Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 38
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,958
    Quote Originally Posted by sylvius View Post
    I thought the Babylon of Revelation alluded to Rome.
    This is a position of the seventh day adventists. I do not support this position.

    Jerusalem was Babylon the Great (as they were also called in the Old Testament) because they were not only overtaken, corrupted, and contaminated by the Babylonian culture under king Nebuchadnezzar, their ideals in the days of Christ mimicked the Babylonians. Everything about first century Judaism was not God-like at all; it was very foreign and mimicked Babylonian practices and its ancient culture. That's why Babylon the Great was first century Jerusalem. Some speculate Peter's phrase, "She who is in Babylon sends you greetings" to reference ancient Jerusalem. Some believe (as I do) that Peter was not killed in Rome as the RCC taught, but that he was killed in Jerusalem. Then again, we do not know. Paul states that he and Timothy were given charge to preach to the Gentiles, while James and Peter concentrated on Israel. In fact, Jesus told Peter, "you shall not have gone through all of the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.."

    What I find interesting is the total lack of proof that Peter traveled to Rome and being crucified in Rome.

    Anyways, Babylon the Great is the same "Great City" that was cast down as a huge millstone, losing its light and never to be found again; losing the voice of the bride and bridegroom and never to be heard again. Jerusalem is Babylon, the mother of Harlots (someone who sells themselves to another), drunk with the blood of the Saints (Matthew 23), haunt of everything unclean (Woe to you Scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites!).

    Very difficult to disprove these important points my friend.

    Joseph
    Israel is more than just a race; it is more than just a nation; it is the people of God, from faith, by faith, and only faith. Those who assemble in the name of Christ Jesus, embrance Israel because they are Israel

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Enschede / Netherlands
    Posts
    2,602
    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    I don't follow you. Could you please explain how you came to a theoretical conclusion that my thesis involving ancient Jerusalem as "Sodom" and "Egypt" does not stand?
    I meant your thesis that Jesus came to save people from Jerusalem like the angels came to save Lot from Sodom.



    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    What helps in a discussion, and which prevents any topic of becoming confused and stagnant, all oppositions must be provided in a contextual sense. The quote you've provided from my post involved the judgment of Israel, more specifically, those who refused to repent matched exactly with the judgment upon Sodom,
    In the case of Sodom there is no question of repentance that could have saved the Sodomites. Lot was not saved because he did repent.


    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    (...) With regards to Sodom and Gomorrah, Jesus used their example of how it would be when the temple in Jerusalem would be destroyed.
    Jesus didn't compare it to the destruction of the temple, but to the parousia.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    They would eat, drink, and act as though no calamity would come upon them (and this we know they did), and yet more than 1.1 million Israeli's were slaughtered by the Romans, and their temple was destroyed,
    It was not at a sudden. The war lasted for several years.


    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    exactly as Daniel predicted.
    Daniel wrote about the destruction under Antiochus I as described in 1 Maccabees 1



    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    It is not easily done because our Calendars Julian based, and the Hebrews used a lunar based Calendar. Therefore, no one can say for certain when an order was issued (what date/year).
    It's not about an order that was issued, but about a word that went forth at the beginning of Daniel's supplications (Daniel 9:23)

    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    (...) But during the middle of the final seven, the Messiah would be cut-off.
    It is not written ""the Messiah", but "a messiah" = an anointed one, probably the High Priest Onias III


    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    First century Christians understood this (despite what you may have been taught) and used this argument to prove to the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah.
    Can you also back that up?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    Thus, the Hellenists (after the 2nd century) began altering the Torah and removing verses pertaining to Christ from the Old Testament.



    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    This is why I reject any Jewish Torah today as it is all based on more than a 1,000 years worth of corruption.
    Can you also provide an example of where it is altered and what is altered?


    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    The Greek Septuagint is the most trustworthy Old Testament that we have
    But it's just a translation

    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    and the dead sea scrolls tend to agree with the Greek Septuagint more than the Masoretic Text
    give an example.



    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    Jesus was "cut-off" (...), 3.5 years after His baptism.
    How you came to that?


    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    This fits perfect.
    in your scheme?


    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    There are a few early church fathers who supported and taught this.
    who were they and what they did teach? Were they preterists?




