Did Some Illumination of Scripture only appear 1800 years after the Revelation?

[Ethan1942]

It has been understood in the church that there is "revelation", that which Holy Spirit inspired men to write, and there is "illumination" where the Holy Spirit guides believers into understanding what He revealed correctly. That is the meaning of 2 Pet. 1:20-21. We cannot interpret God's word apart from the Holy Spirit who inspired it, He who revealed it.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVue
or
"Above all else, however, remember that none of us can explain by ourselves a prophecy in the Scriptures. For no prophetic message ever came just from the human will, but people were under the control of the Holy Spirit as they spoke the message that came from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 GNB

My question is this: Did the Holy Spirit not illuminate what He inspired until the mid 19th century? Was the church in the dark about an important passage in the NT until the mid-1800s?

"So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place." Mat 24:33-34 NRSVue
or
"In the same way, when you see all these things, you may know that the end is near, at the very door. Truly I tell you: the present generation will live to see it all." (Matt 24:33-34 REB)

In Matthew, Mark and Luke, the language makes clear that the generation to whom Jesus was speaking were to see "all these things" he had been describing. It takes some real scripture twisting to make the passage mean otherwise.

Therefore, can anyone quote from men of God out of the past who thought and taught that Matthew 24:1-35 was describing some 7-year tribulation period still future to us, which followed a rapture of the church? I can only conclude that the teaching that the Mt. Olivet discourse is discribing what Dispensationalists claim, is pure nonsense! Here is my challenge. There is a web site with over 100 commentaries and Greek language studies of the NT online where we can access beliefs of the church in the past. Find one prior to 100-150 years ago that taught the crazy notion being taught in our day.

https://www.studylight.org/

Did the Holy Spirit only illuminate Matthew 24, Mark 13 andn Luke 21 to His people in the last 100-150 years or so? I deny that the truth of God in this passage only became clear since Darby and Scofield.

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

It has been understood in the church that there is "revelation", that which Holy Spirit inspired men to write, and there is "illumination" where the Holy Spirit guides believers into understanding what He revealed correctly. That is the meaning of 2 Pet. 1:20-21. We cannot interpret God's word apart from the Holy Spirit who inspired it, He who revealed it.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVue
or
"Above all else, however, remember that none of us can explain by ourselves a prophecy in the Scriptures. For no prophetic message ever came just from the human will, but people were under the control of the Holy Spirit as they spoke the message that came from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 GNB

My question is this: Did the Holy Spirit not illuminate what He inspired until the mid 19th century? Was the church in the dark about an important passage in the NT until the mid-1800s?

"So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place." Mat 24:33-34 NRSVue
or
"In the same way, when you see all these things, you may know that the end is near, at the very door. Truly I tell you: the present generation will live to see it all." (Matt 24:33-34 REB)

In Matthew, Mark and Luke, the language makes clear that the generation to whom Jesus was speaking were to see "all these things" he had been describing. It takes some real scripture twisting to make the passage mean otherwise.

Therefore, can anyone quote from men of God out of the past who thought and taught that Matthew 24:1-35 was describing some 7-year tribulation period still future to us, which followed a rapture of the church? I can only conclude that the teaching that the Mt. Olivet discourse is discribing what Dispensationalists claim, is pure nonsense! Here is my challenge. There is a web site with over 100 commentaries and Greek language studies of the NT online where we can access beliefs of the church in the past. Find one prior to 100-150 years ago that taught the crazy notion being taught in our day.

https://www.studylight.org/

Did the Holy Spirit only illuminate Matthew 24, Mark 13 andn Luke 21 to His people in the last 100-150 years or so? I deny that the truth of God in this passage only became clear since Darby and Scofield.

I agree with some things you say. What is your position about when the Lord comes to collect us? I believe the Bible shows that the Lord will come to collect us after the great tribulation, at the seventh trumpet (the last trumpet).


