Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
lmorovan,
You can be pre, post or ammillennial in your position on that topic. I believe that the Reformed church holds to an ammillennial position as does the Roman Catholic church and the Lutheran church as well. It just so happens, that I recently completed a detailed study of the 3 views where each view as presented by a proponent of that view and each had the chance to rebut the view of the others. It was a great study.
If you are interested in the title of the book, let me know and I can post the information.
To summarize:
1. premillennialists believe that when Jesus Christ returns to earth with His bride, the Church after the final battle, He will set up an earthly kingdom for 1000 years on earth while Satan is bound. They believe that this takes place in the future and before the new heavens and new earth are presented. They also believe that Jesus will rule from Jerusalem.
2. postmillenialists believe that the Church will overcome the world so that the vast majority of people on the earth will be Christians and will prepare the earth for Christ's second coming.
3. ammillennialists believe that the 1000 year reign of Jesus on earth as described in Revelation 20 is to be taken figuratively and they believe it isn't to be taken literally and reflects the spiritual aspect of the kingdom of God today. In other words, they believe we are in the millennial kingdom right now.
I have done many studies on the subject and Bible prophecy in general and I believe that the premillenialist view is the correct one.
NJMARK50,
Good point, I failed to distinguish between the Lord's coming for his bride, the Church, and His coming to rule and reign for 1000 years on earth.
lmorovan,
I believe that the 4 gospels are complementary in many ways. If one fact is in one account and not in another, I see that as more information, not a contradiction or even a conflict.
Do you believe that the gospel of Luke is inspired of God or do you believe it to be fallible literature that should not have been canonized in the Bible?
lmorovan,
I appreciate you stating your belief. If you want me to, I can provide many Bible passages that do not teach that, maybe not today however.
I believe you have robbed yourself of the blessed hope described by Paul. As a result, you are now looking for the rise of antichrist instead of the coming of your Lord.
lmorovan,
I didn't need to, NJMARK50 gave an appropriate response.
lmorovan,
Do you believe that Christ could come today?
Matthew 24:42-44
42 “Therefore be on the alert, for you do not know which day your Lord is coming.
43 “But be sure of this, that if the head of the house had known at what time of the night the thief was coming, he would have been on the alert and would not have allowed his house to be broken into.
44 “For this reason you also must be ready; for the Son of Man is coming at an hour when you do not think He will.
lmorovan,
I don't view this as a problem at all. The important part of the passage that you should focus on is that they were fully awake when they saw Jesus transfigured before them talking with both Moses and Elijah.
If you believe that this is a difference that cannot be reconciled, where does that leave you as far as the gospel accounts are concerned? Like NJMARK50 pointed out, you either believe that the Bible in its entirety is inspired by God and infallible if you don't. If you don't, that would leave you in a place where I don't know how you could determine what to believe. Mark was a disciple, did you read his account of the same event? It can be found in Mark 9.
Mark 9:9
9 As they were coming down from the mountain, He gave them orders not to relate to anyone what they had seen, until the Son of Man rose from the dead.
lmorovan,
I did quote from Matthew's account. We have 3 gospel accounts of this event, we should read them all and use Scripture to interpret Scripture. Reading Matthew's account, I did not draw the same conclusion as you did. Looking further at the context, the Greek and other gospel accounts of the same event, I demonstrated that coming to the conclusion that the account of the transfiguration as described in the book of Matthew was not the result of a vision while someone was asleep, but was an actual event that took place.
In Bible study, you can also look at different translations (not paraphrases) as you study difficult passages. The NIV translated the account in Matthew like this.
Matthew 17:9
9 As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus instructed them, “Don’t tell anyone what you have seen, until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead.”
Moses and Elijah were there speaking with Jesus or the gospels are in error, you decide. From my point of view, there isn't anything left to say on the topic of Soul Sleep and I don't want to argue, God's Word is faithful and true.
lmorovan,
The context of the account does not support your inference and neither does a study of the Greek word interpreted in this version as "vision". If you require further evidence that this was not a sleep vision given to 3 disciples you only need to look to the account in Luke.