    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    You're not mincing words are you? Anyone who tries to build a doctrine by dicecting phrases or words are in danger of going beyond what has been written. Granted there are errors that sometimes may require clarification. But in the case of Daniel's prophesy, how could you argue against a fulfilled position? There is no temple left to destroy, and there hasn't been for 2,000 years. There is no "Daniel's people" left to be destroyed, as they have not existed for more than 2,000 years. Thus, your case would require more than mistranslations of text.
    Daniel 9 ends with v.27,

    And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week; and for half of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease; and upon the wing of detestable things shall be that which causeth appalment; and that until the extermination wholly determined be poured out upon that which causeth appalment.'

    chabad.org chabad.org
    And he will strengthen a covenant for the princes for one week, and half the week he will abolish sacrifice and meal- offering, and on high, among abominations, will be the dumb one, and until destruction and extermination befall the dumb one.

    Rashi:
    and on high, among abominations will be the dumb one:
    This is a pejorative for pagan deities. i.e., on a high place, among abominations and disgusting things, he will place the dumb one, the pagan deity, which is dumb like a silent stone
    The crucifix?


    and until destruction and extermination befall the dumb one
    : and the ruling of the abomination will endure until the day that the destruction and extermination decreed upon it [will] befall it, in the days of the king Messiah.
    :
    befall the dumb one: Heb. תִּתַּךְ, reach; and total destruction will descend upon the image of the pagan deity and upon its worshippers.





    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    New Testament writers? Do please specify.

    I think you misquoted the text. It's not "seventy seven" but "seventy times seven". This is confirmed with the Greek Septuagint. This of course equated to 490 years. Jesus was alluding to Daniel's Prophesy. Peter, when asking how many times he should forgive his brethren (fellow Jews), He was referencing Daniel's prophesy because after the completion of the seventy sevens (490 years), it would be a bit late.
    I think it alludes to the seventy and seven times Lamech should be avenged.
    Genesis 4:24,
    If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, then for Lemech it shall be seventy seven fold.


    Lamech as 9th generation of Adam via Seth fathered Noach, the one who found favor ("chen") in the eyes of the Lord.
    Last edited by sylvius; 10-24-2012 at 11:59 PM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Enschede / Netherlands
    Posts
    2,602
    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    This is a position of the seventh day adventists. I do not support this position.

    Jerusalem was Babylon the Great (as they were also called in the Old Testament) because they were not only overtaken, corrupted, and contaminated by the Babylonian culture under king Nebuchadnezzar, their ideals in the days of Christ mimicked the Babylonians. Everything about first century Judaism was not God-like at all; it was very foreign and mimicked Babylonian practices and its ancient culture. That's why Babylon the Great was first century Jerusalem. Some speculate Peter's phrase, "She who is in Babylon sends you greetings" to reference ancient Jerusalem. Some believe (as I do) that Peter was not killed in Rome as the RCC taught, but that he was killed in Jerusalem. Then again, we do not know. Paul states that he and Timothy were given charge to preach to the Gentiles, while James and Peter concentrated on Israel. In fact, Jesus told Peter, "you shall not have gone through all of the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.."

    What I find interesting is the total lack of proof that Peter traveled to Rome and being crucified in Rome.

    Anyways, Babylon the Great is the same "Great City" that was cast down as a huge millstone, losing its light and never to be found again; losing the voice of the bride and bridegroom and never to be heard again. Jerusalem is Babylon, the mother of Harlots (someone who sells themselves to another), drunk with the blood of the Saints (Matthew 23), haunt of everything unclean (Woe to you Scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites!).

    Very difficult to disprove these important points my friend.

    Joseph

    I do think also the Sodom and Egypt of Revelation 11:8 allude to Rome.
    The two witnesses being Peter and Paul.

    Revelation is not an history-book, It uses metaphors.

    Jerusalem is never called "the great city".

    Cain was the first city-builder, and also the first man-slayer, bloodshedder, and also the first denier, "lo yadati", "Ich habe es nicht gewusst".

    The key is to be found in Revelation 13:18, "Here is the wisdom".

