Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 52

Thread: Bethel: Con't You Yet See That The Seven Last Times Were Over long, Long Ago?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    146

    Default

    Ahh, Bethel, what aileth you now? Has your pacifier been ripped from your mouth? Try chewing on a little meat. True, I shook my shoes off against you and bid you farewell. But I did not intend it for the ones who may chance upon this board who have not yet been indoctrinated with your fables, so here goes:
    The many threads in the chapel here which are addressed to ’Bethel’ are yet extant, and show from the texts without prejudice the myths which are your pacifier. Namely, ‘7 last years’ which were refuted in this very thread, proving by the Gospels that they have been fulfilled. Other myths such as rUpture, the ’beasts’, the ’bottomless pit’, the idol worship of ’bethel’, the ’antichrist’, which is all mankind, and last but not least the fantasy of a ’rebuilt stone temple’ and red cow. Such tripe is merely dung in which the swine roll. They have been destroyed forever, as God has said. They are not coming back.

    Never the less, bethel, once again address your folly, not for your benefit, o house of god, but for the benefit of God’s House who may tune in.

    Obviously, unrecognized by bethel is the existence and easy access of the original texts, where anyone can see the original words. It is called among other things an Interlinear Bible, and is easily found online.
    The numbers affixed to the words of the interlinear are numbered, and correspond to numbers in concordances which offer the definition.

    While this is not anything new, it does seem to be to you, bethel, as you provide your ‘quotes’ showing words that you base your opinions on which do not actually exist.

    Allow me to demonstrate:
    Dan 9:27
    27 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. (KJV)

    There are only 21 Hebrew words in that verse, yet there are 52 English words…

    Cant be lazy. Gotta watch those English words the translators used. If you don’t look at what the texts actually say, you are depending on the words of bethel. There is no he in the texts.
    In the texts, the words in the kjv “and he shall confirm” are but ONE Hebrew word.. #1396 gabar (gaw-bar'); a primitive root; to be strong; by implication, to prevail, act insolently:
    As used in the KJV-- exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more [strength], strengthen, be stronger, be valiant.
    So, since even the translators cant make up their mind ‘confirming’ is in the mind of Bethel. Please note also, there is no ‘he’ there. Man inferred the ‘he’, the ‘shall’, and the ‘confirm’

    The word ‘covenant’ is 1285 beriyth (ber-eeth'); from 1262 (in the sense of cutting [like 1254]); a compact (because made by passing between pieces of flesh): -confederacy, [con-] feder [-ate], covenant, league.
    Like when God made the covenant with Noah, and same word as when he passed between the pieces of Abraham’s sacrifice. Same word as when God made his covenant with Isaac, and then with Jacob. So, the ‘he’ is God, and the week was as shown with the gospel references in the post. It was the week beginning when Christ entered Jerusalem on the donkey, and ending in His resurrection.
    Now, most Christians do concur, that His Crucifixion and Resurrection is the ONLY Covenant that we accept, right? If one can’t accept that, I really feel for them.

    So, ‘and he shall confirm the covenant ‘ is, in the texts simply “strong covenant”
    That’s God. He is in fact the implied ‘he’.

    Now, as if you did not know, there is strong admonition about ascribing the works of the Spirit to an adversary. Like a mythical man “antichrist”

    And here is the covenant,
    Heb 10:4-8
    4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
    5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
    6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
    7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
    8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
    16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
    17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
    18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.

    Actually, anyone who sees these words and don’t believe them, is in a world of hurt.

    I suspect that PART of the problem is lack of understanding. When the King James Version of the Bible came off the press of Robert Barker in 1611, it contained an eleven-page preface titled “The Translators to the Reader.” The preface to the KJV actually warns against taking their English words as absolute.

    For example, they explicitly said that they did not translate the same word in the original the same way in the English but did attempt to capture the sense of the original each time: “An other thing we thinke good to admonish thee of (gentle Reader) that wee have not tyed our selves to an uniformitie of phrasing, or to an identitie of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done, because they observe, that some learned men some where, have beene as exact as they could that way. Truly, that we might not varie from the sense of that which we had translated before, if the word signified the same thing in both places (for there bee some wordes that bee not of the same sense every where) we were especially carefull, and made a conscience, according to our duetie.”