🧇

 

[Dino246]

It has been understood in the church that there is "revelation", that which Holy Spirit inspired men to write, and there is "illumination" where the Holy Spirit guides believers into understanding what He revealed correctly. That is the meaning of 2 Pet. 1:20-21. We cannot interpret God's word apart from the Holy Spirit who inspired it, He who revealed it.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVue
or
"Above all else, however, remember that none of us can explain by ourselves a prophecy in the Scriptures. For no prophetic message ever came just from the human will, but people were under the control of the Holy Spirit as they spoke the message that came from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 GNB

This verse is much-misinterpreted. The GNB version you quoted is (unfortunately) an excellent example of such, and it seems that version leads directly to your question. The NRSV is much better, but still misrepresents the core concept.

The KJV presents the idea soundly: "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."

If you prefer modern English, both the NASB and NIV get it right:

NASB "for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

NIV "For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."

Here's what it means, literally: None of the prophecies that are recorded in Scripture came about from human effort to interpret the events of the times. In constrast, genuine prophecy comes only by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

The verse has nothing to do with interpreting Scripture!

My question is this: Did the Holy Spirit not illuminate what He inspired until the mid 19th century? Was the church in the dark about an important passage in the NT until the mid-1800s?

Obviously, no.

"So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place." Mat 24:33-34 NRSVue
or
"In the same way, when you see all these things, you may know that the end is near, at the very door. Truly I tell you: the present generation will live to see it all." (Matt 24:33-34 REB)

In Matthew, Mark and Luke, the language makes clear that the generation to whom Jesus was speaking were to see "all these things" he had been describing. It takes some real scripture twisting to make the passage mean otherwise.

I agree... but try convincing a pre-millenial dispensationalist weaned on Scofield to see that.

There are some parts of Jesus' discourse that are difficult to reconcile with the events around AD 70, but it is better to wrestle with the minority that don't make (easy) sense than to relocate the fulfillment of the entire passage to the then-distant future.

 

[Magenta]

The verse has nothing to do with interpreting Scripture!

I agree. Many get it wrong.

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

This verse is much-misinterpreted. The GNB version you quoted is (unfortunately) an excellent example of such, and it seems that version leads directly to your question. The NRSV is much better, but still misrepresents the core concept.

The KJV presents the idea soundly: "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."

If you prefer modern English, both the NASB and NIV get it right:

NASB "for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

NIV "For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."

Here's what it means, literally: None of the prophecies that are recorded in Scripture came about from human effort to interpret the events of the times. In constrast, genuine prophecy comes only by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

The verse has nothing to do with interpreting Scripture!


Obviously, no.


I agree... but try convincing a pre-millenial dispensationalist weaned on Scofield to see that.

There are some parts of Jesus' discourse that are difficult to reconcile with the events around AD 70, but it is better to wrestle with the minority that don't make (easy) sense than to relocate the fulfillment of the entire passage to the then-distant future.

Oh I see, so you guys don't believe in dual fulfillment?


🧇

 

[Ethan1942]

This verse is much-misinterpreted. The GNB version you quoted is (unfortunately) an excellent example of such, and it seems that version leads directly to your question. The NRSV is much better, but still misrepresents the core concept.

The KJV presents the idea soundly: "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."

If you prefer modern English, both the NASB and NIV get it right:

NASB "for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

NIV "For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."

Here's what it means, literally: None of the prophecies that are recorded in Scripture came about from human effort to interpret the events of the times. In constrast, genuine prophecy comes only by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

The verse has nothing to do with interpreting Scripture!


Obviously, no.


I agree... but try convincing a pre-millenial dispensationalist weaned on Scofield to see that.

There are some parts of Jesus' discourse that are difficult to reconcile with the events around AD 70, but it is better to wrestle with the minority that don't make (easy) sense than to relocate the fulfillment of the entire passage to the then-distant future.

