The Rapture

[J7]

A beautiful picture, one very true and descriptive. And I don't want to take anything away from it's truth. But if the Jewish system was the primary focus of the event, why did Jesus immediately tie it to the power of faith?

I think this is yet another two-fold manifestation of God. Yes the withered fig tree exampled the death of the Jewish system, something the disciples had already caught on to. But it also showed that if we believe in Jesus instead, look at what we can do!

So it's not an either - or, God's word is bigger than all our earthly languages can contain.

The whole world was about to change, from visible, tangible things - Israel and Jerusalem - to invisible things, the Kingdom Of Heaven which comes not with observation. It was a huge change. Peter struggled to shake off the old.

[FONT=&quot]Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.[/FONT]

 

[J7]

Re the other trees, are they the other cities of Israel?

I.E. When you see Israel being re-inhabited, then the times are nigh?

 

[KJV1611]

Never God's chosen people?

Are you aware that the Jewish race is the descendants of Isaac??? Sarah's son

Ishmael is of Hagar.

Yes I'm aware, but what I'm saying is that earthly lineage has nothing to do with God's people. God's people have ALWAYS been the children of the promise. Romans 9:8, the children of flesh descent are not the children of God (chosen). The children of the promise (Isaac, Jacob and all the other old testament saints) are counted for the seed, or in other words are God's chosen people.

Romans 9:8 KJV
That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

Isaac was a flesh child of Abraham and a spiritual child of Abraham (child of the promse). For which reason was Isaac chosen, his fleshly lineage (being an earthly Jew) or his spiritual lineage (being a spiritual Jew)?

 

[PlainWord]

That's not what the bible says. They cannot have blood sacrifice without the temple...The man of sin signs a covenant with the Jews that allows them to build the temple, have blood sacrifice for three and a half years when he will break that covenant and set himself up as king. Daniel
2 Thess Check it

I have checked out 2 Thes 2 and Dan 9, like a billion times. Have you checked out history for past fulfillment?

Did any or all of the things discussed happen to the second temple?

In Dan 9 we are told that "the people of the Prince to come will destroy the sanctuary and city by fire and leave the city desolate."

Was Titus a prince at the time? Yes
Did he destroy the temple and city by fire? Yes
Did he leave the city desolate? Yes
Did this desolation continue until the war ended? Yes
Did sacrifices end when the temple was destroyed? Yes

Dan 9 seems completed to me. What else are you waiting for? Why are you looking to a future temple and city? Since you have no problem adding a 2,000+ year gap, I would think a 40 year gap would be a little easier to swallow.

As for 2 Thes 2:

A Man of Sin, Son of Perdition, or Lawless One sits in the temple exalting himself to be above God and everything that is worshiped showing himself to be God.

Notice he doesn't claim to be God, he just allows himself to be exalted above God and allows himself to be worshiped as God.

Could a leader who destroys the temple ending the Law be considered, "Lawless?"
If his troops were to offer up sacrifices to him in the Jewish temple and bow down and worship him would that be an event to study? I would think it should be looked at very carefully.

 

[KJV1611]

Rom 11;17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?

See that? They are covenant. You have to factor in the fact that they,the jews,whether you like it or not are family and God is not through with them.

enter jacob's trouble (the great tribulation)

Below is the olive tree and the two branches.

Zechariah 4:11-14 KJV
Then answered I, and said unto him, What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof?
[12] And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?
[13] And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be ? And I said, No, my lord.
[14] Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

The olive tree is Christ, the Word of God. The olive tree on the left is the old testament, the one on the right is the new testament - the Word of God.

The two olive branches, one a natural branch and the other the grafted in branch, these two branches empty olive oil out of themselves, the the oil for the lamp comes from them... thy word is a lamp unto my feet. Without the oil, the lamp (the word of God) doesn't produce any light.

If a branch stops allowing the olive oil to run out of itself, then the branch is cut off and this is what happened to flesh Israel, because of unbelief, the majority of them were cut off because the olive oil dried up in them.