    True to their form of deception, bethel removed the letter beginning with all versions printed after 1666. One of course can still read the 11 page letter online on several sites.

    Now as to the ‘abomination of desolation’ in that verse.
    Abomination =
    8251 shiqquwts (shik-koots');
    or shiqquts (shik-koots'); from 8262; disgusting, i.e. filthy; especially idolatrous or (concretely) an idol: KJV-- abominable filth (idol, -ation), detestable (thing).

    And desolation: = 8074 shamem (shaw-mame');
    a primitive root; to stun (or intransitively, grow numb), i.e. devastate or (figuratively) stupefy (both usually in a passive sense):
    KJV-- make amazed, be astonied, (be an) astonish (-ment), (be, bring into, unto, lay, lie, make) desolate (-ion, places), be destitute, destroy (self), (lay, lie, make) waste, wonder.

    And, as for the words in Matthew:
    Matt 24:15
    15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) (KJV)

    Abomination: Thayers #946 bdelugma- a foul thing, a detestable thing;
    used of idols and things pertaining to idolatry

    Strongs #946 bdelugma (bdel'-oog-mah); from 948; a detestation, i.e. (specially) idolatry:

    Desolation: Strong’s #2050 eremosis (er-ay'-mo-sis); from 2049; despoliation:
    Thayer’s # 2050 eremosis- a making desolate, a desolation

    Hmm, same old same old.. no boogerbear ‘antichrist’ to come in those words… Just standard Bethel idol worship. As a matter of fact, ‘antichrist’ has been around longer than Noah. So he aint coming, hes going, into oblivion.

    As for the words of Paul telling you about the man of sin sitting in temple of God, in Thess. Have you not read that this same Paul also tells twice about the temple of God (1 Cor and 2 Cor)… He says it is US that is the temple of God. That obviously means the ‘man of sin’ is US also. True it is, for we listen to our ‘bottomless pit’ mind quite often.

    And finally, bethel, Jacob shows plainly the difference between house of god(s) and God’s House.

    Gen 28:19
    19 And he called the name of that place Bethel: but the name of that city was called Luz at the first.
    1008 Beyth-' El (bayth-ale'); from 1004 and 410; house of God; Beth-El, a PLACE in Palestine:

    Gen 28:22
    22 And this stone, which I have set for a pillar, shall be God's HOUSE: and of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee.

    Stone: =68 'eben (eh'-ben); from the root of 1129 through the meaning to build; a stone:

    House= 1004 bayith (bah'-yith); probably from 1129 abbreviated; a house (in the greatest variation of applications, especially family, etc.):

    Bethel, the place, the piece of dirt, is where Jacob later buried all the false gods that were with him and his house. And of course, Bethel dug some back up, and still digs for them. But God’s House, the ‘stone’ was carried away with Israel even to this very day.

    1 Cor 10:1-4
    1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
    2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
    3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
    4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. (KJV)

    It was the same ‘stone’ that the builders rejected, the same stone from which Moses delivered water to them.

    And you know what? It does not make the slightest difference whether bethel concurs or not. Live with your myths as long as you wish, bethel. Just remember, as it is written, God’s House left you alone with your idles and myths, long ago.

    Farewell once more, bethel.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,870

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by watchman View Post
    Please note also, there is no ‘he’ there. Man inferred the ‘he’...
    Quote Originally Posted by watchman View Post
    So, ‘and he shall confirm the covenant ‘ is, in the texts simply “strong covenant”
    That’s God. He is in fact the implied ‘he’.
    Contradicting yourself. First you say that there is no "he" in the verse which shows the translators error and then later you say there actually is an implied "he". You can't have it both ways. And actually, the KJV translators did not indicate who the "he" in the verse referred to.

    Do you actually not understand that it is impossible to translate Hebrew to English and retain the original meaning of the Hebrew without using implied English words? If you want to argue that all of the Hebrew scholars were wrong to use the word "he" in the verse then please tell us your own credentials and qualifications to translate Hebrew. In any case, I think I will stick with the "he" of the Hebrew scholars.

    And after all the meaningless gibberish in your posts you don't actually answer any of the issues I raised. Do you think that with all of those words no one will notice?