    Babylon is the place of tower-building, the dispersion (confusion of languages = the one doesn't undertand the other) "haflagah", taking place exactly after 15 (10+5) generations, while the Torah as a whole is about 26 generations (10+5+6+5), an expression of God's name.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    981
    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    Interesting prospect Beck, but I must disagree. And did you expect anything else.

    I'll make it easy for you to see how Jerusalem is the "great city" that was destroyed, and replaced by the TRUE Jerusalem from above. Every book as an opening, and a closing; most importantly a point. What point does it make for John to have all of those visions, and then suddenly end with the presentation of the New Jerusalem? Remember this phrase, "Out with the old, and in with the new". The New Jerusalem could not be delivered until the Old Jerusalem (harlot) had been put to death.

    Here's a selection for you to compare, and then tell me if you cannot see ancient Jerusalem in Revelation:

    Jeremiah 7: (Gods Judgment of Jerusalem for her sins - Babylonian Invasion)
    33 The corpses of this people will be food for the birds of the heaven and for the beasts of the earth. And no one will frighten them away. 34 Then I will cause to cease from the cities of Judah and from the streets of Jerusalem the voice of mirth and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride. For the land shall be desolate.

    Here God uses the language, "Voice of the Bride and Bridegroom being taken away...."

    Now let's see what John says in Revelation (ROMAN INVASION):

    21 Then a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying, “Thus with violence the great city Babylon shall be thrown down, and shall not be found anymore. 22 The sound of harpists, musicians, flutists, and trumpeters shall not be heard in you anymore. No craftsman of any craft shall be found in you anymore, and the sound of a millstone shall not be heard in you anymore. 23 The light of a lamp shall not shine in you anymore, and the voice of bridegroom and bride shall not be heard in you anymore. For your merchants were the great men of the earth, for by your sorcery all the nations were deceived. 24 And in her was found the blood of prophets and saints, and of all who were slain on the earth.”

    Same Prophetic style and language upon the same city.

    On a side note, there's a reason why Revelation doesn't mention ancient Jerusalem, but instead refers to it as a "great city". I believe it's because Jesus was trying to keep the Romans from understanding the prophesy. Had Jesus mentioned Jerusalem being destroyed, no doubt the Romans would have understood that the Prophesy of the Beast was about them. And we know that Christians during that era didn't need anymore heat than what they were already experiencing.

    God bless the first century Church.

    Joseph
    Hey, Joe.

    I don't think we are disagreeing that much. I just don't think that the city Jerusalem is the focus of Revelation, but more toward the Harlot. The destruction was of the Harlot the city of Jerusalem is collateral damage. John seems to be connnecting the Harlot (the wicked people) with the city. There was a spiritual battle going on way before the seige and desturction of the city Jerusalem. The words of God as a sword had already defeated death and hell.
    Beck

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,958
    Quote Originally Posted by Beck View Post
    Hey, Joe.

    I don't think we are disagreeing that much. I just don't think that the city Jerusalem is the focus of Revelation, but more toward the Harlot. The destruction was of the Harlot the city of Jerusalem is collateral damage. John seems to be connnecting the Harlot (the wicked people) with the city. There was a spiritual battle going on way before the seige and desturction of the city Jerusalem. The words of God as a sword had already defeated death and hell.
    The great city is Jerusalem, and Jerusalem was the Harlot; they are all the same Beck.

    A Harlot is someone who sells themselves to another despite being betrothed to a husband. Another term for this is an adulterous. Jerusalem sold itself to Rome (by their own words) in order to have Jesus killed. Jerusalem also use Roman authority to hunt and chase down the Apostles, and their disciples, doing all that they could to stop the spread of Christianity.

    The position you have taken is much like the spiritualist movement; not exactly, but very close.

    Joseph
    Israel is more than just a race; it is more than just a nation; it is the people of God, from faith, by faith, and only faith. Those who assemble in the name of Christ Jesus, embrance Israel because they are Israel

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,958
    Jerusalem is never called "the great city".
    Jeremiah 22:8
    And many nations will pass by this city; and everyone will say to his neighbor, ‘Why has the LORD done so to this great city?

    This was fulfilled when the king of Babylon destroyed Jerusalem.

    Anything else my friend?