Dino, you seem mighty sure of your pick of interpretation of the passage, where I find as far back as I can read in Matthew Poole, there have been two understandings of the passage. I will stay with my understanding and explain more why. First, I have high respect for the translators of the NRSVue which again, reads:

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVAue

I take the connecting word "because" or "for" in some translations, to show the authenticity of the prophet's writings because they spoke as moved by the Holy Spirit. In the NRSVue, it is "one's own interpretation", which obviously means you the reader. The Revised English Bible next -

"But first note this: no prophetic writing is a matter for private interpretation. It was not on any human initiative that prophecy came; rather, it was under the compulsion of the Holy Spirit that people spoke as messengers of God." (2Pet 1:20-21 REB)

The REB's "a matter for private interpretatioon" again is speaking to the reader, and the reason it is not for one's own interpretation is, as in v21, the prophets spoke as inspired or moved by God. I see no reason to make the interpretation of v20 refer to the prophet's authenticity, when v21 makes that perfectly clear. In the Revised English Bible/Oxford Study Bible, the annotation points one to 2 Pet. 3:16 and the comment there -

"He does the same in all his other letters, wherever he speaks about this, though they contain some obscure passages, which the ignorant and unstable misinterpret to their own ruin, as they do the other scriptures." (2Pet 3:16 REB)

OSB Note - "Heretics are false interpreters of the scriptures (see 1.19-21), within which Paul's letters are included."

The NET Bible has a long translators note taking the position that you do, Dino. But, when I find good Greek scholars who cannot agree on the meaning, I go to what I consider a common sense reading of the majority of English translations, and I'll stay with my presentation as in the OP. I'll stay with the first interpretation as given by Matthew Poole -

"That no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation: the Greek word here used may be rendered, either:

1. As our translators do, interpretation, or explication; and then the meaning is, not that private men are not to interpret the Scripture, only refer all to the church; but that no man nor company of men, no church nor public officers, are to interpret the Scripture of their own heads, according to their own minds, so as to make their private sense be the sense of the Scripture, but to seek the understanding of it from God, who shows them the meaning of the word in the word itself, (the more obscure places being expounded by the more clear), and by his Spirit leads believers, in their searching the Scripture, into the understanding of his mind in it: God himself being the author of the word, as 2Pe 1:21, is the best interpreter of it. Or: ....."

 

[Ethan1942]

Oh I see, so you guys don't believe in dual fulfillment?


🧇

If a prophecy can have two fulfillments, why not three or four? It has to mean one thing or it is meaningless. Now, let me add to that or clarify, just as Jesus said the time when the last day arrives, it will be like in Noah's time, it is as in a type. I do not deny that the little season when Satan is released at the end of the 1000 years, it will of course be similar to the lead up to 70AD. I'm post millennial, if one is puzzled by my remark on the 1000 years.

 

[Publican]

It has been understood in the church that there is "revelation", that which Holy Spirit inspired men to write, and there is "illumination" where the Holy Spirit guides believers into understanding what He revealed correctly. That is the meaning of 2 Pet. 1:20-21. We cannot interpret God's word apart from the Holy Spirit who inspired it, He who revealed it.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVue
or
"Above all else, however, remember that none of us can explain by ourselves a prophecy in the Scriptures. For no prophetic message ever came just from the human will, but people were under the control of the Holy Spirit as they spoke the message that came from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 GNB

My question is this: Did the Holy Spirit not illuminate what He inspired until the mid 19th century? Was the church in the dark about an important passage in the NT until the mid-1800s?

"So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place." Mat 24:33-34 NRSVue
or
"In the same way, when you see all these things, you may know that the end is near, at the very door. Truly I tell you: the present generation will live to see it all." (Matt 24:33-34 REB)

In Matthew, Mark and Luke, the language makes clear that the generation to whom Jesus was speaking were to see "all these things" he had been describing. It takes some real scripture twisting to make the passage mean otherwise.

