The Tribulation Period

[David Kent]

So what you are saying is that the events in Revelation 6-19 all occurred at that time? Are you applying an allegorical interpretive theory to those events? Can you break down any number of those events and explain your allegorical interpretation of them? What does the Romans assault on the city have to do with the descriptions of the Tribulation period?

No i didn't say that at all. The tribulation of those days was on Jerusalem when it was made desolate by the Romans. It has nothing to do with Revelation.

Actually I accidentally posted this before I had finished it. I was waiting for a call from my doctor for my wife as she can't use a smart phone. I started to edit it again and I had written quite a lot when the doctor rand, but when we had finished the call I had lost my edit, so I gave up.

I may write it again and I may not.

A couple of questions for you. I don't expect you to answer as I asked you what your literal interpretation of Revelation 9 or the 200,000,000 horsemen is? I asked you a couple of times and you haven't answered.

Anyway is the little horn in Daniel 7 the Antichrist? If so what does it say he will do?

You accuse me of allegory. That is not used in scripture . Scripture uses parable and figure. Revelation was "sent and signified" as I remember, that is it is told in signs and figures.

As you said there are several great tribulations in scripture on different peoples and different perpetrators. So to say The Tribulation is a misnomer.

 

[Revmitchell]

A couple of questions for you. I don't expect you to answer as I asked you what your literal interpretation of Revelation 9 or the 200,000,000 horsemen is?

This question is odd and since I fail to understand the premise I will wait until I do.

You accuse me of allegory.

You need to go back and reread my post. This is false I did not "accuse" you of anything.

 

[David Kent]

This question is odd and since I fail to understand the premise I will wait until I do.

You need to go back and reread my post. This is false I did not "accuse" you of anything.

It is quite a simple question. How you understand Revelation 9? What does it refer to? If that is too hard try Revelation 10.

 

[Revmitchell]

It is quite a simple question. How you understand Revelation 9? What does it refer to? If that is too hard try Revelation 10.

Uh no it is not that simple. You seem to want to avoid communicating the premise for the question. You draw a question from the middle of the trumpet judgments which is odd. Unless you can express your premise and why you pulled this event out of the middle of the trumpet judgments I have no answer for you.

You make a lot of unsubstantiated claims. You give your opinion but no real explanation. You seem to want to debate opinions but care little for real bible study work.

 

[David Kent]

Uh no it is not that simple. You seem to want to avoid communicating the premise for the question. You draw a question from the middle of the trumpet judgments which is odd. Unless you can express your premise and why you pulled this event out of the middle of the trumpet judgments I have no answer for you.

You make a lot of unsubstantiated claims. You give your opinion but no real explanation. You seem to want to debate opinions but care little for real bible study work.

OK so my questions were too hard for you.

Let's try the other one. Is the little horn in Daniel 7 the antichrist?

 

[Revmitchell]

OK so my questions were too hard for you.

Let's try the other one. Is the little horn in Daniel 7 the antichrist?

Your childish antics are noted.

 

[David Kent]

So, you're a Historicist? You're attempting to connect historical events into Revelation to connect dots. It is certainly one way of understanding the book. I think it ends up with gaping holes, like Futurism, but it is one way of interpreting the book. Most people today see little value in that position, but it's still a method that one can use.

Historicism was targeted by the Jesuits, as it was doing much harm to the Catholic Church, so they introduced several different teachings including futurism. After banning and burning scriptures over the centuries, then banning the reading of Revelation, they brought out several different attempts to undermine the teaching. They didn't have much success until Edward Irving preached on Dispensationalism in 1825. (Morning Watch magazine.) For the rest of the 19th century it was mainly confined to the Irvingite church, renamed The Catholic Apostolic Church and then to Darby's Plymouth Brethren.
It didn't tealy take off until the Scofield Bible was introduced.

 

[Revmitchell]

2) The Church is foreshadowed in the OT. This is the Progressive Dispensationalist view, i.e. the Church is part of "All Israel." Thus what foreshadows the Messiah, foreshadows the Church.

I think it is a mistake theologically to say that the church is foreshadowed. It is clearly defined as a mystery in the NT. Further, There in the OT is found in the Abrahamic Covenant a reference to the Spiritual Israel and the National Israel.

 

[David Kent]

Your childish antics are noted.

You sound like a couple of JW elders I speak to. I said Paul wrote that " Your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost." Is the body the individuals body or the corporate body of believers? Each time I pass them I ask that and the always skip round the question. They don't believe the Holy Spirit is God.