    Joseph
    Israel is more than just a race; it is more than just a nation; it is the people of God, from faith, by faith, and only faith. Those who assemble in the name of Christ Jesus, embrance Israel because they are Israel

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,958
    In the case of Sodom there is no question of repentance that could have saved the Sodomites. Lot was not saved because he did repent.
    I think what you meant to say is that Lot was saved because he repented in left the place set for destruction. Likewise, the Apostles (upon seeing the signs Jesus gave to them) left Jerusalem and fled to Mt. Pella; those who remained behind were destroyed. Does this help my friend?

    Jesus didn't compare it to the destruction of the temple, but to the parousia.
    His "presence" (or parousia) is connected with the destruction of the temple. The text says, "Immediately after the Tribulation of those days, the sun shall be darkened and the moon into blood. And then shall the SIGN of the Son of Man appear...."

    His "presence" was seen by the signs involving the temples destruction as well as the city.

    It was not at a sudden. The war lasted for several years.
    The war lasted for about 7 years, but it restarted quickly when Titus returned with a much larger army around 68AD to end the war once and for all; this happened that nobody had enough time to leave once the armies began to approach. That is why Jesus told the Apostles to leave immediately without turning back.

    Daniel wrote about the destruction under Antiochus I as described in 1 Maccabees 1
    Yes that is true, but it does not end there. Daniel chapter 9 is about the seventy sevens; he does not prophesy about Antiochus until we get to chapter 11. The "annointed" is the Messiah being baptized. I think part of the problem you might be having is because you're using the Masoretic text to understand Daniel's vision. Here's the Greek Septuagint as understood by the Apostles and the first century Christians:

    24 Seventy weeks have been determined upon thy people, and upon the holy city, for sin to be ended, and to seal up transgressions, and to blot out the iniquities, and to make atonement for iniquities, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal the vision and the prophet, and to anoint the Most Holy.

    25 And thou shalt know and understand, that from the going forth of the command for the answer and for the building of Jerusalem until Christ the prince there shall be seven weeks, and sixty-two weeks; and then the time shall return, and the street shall be built, and the wall, and the times shall be exhausted.

    26 And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one shall be destroyed, and there is no judgment in him: and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the prince that is coming: they shall be cut off with a flood, and to the end of the war which is rapidly completed he shall appoint the city to desolations.

    27 And one week shall establish the covenant with many: and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and drink-offering shall be taken away: and on the temple shall be the abomination of desolations; and at the end of time an end shall be put to the desolation.



    It's not about an order that was issued, but about a word that went forth at the beginning of Daniel's supplications (Daniel 9:23)
    Interesting. So how did you come up with this? Are you suggesting that the time the seventy sevens begins is when Daniel's supplication is given? Very interesting. I of course do not agree as this is very foreign and has no support from any historical church.

    It is not written ""the Messiah", but "a messiah" = an anointed one, probably the High Priest Onias III
    Incorrect. The Greek Septuagint (translated by Jews) uses the noun "Christ" as that is the Greek translation of the Hebrew equivalent "Messiah or Prince".

    Can you also back that up?

    Actually my friend, I can. And I'm preparing a nice long essay just for you, if you're willing to read it.


    Can you also provide an example of where it is altered and what is altered?


    But it's just a translation

    give an example.
    I'm working on it; the examples will be part of the essay. But just to get you started, take a look at the New Testament quotes given by the Apostles, and see how many of them you can find in your Old Testament version. You will find that there are about 13 quotes from the Old Testament that cannot be found in the Masoretic Text, but they are found in the Greek Septuagint, as well as the Pentateuch.

    who were they and what they did teach? Were they preterists?
    The noun "Preterist" is a laton term which simply means, "past". Oregon, Anathasius, Clement (partial), Eusebius, just to name a few. But I'll be fair and state that there were also Futurist early church fathers who were manipulated by Hellenist Jews primarily from Ethiopia.

    I'm working on the evidence you need. I no longer believe in this line-by-line kind of debate. All it does is create confusion and discouragement.

    After this post, all responses will be provided in essay format for better reading and comprehension. I would appreciate your patience.

    God bless.