Therefore, can anyone quote from men of God out of the past who thought and taught that Matthew 24:1-35 was describing some 7-year tribulation period still future to us, which followed a rapture of the church? I can only conclude that the teaching that the Mt. Olivet discourse is discribing what Dispensationalists claim, is pure nonsense! Here is my challenge. There is a web site with over 100 commentaries and Greek language studies of the NT online where we can access beliefs of the church in the past. Find one prior to 100-150 years ago that taught the crazy notion being taught in our day.

https://www.studylight.org/

Did the Holy Spirit only illuminate Matthew 24, Mark 13 andn Luke 21 to His people in the last 100-150 years or so? I deny that the truth of God in this passage only became clear since Darby and Scofield.

I was at the gas station, the young man pumped the gas while I paid. I came out to my truck and couldn't find the gas cap. I always set it on the bumper or roof or on the pump. It was nowhere. And then I looked at the the little gas cap cover, apparently there's a little slot in the cover to stow the cap while fueling.
I'm 57, been pumping gas 40 years and never noticed that little thing.
I thanked the kid for teaching me something new and gave him a tip.

I felt kinda the same way when many years ago I read the verses that you quoted. Oh man, I've got it all wrong I thought. And I did. And I'm so grateful for figuring that out.

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

If a prophecy can have two fulfillments, why not three or four? It has to mean one thing or it is meaningless. Now, let me add to that or clarify, just as Jesus said the time when the last day arrives, it will be like in Noah's time, it is as in a type. I do not deny that the little season when Satan is released at the end of the 1000 years, it will of course be similar to the lead up to 70AD. I'm post millennial, if one is puzzled by my remark on the 1000 years.

God doesn't need to have more than two fulfillments, He's not frivolous. I think God does dual fulfillment to give an idea: the first fulfillment occurs soon after the prophecy is declared in part and then the second comes to pass in the farther future, but in full. The partial first is to give us an idea of what the complete second fulfillment will be like.

So what happened in 70ad will give us an idea of what it will be like in the latter fulfillment, only worse. So we can prepare for what's to come.


🧇

 

[Dino246]

Oh I see, so you guys don't believe in dual fulfillment?


🧇

Generally, no.

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

Generally, no.

So what happens when the mark of the beast comes? Are you going to take it because you don't see it as such? Because it already happened in the past?

I really want to know what your group will do about that.


🧇

 

[Dino246]

Dino, you seem mighty sure of your pick of interpretation of the passage, where I find as far back as I can read in Matthew Poole, there have been two understandings of the passage. I will stay with my understanding and explain more why.

Yes, I am "mighty sure" that the interpretation to which I hold is the correct one. Any commentator or interpreter can be wrong, no matter how "old" their writings.

First, I have high respect for the translators of the NRSVue which again, reads:

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVAue

I take the connecting word "because" or "for" in some translations, to show the authenticity of the prophet's writings because they spoke as moved by the Holy Spirit. In the NRSVue, it is "one's own interpretation", which obviously means you the reader.

Let's add verse 19 to the conversation (here in the NIV):

We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Peter states that the "prophetic message" is something to be relied upon. We can't very well rely on something we don't understand. In contrast, we can rely on scriptural prophecy "because" it isn't merely human interpretation.

The Revised English Bible next -

"But first note this: no prophetic writing is a matter for private interpretation. It was not on any human initiative that prophecy came; rather, it was under the compulsion of the Holy Spirit that people spoke as messengers of God." (2Pet 1:20-21 REB)

The REB's "a matter for private interpretatioon" again is speaking to the reader, and the reason it is not for one's own interpretation is, as in v21, the prophets spoke as inspired or moved by God. I see no reason to make the interpretation of v20 refer to the prophet's authenticity, when v21 makes that perfectly clear.

The wording "no prophecy... is a matter of one's own interpretation" is itself an interpretation... which results in a catch-22 situation.

If such were a valid interpretation, it would declare for all time that readers of Scripture are not permitted (or not capable) of interpreting prophecy. That means every single preacher, teacher, writer, etc. as well as the vast majority of "regular" Christians who ever attempted or will attempt to interpret prophecies in the Bible is actually violating this principle. That doesn't make sense!