 

[Van]

I think it is a mistake theologically to say that the church is foreshadowed. It is clearly defined as a mystery in the NT. Further, There in the OT is found in the Abrahamic Covenant a reference to the Spiritual Israel and the National Israel.

I disagree. A "shadow" presents a mysterious depiction of a reality. A coming Messiah's work product, those delivered, is thus a shadow of the coming body of Christ.

As far as any sort of Covenant with "national Israel," you would need to cite a verse which indicates "believing Israel" is not in view.

 

[Revmitchell]

The Scope of the Seventieth Week

Given that the nature of the tribulation period is the wrath of God we can see from scripture that the scope of the tribulation period is the whole earth. When we read passages like Rev 3:10; Isaiah 34:2; 24:1, 4-5, 16-17, 18-21 we see this with clarity.

I disagree. A "shadow" presents a mysterious depiction of a reality. A coming Messiah's work product, those delivered, is thus a shadow of the coming body of Christ.

As far as any sort of Covenant with "national Israel," you would need to cite a verse which indicates "believing Israel" is not in view.

No I wouldn't one does not prove the other. However, God said "I will make you a great nation" that is not spiritual Israel that is national Israel in Genesis 12:2 and in v.3 He said "in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed", this is spiritual Israel. These are commonly known.

 

[taisto]

The Scope of the Seventieth Week

Given that the nature of the tribulation period is the wrath of God we can see from scripture that the scope of the tribulation period is the whole earth. When we read passages like Rev 3:10; Isaiah 34:2; 24:1, 4-5, 16-17, 18-21 we see this with clarity.

The tribulation is God's curses upon servants of the Beast for their mistreatment of God's children. God continues to bring curses on men today and we, God's children continue to suffer at the hands of servants of the Beast. We aren't removed from being persecuted, but certainly God's judgment falls upon Babylon, not his children.

No I wouldn't one does not prove the other. However, God said "I will make you a great nation" that is not spiritual Israel that is national Israel in Genesis 12:2 and in v.3 He said "in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed", this is spiritual Israel. These are commonly known.

Paul gives us clarity about who God was referring to when he told Abraham he would make a great nation.
First, the Old Testament gives us the very lineage by which Christ Jesus entered the world, showing that God kept his promise.
Second, Paul gives us information about the extent of that great nation as a people who have been given the same faith that Abraham had.

For you are not a true Jew just because you were born of Jewish parents or because you have gone through the ceremony of circumcision. No, a true Jew is one whose heart is right with God. And true circumcision is not merely obeying the letter of the law; rather, it is a change of heart produced by God’s Spirit. And a person with a changed heart seeks praise from God, not from people.
(Romans 2:28-29)

They are the people of Israel, chosen to be God’s adopted children. God revealed his glory to them. He made covenants with them and gave them his law. He gave them the privilege of worshiping him and receiving his wonderful promises. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are their ancestors, and Christ himself was an Israelite as far as his human nature is concerned. And he is God, the one who rules over everything and is worthy of eternal praise! Amen. Well then, has God failed to fulfill his promise to Israel? No, for not all who are born into the nation of Israel are truly members of God’s people! Being descendants of Abraham doesn’t make them truly Abraham’s children. For the Scriptures say, “Isaac is the son through whom your descendants will be counted,” though Abraham had other children, too. This means that Abraham’s physical descendants are not necessarily children of God. Only the children of the promise are considered to be Abraham’s children.
(Romans 9:4-8)

It seems pretty clear that the Church is the great nation God has brought from His promise to Abraham.

 

[David Kent]

Great Tribulation in the olivet discourse is on the Jews for rejecting and crucified the Messiah.

Great tribulation in Revelation 7:13-14 is on Christian believers, presumably carried out by the little horn in Daniel 7, commonly believed to be Antichrist, whose mission is to wear out the saints of the most high and prevail against them. Daniel 7:21 & 25
There I have answered it for you @Revmitchell , which you declined to answer. Simple wasn't it?

 

[Van]

The Scope of the Seventieth Week

Given that the nature of the tribulation period is the wrath of God we can see from scripture that the scope of the tribulation period is the whole earth. When we read passages like Rev 3:10; Isaiah 34:2; 24:1, 4-5, 16-17, 18-21 we see this with clarity.


No I wouldn't one does not prove the other. However, God said "I will make you a great nation" that is not spiritual Israel that is national Israel in Genesis 12:2 and in v.3 He said "in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed", this is spiritual Israel. These are commonly known.