    Joe
    Israel is more than just a race; it is more than just a nation; it is the people of God, from faith, by faith, and only faith. Those who assemble in the name of Christ Jesus, embrance Israel because they are Israel

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    981
    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    The great city is Jerusalem, and Jerusalem was the Harlot; they are all the same Beck.

    A Harlot is someone who sells themselves to another despite being betrothed to a husband. Another term for this is an adulterous. Jerusalem sold itself to Rome (by their own words) in order to have Jesus killed. Jerusalem also use Roman authority to hunt and chase down the Apostles, and their disciples, doing all that they could to stop the spread of Christianity.

    The position you have taken is much like the spiritualist movement; not exactly, but very close.

    Joseph
    It's the reason why the great city is referred to as Babylon. Jerusalem was never called Babylon in the literal sence, but spiritually. For example when Jesus referred to O Jerusalem thou that killed the prophets and stoned them..how often I would gathered her chickens under her wings, as a hen, but you would not. Clearly Jesus isn't referring to the literal city Jerusalem, but her people. The battle for Jerusalem is one spiritual, this is shown by John by the imagery that he gives to his readers.
    Beck

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Enschede / Netherlands
    Posts
    2,602
    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    Jeremiah 22:8
    And many nations will pass by this city; and everyone will say to his neighbor, ‘Why has the LORD done so to this great city?

    This was fulfilled when the king of Babylon destroyed Jerusalem.

    Anything else my friend?

    Joseph
    Yes that's right.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Enschede / Netherlands
    Posts
    2,602
    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    I think what you meant to say is that Lot was saved because he repented in left the place set for destruction. Likewise, the Apostles (upon seeing the signs Jesus gave to them) left Jerusalem and fled to Mt. Pella; those who remained behind were destroyed. Does this help my friend?
    The Gospels, like also Revelation, were written after the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.



    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    His "presence" (or parousia) is connected with the destruction of the temple. The text says, "Immediately after the Tribulation of those days, the sun shall be darkened and the moon into blood. And then shall the SIGN of the Son of Man appear...."

    His "presence" was seen by the signs involving the temples destruction as well as the city.
    The text says "immediately AFTER"

    "And then shall the SIGN of the Son of Man appear...." -- not to the physical eye, since sun and moon and stars don't give their light ..







    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    Yes that is true, but it does not end there. Daniel chapter 9 is about the seventy sevens; he does not prophesy about Antiochus until we get to chapter 11. The "annointed" is the Messiah being baptized.
    Daniel doesn't mention baptism


    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    I think part of the problem you might be having is because you're using the Masoretic text to understand Daniel's vision. Here's the Greek Septuagint as understood by the Apostles and the first century Christians:
    cf. LXX Isaiah 45:1,
    http://www.septuagint.org/LXX/Isaiah/45
    οὕτως λέγει κύριος ὁ θεὸς τῷ χριστῷ μου *κύρῳ οὗ ἐκράτησα τῆς δεξιᾶς ἐπακοῦσαι ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ ἔθνη καὶ ἰσχὺν βασιλέων διαρρήξω ἀνοίξω ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ θύρας καὶ πόλεις οὐ συγκλεισθήσονται

    "Thus says Lord the God to my Christ to Cyrus, etc"

    (I just don't understand this "my")



    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    Interesting. So how did you come up with this? Are you suggesting that the time the seventy sevens begins is when Daniel's supplication is given? Very interesting. I of course do not agree as this is very foreign and has no support from any historical church.
    LXX:

    http://www.septuagint.org/LXX/Daniel/9

    v.23,
    ἐν ἀρχῇ τῆς δεήσεώς σου ἐξῆλθε πρόσταγμα παρὰ κυρίου καὶ ἐγὼ ἦλθον ὑποδεῖξαί σοι ὅτι ἐλεεινὸς εἶ καὶ διανοήθητι τὸ πρόσταγμα


    "In the beginning of your prayer a command went out from the Lord and I came to show you because you are pitiable and you must understand the command"




    Quote Originally Posted by TheForgiven View Post
    Incorrect. The Greek Septuagint (translated by Jews) uses the noun "Christ" as that is the Greek translation of the Hebrew equivalent "Messiah or Prince".
    Meaning "anointed one", but there are many of them, priests also were anointed. Daniel doesn't refer to Jesus.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •