Victoria
Active Member
All glory be to God Almighty
Last edited:
7 Reasons the church does not go through the great tribulation
- Thread starter civic
- Start date
DavidTree
Active Member
How many gospels are there?
Victoria
Active Member
The Gospel we're saved by today is found in: 1 Corinthians 15:1-4; Ephesians 1:13-14
The apostle Paul says the following in 2 Corinthians 4:1-4:
"Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not;"
"But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God."
"But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:"
"In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them."
One example: there's a Gospel of the circumcision, & a Gospel of the uncircumcision.
Opinions on this may vary, but anyone can check this article out:
The Many Gospels of The Bible
I personally just do word searches, & cross references on topics I desire to learn more about.
The Bible Study Software Tools App I use is: Blue Letter Bible
The word Gospel occurs 104 times in 98 verses: Keyword Gospel
e v e
Active Member
Victoria
Active Member
If you do not teach replacement theology, then why make the BoC the bride, the Lamb's wife?
If we're the bride, the Lamb's wife, you're therefore implying we've replaced Israel.
I don't follow Scofield, John Hagee, or any other man. I can actually provide a long list of believers, going as far back as the 2nd Century, that believed what I believe. The lie that "Dispensationalism" was invented in the 1800's by Darby/Scofield has been debunked many times over. Those who haven't thoroughly researched this for themselves only displays their ignorance when making that accusation.
I aim to be careful not to voice an opinion via from word of mouth of gainsayers. Thus saith man's opinions, or thus saith the scriptures?
If you'd like to review that list, just let me know
For starters, if we're the Israel of God, shouldn't we be mentioned in Hebrews 8:8-12 via the New Covenant?
Galatians 6:12-16
"As many as desire to make a fair shew in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ."
"For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law; but desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh."
"But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world."
"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature."
"And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God."
Israel, in their unbelief, is unable to comprehend this rule, not so much God's elect "aka" the believing remnant of Israel. Notice how they want Gentiles to be circumcised, wanting to glory in their own self righteousness?
Hold on...
I actually made two posts in response to someone earlier in another thread, w/ scriptures to prove it's scriptural, not man forcing his own views on the scriptures. You might find these links helpful. This is what God says, not man.
The Bride, The Lamb's Wife/page-3#post-206340
The Meaning of Romans Chapter 11
Not blasphemy, it's scriptural...
"And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one 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." Daniel 9:27
"Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." 2 Thessalonians 2:4
Modern day Israel is still apostate, the vast majority are still in unbelief. They're not the believing remnant written about in Peter's ministry, hence why they need to be "born again" as a nation. This cannot happen until God gathers those scattered from out of the nations, & brings them into the land God promised them. There are two purposes for the tribulation.
1) Daniel's 70th Week/Jacob's Trouble inevitably results in a "born again" Jewish nation of God on the earth.
2) God pours out His wrath unto a Christ-rejecting, ungodly world.
Difference in Peter's ministry (Earth)...
"When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" Acts 1:6
"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;" Acts 3:19 <--- waiting for the atonement "aka" Israel born again as a nation
"For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."
Hebrews 6:4-6 <--- future, tribulation
Difference in Paul's ministry (Heavens)...
"For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:" Philippians 3:20
"For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens." 2 Corinthians 5:1
"In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory." Ephesians 1:13-14
Last edited:
Victoria
Active Member
I'm sorry, hun
It appears truth to you is relative, not absolute. You have your truth, Christians have God's truth. Two, or more, cannot compare spiritual things w/ spiritual if anything that goes against what they believe is to be considered Vatican, sorcery, etc. That leaves no room for God Himself to be the final authority in all matters, & it doesn't bring unity to His body.
Last edited:
I have more time starting today...so, I'll be posting later.If you'd like to review that list, just let me know
DavidTree
Active Member
What would be the differences between the two?
FreeInChrist
Active Member
If you could provide any single writing or more, from the historians that lived at that time ... say from Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian, and Tacitus, a Roman historian.... both of whom were alive in 70AD and it was Josephus who wrote about events in that period.... Tacitus no. Tacitus the Roman historian who wrote about the Roman Empire and its events. But not yet active as a historian in 70 CE, though he did live during this time.
And last but certainly not least Polycarp... who was a disciple of the Apostle John. Even being born around the year 69AD should have certain insights and knowledges he learned as an historian and a diciple of John... so I will post him last
if any of these support the And common preterist belief that Jesus came back then was fact, I might be persuaded that was when the great tribulation happened.
So what do of them say about such a thing.
Ill start with Tacitus.... as he did not start until after the 70AD period....and likely has less to say then Josephus
Tacitus on the Destruction of the Temple | Society for Classical Studies
This paper considers how Tacitus may have portrayed the destruction of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem in the now-lost portion of the Histories, and how this might have affected readers’ experience of the Histories as a religious narrative.
The above is what I could find on what Tacitus writing about the time had to say...
Now lets see what Flavius Josephus wrote as he was writing before 70AD
Ai ~ Josephus wrote that the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD was a result of Jewish sins and a sign that God had turned to the Romans, emphasizing the need for Jewish repentance. He did not claim that Jesus returned at that time; rather, he focused on the political and religious implications of the Temple's destruction for the Jewish people.
Did Josephus reveal Christ returned in A.D. 70? — Preterism
Preterism is an increasingly popular view of the second coming of Christ. Is it true, did Josephus reveal Christ returned in A.D. 70?
www.neverthirsty.org
So far we have only speculation and guesswork as to if the signs really happened and if any biblical signs happened.
POLYCARP
Polycarp was a disciple of the Apostle John, and is considered one of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers. His writings provide insight into early Christian beliefs regarding eschatology, particularly concerning the return of Jesus.
Ai~ Polycarp, an early Christian writer, hinted at a future coming of Christ in his writings, indicating that he did not believe the return of Jesus occurred in 70 AD. His references suggest that he viewed the events of the second coming as still to come, rather than having already happened.
Why Did the Disciples of the Apostles like Polycarp Teach a Future Resurrection Beyond A.D. 70?
It eems from other sources that the tribulation mentioned by Jesus was not the future Great Tribulation.
There is not much from Polycarp on this subject of 70AD...but he was into the future coming of Jesus and that is where his teaching lay.
civic
Active Member
And John was alive at that time. He did not write Revelation until much later around 95 ADIf you could provide any single writing or more, from the historians that lived at that time ... say from Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian, and Tacitus, a Roman historian.... both of whom were alive in 70AD and it was Josephus who wrote about events in that period.... Tacitus no. Tacitus the Roman historian who wrote about the Roman Empire and its events. But not yet active as a historian in 70 CE, though he did live during this time.
And last but certainly not least Polycarp... who was a disciple of the Apostle John. Even being born around the year 69AD should have certain insights and knowledges he learned as an historian and a diciple of John... so I will post him last
if any of these support the And common preterist belief that Jesus came back then was fact, I might be persuaded that was when the great tribulation happened.
So what do of them say about such a thing.
Ill start with Tacitus.... as he did not start until after the 70AD period....and likely has less to say then Josephus
Tacitus on the Destruction of the Temple | Society for Classical Studies
This paper considers how Tacitus may have portrayed the destruction of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem in the now-lost portion of the Histories, and how this might have affected readers’ experience of the Histories as a religious narrative.www.classicalstudies.org
The above is what I could find on what Tacitus writing about the time had to say...
Now lets see what Flavius Josephus wrote as he was writing before 70AD
Ai ~ Josephus wrote that the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD was a result of Jewish sins and a sign that God had turned to the Romans, emphasizing the need for Jewish repentance. He did not claim that Jesus returned at that time; rather, he focused on the political and religious implications of the Temple's destruction for the Jewish people.
Did Josephus reveal Christ returned in A.D. 70? — Preterism
Preterism is an increasingly popular view of the second coming of Christ. Is it true, did Josephus reveal Christ returned in A.D. 70?
So far we have only speculation and guesswork as to if the signs really happened and if any biblical signs happened.
POLYCARP
Polycarp was a disciple of the Apostle John, and is considered one of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers. His writings provide insight into early Christian beliefs regarding eschatology, particularly concerning the return of Jesus.
Ai~ Polycarp, an early Christian writer, hinted at a future coming of Christ in his writings, indicating that he did not believe the return of Jesus occurred in 70 AD. His references suggest that he viewed the events of the second coming as still to come, rather than having already happened.
Why Did the Disciples of the Apostles like Polycarp Teach a Future Resurrection Beyond A.D. 70?
It eems from other sources that the tribulation mentioned by Jesus was not the future Great Tribulation.
There is not much from Polycarp on this subject of 70AD...but he was into the future coming of Jesus and that is where his teaching lay.
Even the bias Calvinist backed ESV agrees with me.
New Testament Timeline | ESV.org
www.esv.org
Last edited:
e v e
Active Member
Since we cannot judge each other anyway, that job being reserved for Christ, I will take your reply as speculative. But thanks for the opinions!
FreeInChrist
Active Member
I have more on this but John of Rev is not the Apostle John from what I can tell... I jumped on that first cause if Polycarp was not born til 69 AD that would mean the Rev could not be written before... and I wanted prooof.....And John was alive at that time. He did not write Revelation until much later around 95 AD
Even the bias Calvinist backed ESV agrees with me.
New Testament Timeline | ESV.org
I think this is true...about John.
Later I am posting something that blew my mind on the Trinity... just finishing a couple of links.....
another 15 or 20 min
civic
Active Member
We know that Polycarp was a disciple of John which would automatically lead to a late date for Revelation. History proves John was exiled to Patmos late in the 90's. Thats a historical fact the revisionists ( preterists ) hate.