    Quote Originally Posted by watchman View Post
    Farewell once more, bethel.
    Promises, promises.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    997

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by watchman View Post
    Particularly those of you who cling to the fables of Bethel as taught by your pastors from his Scofield ‘study bible’ notes. In particular, you cling to your rUpture, and your ‘last seven years’ fable. This in spite of the fulfillment of the ENTIRE 70 weeks as was shown in the initial part of this thread. ALL of them. Yet, you still want another week, when ( 9:24) specifically said there were only 70..

    So ok. You look for a ‘last seven years’ because of the ’antichrist’ which your ’pastors’ say has to happen.
    Most have been taught that at the time of the end, an ‘anti-christ’ will arise (Futurist View)…the ‘torahless one’ as mentioned above. The common thought (and we see it even more prevalent now with a new red-heifer candidate and the Temple Institute chomping at the bit to do sacrifices) is that this individual will come to power, make a covenant, allow sacrifices at a new temple, break the covenant…you’ve all heard the scenario. Well, here’s a bit of history for you…did you know it was the Jesuits who spawned the Futurist View? They had to do something to sidetrack the newly-formed Protestants—all the early reformers saw the Catholic system as the great whore, and the Pope (and the procession of following Popes) as ‘the man of sin’ (Historicist View). That was a monkey on Rome’s back; thus the Jesuit theory (and swallowed hook, line, and sinker by the Protestant world) of a FUTURE, one-man antichrist, who will sit in the Dwelling Place (temple) of Yah, showing himself to be Yah. Papists and Protestants are both, by definition, part of the apostasy…a harlot mother and her ‘wayward’ children that have carried much of her baggage. I don’t mean to be harsh here, but please hear me out. So, where does that leave us? Is it one way or the other, or have we overlooked some important principles than need reexamined? In a bit, we will look at Dan. 9, also we will look at the ‘dunamis’/ power, but first let me offer this for consideration…
    Where is the Dwelling Place (temple) of Yah? Will Abba have anything to do with what the Temple Institute is doing? According to “he sits as Elohim in the Dwelling Place (temple) of Elohim, showing himself that he is Elohim”, we’d have to believe that temple will be His Dwelling place; but the ‘antichrist’ bumps Him out!! I have a hard time swallowing that. So what temple (Dwelling Place) IS he talking about? Perhaps: 1Co 3:16-17 Know ye not that ye are the temple of Yahuwah, and that the Spirit of Elohim dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of Elohim, him shall Elohim destroy; for the temple of Elohim is qodesh, which temple ye are. And what agreement hath the temple of Yahuwah with idols? for ye are the temple of the living Elohim; as Elohim hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their Elohim, and they shall be my people. Eph 2:20 having been built upon the foundation of the emissaries and prophets, יהושע Messiah Himself being chief corner-stone, in whom all the building, being joined together, grows into a set-apart Dwelling Place in יהוה, 2Co 6:16 And what union has the Dwelling Place of Elohim with idols? For you are the Dwelling Place of the living Elohim, as Elohim has said, “I shall dwell in them and walk among them, and I shall be their Elohim, and they shall be My people.” 1Co 6:19 Or do you not know that your body is the Dwelling Place of the Set-apart Spirit who is in you, which you have from Elohim, and you are not your own? Interesting that in 2th 2 temple/Dwelling place is G3485 ‘naos’…also used in 1Co 3…the most common physical temple usage is G2411 ‘hieron’. Did not Yahusha rebuilt the ‘temple’ in three days while prophesying the destruction of the temple made WITH hands?
    But Scripture, you may say, says: 2Th 2:3-4 “…the man” of torah-less-ness, so it has to be ONE man? The man of 'torahlessness'' sounds like an individual evil person. But as I read about the ''torahless'' man, a completely different picture formed in my mind because now I can see a host of people who reject Torah. In contrast, we can see a group of people who Messiah approves of and saves, calling ''him'' the ''one new man''. So, if we apply the similar reasoning to the ''torahless one'', it's not hard to see that this torahless one, like the one new man, is seen as ONE man. Does that make sense? So maybe this ''antichrist'' isn't A MAN (an individual) but is instead comprised of the many who share in the ''torahless'' philosophy? Can it possibly be as simple as that? Certainly we see how through the centuries anti-christ doctrine has ENTHRONED itself within so many who have accepted and teach ANOTHER ‘messiah’ (anti-messiah)…WHO: “sits as Elohim in the Dwelling Place (temple) of Elohim, showing himself that he is Elohim”. Let’s face it. The ‘jesus’ that the average church preaches IS NOT the Yahusha of Scripture. The counterfeit has a different name (jesus), a different purpose (abolish the torah), different ‘holy’ days such as sun-day, x-mass, ishtar, eats abominable food, uses grace as an excuse to sin…and yet, claims to be led by the SAME Spirit we do. And we are to believe this (falling away) is all supposed to come about at ‘the end’ of days by a singular ‘man’ of torahlessness? But it also says ‘the son of perdition / destruction’…surely that is ONE man, as likened to the one man Judas—also known by the same term. But is it? Or, do we see Judas characteristics as of ‘churchly’ men—imposters just as Judas who betrays with a kiss (lip service?), as one of the immediate chosen…but who’s name when translated, means ‘man of the city’…a possible connection to institutions of men? Oddly, as I considered these matters today, I read an article from a dear brother and friend, who offers similar thoughts: Anti-christ by Brad Scott---
