Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Those days be shortened for the sake of the ELECT

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 

I advocate nothing.
It says so in the Bible.

Gay is an orientation, and I don't think it matters what their orientation is, but I'd think that "virgin" means not sexually active.

And they need 144, 000 such male virgins.




posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
In Revelation "those days" are not shortened for the church, because the church will not be here at that time, but it is for the sake of the Elect that those days be shortened so that God can keep his covenant with Abraham and with Jacob.

The Elect- EKLEKTOUS
Some other New Testament usages of this word, whether translated "elect" or "chosen" (it's the same thing)
.
Matthew ch22 v14; "many are called but few are chosen". Note the context of this statement- those who are not chosen are "cast into outer darkness, where men will weep and gnash their teeth".
In other words, "the elect" are all those who are NOT cast into outer darkness.

In the gospel end-time descriptions, like Matthew ch.24 and Mark ch.13, the days are shortened for the sake of the elect (Matthew ch.24 v22), the elect are those who would nearly be deceived, if it were possible (v24), and the elect will be gathered in by the angels (v31) when the Son of Man returns (i.e. those who are not elect are those who are not gathered in).

"Who shall bring any charge against God'e elect?" Romans ch8 v33

The Colossians are addressed as "God's chosen ones"- Colossians ch3 v12

"I endure everything for the sake of the elect"- 2 Timothy ch.2 v10

In the first verse of Titus, Paul wants to further the faith of "God's elect".

To me, these references look as though "the elect" is being used in the New Testament to describe the followers of Christ.




edit on 28-9-2012 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
Well it doesn't say that married men or those with sexual sin cannot be saved.

It doesn't say this is good or bad.

It just reserves a special condition for the procession of the redeemed.

So the reaction to this sometimes makes me wonder how much some followers of the Bible are really interested in following what it says, or simply self-justification, because it's really not taking anything away from other believers, they just cannot be in that procession.

Perhaps some tried but burnt with lust too much, so it was better for them to take one wife (to paraphrase Paul).
1 Corinthians 7:29: "But I say brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both that have wives be as though they had none".

But even the pagans had their vestal virgins and celibate priests, so at that time it was not an unusual self-sacrificing lifestyle.
Some even opted for castration or forced it on others, which thankfully was not demanded by Christianity, although some Christians like Origen are said to have practiced it.
There are NT verses referring to amputations (if your eye or hand offends you cut them off or stick them out) to avoid sin, but these are regarded as metaphors by most.

The Catholics would employ hundreds of thousands of castrati well into the 19th century, mainly for their singing.
Their sexual status remains unknown or debated, but in a literal sense one can assume they were virgins.

However, I'd think forced virginity is not the issue, but rather a group of men so sold out to Christ that remaining virgins would not be an important factor for them.
edit on 28-9-2012 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


Then who were the 2 prophets in the OT witnessing to the elect and who were those elect? The elect go all the way back to the OT.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 

I'm not sure which prophets you've got in mind. Please quote references.
I was surveying the New Testament usage, which is relevant when you're interpreting New Testament verses.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 

I'm not sure which prophets you've got in mind. Please quote references.
I was surveying the New Testament usage, which is relevant when you're interpreting New Testament verses.



Deuteronomy 7:6-8 “For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. 7 It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the LORD set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, 8 but it is because the LORD loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that the LORD has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

He chose them, they were elected by him. There's the oaths to Israel's forefathers mentioned.

Genesis 25:23 And the LORD said to her [Rebekah], “Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you shall be divided; the one shall be stronger than the other, the older shall serve the younger.”

Malachi 1:1 The oracle of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi. 2 “I have loved you,” says the LORD. But you say, “How have you loved us?” “Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?” declares the LORD. “Yet I have loved Jacob 3 but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert.” 4 If Edom says, “We are shattered but we will rebuild the ruins,” the LORD of hosts says, “They may build, but I will tear down, and they will be called ‘the wicked country,’ and ‘the people with whom the LORD is angry forever.’” 5 Your own eyes shall see this, and you shall say, “Great is the LORD beyond the border of Israel!” (c.f. Romans 9:13-15).

Jacob was a swindler, yet God chose him over Esau. Even though Israel defiled the land he gave them and caused him to drive them out, still he chooses to redeem them even after all of that. Thats election. As much as many want to deny it, there is no getting around that he chose and elected them. They may not be acting like his people sometimes, but he again will choose to remedy that as is spoken of in Zechariah 13. But as i said before salvation is from the jews, no one else was elected to bring Messiah to bear, only Judah in which the line of David comes from.
edit on 28-9-2012 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 08:04 PM
link   


Who are the Elect in the bible? The Elect are the natural born jewish decendants of Abraham.

Matthew 24:24

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.


