of the antichrists the many that are here. Standing in the holy place of God.

Is it Calvinism or Arminianism or both that totally opposes issues with lots of scripture to back them up?

I have yet to see a scripture that can negate the so called 'calvinist' view if taken in context and applied with hermeneutics

 

[GraceAndTruth]

Why is it anytime we discuss this topic it gets to the point where people attack and mock each other? And why is it NO ONE is humble enough to admit when they made a mistake? Is this topic so important we think we have to push out view on the others because if they do nto repent they will go to hell? It makes us look bad. The world laughs at us when we do stuff like this!

You might ponder that question of yours the next time you call someone a "liar" . As you tend to do often.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

In 212 to 500 the creeds were created that stated the beliefs a person must have to be a Christian. Anything contrary to them is heresy. Any Biblical issue outside them is agree to disagree. There are a whole lot of issues that are agree to disagree. That is why there are so many gospel preaching denominations. Calvinism vs Arminianism is an example. Totally opposing issues with lots of scripture to back them up.

You missed the point, tanakh was referring to the insults of Endoscopy, not the content. You KNOW that Endo is known for agressive attacks on anyone who disagrees with her.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

Thats what I thought.

I am a futurist, and never read lindsey and all that other stuff. And don;t worry, Those people can not Mislead people and send them to hell. This is not a gospel issue,, Both futurists and preterists will be in heaven..

Anyway, I just read the word. And when I read anything I always put it up next to the words. And interpreted it that way.

Thank you for admitting you do not study, thought i'd never see that day! Hallelujah

 

[eternally-gratefull]

You misunderstand what the abomination of desolation is.....it was the army of Rome. Compare Matt 24 and Luke 21 on Olivet Discourse

When was the army of rome STANING in the holy place (the name given the inner room of the temple)

 

[eternally-gratefull]

You might ponder that question of yours the next time you call someone a "liar" . As you tend to do often.

You might ponder WHY i call people liars. And not just judge.

I called hm a LIAR because he stated a belief about me and otheers like me which was NOT TRUE.

Maybe the issue is we have no guts to call people out for their sins, unless they disagree with us?? (Ie the friend of my enemy is my enemy, and is always wrong, the friend of my friend is my friend and can do no wrong?

 

[GraceAndTruth]

You missed the point, tanakh was referring to the insults of Endoscopy, not the content. You KNOW that Endo is known for agressive attacks on anyone who disagrees with her.

I need to be ignored........ok I am eating crow agaiin....it was not Endo that tanakh was upset with ......it was our old nemesis, EternallyGrateful.
And now I am going to take a break before I make any more messes this morning.

 

[tourist]

When did "the sacrifice and the oblation" cease, and by what cause?

There was mentioned also about an abomination of desolation or something like that.

 

[dcontroversal]

I have threatened more than I have done it. I am sure the mods would get mad if we reported every time we threaten..lol But this attitude of blame shifting drives me crazy!

If you did something wrong, and someone calls you out. Be a man and fess up to it. Stop blaming everyone else..

Fully agree my friend......100%

 

[garee]

because history is not on he side of the Amil view

. For bible study I use the bible, of course, history, customs of the time, etc....read the communications of early saints and later theologians,....whatever will enhance my knowledge of a subject. I employ the Hermeneutic method as I find it give insight to a lot of questions that seem to come up again and again that often leads to apostate beliefs.

I am open to hear what others find in their study because I believe iron sharpens iron.

Not sure what you meant as far as history not on he side of the Amil view?

 

[garee]

I have yet to see a scripture that can negate the so called 'calvinist' view if taken in context and applied with hermeneutics

'Calvinist' view is in respect to the many or as many? I will offer a few.

Matthew 14:36 And besought him that they might only touch the hem of his garment: and as many as touched were made perfectly whole.

Matthew 20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:


John 8:30As he spake these words, many believed on him.


John 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

 

[Endoscopy]

Two or three walking together in agreement to the word of God means he is there . Two or three, a family make a denomination as part of the whole bride the church .

Safety in numbers? Perhaps but no law. When David numbered thousands died.

Our agreement is with God and not each other private interpretations. The Bible warns us of those who say we need a man seen to teach us a description of the antichrists the many that are here. Standing in the holy place of God.

Is it Calvinism or Arminianism or both that totally opposes issues with lots of scripture to back them up?

