It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Things that won't happen;- Armageddon

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2020 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI


To avoid one possible source of confusion, I should point out that the wars themslves are not the tribulation. The persecution of the church is the tribulation, as confirmed when John says to the church of his own time "I share with you in Jesus the tribulation and the kingdom and the patient endurance" (Revelation ch1 v9.) He's not sharing with them an experience of war- he's sharing with them the experience of being persecuted.


This statement too lacks all common sense. While the disciples were indeed persecuted and suffered tribulation, Matthew 24 shows us that the whole world will eventually be in tribulation. In Matthew 24, the disciples asked about "the end of the world". Here's what Jesus said...

Matthew 24:21-22

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.




posted on Feb, 12 2020 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined
See Revelation ch8. Loads of natural disaster. By the time we reach the bowls, which is the climax of the process announced by the trumpets, the sea has become "like the blood of a dead man". The impact on the natural world, that's where the danger to life is coming from.
That's why the human world falls into despair (first woe) and social chaos (second woe).

The implication of Revelation ch13 is that the world is comparatively united under the domination of the Beast. There was war in the time of the Four Horsemen (ch6), but the point of ch7 v1 is that the Four Horsemen episode is brought to an end- "the four winds are held back". Whatever happens in ch16 is a new development.

We need to follow the sequence through.



edit on 12-2-2020 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2020 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

What does any of that have to do with what I've said? The problem is that you can't explain how "piles of bodies" in Ezekiel 39 is NOT a metaphor nor is the tribulation only about Christians being persecuted.

You're responses are all over the place and aren't even coherent at this point. You just want to evade my points and use pointless words to confuse everyone and yourself.



posted on Feb, 12 2020 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined
I was, in the first place, answering your point that human life is endangered during the tribulation. My response was showing that the danger comes from natural disaster, not war.
At the same time, I was answering your previous claim that the war is continuous from Matthew ch24 v7, that the wars commencing at the beginning of the tribulation climax in Armageddon at the end.
My post showed how the war is NOT continuous. It stops at the end of ch6, and probably at least during the domination of the Beast. So there is no reason why Armageddon should not be something different.


edit on 12-2-2020 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2020 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

First of all, I'm not sure why you think that Revelation is written in chronological order of events.

In Revelation 11, you have a vision of God destroying "the people who destroy the earth" and then you have the beasts and dragon rising in chapter 13.



posted on Feb, 12 2020 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined
The main outline is in roughly chronological order, with interruptions. E.g. the gathering for battle in ch16 and the descent of Christ in ch19 are separated by a description of the Harlot which is about to be destroyed (ch17) and a chapter of mock mourning on her (ch18)
I devoted a specific thread to sorting out the chronology- A time, two times, and half a time. See also the second post in the Index thread already linked, which lays out the chapters in "timeline" order.

As for the case you bring up; Look again at that penultimate verse in ch11. It is only announcing the fact that the destroyers are about to be destroyed. The chapters 12 and 13 are actually a "flashback" , explaining how and why the Beast came into existence in the first place. To cut a long story short, the Atonement means that Satan has been defeated by Christ, so Satan raises up the beast in order to get his revenge on the church.

We just need to follow the sequence through.


edit on 12-2-2020 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2020 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

Now we're just debating silly stuff that's irrelevant to anything and we'll continue to disagree.

The bottom line is that there WILL BE Armageddon (which you've admitted) and a lot of lives will be lost and bodies will be piling up. The outcome will be the same regardless of who finishes it.



posted on Feb, 12 2020 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined
Just to clarify- I've "admiited" Armageddon only in the sense that I've described it from the beginning, i.e. "a battle between the world and God, settled by the Return of Christ, not a physical battle between human armies".



posted on Feb, 13 2020 @ 06:34 AM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

Just to be clear, you said that the description of it taking seven months to bury all of the dead bodies (Ezekiel 39) as a metaphor. Based on your title AND the text written in your original post, you're trying to make it sound like Armageddon is some kind of spiritual battle that doesn't have anything to do with the physical deaths of mankind.

Part of the problem is that you still don't understand how this leads straight into the millennial reign of Christ here on earth, that you have also called a metaphor. The reason it takes seven months to bury the bodies is because the millennial period here on EARTH WILL HAPPEN after this battle. It's also not the final battle. At the end of the millennial period, there will be the final battle of Gog and Magog after Jesus releases Satan from the Abyss after his 1,000 year reign. Satan will try to gather his armies one last time before the final battle and judgement, otherwise known as the Great White Throne Judgement, where some will end up dying a "second death".


edit on 13-2-2020 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2020 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
Based on your title AND the text written in your original post, you're trying to make it sound like Armageddon is some kind of spiritual battle that doesn't have anything to do with the physical deaths of mankind.