 

[PlainWord]

When you have an historical father-son dual worshiped as deities by an oppressive empire who ruled over Israel then later were responsible for destroying the temple thereby ending the sacrifices and Law, that should cause us to pause and ask ourselves if this event fulfilled any prophesy.

Add to this the fact that Vespasian (who came to Israel first) "restrained" or held back Titus until Vespasian was called back to Rome to be Emperor and thus Titus came and finished off the Jews. This little tidbit of information should perk up a few more ears.

Then if we read Josephus and learn about the Jewish Tyrants inside the city who robbed, pillaged and killed the people by sword, sickness, disease, etc to the point where they were responsible for so much suffering that many of the people were actually delighted when Titus showed up hoping he would deliver them. Many actually looked upon Titus as their Messiah and the Romans certainly thought Titus was not only King of the World but also was the long anticipated Jewish Messiah. If we start adding some of these facts to the Table suddenly 2 Thes 2, Rev 13 and Dan 9 start coming into focus.

But of course, the big question which nobody on here has come to understand (except me), is the issue of the "Day of the Lord" and the coming (parousia) of Christ. Because nobody thinks this happened ~ 70 AD, they ignore all the other facts which seem to line up. However, once the "day of the Lord" is understood as divine judgment and that this term was used to describe at least 3 other periods of divine judgment (Egypt, Babylon and Edom) and if we recognize that apostate Israel lost favor with God because they rejected and killed His Son, then we might be able to consider that a 4th "day of the Lord" came upon Israel.

But what about the parousia of Christ? Did the presence of Christ return ~ 70 AD to execute judgment? This is the million $ question. The first thing to understand is the nature of a parousia. What does the word mean and how was it used by the ancients? Normal use of parousia is that a dignitary (important person, usually a king or other high ranking official) comes to visit and stays for a period of time before returning to his "throne" or capitol.

Many believe that when Christ returns that He comes snatches the righteous off the planet and quickly leaves again with the whole event taking what 10-15 mins? But do we have any passage telling us that? If Christ were to return to execute judgment against Jerusalem, wouldn't He need to hang out until the job was finished? This is the clear meaning of the word as we see from the interlinear Bible.

 

[PlainWord]

Below is the olive tree and the two branches.

Zechariah 4:11-14 KJV
Then answered I, and said unto him, What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof?
[12] And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?
[13] And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be ? And I said, No, my lord.
[14] Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

The olive tree is Christ, the Word of God. The olive tree on the left is the old testament, the one on the right is the new testament - the Word of God.

The two olive branches, one a natural branch and the other the grafted in branch, these two branches empty olive oil out of themselves, the the oil for the lamp comes from them... thy word is a lamp unto my feet. Without the oil, the lamp (the word of God) doesn't produce any light.

If a branch stops allowing the olive oil to run out of itself, then the branch is cut off and this is what happened to flesh Israel, because of unbelief, the majority of them were cut off because the olive oil dried up in them.

Yes, and the oil represents the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

 

[tanakh]

I think I am going to write a Screenplay about this mythical Covenant. How about:

"The Seven Year Hitch"

This ''seven year Covenant'' is not found in Daniel or anywhere else in the Bible including Revelation. It is created by the following You take the 70th week of years. You shunt it foreward by a few thousand years. You take Jesus words about a great tribulation and identify it with Daniels seventieth week. You assume the Prince that is to come in Daniel is the Antichrist/Beast and he makes a Covenant with Israel for the seven weeks of years. You take Jesus words about the Abomination of Desolation to mean a distant future event instead of the one that happened in AD70. In order for the Antichrist to desecrate the holy place you need a Temple according to the teaching. So you have another temple built to accommodate this. Thats how the Temple Sacrifices cease. So Hey Presto you have it!

There is another far older explanation. Some verses to consider.....

And this I say that the covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ
the Law, which was four hundred and thirty years after cannot disannul that it should
make the promise of none effect.

