Who Was The Beast Of The Book Of Revelation?

[Manonthestreet]

THANK YOU! That obvious truth in and of itself should be enough to show that preterism is not only a lie but completely idiotic. But sadly, when someone is being led by spiritual forces of darkness, they will continue to spread obvious lies in order to mislead people.

Your logic doesnt follow.

 

[norwegen]

That would be the false teachings of the Babylonian Jews Cyrus built the 2nd Temple for, beginning with Ezra's attempt at 'racial purification'.

I'm not sure where the Bible says that.

Jesus said that this murderous tendency began with the Adamic people, that the faithful all the way back to Abel were slain (Mt 23:34-35), long before Babylon.

 

[buttercup]

Your logic doesnt follow.

I was refuting preterism. The preterists here say that the prophecies have already happened, they reject the standard Christian position that the last days have yet to come. They say that all of that was already fulfilled in the past.

Then you correctly said that the new heaven and new earth are not here yet. (I mean, obviously we are not yet in that renewed world of peace, harmony and justice.)

That's why I said that your statement in and of itself should be enough for anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together to see the lie of preterism.

So I thought I was agreeing with you. But if you didn't get my point, maybe we don't have the same position?

 

[Manonthestreet]

I was refuting preterism. The preterists here say that the prophecies have already happened, they reject the standard Christian position that the last days have yet to come. They say that all of that was already fulfilled in the past.

Then you correctly said that the new heaven and new earth are not here yet. (I mean, obviously we are not yet in that renewed world of peace, harmony and justice.)

That's why I said that your statement in and of itself should be enough for anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together to see the lie of preterism.

So I thought I was agreeing with you. But if you didn't get my point, maybe we don't have the same position?

Ok what do you mean by preterism.......I took that as pre-tribulation

 

[buttercup]

Ok what do you mean by preterism.......I took that as pre-tribulation

No. When I say preterism I'm talking about the view that biblical prophecies have already been fulfilled, in the first century. That is what surada and at least one other poster here constantly promote. For more on that, you can read this.

As for pre-tribulation, if you're talking about the the "pre-trib" view in regard to the timing of the rapture and second coming of Christ, I don't agree with the pre-tribulation view. I know that many Christians believe that, but I think it is flatly unbiblical....and a deception of the enemy, so that Christians will not be prepared for what is to come.

My view is that the rapture and second coming of Christ happen post-tribulation, the bible says it happens "on the last day." (of this age) In other words, Christians are going to be here for the tribulation.

 

[surada]

I was refuting preterism. The preterists here say that the prophecies have already happened, they reject the standard Christian position that the last days have yet to come. They say that all of that was already fulfilled in the past.

Then you correctly said that the new heaven and new earth are not here yet. (I mean, obviously we are not yet in that renewed world of peace, harmony and justice.)

That's why I said that your statement in and of itself should be enough for anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together to see the lie of preterism.

So I thought I was agreeing with you. But if you didn't get my point, maybe we don't have the same position?

Your view is not traditional Christianity and it's pretty new. It was promoted by Cyrus Scofield, Hal Lindsey, Moody institute and the Dallas theological seminary. It ignores Antiochus IV and the Maccabean revolt. It was preached at tent revivals during the Depression and the Dust Bowl years.

 

[surada]

No. When I say preterism I'm talking about the view that biblical prophecies have already been fulfilled, in the first century. That is what surada and at least one other poster here constantly promote. For more on that, you can read this.

As for pre-tribulation, if you're talking about the the "pre-trib" view in regard to the timing of the rapture and second coming of Christ, I don't agree with the pre-tribulation view. I know that many Christians believe that, but I think it is flatly unbiblical....and a deception of the enemy, so that Christians will not be prepared for what is to come.

My view is that the rapture and second coming of Christ happen post-tribulation, the bible says it happens "on the last day." (of this age) In other words, Christians are going to be here for the tribulation.

The tribulation ended in 70 AD. Jesus told them to flee to the mountains. It was the end of temple Judaism so it changed their lives forever.

 

[irosie91]

The tribulation ended in 70 AD. Jesus told them to flee to the mountains. It was the end of temple Judaism so it changed their lives forever.

^^^^ a conversation for those who BELIEVE in biblical magic and
on both sides-----both the suradies and possibly the buttercups---
(our butter has not actually stated that she BELIEVES in magical
divination)

 

[surada]

When Did Nero sit in the Jewish Temple and defile it?

Antiochus IV (God Manifest) did that when he tried to Hellenize the Jews. He defiled the temple. That was the first Abomination of Desolation. After the Maccabees defeated Antiochus they rededicated the temple and Hanukkah was the result.

 

[buttercup]

Your view is not traditional Christianity and it's pretty new. It was promoted by Cyrus Scofield, Hal Lindsey, Moody institute and the Dallas theological seminary. It ignores Antiochus IV and the Maccabean revolt. It was preached at tent revivals during the Depression and the Dust Bowl years.

That's the biggest load of BS I've read all day. You don't understand the bible, at all.

But I wouldn't expect someone who uses a satanist website as a source while constantly bashing Christianity to understand the bible.

And btw, preterism is so observably false that in my view it isn't even worthy of debate or discussion. Some things are so obviously false that it's not even necessary to take the time to address it. Only problem is, there are non-Christians out there who read your posts and might be misled. Which is precisely why you're here, I suspect.

 

[surada]

That's the biggest load of BS I've read all day. You don't understand the bible, at all.

But I wouldn't expect someone who uses a satanist website as a source while constantly bashing Christianity to understand the bible.

And btw, preterism is so observably false that in my view it isn't even worthy of debate or discussion. Some things are so obviously false that it's not even necessary to take the time to address it. Only problem is, there are non-Christians out there who read your posts and might be misled. Which is precisely why you're here, I suspect.

I'm sorry you think that way. It's best to accept scripture rather than politicize it. Why did Jesus warn the people about the Abomination of Desolation in Daniel? Daniel was an historian not a prophet.

 

[irosie91]

I'm sorry you think that way. It's best to accept scripture rather than politicize it. Why did Jesus warn the people about the Abomination of Desolation in Daniel? Daniel was an historian not a prophet.

what does "accept scriptures" mean?

 

[surada]

what does "accept scriptures" mean?

Scripture is often symbolic history or poetic language or teaching narrative. Even if it's difficult I think we shouldn't change it. Revelation says soon before this generation passes. That doesn't mean 2000 years into the future.

 

[irosie91]

Scripture is often symbolic history or poetic language or teaching narrative. Even if it's difficult I think we shouldn't change it. Revelation says soon before this generation passes. That doesn't mean 2000 years into the future.

yes it is-------and it should not be changed and not "accepted"
uncritically as magical divination

 

[surada]

yes it is-------and it should not be changed and not "accepted"
uncritically as magical divination

Why change Hosea or Isiah? Just accept it as written. Why change revelation? What magical divination are you speaking of?

 

[irosie91]

Why change Hosea or Isiah? Just accept it as written. Why change revelation? What magical divination are you speaking of?

was HOSEA or ISAIAH changed? What is it that concerns you about
"acceptance" thereof? As to the book of revulsions-----it is mysterious
and even more prone to fanciful interpretations than is Hosea or Isaiah,
AND, as far as I know---the original is in Greek.........making it sorta
incomprehensible. As to Hosea and Isaiah, as far as I know, the originals
were in Hebrew and seem entirely consistent with the hebrew style of
the time----to me

 

[skye]

who knows,...who is the Beast of the Book

I don't...

 

[irosie91]

who knows,...who is the Beast of the Book

I don't...

the guy running on the other ticket

 

[surada]

was HOSEA or ISAIAH changed? What is it that concerns you about
"acceptance" thereof? As to the book of revulsions-----it is mysterious
and even more prone to fanciful interpretations than is Hosea or Isaiah,
AND, as far as I know---the original is in Greek.........making it sorta
incomprehensible. As to Hosea and Isaiah, as far as I know, the originals
were in Hebrew and seem entirely consistent with the hebrew style of
the time----to me

Yes, they are consistent. Christians change them which makes a mess of things.

 

[irosie91]

Yes, they are consistent. Christians change them which makes a mess of things.

christians CHANGED hosea and isaiah? fret not----the hebrew version
never went away. What did christians DO to hosea and isaiah?