Yes, that's exactly what I was trying to say. To be exact, I ended the OP with the conclusion
"The reality behind the picture would be that the Return of Christ, in itself, IS God’s victory, the battle of Armageddon and the fulfilment of the prophecy. "
Armageddon, from God's side, IS the fact that Christ returns.

I treat the "battle in heaven" in ch12 in the same way. Satan's defeat is explained a couple of verses later as Satan being overcome "by the blood of the Lamb", and so I've described the battle in heaven as a dramatised version of the doctrine of the Atonement. It is the Cross that defeats Satan and sends him down from his place of power over men.

The point is that Revelation is a book full of metaphors and symbolism, a place where God wants to express spiritual meaning in pictures. If people maintain an attitude of "literal interpretation good, spiritual interpretation bad", the result is that they LOSE the spiritual message that God wants to give them.

The same thing happens elsewhere in scripture. Jesus called for prayer that God would "send forth labourers into the harvest". How literally would you want to take that? How would you react if your pastor began handing out scythes to his congregation and insisted on leading them to the nearest field of corn to start work? Yet there is nothing in the text giving permission to treat it as a metaphor- we just have to use our common sense and recognise the picture as a picture.

In a couple of places in Deuteronomy there are passages telling israel to write God's laws on their foreheads and palms of their hands and other places. The Pharisees, being the original scriptural literalists, put strips of scripture into little boxes and bound them to the places mentioned. Yet even you, I'm sure, can see that they were missing the point. it's obvious enough, even in Deuteronomy, that God wanted them to keep his laws at the forefront of their MINDS. "Palms of your hands" was just a metaphorical way of saying that.

Obsessive literalism is a side-effect of the legalistic streak which is one of mankind's most persistent flaws. It is also, as in the case of the Pharisees, an excellent way of missing the point. It is NOT always the most effective way of understanding what the other person is trying to say, even in ordinary conversation. New Testament Chrsitianity is about being guided by the Spirit, not by "the letter". So I'm not going to apologise for trying to recognise when God speaks to us in metaphor.


edit on 13-2-2020 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2020 @ 06:35 PM
link   
So it wont be some gigantic, climatic battle between good an evil, and aliens. It where supposed turn out the good ones are actually evil, and the bad ones are really the Angel's in plot twist of the fates, where even the creators all knowing gaze just concentrated in one single point in time an space?



posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 06:51 AM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI


es, that's exactly what I was trying to say. To be exact, I ended the OP with the conclusion
"The reality behind the picture would be that the Return of Christ, in itself, IS God’s victory, the battle of Armageddon and the fulfilment of the prophecy. "

Armageddon, from God's side, IS the fact that Christ returns.


While that may be the "conclusion", you've certainly chosen to leave out the details surrounding it and what happens during and after that time because you don't understand it.



posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 06:59 AM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI


I treat the "battle in heaven" in ch12 in the same way. Satan's defeat is explained a couple of verses later as Satan being overcome "by the blood of the Lamb", and so I've described the battle in heaven as a dramatised version of the doctrine of the Atonement. It is the Cross that defeats Satan and sends him down from his place of power over men.

The point is that Revelation is a book full of metaphors and symbolism, a place where God wants to express spiritual meaning in pictures. If people maintain an attitude of "literal interpretation good, spiritual interpretation bad", the result is that they LOSE the spiritual message that God wants to give them.


While the cross defeated Satan, it certainly doesn't stop him from influencing and creating chaos here on earth. Your description of the defeat of Satan as being "dramatized", you only look at the end result and choose to overlook the details on the events that surround how Satan is brought down....as usual.

While Revelation is filled with symbolism, it helps to review all of the scripture to help determine their meanings. Revelation is the New Testament version of Zechariah in the Old Testament. Revelation has over 400 quotes from throughout the Old Testament to help guide you in understanding what those symbols mean. Use them.

No spiritual message is lost by trying to decipher details of future events and the details given on how they will happen. You've just chosen to ignore the physical part of what happens.



posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI


The same thing happens elsewhere in scripture. Jesus called for prayer that God would "send forth labourers into the harvest". How literally would you want to take that? How would you react if your pastor began handing out scythes to his congregation and insisted on leading them to the nearest field of corn to start work? Yet there is nothing in the text giving permission to treat it as a metaphor- we just have to use our common sense and recognise the picture as a picture.


When you read the entire context of Matthew, chapter 9, it's pretty clear what Jesus' meant. His laborers and HIS harvest are his disciples helping to spread the message of the Kingdom to harvest believers and ultimately weed out the non-believers from the believers.