I'm also certain that such a view of this passage has been used abusively to shut down disagreement over interpretation. "This verse says prophecy is not for private interpretation! You must accept MY interpretation of all prophecy!" The view I hold avoids such carnal silliness.

In the Revised English Bible/Oxford Study Bible, the annotation points one to 2 Pet. 3:16 and the comment there -

"He does the same in all his other letters, wherever he speaks about this, though they contain some obscure passages, which the ignorant and unstable misinterpret to their own ruin, as they do the other scriptures." (2Pet 3:16 REB)

OSB Note - "Heretics are false interpreters of the scriptures (see 1.19-21), within which Paul's letters are included."

Yes, it is certainly possible for misguided people to misinterpret Scripture. It is also possible for well-meaning Christian people to misinterpret Scripture. If we take this note to its logical end, every person who ever misinterpreted a verse of Scripture is "a heretic". Shall we go there? I hope not.

The NET Bible has a long translators note taking the position that you do, Dino. But, when I find good Greek scholars who cannot agree on the meaning, I go to what I consider a common sense reading of the majority of English translations, and I'll stay with my presentation as in the OP. I'll stay with the first interpretation as given by Matthew Poole -

"That no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation: the Greek word here used may be rendered, either:

1. As our translators do, interpretation, or explication; and then the meaning is, not that private men are not to interpret the Scripture, only refer all to the church; but that no man nor company of men, no church nor public officers, are to interpret the Scripture of their own heads, according to their own minds, so as to make their private sense be the sense of the Scripture, but to seek the understanding of it from God, who shows them the meaning of the word in the word itself, (the more obscure places being expounded by the more clear), and by his Spirit leads believers, in their searching the Scripture, into the understanding of his mind in it: God himself being the author of the word, as 2Pe 1:21, is the best interpreter of it. Or: ....."

Which we should be doing in all our study of Scripture, not just the prophetic parts. Here's the problem: even the most sensitive among us have difficulty determining (in the moment) whether an idea comes from God or from our own heads. We are given the tools to examine ideas and determine, on the basis of available evidence (of Scripture and experience), whether the idea is good or not good, and we give credit to God for any good ideas. Did God give me this idea? Ultimately, yes. Did He endow me with the intelligence to examine available interpretations and determine which makes the best sense to me? Also, yes.

Poole's note in its entirety makes good sense, but it still leaves us with the awkward sense that individual Christians should not think for themselves. Again, my view on verse 21 avoids this whole complication, and in my private interpretation, my view makes better "common sense" than yours.

 

[glf]

God doesn't need to have more than two fulfillments, He's not frivolous. I think God does dual fulfillment to give an idea: the first fulfillment occurs soon after the prophecy is declared in part and then the second comes to pass in the farther future, but in full. The partial first is to give us an idea of what the complete second fulfillment will be like.

So what happened in 70ad will give us an idea of what it will be like in the latter fulfillment, only worse. So we can prepare for what's to come.


🧇

Much like Revelations message to the angels of the seven Churches which were in Asia...

 

[Dino246]

So what happens when the mark of the beast comes? Are you going to take it because you don't see it as such? Because it already happened in the past?

I really want to know what your group will do about that.


🧇

"Generally", does not mean "absolutely". I do pay attention to what's happening in the world, and I'm not so stuck on my view of prophetic fulfillment that I would deny such may happen in the future. I do hold that many events prophesied for the "end times" have already taken place. That said, I don't hold to a "group" in this regard.

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

"Generally", does not mean "absolutely". I do pay attention to what's happening in the world, and I'm not so stuck on my view of prophetic fulfillment that I would deny such may happen in the future. I do hold that many events prophesied for the "end times" have already taken place. That said, I don't hold to a "group" in this regard.

That's really good to hear! As long as you're being a watchman for yourself and family and just stick close to God to help you recognize things, you'll be okay.

I would like to hear from other people who don't believe in all the end times stuff. So any of you out there, you can chime in any time!