    “In Yochanan's (John) first epistle we are told that there is an antichrist to come and is even now in the world as we speak. This word in the Greek is antichristos (άντίχριστος). The word anti is a word that has several meanings but has come to be understood in our culture as something that opposes or is the opposite of. However, that is not the biblical use of this word as it pertains to this entity that supposedly opposes the Messiah. The word also means instead of or because of, as well. The word comes from the Hebrew word tachat (תחת). In the Tanakh the equivilent phrase for antichrist is mashiach tachat, or the anti-Messiah. The word tachat means instead of or under. As we have proven so many times, the first occurrence of a word sets the pattern for its physical and symbolic meaning throughout the rest of Scripture. One of the first occurrences is in Genesis: Bere’shiyt (Genesis) 2:21 And YHVH ’Elohiym caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof. YHVH replaces the gap left from removing the rib for Chavah (Eve) with his flesh. Another appropriate definition of this word is found in: Bere’shiyt 4:25 And Adam knew his wife again; and she bore a son, and called his name Seth. For ’Elohiym hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.
    The word acher (אחר), or another, further defines the meaning of tachat here. The idea is that Seth replaced Abel. The other definition of under is also seen in our concept of an understudy. This is one who stands ready to take the place of a lead actor in a play. It is important to see this subtle difference between the idea of being the opposite of the Messiah and setting himself up to be like the Messiah or to replace the Messiah. This is the nature of hasatan from the beginning (Yesha’yahu (Isaiah) 14:14). The consistent warning and testimony from Scripture is that the true Messiah will have the testimony of His Father and will be a prophet like unto Mosheh. However, the followers of the antichrist will be identified by the fact that they worship a christ but they are lawless (2Thessalonians 3:6 cp Mattityahu (Matthew) 7:23). Yahusha makes another subtle comment about this Mashiach tachat in His so-called Olivet discourse in Mattityahu 24:4-5. Here, Yahusha‘ comments that many shall come in His name and will confess that He is christ (speaking of Himself) but will deceive many. These people will confess that "Jesus is the Christ" but they are deceiving many for they are lawless (Torahless) because their so-called christ is lawless. Yahusha‘ is not speaking here of people who claim to be the Messiah, but rather those who claim that Jesus is the christ. This anti-Messiah spirit, according to Yochanan, was already in the world. It might be worth considering that if you belong to a religious system that denies the laws of the God of Israel, that perhaps you are denying the Son, as well. The Messiah was sinless, for sin is transgression of Torah, and Messiah kept Torah. It is this same Messiah who said: Mattityahu 16:24 Then said Yahusha unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me. That is one thing that the ‘antichrist’ will not do.”
    Dan 9 thoughts: When the topic of the "future Antichrist'' arises, its supporters refer to the 70 weeks prophecy in Daniel 9 for Scriptural proof. This is a recent development-since dispensationalism entered mainstream doctrine. Very popular amongst the secret rapture folks. However, a close examination of this passage seems to prove otherwise. In verse 24, six things are mentioned that would be accomplished during the 70 weeks. Notice how all six relate to the work of Yahusha. In fact, the fulfillment of each event by Messiah is mentioned by NT writers in the following passages: To finish the transgression - Matthew 23:32, 38. To put an end to sin offerings - Hebrews 10:11-14. To atone for iniquity - Hebrews 10:1-4, 12-14. To bring in everlasting righteousness - Romans 2:7; 1 Corinthians 1:30 To seal both vision and prophet - John 6:27. To anoint a Most Qodesh One - Acts 10:38. I see absolutely no reason to insert a ‘gap’ of 2000+ years into a 70 ‘week’ prophecy; and most importantly negate that Yahusha prophesied that the stones of the temple would fall—picked apart by Titus’ army for the gold melted within—an abomination that left it desolate. I’ve always been of the strong opinion it is very dangerous ground to try to insert ‘anti-christ’ in a doctrine without truly searching out the matter; especially if it is Yahusha being spoken of!
    1Jn 2:6 The one who says he stays in Him ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,870

