Arpel- concerning the scripture that you first used Heb 4:3 about wrath. First go to Heb 3:11, this is not speaking of God's wrath, it should read, "so I swear in 'their' wrath, they shall not enter into my rest.
This is feminie gender, God is not female right? This is speaking of the covetousness of man. As in the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.
Adam was the first priest, but he did not rest from his labor because of covetousness. God made him work, and toil to produce food from the earth all the days of his life. This is abstract thinking, but relevant to your question.
Was he not part of the Kingdom of God because of this trangression? No. He is part of the church.

All of Israel shall be saved. This is speaking of spiritual Israel, because spiritual Jews are those who God loves. This is 'pas' or "the all"
The Jews had an expression, they said that a part of something was the whole, or the all. We have a similar expression,. If you and a friend hung out for say 6-7 hours, and then someone asked you what you did all day, you would mostlikely say  "I was hanging out with my friend all day" this is an expression, unless you actually spend all 24 hours with your friend.

 The All (pas) spiritual Jews, bond and free will be saved. God says so.

Whether from the O.T or the N.T, they are part of the ekklasia.

Arpel-

What you will find here is that most people do not want definition. This particular topic was looked at over twenty times. One person responded. This is really good information that you brought to the table and I agree that we should seek more than a pat answer to satisfy us. Interlinear bibles and parsing guides are not popular, because that means that people would actually have to study for themselves. But isn't that what we are supposed to be doing? And for that matter how long? I'm thinking that it's a lifetimes work, something to keep us focused on God, instead of self.
God is able to hide things in plain sight fro people, and has all throughout the entire bible. Thank you for giving me something to think about.

Bronzesnake. If satan can only appear on earth when to church is taken (raptured) taken out of the way. Then
where do you suppose he is now? Who or what is coodinating the darkness of this world? What is the spiritual wickedness in high places? He can't be in Heaven, because he's been cast out. So where is he if he's not on earth?

Bronzesnake-

You said that revelation is absolutely is chronological order, but you
still believe that there is a pre-trib rapture? That's fine, and you
made some good points, but I believe that you are overlooking the time
factor involved. I Corinthians 15:51. The 'key'is in the mystery
(musterion) There are only two mysteries in the bible. The mystery of
the Church, Eph chapters 3 and 5 and the mystery of iniquity, 2nd Thes
2:6. Jesus said in John 6:38 that he will raise the church up at the
last day. So we have to go by what he said, it's not just my opinion, or as you once again condecendingly put it "inaccurate interpretations"
That word last is eskatos, last in the series, like the last echo heard
after shouting into the Grand canyon or something.
Matt 24:31 AFTER the tribulation of those days. He will send his angels
with a great sound of a trumpet.
Angels are messengers, human as well as angelic.
1st angel sounds in Rev 8:7, 2nd, vs 8, 3rd, vs 10, 4th, vs 12, 5th,
Rev
9:1, 6th, vs 13, 7th, Rev 10:7 But in the days of the voice of the
seventh angel, when he should begin to sound THE MYSTERY OF GOD (The
Church) IS FINISHED. As he had declared to his servants the prophets.

That lines up with the last trump doesn't it? And also the bible says
that we are going to be changed by the same operation that destroys the
last enemy of God which is death. So, again, no I do not see the
pre-trib rapture.

Not only that, but there is a shadow picture of this in the Old
Testament story of Jericho. On the 7th day they marched seven times ,
and then shouted and blew trumpets. The end. I believe that it's a good
example of meaning of  the word seven because it's not only a literal number, it's
also an adjective.
It's not literal in the case of the seven churches in Asia because
there
where more than just 7 churches in Asia for one thing, and for another
that word means to be complete, or refined. Well, to be complete means,
finished, right?

Bronzesnake-

Are you serious? We are not supposed to get angry, or be blunt? Sorry, that's not true. Look up the original meanings of words, and you will see that Paul said I do not come with enticing words, I Cor 2:4 enticing/ peitho
persuade

a) to persuade, i.e. to induce one by words to believe

b) to make friends of, to win one's favour, gain one's good will, or to seek to win one, strive to please one

c) to tranquillise

d) to persuade unto i.e. move or induce one to persuasion to do something

2) be persuaded

a) to be persuaded, to suffer one's self to be persuaded; to be induced to believe: to have faith: in a thing

1) to believe

2) to be persuaded of a thing concerning a person

b) to listen to, obey, yield to, comply with

3) to trust, have confidence, be confident


Jesus came baring a sword, not peace. Not for an unbeliever anyway. If we are told that we must agree to disagree, then that is a false doctrine, and we are told to be angry at it. I'm not here to make people mad, I didn't write these words. People get mad when their theology gets challenged. You , and this other person are saying that I'm an angry person for no reason, or a trouble maker, when I'm really not, I'm just direct. And no, I've never been kicked out of this particular forum before.