In a couple of places in Deuteronomy there are passages telling israel to write God's laws on their foreheads and palms of their hands and other places. The Pharisees, being the original scriptural literalists, put strips of scripture into little boxes and bound them to the places mentioned. Yet even you, I'm sure, can see that they were missing the point. it's obvious enough, even in Deuteronomy, that God wanted them to keep his laws at the forefront of their MINDS. "Palms of your hands" was just a metaphorical way of saying that.


As the Bible clearly tells us, Jesus often spoke in parables to confuse the Pharisees and used language like, "for those who have ears to hear, hear". The quote I just listed is a specific directive to listen to what He was saying through spiritual ears and the use of the Holy Spirit. Something that the Pharisees lacked.

By the way, the reference to keeping God's laws on the "palms of your hands" is a reference to do work with your hands that is pleasing to God and to practice what you preach. Something the Pharisees also lacked. They preached but rarely practiced what they were preaching. The Bible talks about this several times.



posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 07:16 AM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI


Obsessive literalism is a side-effect of the legalistic streak which is one of mankind's most persistent flaws. It is also, as in the case of the Pharisees, an excellent way of missing the point. It is NOT always the most effective way of understanding what the other person is trying to say, even in ordinary conversation. New Testament Chrsitianity is about being guided by the Spirit, not by "the letter". So I'm not going to apologise for trying to recognise when God speaks to us in metaphor.


No, the problem is that most people don't use the entire Bible to decipher itself. They choose to focus on one area when it is meant to be used as a whole to understand what's being said and what's going to happen.

Using the Bible along with using the power of the Holy Spirit is how you decipher God's word. Focusing on the New Testament only will keep you in the dark to many New Testament meanings. Do some research on the internet of all the verses that are listed in the New Testament that are repeated from the Old Testament and then read and compare both together to get a better understanding of what was said and why. It will paint the whole picture for you.

Using the whole Bible as a tool is not a means of only following the "letter" without realizing the spiritual messages that are given, but you have to use ALL of it, not just chosen portions of it.


edit on 14-2-2020 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
Revelation has over 400 quotes from throughout the Old Testament to help guide you in understanding what those symbols mean.

You think I don't know that? I've already given you a link to my original Revelation series Index Thread. I am now going to link you to THIS PAGE
Don't just ignore it, this time, Look at it.
That page, my friend, is the annotated index of every Old Testament reference that I quoted during the series. I WROTE that series on the premise that the Old Testament is the only code-book we need in understanding Revelation.
You will see that I identify eight (8) reference points in Zechariah. Yes, I know about all that, trust me.


edit on 14-2-2020 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 12:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
Focusing on the New Testament only will keep you in the dark to many New Testament meanings. Do some research on the internet of all the verses that are listed in the New Testament that are repeated from the Old Testament and then read and compare both together to get a better understanding of what was said and why. It will paint the whole picture for you.

I don't need to research on the internet, because I've read the Old Testament enough times to be very familiar with the locations of such passages. I've also got a copy of Crudens which I've been using only the last couple of days to research a thread on Peace, which will possibly be put up next week.

Where on earth do you find the idea that I don't use the Old Testament? I may not use it by taking evry word in a literal sense, but that doesn't mean that I don't use it at all.
I can refute that suggestion by inviting you to scroll down my back catalogue of threads (there's a icon on the left) and see how many threads or projects are Old Testament based.
Alternatively you could wait for a few weeks; I'm going to put up a massive Index Thread of every faith-based thread or series of threads that I've placed on ATS over the last ten years. I've got a printed copy in front of me, and I can count eleven separate series on the Old Testament page and a couple of dozen other threads.

I take particular pride in the pairing of the "Does the Od Testament have a remedy for sin?" series and the later "New Testament salvation" series. Together, they give a combined answer "No, the Old Testament doesn't, but the New Testament does."

Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs. Don't try telling me that I need to read the Old Testament.



edit on 14-2-2020 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

So, what you're really telling me isn't that you lack research, but just lack understanding instead. It sounds like you need to read some Christian commentary to explain it to you.

If you truly believe in the veracity of the Old Testament, then stop making silly comments that involve words like "New Testament Christianity" and making it sound like the Old Testament is nothing but the "letter" of the law, which it is not. There's obviously tons of prophecy in the Old Testament that you need to spend more time researching than the book of Revelation.



posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined
It's open to me to riposte by suggesting that you don't understand my spiritual interpretation.
However, we may be in more agreement on the next thread.




edit on 14-2-2020 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined
I know there is much prophecy in the Old Testament. I've done threads on most of it.




top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join