It gets tiring hearing this same tired old hearing the concept stated many different ways. The Biblical issues are defined by men creating documents to look at an issue by looking at all of the scripture relating to it. That is what theologians do. Going back to the early elders there was many diverse opinions of many issues. Their response was to create the creeds
The creeds do 3 things as I have stated before.
1. Define what a Christian must believe.
2. Anything contrary is heresy.
3. Any Biblical issue outside it is to agree to disagree.

This last is exemplified by the many gospel preaching denominations and independent churches. Each church and denomination create a statement of doctrine explaining their view of the several issues defining their view of scripture.

If you go to a Bible book store there are lots of books that try to help Christians understand different issues. All written by men. So why do so many on this site go with Bible only. And nothing written by men?

 

[Endoscopy]

'Calvinist' view is in respect to the many or as many? I will offer a few.

Matthew 14:36 And besought him that they might only touch the hem of his garment: and as many as touched were made perfectly whole.

Matthew 20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:


John 8:30As he spake these words, many believed on him.


John 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

What are you trying to say? None of those verses has anything to do for or against the Calvinist view. Since Calvinism and Armenianism fall outside of the creeds then the issues are agree to disagree. That is what the early elders stated about it. We have many more issues of agree to disagree. All of he different gospel preaching denominations are proof of this.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

'Calvinist' view is in respect to the many or as many? I will offer a few.

Matthew 14:36 And besought him that they might only touch the hem of his garment: and as many as touched were made perfectly whole.

Matthew 20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:


John 8:30As he spake these words, many believed on him.


John 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

I thought better of you than to use scripture like that
Matt 20:28 is about healing
John 1:12, you only posted HALF the sentence, which actually ends in v13 (good hermeneutics, remember?)
John 8:30 many believed, does not say ALL it says in v31 that Jesus spoke to those who believed
John 17:2 to as many as .again not all

Look at the discourse of the Good Shepherd ie: JOhn 10, in verses 26 & 27 He says that His sheep hear His voice, others are not of His sheep

Just asking, but you don't hold to univeral salvation, do you??

 

[GraceAndTruth]

Not sure what you meant as far as history not on he side of the Amil view?

Suggest you read Josephus Antiquities, I think it is book 12..........about the events around the Jewish Wars of 66AD to 70AD
Josephus was a Jewish historian who traveled with the army of Rome and was THERE.

Tertullian wrote around 200 to the Jews explaining them going through the "great trib"

I can site several more but you get the drift as to history not being on the side of Amil. Early writers talk about it as a past event.
Position being that all prophecy to the JEWS has been fulfilled, prophecy to the church is being fulfilled and has a future fulfillment in the end of all things.

 

[garee]

It gets tiring hearing this same tired old hearing the concept stated many different ways. The Biblical issues are defined by men creating documents to look at an issue by looking at all of the scripture relating to it. That is what theologians do. Going back to the early elders there was many diverse opinions of many issues. Their response was to create the creeds
The creeds do 3 things as I have stated before.
1. Define what a Christian must believe.
2. Anything contrary is heresy.
3. Any Biblical issue outside it is to agree to disagree.

This last is exemplified by the many gospel preaching denominations and independent churches. Each church and denomination create a statement of doctrine explaining their view of the several issues defining their view of scripture.

If you go to a Bible book store there are lots of books that try to help Christians understand different issues. All written by men. So why do so many on this site go with Bible only. And nothing written by men?

Not saying they could be helpful but not the way designed to seek the approval of God.

Why nothing written by men other than we are warned of those who would seduce us by saying we need a man to teach us as the MO of antichrists? (1 John3:2627)

Creeds are creeds as private interpretations of men nothing more . God's word is God's word nothing less.

 

[Dino246]

Not saying they could be helpful but not the way designed to seek the approval of God.

Why nothing written by men other than we are warned of those who would seduce us by saying we need a man to teach us as the MO of antichrists? (1 John3:2627)

Creeds are creeds as private interpretations of men nothing more . God's word is God's word nothing less.

We don't read to seek the approval of God; we read to learn.

You have an issue with private interpretation, but your private interpretation that has led your issue is erroneous. It would be helpful if you read 2 Peter 1:20 and understood it for what it clearly and simply states. It does not say what you think it says!