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Off-Grid Organics View Post
    Well, here’s a bit of history for you…did you know it was the Jesuits who spawned the Futurist View? They had to do something to sidetrack the newly-formed Protestants—all the early reformers saw the Catholic system as the great whore, and the Pope (and the procession of following Popes) as ‘the man of sin’ (Historicist View). That was a monkey on Rome’s back; thus the Jesuit theory (and swallowed hook, line, and sinker by the Protestant world) of a FUTURE, one-man antichrist, who will sit in the Dwelling Place (temple) of Yah, showing himself to be Yah.
    Contrary to what you want to believe about the Jesuit theologian Francisco Ribera who lived in the 16th century and promoted a futurist view of prophecy, he certainly did not originate that view and Protestants were not deceived into accepting a concocted lie which had no basis in Scripture, as you want us to believe.

    Unless you want to attempt to defend the preterist position (which is really indefensible) none other that Christ Himself presented a futurist view of Daniel and the end times:

    Matt 24:15 “So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),
    Matt 24:16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.
    Matt 24:17 Let the one who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house,
    Matt 24:18 and let the one who is in the field not turn back to take his cloak.
    Matt 24:19 And alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days!
    Matt 24:20 Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath.
    Matt 24:21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be.
    Matt 24:22 And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.
    Matt 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
    Matt 24:30 Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
    Christ ties His second coming to Daniel's prophecy and specifically the abomination of desolation. And a person would have to be blind not to see the direct connection between what Daniel and Christ said with regard to the abomination of desolation and what Paul told the Thessalonians:

    2Thess 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
    2Thess 2:4 Who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sits in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
    By no stretch of the imagination can these verses be interpreted to not be describing a physical person, the man of sin or the antichrist, physically sitting in the temple of God. And these verses from 2Thess tie directly back to Daniel chapter 11 where the abomination of desolation is mentioned in verse 31 and then we have this in verse 36:

    Dan 11:36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvelous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.
    Certainly, there are many antichrists (1John 2:18), one of which would be Antiochus Epiphanes, but they are all forerunners or types of the final antichrist who is the antitype.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    997

    Default

    One may be surprised to find this end-time ‘anti-christ’ scenario was made popular centuries ago by true enemies of the faith…the Jesuits…also where the ‘secret rapture’ was spawned…here is the history…

    The Historical Interpretation: When the Scriptures, after being almost unknown for centuries, was suddenly made an open book at the Reformation, the Reformers saw in it a full-length portrait of the great anti-Christian system known as the "Church" of Rome, with the Pope at its head. They found in the Book of Revelation a prophetic account of the fiery trials through which the True Assembly was to pass, and also of YHUH's judgments on her enemies. They recognized the Romish system as the spiritual Babylon denounced in that prophecy, and the Pope as the Antichrist, the Man of Sin and Son of perdition. They used the prophecy as a sharp two-edged sword with which to smite the iniquitous imposture which had usurped the place of the called ones in Messiah. The interpretation of prophecy as a foretelling of actual history which had been and was being strikingly fulfilled, was largely blessed of YHUH in bringing about the Reformation. What could Rome do? She could not blot the Book of Revelation out of Scripture. She had to find some other meaning for the Book, which would provide her with an alibi and turn aside the accusing finger pointed at her. The Jesuits, the most unscrupulous body of men on earth, whose "moral theology" reeks of the bottomless pit, a body whom Loyola had formed specially to undo the work of the Reformation, set to work to find a meaning for the Revelation which would side-track the Protestant.
    The Preterist Theory: Alcazar, a Spanish Jesuit, started the idea that the Apostle John could not possibly foretell events which were to happen hundreds of years after his own time; that he was writing merely about what was happening in his own day, and that his Antichrist was probably the Emperor Nero or some other early persecutor. This theory has been adopted by German rationalists, and finds favor with the modernists in the churches today.