Luke 9:28-32
28 Some eight days after these sayings, He took along Peter and John and James, and went up on the mountain to pray.
29 And while He was praying, the appearance of His face became different, and His clothing became white and gleaming.
30 And behold, two men were talking with Him; and they were Moses and Elijah,
31 who, appearing in glory, were speaking of His departure which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.
32 Now Peter and his companions had been overcome with sleep; but when they were fully awake, they saw His glory and the two men standing with Him.
lmorovan,
I am not being aggressive. I am somewhat frustrated at the way you choose to handle Scripture. On one hand, you say that you believe that the Bible is the Word of God and is infallible. On the other hand, you do not interpret Scripture using Scripture and have not interpreted verses of Scripture, that taken at face value, conflict with the doctrinal position that you hold on a particular subject in a way that supports your position. Earlier when I presented the transfiguration account in Matthew when we were discussing Soul Sleep, you seemed to infer that you questioned its accuracy since the text does not say that Matthew was present. That is a slippery slope. Where do you draw the line on such reasoning? In the desire to not put words in your mouth, I will ask you again, if that is not what you meant to infer when making the point with the questions you asked, what point were you trying to make?
You have said that you believe that the Bible does not contradict itself, I agree! If the Bible does not contradict itself and two verses on a subject seem to conflict with each other, shouldn't we seek how they complement each other before taking a firm position on the topic being discussed?
When you demonstrate a willingness to interpret the Bible verses that have been provided for you by NJMARK50 and myself, we can continue the discussion, until then, the discussion is meaningless unless the entire Bible is the authority from which we determine sound doctrine.
We are both sincere, and either of us may be sincerely wrong on any given topic, but let's let the Bible decide. You can challenge me on a view I hold, all I ask is that you do it with Scripture in its entirety, not with opinions.
lmorovan,
I would appreciate it if you would explain John 17 to me and also explain the many verses that NJMARK50 and I have presented to you and how they can be interpreted to support your position. I have not seen you do that yet. You seem to take a verse and create an entire doctrine from it, without using Scripture to interpret Scripture.
God's foreknowledge of who will be saved does not negate our responsibility in our decision to accept or reject Christ's atoning sacrifice for our sins. The Bible makes that perfectly clear and that is something you need to accept, it is in God's infallible Word.
I will check back later.
lmorovan,
You said "if He took upon Himself all the sins of all mankind, then the whole mankind was declared righteous and its sins cannot be hold against themselves, hence, all mankind would be deemed sinless and all be saved."
I completely disagree, you, myself and every other believer have only been declared righteous by grace through faith as we accepted Christ's payment for our salvation, yet the provision has been made for all men.
2 Peter 3:9
9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.
1 Timothy 2:3-6
3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.
John 3:16-18
16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
17 “For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
18 “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Without Christ, we are all condemned, it is only those who accept through faith the provision of Christ's sacrifice for our sins them that are saved.
You will not find a verse in the Bible that says that Jesus died only for the elect. I accept Christ's sacrifice as atonement for my sins, others choose to reject Christ's atoning sacrifice and therefore will pay the consequences of an eternity seperated from God.
You also said "Neither Stephen nor Paul had any idea what was going to happen the moment they would die as no one before or after them had either."
You need to do some study into the afterlife beliefs of the Jewish rabbi's before and after Christ. I also don't think you can claim authority to tell people what Paul did or did not know or understand.
NJMARK50,
Amen again! A kindred spirit indeed! The Hebrew word, Yom as well as day and night, makes it pretty clear to me!
Have you seen this fish that science said went extinct millions of years ago until they found them off of the coast of africa? I must laugh sometimes. Isn't it curious how it stopped evolving 400 million years ago?
http://www.dinofish.com/
Romans 1:22
22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
NJMARK50,
Again, I say Amen! I can tell by reading your posts that you have studied God's Word in depth and I find myself agreeing with everything you have posted, or at least everything that I have read.
I too am a young earth, literal 24 hour day creationist.