Gal 3:17

Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God to confirm the promises
made to the Fathers

Rom 15:8

This is my blood of the new testament (covenant) which is shed for many for the remission of sins

Matt 26:28

The Covenants in the Bible are all made by God. Nowhere does it say that the Antichrist makes or breaks a covenant with anyone.

The seventieth week started with the ministry of John the Baptist and ended with the death of Stephen after which the Gospel was preached to the Gentiles. Halfway through the week Christ was crucified and the Temple Sacrifices ceased to be valid.
There will be a period of severe tribulation before the second coming but much of what is believed by Christians now was not believed by some of the greatest Preachers and Theologians in History

 

[KJV1611]

Yes, and the oil represents the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

I don't know PW, to say the oil represents the Holy Spirit infers that branches had the Holy Spirit and then lost the Holy Spirit. Believers don't lose the Holy Spirit.

The oil must be symbolic of something else... I think maybe it symbolizes knowledge of the scriptures and true knowledge of the scripture does come from the Holy Spirit but it's not the Holy Spirit itself.

 

[Issachar92]

earthly Jerusalem is done as well.

What about Zechariah 14:4 and Acts 1:11?

 

[KJV1611]

What about Zechariah 14:4 and Acts 1:11?

I don't know about Zechariah 14:4, I don't know if that happened when Jesus set foot on the mount of Olives the first time he came or if it will happen when he comes the second time. Sometimes I think it's future but then when I consider verses like Zech 14:8 and compare that to John 4:10, it seems that the living waters went out of Jerusalem at the first coming.

Zechariah 14:8 KJV
And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

John 4:10 KJV
Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.

 

[KJV1611]

What about Zechariah 14:4 and Acts 1:11?

Acts 1:11 KJV
Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

Does that mean he's returning to Jerusalem because he left from Jerusalem? I don't know for sure, but I think he will. He's got to come back some where. When I said earthly Jerusalem I meant, the religious system not the literal city. When the two witnesses are finished with their testimony their dead bodies are going to be in Jerusalem.

The second coming is an area that I'm weak in, I still after several years, carry a lot of dispensational baggage that I was taught as a young Christian.

 

[Issachar92]

Maybe the dispensational baggage is called Bible teaching and believing the Word of God.
Just because people like John Hagee make a mockery of dispensationalists don't mean that the doctrine is wrong! That's like saying Mormons believe in Jesus, therefore we shouldn't.

 

[KJV1611]

Maybe the dispensational baggage is called Bible teaching and believing the Word of God.
Just because people like John Hagee make a mockery of dispensationalists don't mean that the doctrine is wrong! That's like saying Mormons believe in Jesus, therefore we shouldn't.

I'm not talking about the fruit loops like John Hagee, I'm talking about normal good people like you, the things you believe. The error with dispensationalism starts with - Flesh Israel is God's people... everything else the dipensationalist believes is based off that one fatal error. If you understood that flesh Israel is not God's chosen people and never have been, then your views on the "end times" would be completely different.

Unfortunatley you guys are so brainwashed by this belief that you just stop up your ears and refuse to listen when someone tires to show you the truth about Israel.

 

[KJV1611]

Below is the olive tree and the two branches.

Zechariah 4:11-14 KJV
Then answered I, and said unto him, What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof?
[12] And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?
[13] And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be ? And I said, No, my lord.
[14] Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

The olive tree is Christ, the Word of God. The olive tree on the left is the old testament, the one on the right is the new testament - the Word of God.

The two olive branches, one a natural branch and the other the grafted in branch, these two branches empty olive oil out of themselves, the the oil for the lamp comes from them... thy word is a lamp unto my feet. Without the oil, the lamp (the word of God) doesn't produce any light.

If a branch stops allowing the olive oil to run out of itself, then the branch is cut off and this is what happened to flesh Israel, because of unbelief, the majority of them were cut off because the olive oil dried up in them.

If anyone can correct or add to this, please do. I think understanding this chapter is key to understanding the 2 witnesses in Revelation.