Here, the phrase "I will make your descendants into a great nation" is claimed to represent a promise to national Israel. Fiddlesticks. God used the same phrase to describe the descendants of Ishmael, Genesis 17:20. And the Hebrew word translated "nation" could also be translated "people" thus national Israel is no where to be found. OTOH, believers comprise a "holy nation" 1 Peter 2:9.

Obviously, the great nation promised to Abraham is the body of Christ!!!

 

[Revmitchell]

And the Hebrew word translated "nation" could also be translated "people" thus national Israel is no where to be found.

One doesn't lead to the other here i.e. the nation being translated people is not logically mean Israel is no where to be found. Not sure how you reached that conclusion.

 

[taisto]

One doesn't lead to the other here i.e. the nation being translated people is not logically mean Israel is no where to be found. Not sure how you reached that conclusion.

The nation of Israel was in a covenant that God set up with Moses. If the nation obeyed the law, they would be blessed. If they disobeyed, they would be cursed. The nation disobeyed and its leaders did the absolute worst thing by killing the Anointed King, Jesus. In my opinion, when Jesus said "It is finished", on the cross, He was referring to the Mosaic covenant with the nation of Israel. The New Covenant was established and the Israel of God became the Church by which the blessing is conferred.

The nation of Israel has had its relationship with God ended and that is one reason why the destruction of Jerusalem happened in 70AD.

 

[Revmitchell]

The nation of Israel was in a covenant that God set up with Moses. If the nation obeyed the law, they would be blessed. If they disobeyed, they would be cursed. The nation disobeyed and its leaders did the absolute worst thing by killing the Anointed King, Jesus. In my opinion, when Jesus said "It is finished", on the cross, He was referring to the Mosaic covenant with the nation of Israel. The New Covenant was established and the Israel of God became the Church by which the blessing is conferred.

The nation of Israel has had its relationship with God ended and that is one reason why the destruction of Jerusalem happened in 70AD.

You make claims but provide no evidence for them. this is simply wishful thinking

 

[taisto]

The nation of Israel was in a covenant that God set up with Moses. If the nation obeyed the law, they would be blessed. If they disobeyed, they would be cursed. The nation disobeyed and its leaders did the absolute worst thing by killing the Anointed King, Jesus. In my opinion, when Jesus said "It is finished", on the cross, He was referring to the Mosaic covenant with the nation of Israel. The New Covenant was established and the Israel of God became the Church by which the blessing is conferred.

The nation of Israel has had its relationship with God ended and that is one reason why the destruction of Jerusalem happened in 70AD.

You make claims but provide no evidence for them. this is simply wishful thinking

Why would it be wishful thinking. I actually provided scriptural evidence for my position, I did no wishful thinking when I provided scripture.
Why is it that you won't even consider the evidence set before you?

 

[Revmitchell]

Why would it be wishful thinking. I actually provided scriptural evidence for my position, I did no wishful thinking when I provided scripture.
Why is it that you won't even consider the evidence set before you?

Uh no, there was no scripture I that post I quoted. I have seen and investigated the preterist view and it is the weakest of them all. Your arguments are not new to me. I have been on this board for a long time. This entire topic has been rehashed over and over again. The fact remains I have considered it long ago. To quote someone else:

"There are some eschatological differences that exist between Christians that I consider to be relatively benign and within the realm of Christian orthodoxy. This is not one of them. To the contrary, the teaching of Preterism comes uncomfortably close to the spiritual gangrene that is described by Paul in 2 Timothy 2:18 when he speaks of those who have gone astray from the truth saying that the resurrection has already taken place, and thus they upset the faith of some. I have yet to meet a Preterist whose focus is upon church ministry or the spreading of the gospel or the building up of the church. To the contrary, those with whom I have thus far come into contact seem to have as their primary focus the spread of this particular teaching."

(the above quote is not by me and I forget the original source this is not my original work)

I agree with the sentiment in the above quote.

 

[Revmitchell]

The nation of Israel was in a covenant that God set up with Moses.

That would be the Sinaitic Covenant and then there is two sides of the Abrahamic Covenant. Those two sides are 1.) "I will make of you a great Nation". This Nation was to come from the physical seed of Isaac. In Genesis 15 in verses 7 and 13 points to National Israel. 2.) God promised a Spiritual Israel in Genesis 12:3 "And all the families of the earth shall be blessed". This was to come through the spiritual seed which is Christ.