I think that the weakness in what secular scientists teach and believe is based in the fact that they need to find some way to rationalize in their own minds a way to exist without God. Sometimes I get frustrated when I see them deny God's handiwork when it is so obvious to me, everywhere! The other major fault I see, is that they assume that the way earth functions today is the way that the earth has always functioned, big mistake!
For instance, the recent debate about intelligent design. Supposedly science teaches that there is no need for an intelligent designer and that all we see, life in its various and unique forms, is simply the result of natural processes. Yet, when I watch a scientific program on television, they cannot help but describe God's creatures as engineered and designed, such as "The shark has been engineered to kill and hasn't changed in a kabillion years".
Their reasoning is so faulty and circular as well. They say "Let's date these bones, but I need to know what type of rock they were found in in order to accomplish that. Now let's date the rock, what type of fossils have been found in it?".
I recently saw a live demonstration of the ASIMO robot which is made by Honda. As far as robots go, it was very impressive. It could walk, talk, go up and down stairs, kick a ball (they called that playing soccer), had face recognition software, could run, balance on one foot, etc.
During the presentation, as the presenter was describing all of the technology and many years of engineering that went into this robot, I couldn't help but notice how pitifully inadequate it is compared to the human form, designed and engineered by God. I wanted to yell out, let's see it play soccer against a human. Let's see it do a mundane task like empty the dishwasher, get on and ride a bike, climb a rope, lay down and get up, run up and down the stairs, play catch with a football, or get in and drive a car around town.
For the robot to go up and down the stairs it had to stop at the first step, analyze some markings on the step with a camera so it could adjust itself to going up or down the stairs. When was the last time you had to pause to make calculations before going up or down stairs?
The Word speaks to me on the true nature of secular scientists.
Romans 1:21-22
21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
One other thing I would like to say is that it frustrates me when Christians compromise themselves by trying to make the Genesis account fit with scientific evolution by saying, that the days in Genesis were long time periods in which God used evolutionary processes (trial and error, God doesn't make mistakes) in order to create life on earth. Even "simple" cells are so very complex, with interdependant organelles that are all required for the cell to sustain a living state. Of course they cannot tell us how one of these "simple" cells came to be and deny a scientific law in saying it happened, that law being that life only comes from life. They also cannot tell us how single, simple cells became multicellular sensient human beings. What mutated into existence first? Blood or the cardiovascular system that carries it? Bone or the muscular system that attaches to it to allow movement? The stomach or the esophogous and the intestinal tract that attaches to it? I really cannot fathom how they can deny God's handiwork.
I am sure we could go on all day on various subjects, pre and post flood geology, fossilization, etc. I think it is great that you give these seminars and I am sure the Lord will bless you as a result. I attended a creationist seminar taught by Ken Ham many years ago and I found that it really bolstered my faith in God's Word.
Have a great weekend!
NJMARK50,
You said "Read God's Word & listen to what It (and He) says, not what other people believe. 'Draw nigh to God and He will draw nigh to you.'"
Amen!
I think that is great that you give seminars on Creation & Evolution.
I would love to discuss this topic with you.
What type of audience do you typically present to? Believing or unbelieving?
Also, do you believe in a literal six 24 hour day creation period as described in Genesis?
I know you said that you are very busy during the weekdays, but hopefully you can reply this weekend.
lmorovan,
But weren't you questioning Matthew's account? You were implying that Matthew's account of the transfiguration account may be inaccurate since he wasn't an eyewitness, at least that is how I read it. Did I read you wrong? If I did, I apologize and would ask you to please clarify the point you were trying to make.
I am not an investor of CDEX. I don't understand why you would ask me such a question.
lmorovan,
Please forgive me if I put you on the defensive, I never intended for that to happen. This is a Bible discussion board and that is what I thought we were doing. Can you tell me what I said that you viewed as a personal attack so I can ask for your forgiveness?
I guess it does boil down to being right or wrong on doctrinal issues, since different views cannot all be correct, don't you agree?
My prayer for you is that you use what you may view as a challenge to your beliefs as an opportunity for further study of God's Word and not to withdraw. None of us understand everything, "For we now see in a mirror dimly" (1 Cor 13:12), but we should all seek to study God's Word, His revelation to us.