Unless you are speaking specifically of Christian Jews, then the elect aren't necessarily the blood descendants of Abraham. Considering those Jews who have rejected Christ have been deceived, something Christ said the elect will not be.
edit on 9/28/2012 by Klassified because: missed a letter / redaction



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Fornication in prophetical terms often refers to idolatry and worship of false gods and pariticipation in witchcraft, spellcasting and magick. Ways which do not come from God.


Many many Christians today, commit idolatry through the false doctrine of the world. They do not understand the true God for God is NOT of this world.

Many many 'humanize' God, to make Him compatible with our worldly affairs but He can never be in the utter surprise of many Christians later on.

The elect is the very few among many, among all nations, the tiny percent among churches.

I'm speaking in literal terms



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Klassified


Who are the Elect in the bible? The Elect are the natural born jewish decendants of Abraham.

Matthew 24:24

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.


Unless you are speaking specifically of Christian Jews, then the elect aren't necessarily the blood descendants of Abraham. Considering those Jews who have rejected Christ have been deceived, something Christ said the elect will not be.
edit on 9/28/2012 by Klassified because: missed a letter / redaction


There were aways a faithful remnant in every age. When Elijah walked the earth and he fought against Jezebel and her Ba'al priests, even then there were still 7000 of Abraham's decendants who remained true to God.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by DarkKnight21
 

Harsh words. Do you have any proof of this claim?

Proof of what, that he belongs to a cult?
He admits he goes to a church with Jews, meaning practicing Jews, in a congregation that probably gets all quivery thinking one of the gods are in their midst.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 

Not replacement theory . . .

Only members of the anti-Christian, man-worshiping cult even use the term "replacement theory".
Non-cult members see this as the very foundation of Christianity.
The branches were cut off, meaning Israel.
The tree is not Israel, but God's blessings.
Your cult replaces God with men by calling them the tree.
The church is grafted in as the recipients of God's blessing.
Your cult philosophy is not just against the teachings of the New Testament but it does not fit the Old Testament either. Jesus was born of a Gentile by the name of Ruth, the Moabite, so there. Bloodlines is just Satan's delusion which you have fallen for and are damned unless you repent of your sin.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 



There were always a faithful remnant in every age. When Elijah walked the earth and he fought against Jezebel and her Ba'al priests, even then there were still 7000 of Abraham's descendants who remained true to God.

You had me going for a moment there. Your OP sounded a bit like one of those that believes "the Jews don't need Christ because they have their own covenant with God." But I think I understand where you're coming from.

I'm not so sure I agree completely, but that's not important. I just wanted to understand you correctly.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 



There were always a faithful remnant in every age. When Elijah walked the earth and he fought against Jezebel and her Ba'al priests, even then there were still 7000 of Abraham's descendants who remained true to God.

You had me going for a moment there. Your OP sounded a bit like one of those that believes "the Jews don't need Christ because they have their own covenant with God." But I think I understand where you're coming from.

I'm not so sure I agree completely, but that's not important. I just wanted to understand you correctly.



I'm not saying jews are automatically saved at all. Thats why in the OP i said the King would send out invitations to his relatives, but some were too busy and couldn't come to his son's wedding feast. Of the 100 invitations to his family he sent ouy, only a handful showed up, so the invitation was extended to the other friends and neighbors in the area.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 

I got it LW, and I did catch the parable reference. Just double checking our theology.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 03:01 AM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 

However, every example of TOUS EKLEKTOUS or similar that you can find in the New Testament shows the term as transferred to the followers of Jesus.
That includes Revelation ch.17 v14; "He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with him are called and chosen and faithful".
In fact that transference is the whole point of the New Testament. Disregard it, and you are disregarding the New Testament.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by truejew
If the Church and the elect are two different groups, which one do the twelve apostles belong to?



The apostles were jews. Believing in Jesus didn't change that. Jesus took away the need for sin sacrifice to cover our sins, by sacrificing himself once and for all. The word "christian" is a vague term, we're all messianics who believe in him.

This is hinted at in the parable of the cultivated olive tree with the wild olive branches grafted in. If you take away the word "christian" would it make you any less of a believer in him? Would it change your spirit and your disposition? Only if you're spirit and disposition did not come from God.

Take for instance, what if Jesus had been chinese or african? What if he had been a russian or a philippino? Would you care about his appearence if he can still save? The word for what we are matters not, we are what and who we are.


Correct. However, you are wrong that the Church is not the elect.

When Gentiles are grafted in, they become Jewish in faith, seeds of Abraham, the elect. Those who reject Jesus, are cut off from the olive tree. They are no longer true Jews, seeds of Abraham, the elect.