Polycarp was a bishop of the early church, a disciple of the apostle John, a contemporary of Ignatius, and the teacher of Irenaeus. According to Irenaeus, Polycarp “was instructed by the apostles, and was brought into contact with many who had seen Christ.” He lived from the latter half of the first century to the mid-second century. Polycarp was martyred by the Romans, and his death was influential, even among the pagans.
Polycarp was one of the Apostolic Fathers—a group of church leaders and early Christian writers who directly followed the apostles. Unfortunately, the only extant writing by Polycarp is his letter to the Philippians, but he is mentioned in other documents including “The Martyrdom of Polycarp” and a few papers written by Irenaeus.
Even Polycarp’s “Letter to the Philippians” isn’t a stand-alone document. When Ignatius, the bishop of Antioch, was ordered to Rome to be executed for refusing to renounce Christianity, he passed through Smyrna (Izmir) and visited with Polycarp, who was bishop there. Ignatius then went to Philippi, where the church became quite fond of him. After he left to continue his journey to Rome, the church in Philippi wrote to Polycarp, requesting copies of Ignatius’ writings. Polycarp obliged, including a cover letter of his own.
The letter is notable for two things. First, it continues Paul’s tradition of warning against false teaching in the church, namely the heresies of Gnosticism and Marcionism. Second, it quotes or paraphrases from many books that would later be recognized as part of the New Testament canon. Polycarp’s letter includes phrases from Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 1 and 2 Peter, 1 John, and Jude. This is a strong indication that the early church already considered the Gospels, Acts, and the Epistles as inspired Scripture.
Information on Polycarp is scarce. Ignatius included him in his greeting in his letters to the churches in Magnesia Ephesus, but most of our information about Polycarp comes from the writings of his student Irenaeus. In Irenaeus’ letter to Florinus, he attempts to bring an old friend back from heresy by recounting their time together under Polycarp’s tutelage, reminding him of when Polycarp spoke of his own study under the apostle John and others who’d had firsthand experience with Jesus. In Irenaeus’ letter to Pope Victor, he reminds the pope that, despite Polycarp’s strict rejection of false teaching, he was gracious regarding non-theological matters—and so the pope should lighten up about when to celebrate Easter.
Irenaeus’ passage on the Roman church gives us an interesting view of the troubles the church had with maintaining orthodoxy and the role Polycarp played in the debate. The last of the apostles to teach in Rome was killed around AD 67. The last of their students, Clement, died twenty-five years later. But, in Asia, the apostle John lived until around AD 100, and his student, Polycarp, wasn’t killed until half a century later. Irenaeus points out that teachers several church-generations removed from the apostles could not extrapolate special knowledge from the apostles’ teachings that Polycarp (and, by extension, Irenaeus) would not be aware of. Irenaeus then gives specific notes of Polycarp’s strong words against Marcion and the Gnostic Cerinthus.
“The Martyrdom of Polycarp” was a letter from the church in Smyrna to the congregation in Philomelium and the surrounding area. After general introductions, the letter contrasts the martyrdom of Germanicus of Smyrna (a young man who refused to renounce Christianity despite the pleadings of the Roman proconsul who didn’t wish to see him attacked by wild beasts) with that of Phrygian Quintus (who recanted his faith) to illustrate the difference between a good martyr and a poor one. The bulk of the letter then gives specifics on Polycarp’s death. There is some debate as to the letter’s authenticity, but, authentic or not, “The Martyrdom of Polycarp” was effective in encouraging persecuted believers and instructing them on proper behavior during martyrdom.
Some of the details of Polycarp’s death are up for debate. It’s agreed that he was arrested as an old man and sentenced to be burned at the stake for his devotion to Christ. The Roman proconsul took pity on Polycarp and urged him to recant. All he had to do was say, “Caesar is Lord,” and offer a little bit of incense to Caesar’s statue, and he would live. Polycarp’s stalwart response: “Eighty-six years I have served Christ, and He never did me any wrong. How can I blaspheme my King who saved me?” So he was taken to the place of execution. One tradition states that, when the guards realized they had no nails or rope to affix him to the post, Polycarp assured them that no restraint was necessary—that Jesus would empower him to bear the flames. Another account says that the flames avoided his body, arching over his head. When the guards realized that Polycarp could not be burned, they stabbed him with a spear—and the blood that ran down extinguished the flames.
Despite the scant information we have about Polycarp, he serves as a powerful example for us. His reliance on the Gospels and the Epistles gives evidence of the inspiration of the New Testament. His dedication to the theology taught by the apostles encourages us to take their writings at face value even as we follow his lead in not concentrating on the nonessentials. And his steadfastness in the face of death inspires us to remain faithful to Christ.got?
hope this helps !!!