Please reconsider.
lmorovan,
I think NJMARK50's point is that the bride of Christ in Revelation 19:7 has been made ready before Christ's second coming to the earth.
Revelation 19:7
7 “Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready.”
lmorovan,
Are you questioning the accuracy of Matthew's account? Do you not consider the book of Matthew God's inspired and infallible Word? If you feel you can't rely on the book of Matthew, that is very disturbing.
Even if you do reject Matthew's account, will you reject these as well?
Mark 9:1-4 and Luke 9:28-30.
You said that Enoch's rapture was the only exception from the laws of life and death. What about Elijah?
2 Kings 2:11
11 As they were going along and talking, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire and horses of fire which separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind to heaven.
Moving on to the rich man and Lazarus.
No, there is no condemnation towards the rich man for being rich, he was condemned because of how he treated the poor.
No, the verses don't imply that being poor is a virtue.
No, they had not appeared before the White Throne of God at that point, but they were seperated and they were conscious, not asleep.
I don't see any pandora's box. The Bible clearly teaches that a soul departs the body when the physical body dies. Even in the Old Testement.
Genesis 35:18
18 It came about as her soul was departing (for she died), that she named him Ben-oni; but his father called him Benjamin.
The story doesn't refer to the gospel of Jesus Christ, for at that point, there was no gospel of Jesus Christ, the sacrifice for sin had not been made, they were still under the Old Covenant dispensation. None of this proves that this is a parable to be taken figuratively.
Since I wasn't there and haven't died, I cannot say how the rich man knew he was speaking with Abraham, but this question again does not demonstrate that this story was a parable.
Remember that this story took place before Christ's sacrifice. You might want to do some study on what Jewish Rabbi's believed and taught about the afterlife (before Christ).
Google the words, Sheol, Hades, Paradise and Gehenna.
Why would you expect Jesus to say that they have the scrolls of Moses and the prophets? Of course He was referring to the Torah. Moses wasn't a contemporary of all of the prophets.
You have only asked me answerable questions, but you have not demonstrated that your view that this story is a parable is the correct one.
If you still believe that this story is a parable, can you tell me what it means? What is its purpose? What does it symbolize?
You also didn't address the other, even more powerful verses that I presented to you from the Apostle Paul and our Lord Jesus Himself in the gospel of John, or 1 Peter.
I hope and pray that you are not so rigid in your beliefs that you believe you have it all figured out or that you feel you cannot question what has been taught to you in the past.
One last comment on the book of Revelation. You seem to have hinted that we are not able to comprehend what was written in that book and that it is confusing. I would like to ask you two questions on that position, and please correct me if I am wrong on how you view that book.
1. Why was it given to us, if we are not able to understand it?
2. What do you think of this verse?
Revelation 1:3
3 Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things which are written in it; for the time is near.
Although I believe that these types of discussions are important since we are commanded to hold to sound doctrine and to rightly divide the Word of Truth, I don't believe that being wrong on these types of topics is a condition of salvation, thank the Lord!
Thank you again for the dialogue.
Personally, I believe that he was referring to that very day. Doing a word study in the Greek, this is what I found.
4594 semeron { say’-mer-on}
neuter (as adverb) of a presumed compound of the art. 3588 and 2250, on the (i.e. this) day (or night current or just passed); TDNT - 7:269,1024; adv
AV - this day 22, to day 18, this + 3588 1; 41
GK - 4958 { σήμερον }
1) this (very) day)
2) what has happened today
lmorovan,
Thank you for the reply. From your reply I take away that you think that the verse that I mentioned is to be spiritualized and not to be taken literally. That can be an entirely new discussion, maybe we can save that one for later.
May I ask you about some others?
Matthew 17:1-3
1 Six days later Jesus took with Him Peter and James and John his brother, and led them up on a high mountain by themselves.
2 And He was transfigured before them; and His face shone like the sun, and His garments became as white as light.
3 And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him.
Moses died and Elijah was taken to heaven without seeing death, and yet, they were both there talking with Jesus.
Genesis 5:24
24 Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.