    The Futurist Theory: Ribera, another Spanish Jesuit, went to the other extreme and propounded the theory that the whole Book of Revelation related to events to take place just at the time of Messiah's Second Coming, and therefore still in the future. The antichrist was to be a World-Dictator who would appear at the end of this dispensation. The Massacre of St. Bartholomew, instigated by the Jesuits, took place in 1572, and Ribera published his theory in or about 1580 so that the blood-stains had scarcely disappeared from the streets of Paris, and in the sight of YHUH the hands of the Jesuits were still deep-dyed with the blood of the Protestants of France, when they gave their theory to the world. It was published with a design to shift the odium of being the Antichrist away from the Pope who had held a festival and struck a medal in commemoration of the massacre. Ribera was not simply a disinterested lover of the Word of YHUH, studying Prophecy for its own sake. YHUH has testified: "None of the wicked shall understand;" -Daniel 12:10 yet thousands of "Bible Teachers" today maintain strongly that Ribera's ideas of a future personal Antichrist is the right interpretation, and that the reformers' view of the papacy as the Antichrist is wrong. For 250 years, from 1580 to 1830, the idea of an individual personal Antichrist to appear sometime in the future was the recognized teaching of the church of Rome, while the belief that the reign of Antichrist extended all through the Dark Ages, from the fourth century to the Reformation, was universally held by the Protestant Churches.


    THAT is where the futurist view came from. Scripture tells us there are MANY anti-messiahs/deceivers…many who reject Messiah; many who reject torah (apostasy)…so while I agree with the history above, I believe the popish system is just one of many methods used to enthrone the anti-messiah within our temples.
    1Jn 2:6 The one who says he stays in Him ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    997

    Default

    Old, Broken Stones, Or LIVING Stones? Third temple…briefly addressed…and refuted: Mat 24:2 And יהושע said to them, “Do you not see all these? Truly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, at all, which shall not be thrown down.” THROWN DOWN! But why?

    Luk 13:34-35 “Yerushalayim, Yerushalayim, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to her! How often I wished to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, but you would not! “See, your HOUSE IS LEFT TO YOU LAID WASTE. And truly I say to you, you shall by no means see Me until the time comes when you say, ‘Blessed is He who is coming in the Name of יהוה!’ ” Not to fear…Messiah has a plan for temple building, but not by the hand of men who deny Him! He builds the temple! Act 15:16 ‘After this I SHALL return and rebuild the Booth of Dawiḏ which has fallen down. And I SHALL rebuild its ruins, and I SHALL set it up,

    Zec 6:12-13 and shall speak to him, sayi
    ng, ‘Thus said יהוה of hosts, saying, “See, the Man whose name is the Branch! And from His place He shall branch out, and HE SHALL BUILD the Hĕkal of יהוה. “IT IS HE WHO IS GOING TO BUILD the Hĕkal of יהוה. IT IS HE who is going to bear the splendour. And He shall sit and rule on His throne, and shall be a priest on His throne…” ’

    Now, if the above does not refer to a physical temple, then consider that currently WE ARE THE TEMPLE! The above may just be referring to that! At any rate…Joh 2:19-22 יהושע answered and said to them, “Destroy this Dwelling Place, and in three days I shall raise it.” Then the Yehuḏim said, “It took forty-six years to build this Dwelling Place, and You are going to raise it in three days?” But He spoke about the Dwelling Place OF HIS BODY. So, when He was raised from the dead, His taught ones remembered that He said this to them. And they believed the Scripture and the word which יהושע had said.