 

[tanakh]

I have checked out 2 Thes 2 and Dan 9, like a billion times. Have you checked out history for past fulfillment?

Did any or all of the things discussed happen to the second temple?

In Dan 9 we are told that "the people of the Prince to come will destroy the sanctuary and city by fire and leave the city desolate."

Was Titus a prince at the time? Yes
Did he destroy the temple and city by fire? Yes
Did he leave the city desolate? Yes
Did this desolation continue until the war ended? Yes
Did sacrifices end when the temple was destroyed? Yes

Dan 9 seems completed to me. What else are you waiting for? Why are you looking to a future temple and city? Since you have no problem adding a 2,000+ year gap, I would think a 40 year gap would be a little easier to swallow.

As for 2 Thes 2:

A Man of Sin, Son of Perdition, or Lawless One sits in the temple exalting himself to be above God and everything that is worshiped showing himself to be God.

Notice he doesn't claim to be God, he just allows himself to be exalted above God and allows himself to be worshiped as God.

Could a leader who destroys the temple ending the Law be considered, "Lawless?"
If his troops were to offer up sacrifices to him in the Jewish temple and bow down and worship him would that be an event to study? I would think it should be looked at very carefully.

The Antichrist comes from within the Church. The Church is the Temple not one made of stone Antichrist is not one single man but a spirit that manifests itself through false believers.

 

[Issachar92]

The Antichrist comes from within the Church. The Church is the Temple not one made of stone Antichrist is not one single man but a spirit that manifests itself through false believers.

Nope, its a literal temple. When you see Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet.
Also think about it like this: Jesus was a Jew, therefore the AntiChrist should be a Jew as well to fool everyone.

 

[PlainWord]

The Antichrist comes from within the Church. The Church is the Temple not one made of stone Antichrist is not one single man but a spirit that manifests itself through false believers.

I agree that the Church is the Temple not made with hands.

The Man of Son, Lawless One, Son of Perdition was indeed Titus. He fits every clue without exception.

There is no future "antiChrist" prophesied.

 

[garee]

If anyone can correct or add to this, please do. I think understanding this chapter is key to understanding the 2 witnesses in Revelation.

I think the two witnesses are.... 1 the law of God represented by Moses according to the letter of the law that shows all men are dead in our trespasses and sin and.... 2 the prophets represented by Elisa the Spirit of God, the law of faith .

The end times timing that works the best is that of the Amil no literal thousand year reign . The one time demonstration in respect to the temporal flesh ended when he disappeared into the clouds . God is not a man as us. Never was never could be. Eternal Spirit remains without mother or father beginning of Spirit life nor end thereof

 

[PlainWord]

In Daniel 7:25, the little horn, Titus, is said to “speak against the Most High.” In Gittin 56b of the Babylonian Talmud records the fulfillment of this verse immediately following the worship of Caesar and Rome in the Temple on the 9[SUP]th[/SUP] of Av of A.D. 70:

Vespasian sent Titus who said, “Where is their God, the rock in whom they trusted?” This was the wicked Titus who blasphemed and insulted Heaven. What did he do? He took a harlot by the hand and entered the Holy of Holies and spread out a scroll of the Law and committed a sin on it. He then took a sword and slashed the curtain. Miraculously blood spurted out, and he thought that he had slain God himself.

After assuming that he had killed God, did Titus affirm his divinity while being worshiped as a god in the Temple? This fact seems even more likely when considering the fact that while on his way back to Rome Gittin 56b of the Babylonian Talmud also records General Titus’ haughty challenge to the Almighty God of Israel: “If he [the God of Israel] is really mighty, let him come up on the dry land and fight with me.” In light of this blasphemous challenge, the fact that Titus was worshiped in the Temple, and the fact that Titus thought that he had slain the Lord of Israel, one might safely assume that Titus fulfilled of 2 Thessalonians 2:4: “He sets himself up in God’s Temple proclaiming himself to be God.”