Where did God take Enoch?
Hebrews 11:5
5 By faith Enoch was taken up so that he would not see death; and he was not found because God took him up; for he obtained the witness that before his being taken up he was pleasing to God.
Enoch was also taken to heaven and did not see death, is he asleep?
You stated earlier that you believe that the story of Lazarus and the rich man was a parable. I see no reason to believe that, the Bible doesn't say that, and unlike a parable, Jesus referred to someone by name. Read this carefully and you will see that this is not a symbolic parable, but a story about real people after they died. If you still believe it is a parable, and symbolic in nature, could you please tell me what it is teaching and what the significance is of Jesus naming the man Lazarus by name?
Luke 16:19-31
19 “Now there was a rich man, and he habitually dressed in purple and fine linen, joyously living in splendor every day.
20 “And a poor man named Lazarus was laid at his gate, covered with sores,
21 and longing to be fed with the crumbs which were falling from the rich man’s table; besides, even the dogs were coming and licking his sores.
22 “Now the poor man died and was carried away by the angels to Abraham’s bosom; and the rich man also died and was buried.
23 “In Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far away and Lazarus in his bosom.
24 “And he cried out and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool off my tongue, for I am in agony in this flame.’
25 “But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that during your life you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus bad things; but now he is being comforted here, and you are in agony.
26 ‘And besides all this, between us and you there is a great chasm fixed, so that those who wish to come over from here to you will not be able, and that none may cross over from there to us.’
27 “And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, that you send him to my father’s house—
28 for I have five brothers—in order that he may warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
29 “But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’
30 “But he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent!’
31 “But he said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”
When Paul stated
2 Corinthians 5:8
8 we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.
and
Philippians 1:21-23
21 For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.
22 But if I am to live on in the flesh, this will mean fruitful labor for me; and I do not know which to choose.
23 But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better;
You are correct, Paul doesn't teach that when unbelievers die that they go to be with the Lord, he is teaching that believers do and that is our hope! Why would Paul consider dying, gain?
I don't see how you can interpret these verses any other way, they look pretty straight forward to me.
Can you list some verses that clearly say that when someone dies that their soul goes to sleep until resurrection day?
Here is one more.
John 8:56
56 “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”
I love the verses that follow, which are a very powerful claim of Christ's pre-existence and Deity.
How could Abraham rejoice to see Jesus come to earth and how could he be glad if he is asleep and unaware?
There are other verses as well, such as what Stephen said when he was being stoned and what Jesus said before he died on the cross. Also, you believe that Jesus went to hell, was he the only one there or the only one to ever go there? What about the mention of the spirits in 1 Peter 3:19 and 4:6?
Even if you spiritualize the verse in Revelation, I think the evidence is overwhelming against the idea of Soul Sleep.
Thanks again for the interaction.
lmorovan,
Can you tell us some information about your theological background and maybe what denomination of church you attend?
I am just trying to figure out where you are coming from with some of your theological positions like soul sleep.
Before you take a position, do you consider what all of God's Word says? I know of several verses that simply can't be fit into the position of soul sleep.
How do you deal with the following verse?
Revelation 6:9-11
9 When the Lamb broke the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God, and because of the testimony which they had maintained;
10 and they cried out with a loud voice, saying, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, will You refrain from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?”
11 And there was given to each of them a white robe; and they were told that they should rest for a little while longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brethren who were to be killed even as they had been, would be completed also.
Looking forward to the discussion.
Hello everyone,
I am new to posting on investorshub, but have observed for a while now. I have found this forum to be of interest to me. It is great to have a place to discuss our Lord and theological issues.
Just some background on me, I am a born again Christian. For most of my youth I attended Lutheran churches. I now attend a non-denominational, Bible teaching church.
I enjoy discussing doctrinal issues with other believers, not to argue, but I find that it prompts further study into God's Word and I like to be able to defend what I believe and defend it with God's Word.
I try and follow the example of the Bereans, who tested what Paul and others taught them by searching the Scriptures to see if it was true. Acts 17:10-11
I am looking forward to listening and discussing things with you all.