🧇

 

[glf]

It has been understood in the church that there is "revelation", that which Holy Spirit inspired men to write, and there is "illumination" where the Holy Spirit guides believers into understanding what He revealed correctly. That is the meaning of 2 Pet. 1:20-21. We cannot interpret God's word apart from the Holy Spirit who inspired it, He who revealed it.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVue
or

It has been understood in the church that there is "revelation", that which Holy Spirit inspired men to write, and there is "illumination" where the Holy Spirit guides believers into understanding what He revealed correctly. That is the meaning of 2 Pet. 1:20-21. We cannot interpret God's word apart from the Holy Spirit who inspired it, He who revealed it.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVue
or
"Above all else, however, remember that none of us can explain by ourselves a prophecy in the Scriptures. For no prophetic message ever came just from the human will, but people were under the control of the Holy Spirit as they spoke the message that came from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 GNB

My question is this: Did the Holy Spirit not illuminate what He inspired until the mid 19th century? Was the church in the dark about an important passage in the NT until the mid-1800s?

"So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place." Mat 24:33-34 NRSVue
or
"In the same way, when you see all these things, you may know that the end is near, at the very door. Truly I tell you: the present generation will live to see it all." (Matt 24:33-34 REB)

In Matthew, Mark and Luke, the language makes clear that the generation to whom Jesus was speaking were to see "all these things" he had been describing. It takes some real scripture twisting to make the passage mean otherwise.

Therefore, can anyone quote from men of God out of the past who thought and taught that Matthew 24:1-35 was describing some 7-year tribulation period still future to us, which followed a rapture of the church? I can only conclude that the teaching that the Mt. Olivet discourse is discribing what Dispensationalists claim, is pure nonsense! Here is my challenge. There is a web site with over 100 commentaries and Greek language studies of the NT online where we can access beliefs of the church in the past. Find one prior to 100-150 years ago that taught the crazy notion being taught in our day.

https://www.studylight.org/

Did the Holy Spirit only illuminate Matthew 24, Mark 13 andn Luke 21 to His people in the last 100-150 years or so? I deny that the truth of God in this passage only became clear since Darby and Scofield.

"Above all else, however, remember that none of us can explain by ourselves a prophecy in the Scriptures. For no prophetic message ever came just from the human will, but people were under the control of the Holy Spirit as they spoke the message that came from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 GNB

My question is this: Did the Holy Spirit not illuminate what He inspired until the mid 19th century? Was the church in the dark about an important passage in the NT until the mid-1800s?

"So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place." Mat 24:33-34 NRSVue
or
"In the same way, when you see all these things, you may know that the end is near, at the very door. Truly I tell you: the present generation will live to see it all." (Matt 24:33-34 REB)

In Matthew, Mark and Luke, the language makes clear that the generation to whom Jesus was speaking were to see "all these things" he had been describing. It takes some real scripture twisting to make the passage mean otherwise.

Therefore, can anyone quote from men of God out of the past who thought and taught that Matthew 24:1-35 was describing some 7-year tribulation period still future to us, which followed a rapture of the church? I can only conclude that the teaching that the Mt. Olivet discourse is discribing what Dispensationalists claim, is pure nonsense! Here is my challenge. There is a web site with over 100 commentaries and Greek language studies of the NT online where we can access beliefs of the church in the past. Find one prior to 100-150 years ago that taught the crazy notion being taught in our day.

https://www.studylight.org/

Did the Holy Spirit only illuminate Matthew 24, Mark 13 andn Luke 21 to His people in the last 100-150 years or so? I deny that the truth of God in this passage only became clear since Darby and Scofield.