    1Pe 2:5 YOU also, as LIVING STONES, are being built up, a SPIRITUAL HOUSE, a set-apart priesthood, to offer up spiritual slaughter offerings acceptable to Elohim through יהושע Messiah. 1Co 3:16 Do you not know that YOU ARE the Dwelling Place of Elohim and that the Spirit of Elohim dwells in YOU? 2Co 6:16 “… For YOU are a Dwelling Place of the living Elohim, as Elohim has said, “I shall dwell IN THEM and walk among them, and I shall be their Elohim, and they shall be My people.” Eph 2:20-22 having been built upon the foundation of the emissaries and prophets, יהושע Messiah Himself being chief corner-stone, in whom all the building, being joined together, grows into a set-apart Dwelling Place in יהוה, in whom YOU also are being built together into a dwelling of Elohim in the Spirit.

    Additionally, we see: Mal 3:1 “See, I am sending My messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Me. Then suddenly the Master you are seeking comes to His Hĕḵal, even the Messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight. See, He is coming,” said יהוה of hosts. Again, to whom/which temple does He suddenly come? Act 7:48 “However, the Most High DOES NOT dwell in dwellings made with hands, as the prophet says…” So, what about His sudden coming? To inhabit rocks and stones? Or…1Co 15:52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. Zec 14:4 And in that day His feet shall stand upon the Mount of Olives, which faces Yerushalayim on the east…”


    Who will be striving to build the physical 3rd temple now? Unbelievers, those with a spirit of deep sleep…no sight; no hearing…the branches that were cut out…Rom 11:8 As it has been written, “יהוה has given them a spirit of deep sleep, eyes not to see and ears not to hear, unto this day.” Rom 11:23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, shall be grafted in, for Elohim is able to graft them in again. When they change their unbelief… Rom 11:15 For if their casting away is the restoration to favour of the world, what is their acceptance but life from the dead?...it will be as brought back to life from a “dead” state.


    Those also who are self-proclaimed ‘rabbis’…those who deny Messiah has come in the flesh! Mat 23:8 “But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi,’ for One is your Teacher, the Messiah, and you are all brothers. Further described as ‘anti-messiahs’! Harsh, yes…but it IS written…1Jn_2:22 WHO IS THE LIAR, except the one denying that
    יהושע is the Messiah? This is the anti-messiah, the one denying the Father and the Son. 1Jn_4:3 and every spirit that does not confess that יהושע Messiah has come in the flesh IS NOT of Elohim. And this is the spirit of the anti-messiah which you heard is coming, and now is already in the world. 2Jn_1:7 Because many who are leading astray went out into the world WHO DO NOT CONFESS יהושע Messiah as coming in the flesh. This one is he who is LEADING ASTRAY and the anti-messiah.

    DON'T BE LED ASTRAY! Joh 14:6
    יהושע said to him, “I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father EXCEPT through Me. Building any temple by men who cannot even access the Father because of unbelief in Messiah is simply crazy talk. Many more verses deal with this; but that should be enough to give anyone pause for now. But you may say, doesn’t the anti-messiah have to inhabit a third temple? 2Th 2:4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called Elohim or that is worshipped, so that he sits as Elohim in the Dwelling Place of Elohim, showing himself that he is Elohim. In light of the numerous Scriptures telling us WE are the temple, living stones, would it not be perfectly in line to say that this torahless ‘one’ has been inhabiting the temple of men for millennia already…and by deception; shewing ‘himself’ to be ‘YHUH’ as a counterfeit? Yes, this ‘secret’ was alive and well in the 1st. Century…2Th 2:7 For the secret of torahlessness is already at work …
    1Jn 2:6 The one who says he stays in Him ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,870

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Off-Grid Organics View Post
    Old, Broken Stones, Or LIVING Stones? Third temple…briefly addressed…and refuted: Mat 24:2 And יהושע said to them, “Do you not see all these? Truly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, at all, which shall not be thrown down.” THROWN DOWN! But why?

    Luk 13:34-35 “Yerushalayim, Yerushalayim, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to her! How often I wished to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, but you would not! “See, your HOUSE IS LEFT TO YOU LAID WASTE. And truly I say to you, you shall by no means see Me until the time comes when you say, ‘Blessed is He who is coming in the Name of יהוה!’ ” Not to fear…Messiah has a plan for temple building, but not by the hand of men who deny Him! He builds the temple! Act 15:16 ‘After this I SHALL return and rebuild the Booth of Dawiḏ which has fallen down. And I SHALL rebuild its ruins, and I SHALL set it up,