"28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." (Galatians 3:28-29 KJV)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 



Perhaps, but my KJV says they are virgins, undefiled by women.
So the KJV is wrong?



No one could learn that song except the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth. For it is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins. It is these who follow the Lamb wherever he goes. These have been redeemed from mankind as firstfruits for God and the Lamb, and in their mouth no lie was found, for they are blameless.



I think its quite clear....the 144,000 are LITERAL virgins. They are also described as not having lied because they were "blameless".

Question to peope who assume that words like "women" and "virgin" in that particular verse are only symbolic.....is the statement about them being "blameless" and not having lied also symbolic?

edit on 29-9-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n

Question to peope who assume that words like "women" and "virgin" in that particular verse are only symbolic.....is the statement about them being "blameless" and not having lied also symbolic?



If it is not symbolic, then I'll present you with a more disturbing theory.

Women could represent the 'Great Prostitute' - the worldly system itself which many committed adultery (idolatry) with.

Many who is in this worldly system without their knowledge, is worshiping their education, titles, careers, possessions, family, financial stability/security, achievements, Christian or not.

They would lie to advance in this world?? No?? They would pretend they esteem someone (suck up) to get favors usually a promotion or any worldly opportunity. Now that is lying!

Either ways, symbolic or not. Literal or not. Conforming to the ways of the elect is easy if you truly love God with all your heart, soul, and mind. The difficult thing that remains is the amount of persecution you will get from other unbelievers and Christian who were deceived by the false doctrine.

You will be accused of being a gay for not desiring a partner at such an advanced age. You will be accused of stupidity or being a 'simpleton' for not groveling/pretending (lying) to advance in your career, grab a worldly opportunity/favors.

You will be hated by your relatives and friends Christians or not for not being conformed to this world, for not desiring to be civilized, respectable, neat, and not running after what everybody else runs after - the pride of life!
edit on 29-9-2012 by ahnggk because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by ahnggk
 




You will be hated by your relatives and friends Christians or not for not being conformed to this world, for not desiring to be civilized, respectable, neat, and not running after what everybody else runs after - the pride of life!


You are right.

I can tell you from first hand experience that those who DONT run after careers and material pleasures are seen as "losers" or "idiots" etc.

In this world, we see people who run after material wealth... if they are successful at it, they are usually rewarded by their peers and society. But they seem to be unaware that it is only temporary. The truth is that a man has to leave behind whatever he made in his lifetime... and it will be of NO USE to him at the time of judgement and in the afterlife.

Naked a man comes from his mother's womb, and as he comes, so he departs. He takes nothing from his labor that he can carry in his hand. ... We all come to the end of our lives as naked and empty-handed as on the day we were born. - Ecclesiastes 5:15

Read that again one more time.... EMPTY-HANDED.


edit on 29-9-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by halfoldman
 



Perhaps, but my KJV says they are virgins, undefiled by women.
So the KJV is wrong?



No one could learn that song except the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth. For it is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins. It is these who follow the Lamb wherever he goes. These have been redeemed from mankind as firstfruits for God and the Lamb, and in their mouth no lie was found, for they are blameless.



I think its quite clear....the 144,000 are LITERAL virgins. They are also described as not having lied because they were "blameless".

Question to peope who assume that words like "women" and "virgin" in that particular verse are only symbolic.....is the statement about them being "blameless" and not having lied also symbolic?

edit on 29-9-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)


The 144k are not people who never had sex with women. Go through the entire OT and see what women are referred as. What is idolatry to God? What does he consider it when Israel played the harlot with other gods on him?

Jeremiah 3:1-5

Israel Is Shameless

1 “They say, ‘If a man divorces his wife,
And she goes from him
And becomes another man’s,
May he return to her again?’
Would not that land be greatly polluted?
But you have played the harlot with many lovers;
Yet return to Me,” says the Lord.

2 “Lift up your eyes to the desolate heights and see:
Where have you not lain with men?
By the road you have sat for them
Like an Arabian in the wilderness;
And you have polluted the land
With your harlotries and your wickedness.
3 Therefore the showers have been withheld,
And there has been no latter rain.
You have had a harlot’s forehead;
You refuse to be ashamed.
4 Will you not from this time cry to Me,
‘My Father, You are the guide of my youth?
5 Will He remain angry forever?
Will He keep it to the end?’
Behold, you have spoken and done evil things,
As you were able.”

[verse 14]

14 “Return, O backsliding children,” says the Lord; “for I am married to you. I will take you, one from a city and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion. 15 And I will give you shepherds according to My heart, who will feed you with knowledge and understanding.

He's not talking about actual women. It's a dangerous thing taking everything for literal interpretation, this is why we have the Helper.

The 144k are those who were never defiled by traditions of men, cults and ungodly religions fornicating with lawlessness.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join