In Lu 21: 24:
And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
Jesus' prophecy above was fulfilled in 1967, when Israel regained Jerusalem.
Lu 21: 25-26:
And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
I suspect this refers to the burning mountain that will kill one third of the world's population, sink one third of its ships, and polute one third of its rivers.
Lu 21: 27:
And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
This, I suspect, refers to the mid-trib rapture of the Church's departure from the earth. Which will inspire 144,000 Jewish believers to turn to the Lord; 12,000 from each tribe. Those tribes that were lost, were not lost to the Lord. (See Rev 7: 4-8)
2 Thes 2: 6-8:
And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, (Based upon the Greek, this should be translated "hinder will hinder," rather that letteth will let.")
It is the Chruch that withholds, hindering the man of sin from being revealed in his time as Jesus said in Mt 16: 16-19:
And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter(Petros), and upon this rock(Petra) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (See Rev 7: 9-17 If you check the scripture prior to this, you'll see that the elders mentioned here in Rev 4, refers to both the Jewish tribal patriarchs and Jesus' twelve apostles.)
IMO... : )

 

[glf]

So what happens when the mark of the beast comes? Are you going to take it because you don't see it as such? Because it already happened in the past?

I really want to know what your group will do about that.


🧇

I suspect that the USA, which will be ground zero for the burning mountain, and China will not be a part of the anti-christ's 10 nation kingdom and will not therefore be required to worship the beast and the antichrist to receive the mark of the beast...

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

I suspect that the USA, which will be ground zero for the burning mountain, and China will not be a part of the anti-christ's 10 nation kingdom and will not therefore be required to worship the beast and the antichrist to receive the mark of the beast...

Can you explain what burning mountain you're talking about? I honestly don't know.

The thing about the antichrist's 10 nation kingdom? I wasn't sure what that meant before, but the globalists have said they want to divide the world into ten regions or zones, so that all the nations of the world will fall into one of the ten regions or zones.

I have nothing against China so if they can keep out of the antichrist's control, that would be great for them. I did read though that when the river Euphrates dries up that the kings of the East (I think not just China, but Japan, Korea, India and the SEA nations) will cross the river and fight the antichrist.


🧇

 

[glf]

Can you explain what burning mountain you're talking about? I honestly don't know.

The thing about the antichrist's 10 nation kingdom? I wasn't sure what that meant before, but the globalists have said they want to divide the world into ten regions or zones, so that all the nations of the world will fall into one of the ten regions or zones.

I have nothing against China so if they can keep out of the antichrist's control, that would be great for them. I did read though that when the river Euphrates dries up that the kings of the East (I think not just China, but Japan, Korea, India and the SEA nations) will cross the river and fight the antichrist.
🧇

Rev 8: 7-12:
The first four of seven trumpet judgements are sounded:
1st Trumpet) vs. 7: The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up.
2nd Trumpet) vs. 8-9: And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood; And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed.
3rd Trumpet) vs. 10-11: And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters; And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.
4th Trumpet) vs. 12-13: And the fourth angel sounded, and the third part of the sun was smitten, and the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; so as the third part of them was darkened, and the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise. And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!
These four trumpets deal in destructions of thirds. Trees and grass probably including vegetation in northern South America and southern North America, I imagine. A mountain burning with fire, which I suspect is a meteor hits in what I suspect will be the gulf of Mexico; killing sea life and the ships in this same area. The falling star can be another meteor or the same burning mountain listed in the prior verse; makes the rivers, lakes, and ground waters in these same areas polluting them with wormwood. A cloud of dust and debris will make the sun, moon, and stars to dim by a third expanding in the earth's atmosphere to cover the world, making crops all over to be less productive, which in turn will lead to the price of food to cost a days wages.
The reason, I suspect, that this occurs where it does is because it can't happen in Russia as the King of the North will be taken out when they attack Israel during the 2nd half of the Great Tribulation. Nor can it occur in Africa as North Africa will be taken out when they attact Israel shortly after Russia does. Europe and Asia must meet in the battle of Armageddon so they also will not be in the impact zone(s).
1 Pet 4: 17:
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
These first four trumpet judgements that, IMO, occur in the sourthern US and northern S. America become an act of mercy by the Lord because many of those that die from this judgement, will die before they have time to "fall away," from the Lord as per 1 Tim 4: 1:
Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
And in 2 Thes 2: 3:
Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
Let me add here that the difference between stumbling and falling away is that when someone stumbles he gets back up, but when he falls away, 2 Pet 2: 20-21:
For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.