    Zec 6:12-13 and shall speak to him, sayi
    ng, ‘Thus said יהוה of hosts, saying, “See, the Man whose name is the Branch! And from His place He shall branch out, and HE SHALL BUILD the Hĕkal of יהוה. “IT IS HE WHO IS GOING TO BUILD the Hĕkal of יהוה. IT IS HE who is going to bear the splendour. And He shall sit and rule on His throne, and shall be a priest on His throne…” ’

    Now, if the above does not refer to a physical temple, then consider that currently WE ARE THE TEMPLE! The above may just be referring to that!
    Quote Originally Posted by Off-Grid Organics View Post
    So, what about His sudden coming? To inhabit rocks and stones? Or…1Co 15:52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. Zec 14:4 And in that day His feet shall stand upon the Mount of Olives, which faces Yerushalayim on the east…”
    It sounds like you not only deny the physical reality of the Temple that God says will be rebuilt, from its ruins, but you also seem to want to deny the physical reality of Christ's second coming and His standing again on the Mount of Olives. It seems like, in order to accommodate your misguided beliefs, you want to spiritualize every prophecy so that there are no conflicts with your doctrines and what you are left with is prophecy without physical reality.

    And if you didn't know, that puts you squarely inline with the mainline Protestant denominations. But I guess that doesn't really surprise me.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    997

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forty9er View Post
    It sounds like you not only deny the physical reality of the Temple that God says will be rebuilt, from its ruins, but you also seem to want to deny the physical reality of Christ's second coming and His standing again on the Mount of Olives. It seems like, in order to accommodate your misguided beliefs, you want to spiritualize every prophecy so that there are no conflicts with your doctrines and what you are left with is prophecy without physical reality.

    And if you didn't know, that puts you squarely inline with the mainline Protestant denominations. But I guess that doesn't really surprise me.
    LOL...no idea how you arrived at that conclusion!

    Zec 6:12 and shall speak to him, saying, ‘Thus said יהוה of hosts, saying, “See, the Man whose name is the Branch!a And from His place He shall branch out, and He shall build the Hěḵal of יהוה. Footnote: aSee Zec_3:8.
    Zec 6:13 “It is He who is going to build the Hěḵal of יהוה. It is He who is going to bear the splendour. And He shall sit and rule on His throne, and shall be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace shall be between Them both,” ’

    Zec 14:4 And in that day His feet shall stand upon the Mount of Olives, which faces Yerushalayim on the east. And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two, from east to west, a very great valley, and half of the mountain shall move toward the north and half of it toward the south.

    Also when the xmas/ishtar folks will have to buckle down and keep HIS FEASTS, if they make it...

    Zec 14:18 And if the clan of Mitsrayim does not come up and enter in, then there is no rain. On them is the plague with which יהוה plagues the nations who do not come up to celebrate the Festival of Sukkot.e Footnote: eBooths.
    Zec 14:19 This is the punishment of Mitsrayim and the punishment of all the nations that do not come up to celebrate the Festival of Sukkot.e Footnote: eBooths.

    But why? I thought those were done away?

    Isa 2:2 And it shall be in the latter days that the mountain of the House of יהוה is established on the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills. And all nations shall flow to it.
    Isa 2:3 And many peoples shall come and say, “Come, and let us go up to the mountain of יהוה, to the House of the Elohim of Ya‛aqoḇ, and let Him teach us His ways, and let us walk in His paths, for out of Tsiyon comes forth the Torah, and the Word of יהוה from Yerushalayim.”
    Isa 2:4 And He shall judge between the nations, and shall reprove many peoples. And they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither teach battle any more.

    Still time to get on His schedule before He return!
    1Jn 2:6 The one who says he stays in Him ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    997

    Default

    Did you arrive at your erroneous conclusion from this statement I made?

    "Now, if the above does not refer to a physical temple, then consider that currently WE ARE THE TEMPLE! The above may just be referring to that!"

    Unlike you, I keep every possibility on the table so I won't be taken surprise, thus I offered that for consideration.
    1Jn 2:6 The one who says he stays in Him ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    997

    Default

    You must have missed this as well: "Act 15:16 ‘After this I SHALL return and rebuild the Booth of Dawiḏ which has fallen down. And I SHALL rebuild its ruins, and I SHALL set it up, "
    1Jn 2:6 The one who says he stays in Him ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •