Jump to content

Invicta

Member Since 09 Feb 2008
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 08:43 PM
-----

#397298 Paul Craig Roberts Interview

Posted by Invicta on 18 December 2014 - 03:59 PM

Yeah. The Cubans are real thrilled about that "talking."

 

So should the Americans be.  If they had talked year ago they may not have communism there today. After all you not only talk to China, we make all our goods there, despite the fact that the ruin the peasants, pollute the atmosphere, and ruin our economies.  In five minutes time there is a Panorama programme about Apple factories in chine it purports to show workers falling asleep a their desks because of the long hours they work.  I intend to watch it.

 

Sanctions only make those countries more bitter and anti those who impose them.  The only time I can remember sanctions working was in Southern Rhodesia, and what happened?  We got Mugabe. 




#397114 Concerning Daniel 9:24-27

Posted by Invicta on 15 December 2014 - 06:56 PM

I mostly agree with your post, Ian.  It is better than I could do.  

 

The Jews would have had in mind Moses' prophecy of the Messiah. Deu. 18:15-19 They would also been expectantly looking for the 69th week to begin. There had been extraordinary stories at his birth, & they had met this 12-y-o in the temple.

 

 However unless I misunderstand your reasoning, I think you mean the 70th. week.




#397052 Concerning Daniel 9:24-27

Posted by Invicta on 14 December 2014 - 12:58 PM

From my perspective, you have not made any direct attempts at responding to Pastor Markle's post.  Here is a tremendous opportunity for you to dissect his points, and allow him to respond to you in kind.  Your failure to have an open dialogue with him directly on this issue does not speak well of you, in my book.  I cannot for the life of me understand why you would pass up such a great opportunity...

 

I guess the same thing goes for Geneva and Invicta.

 

You guys simply cannot say that our position has not been presented clearly, thoroughly and Scripturally.  

So the next time this topic comes up, I will just put a link back to this forum and let you deal with it then.

 

:popcorn:

 

I have been intending to answer the points in the OP, but as has been said it is a long post and will take a time to answer and I just have  not had time to post that. I will just make one point.

 

Why do you say the prince who is to come is still future, when the prince did come and his people did destroy the temple and the city?

 

Oh and another question.

 

What do you thing Paul meant when he said "All Israel will be saved"? 




#396930 The Moon Is It;s Own Light?

Posted by Invicta on 12 December 2014 - 08:25 PM

I always say Genesis 1:1. is the most important verse in the bible.  If you don't believe that, you cannot believe anything that follows.




#396928 Two Returns?

Posted by Invicta on 12 December 2014 - 08:15 PM

Newsflash:  they did ultimately kill Him...

Agreed.  And in killing Him, they fulfilled Matt 23:30  And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31  Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. 32  Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. 33  Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

 
They filled up the measure of their fathers who had killed the prophets, by killing Him.  The tribulation during the war of AD 66-70 was the wrath of God on those Jews, in that generation, Matt 23:36, for killing their Messiah.  



#396926 Concerning Daniel 9:24-27

Posted by Invicta on 12 December 2014 - 07:59 PM

The "Holy of Holies" (qodesh-qodesh) doesn't even exist at this time.  There are clear passages in the N.T. that state that the (3rd) Temple must be built.  It is this temple that the False-Messiah (man of sin) will pollute with his presence, proclaiming that He is God.

 

The Second Temple was polluted/desecrated by the actions of Antiochus Epiphanes.in 168 BC and was later cleansed by what we refer to as Hanukkah.  The term "most Holy" is the Hebrew qodesh-qodesh  (ie: Holy-Holy, or Holy of Holies).

 

What or who is holier than The Lord Jesus Christ.  He was anointed at His baptism.




#396769 Whats for Supper...

Posted by Invicta on 11 December 2014 - 07:30 PM

This evening we went to our former foster son and his wife for dinner.  He did the catering and did Chicken breasts wrapped in bacon and roasted, roast potatoes, Steamed red cabbage, carrots and green beans, and a lentil savoury for my wife who is vegetarian.  We all had some of that.  Not bad for someone who is dyslexic and when he came to us aged 14 could not read mare than three letter words.  We took a raspberry gateau for desssert. 




#395943 God's Will Was Done.

Posted by Invicta on 04 December 2014 - 03:36 PM

Dan 4:25  That they shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field, and they shall make thee to eat grass as oxen, and they shall wet thee with the dew of heaven, and seven times shall pass over thee, till thou know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will. 




#394839 Matthew 24

Posted by Invicta on 26 November 2014 - 08:01 PM

It doesn't say - "the seventieth week is the Tribulation", but it does definitely indicate that it is.

 

Daniel 9:24-27
  24   Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
  25   Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks(7 weeks), and threescore and two weeks(62 weeks): the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
  26   And after threescore and two weeks(same 62 weeks as before) shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
  27   And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week(1 week): and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

 

So, you have 69 weeks that have been accounted for in history. There is one week left over (verse 27) that hasn't happened yet...the 70th week. Christ referred to this very week as a future event (Matthew 24:15, Mark 13:14, Luke 21:20). The "abomination of desolation" that Christ spoke of hasn't happened yet, nor has any of the other things mentioned in Daniel 9:27. Add to that, the beginning of the prophecy (Daniel 9:24) tells several things that will happen to FULFILL the 70 weeks...so, the 70th week, and all that is indicated by it, is still future and fits in with the description of the Tribulation period.

 

Now, I understand the Preterist/Partial-Preterist view of Daniel 9:24 and the remainder of the prophecy. So, I was just giving you the answer to your question.

 

It's there...for all to see...the 70th week will be the Tribulation period. It may not use the words that you asked in your question, but it's there. 

 

I don't mean this to be rude, but I hope it might help you understand where those of us who hold to a literal interpretation of God's word are coming from. Just as you can't see (?) the 70th week being the Tribulation, we can't s terists/Partial-Preterists interpret scripture by. Spiritualizing literal events doesn't make a lick of sense to me.

 

My view is: I serve a real, living, and literal God...who gave us a real, living, and literal word...to be followed literally.

 

But no worries here...you can to believe as you wish. I'll not argue over it...just answering your question.  :yeah:

 

The problem with that view is.     26   And after threescore and two weeks(same 62 weeks as before) shall Messiah be cut off.

 

What comes after 69 (62+7) ?  Well 70, of course, so Messiah was cut off after 69 weeks and during the 70th week.  Literally.




#394086 Way Of Life - When Was The Pre-Tribulation Rapture First Taught?

Posted by Invicta on 19 November 2014 - 07:18 PM

The Scriptural evidence is clear and abundant....you simply refuse to hear it!  

The point of the article was to show that the Pre-Trib rapture was in fact taught long before Darby popularized it.  

 

:bang:

 

If it is clear and abundant, please show where.




#393897 Way Of Life - When Was The Pre-Tribulation Rapture First Taught?

Posted by Invicta on 15 November 2014 - 08:37 PM

And how about this: Luke 17:22  And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it.
 

Jesus, talking to His Disciples, says taht they WILL NOT SEE the days of the Son of Man.

 

These two passages combined indicate to me that what the Bible is actually teaching here is not in fact nonsense.

 

The only reason to take the Matthew passage as meaning the people listening right then is to force it to fit with your false claim that everything was fulfilled in AD 70.

Without that presupposition there is no need to change what the structure of the language says, nor to ignore the passage in Luke.

 They did not see His days when he was in the grave.




#393896 Way Of Life - When Was The Pre-Tribulation Rapture First Taught?

Posted by Invicta on 15 November 2014 - 08:33 PM

This thread gets a little confusing when we stop talking about the main topic and start fighting with each other.  

 

"When was the pre-tribulation rapture first taught?"

 

This is actually a loaded question used by liberals and atheists a lot. They use it to confuse us on one or two points then say that our beliefs must be false because we can not agree on something. You'll see this used a lot on some websites and blogs such as stuff fundies like as ammo against fundamentalists. Fundamentalist by in large hold to the pre tribulation  & pre millennial doctrines.  Yes they got them from Scofield who got them from Darby and his Brethren Sect.  Darby got the secret ratpture teaching from Edward Irving and his Charismatic followers.  Irving got it from a book he translated from Spanish, entitled The coming of the Christ in Power and Majesty. by J J ben Ezra,  A converted Jew.  A false name as his true name was Manuel Lacunza, a South American Jesuit.  It was a fraud.

 

The question is not asking if the pre trib position is biblical. I believe it is biblical but that's another matter.

Its asking when it was first taught. As you have seen in the article, it was believed and taught long before Charles Darby. (more on that later).

Was it taught by Jesus and the apostles? I personally believe it was, just not called "pre tribulation."  For that, you must understand the importance on "IMMINENCE".

 

Christ and the apostles taught us to be watchful of His soon coming. Like a thief in the night. In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye Christ will come and call his bride away! Knowing that Christ may come at any moment is pre tribulation by default. If you wait till the the events of the first half of the tribulation happens and expect to be saved from the second half, "the great and terrible wrath of God", they why bother with imminence at all? Why bother looking for that great and blessed hope if all you have to do is wait for the first half of the 7 years of tribulation to happen?

 

For those who are post tribulationalist, do you really want to go through all that? Are you not saved from the wrath that is to come?

I have a frien who says he doesn't believe the church will go through the tribulation.  I say "What world are you living in?"  "What history do you read?"   Do you know history?  Do you read when the church was almost wiped out due to persecution or tribulattion.

You Americans have had it too easy and have gone soft. We in Europe know the tribulation that the saints have gone through under the Church of Rome. Within 20 miles of here many saints were burnt to death, starved to death or died of other persecutions. The French coast is nearer to wh, ere I live than London.  Have you heard of the massacre of Wassy (or Vassy)?  Or the massacre of St Bartholomew?  Have you nheard of vthe French Galleys when you would be sent  if you were caught attending preaching if you were a man or to imprisonment in the Tower of Constance if you were a woman.  For life.  The Tower was in a town called Aigues Mortes.  (Bitter deaths.)  When the persecution ended one man freed was 82 years old and a woman aged 52 was freed from the Tower having been sent  there when she and her mother were caught attending a service when she was eight years old.  Oh and you preachers, if you were caught leading a service, the sentence was to have your body broken on the wheel and then hung.  But then that wasn't tribulation. was it?  McGrath said he did not want tribulation because he didn't like a minor operation.  

 

Christians have suffered in their millions, all over Europe.  Have you heard of the Inquisition?  Not only in Spain but all over Europe?   Have you heard of the Iron Virgin?

 

The wrath to come is the judgment.

 

For Christ to allow his bride to go through the tribulation would be spousal abuse!

 

Now, back to Darby and Dispensationalism. Of all the views about the end times, the pre tribulation view is always linked with dispensationalism. Nearly always.

Darby did not come up with the pre tribulation doctrine by way of dispensationalism, but his system that he came up with lines up the best with the pre tribulation rapture.

It is also the best system that lines up with a LITERAL INTERPITATION of the Bible.

 

 

In the book "Things to Come" by J. Dwight Pentecost, it states: "Pretribulation rapturism rests essentially on one major premise- the literal method of interpretation of the Scriptures." If you don't have this book, stop what you are doing and GO GET IT AND READ IT!!  If it is a literal interpretation it is false for REv 1:1 says     1 ¶  The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: 2  Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

Signified means it was told by signs, or figures,

 

So! back to the main focus of this thread: When was the pre tribulation rapture first taught? If you interpret the Bible literally and you are fully knowing that Christ can come at any moment, then you can say it was first taught in the new testament.

Therefor the pre tribulation rapture is both a historic doctrine and more important, a BIBLICAL one.

 

I hope this is a help to everyone and a good reason why we need to be a faithful steward of God's Word.  

 

 

Dr. Roberson 

 

I never hear any literalists mention Rev 10.  




#393712 The Coming Asteroid Impact In The Atlantic Ocean

Posted by Invicta on 12 November 2014 - 07:15 PM

I have most often heard it as something along the lines of the Catholic Church gaining secular as well as religious power.

So from what I have heard the answer would be no - but I personally have no great opinion on it.
I would be really surprised if the Catholic Church does not play a big part in the great tribulation though.

 

Have you ever heard of the papal states?  These were states which comprised much of Italy which the pope ruled over as his personal fief with his own armies.  These lasted until 1870, the same year as the pope proclaimed his infallibility when the French troops guarding Rome departed and the king of Italy walked in.   The Popes sulked and refused to leave the Vatican Palace until 1926 when Mussolini gave him Vatican City.  




#393609 Whats for Supper...

Posted by Invicta on 11 November 2014 - 05:07 PM

Left over mashed potato made into potato cakes with Bacon and cheese omelette garnished with watercress.




#393608 The Coming Asteroid Impact In The Atlantic Ocean

Posted by Invicta on 11 November 2014 - 05:03 PM

Ok, I assume people are not reading my posts. Nobody has answered my question.

Does anyone here believe Rome in Italy is the governmental power in armed forces that will be the

Revived Roman Empire that has been discussed here?

 

Or will it be another power like the Roman Empire of history?

 

And where exactly in scripture does it mention a revived Roman Empire?






The Fundamental Top 500IFB1000 The Fundamental Top 500