The ten nations of the antichrist will be Europe, backed by the euro-dollar...

 

[montana123]

It has been understood in the church that there is "revelation", that which Holy Spirit inspired men to write, and there is "illumination" where the Holy Spirit guides believers into understanding what He revealed correctly. That is the meaning of 2 Pet. 1:20-21. We cannot interpret God's word apart from the Holy Spirit who inspired it, He who revealed it.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVue
or
"Above all else, however, remember that none of us can explain by ourselves a prophecy in the Scriptures. For no prophetic message ever came just from the human will, but people were under the control of the Holy Spirit as they spoke the message that came from God." 2Pe 1:20-21 GNB

My question is this: Did the Holy Spirit not illuminate what He inspired until the mid 19th century? Was the church in the dark about an important passage in the NT until the mid-1800s?

"So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place." Mat 24:33-34 NRSVue
or
"In the same way, when you see all these things, you may know that the end is near, at the very door. Truly I tell you: the present generation will live to see it all." (Matt 24:33-34 REB)

In Matthew, Mark and Luke, the language makes clear that the generation to whom Jesus was speaking were to see "all these things" he had been describing. It takes some real scripture twisting to make the passage mean otherwise.

Therefore, can anyone quote from men of God out of the past who thought and taught that Matthew 24:1-35 was describing some 7-year tribulation period still future to us, which followed a rapture of the church? I can only conclude that the teaching that the Mt. Olivet discourse is discribing what Dispensationalists claim, is pure nonsense! Here is my challenge. There is a web site with over 100 commentaries and Greek language studies of the NT online where we can access beliefs of the church in the past. Find one prior to 100-150 years ago that taught the crazy notion being taught in our day.

https://www.studylight.org/

Did the Holy Spirit only illuminate Matthew 24, Mark 13 andn Luke 21 to His people in the last 100-150 years or so? I deny that the truth of God in this passage only became clear since Darby and Scofield.

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

1Jn 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

Jas 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

The Spirit will always teach us the whole of the Bible.

But there are some passages that people cannot understand until they happen for they cannot understand beforehand.

Dan 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Dan 12:8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?
Dan 12:9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

Daniel did not understand what was told him but was told to go his way, and not be concerned with it for the book is sealed until the time of the end, which means no person can understand it until the time of the end.

Which they can understand it at the time of the end for many shall run to and fro, advanced travel, and knowledge shall be increased, advanced technology, which then the saints can know, see, and hear what is going on in the world, and how it is possible for the nations governments to come together with an operation that is contrary to the operation of God and be ruled by a man exalting himself above all gods people worship.

So even though it was written many years ago people could not understand it until the time of the end.

Nah 2:3 The shield of his mighty men is made red, the valiant men are in scarlet: the chariots shall be with flaming torches in the day of his preparation, and the fir trees shall be terribly shaken.
Nah 2:4 The chariots shall rage in the streets, they shall justle one against another in the broad ways: they shall seem like torches, they shall run like the lightnings.

This is obviously speaking of automobiles with the headlights, there will be tight knit traffic, and they would move fast.

Nahum did know to call them automobiles but he knew chariots was a form of transportation but less advanced.

Would they be able to understand that back then.

Isa 31:4 For thus hath the LORD spoken unto me, Like as the lion and the young lion roaring on his prey, when a multitude of shepherds is called forth against him, he will not be afraid of their voice, nor abase himself for the noise of them: so shall the LORD of hosts come down to fight for mount Zion, and for the hill thereof.
Isa 31:5 As birds flying, so will the LORD of hosts defend Jerusalem; defending also he will deliver it; and passing over he will preserve it.

This seems to be speaking of the 1967, 6 day war, when Israeli fighter pilots paved the way to win the war which they took control of Jerusalem.

Would they understand that back then.