You bronzesnake, asked if I believe that the whole bible is literal. No, I don't, it has a lot of figurative language, even though you believe that that is just what people say to explain away the scriptures.

No. Jesus used this idiomatic language all the time. He called people scorpions, which is still to this day a term used in the middle east for a devious, and evil person. Mountains, were the ruling cities of an empire, born again, was also an expression of the Jews in their verbal commentaries. You see see this for yourself in Alfred Edersheim's books, McClintock and Strong's Cyclodedia of Biblical Literature, and several other references.
Everything mentioned in the book of Revelation can be found in the Old Testament. All you have to do is study it out to completion. I haven't, because it will take a lifetime.

But, you and I, and everyone else that bothers to write anything on these boards are just students. And we haven't said anything that past generations of opposing views haven't discussed. This is a tired arguement.

You said that we should be able to learn from eachother.
Well, apparently, that seems to be one-sided. Meaning, I can learn from you.
All I did was define words, and you and a few others got mad. That is the first problem. People don't want definition, they want comfort at the cost of sound doctrine.
It's sad.

Your question that you said I could answer about wrath.

 If you look up the words in the Greek you will also learn that the wrath that believers are not appointed to, is not referring to God's judgement. What he didn't appoint us to is ario, and oregomai. Meaning, that we are not to lift up ourselves, or take up for ourselves, and and we not to desire carnal things, like money. You won't ever see this, if you don't study and parse the Greek, and compare them to other scriptures. This is NOT taking scripture out of context, because there are not certain scriptures for certain things. Even though most people have their pet scriptures, that they somehow believe negate others.

It also says in the proper translation, of Hebrews 3:11, So I swear in their wrath/ orge, and oregomai, they shall not enter into my rest.

God does not appoint true followers unto wrath. If you define it properly.

Because. The wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. Jms 1:20

So God does not pour out his wrath (as your implying it to mean) upon believers. but he will destroy all of our physical bodies because the word says so. And we cannot enter into his rest (the spiritual sabbath) when we are trying to defend ourselves, the bible says that the battle is the Lord's. We are commanded to rest in Him.

a mathetes

"Brothers and sisters in Christ should be able to discuss differences and maintain fellowship and friendship. Discussing differences can be a learning experience for everyone and can be part of our fellowship. "

Yes, but there are some factors that are getting overlooked here.
1. 1Cr 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

The same thing=lego, to speak, teach, affirm, and so on.

It has the basic same meaning as confessing Christ.
Homolegeo, or of the same, and words.

And if we are not speaking the same words, then we cannot be friends according to the Bible, it's not my opinion. This is how iron sharpens iron.

If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed:

god speed, chairo, rejoice with, hail etc.

A few verses before this Paul mentions confess, which is again homolegeo or, saying the same thing as another, agree with.

We are to agree with God, if we choose to save face with each other, and are not speaking the same thing that Jesus spoke, then we cannot be friends with God according to the bible. That would make us anti-christ wouldn't it?

I'm not trying to be contentious, this is what the bible says. Do you deny this?

I don't believe that the bible teaches a pre-trib, and I will present the reasons why. But I will not agree to disagree, the bible does not teach that.

So, when you called me friend, it was not in love, not really, because you ended your letter with "good luck" Or, I'm right and you are wrong but please humor us.

Jesus said that we are his friends IF we do whatsoever he commands us.
How can two walk together except they agree?

I will send you the reasons why I don't see the pre-trib. If you choose to engage them, cool. If not, that's fine too. But I hope you will at least seriously consider the reasons. Then, you can lock me out of the forum, won't be the first time.

a mathetes of Christ.

[Psalms 119-]

I agree with Psalms 119-

Tim Lahaye is just a storyteller who knows nothing about prophecy.  He's a rich man capitalizing on the selling of fear to people who don't study scripture. But the so-called "Church" loves his books regardless. And he's proporting lies, for money. That is the doctrine of devils (diamonion) distributor of fortunes.

Anyone, please name one of God's true prophets that were rich. They were all hated, infamous, threatened, and abased, but they all spoke the same thing.
And the Pope is not infailible, he's a man, dust, nothing greater  that any other man. He's voted into the office by other sinful men, not by God.
Jesus said call NO man, Father on the Earth, for one IS your Father which is in Heaven. Matt 23:9
Pope, means "papa" He's just a man, period. I don't take my instruction from "the chair" ex-cathedra.

But from The Lord of Heaven and Earth.

In the Ancient Jewish culture, a man was not considered to be the son of his father, unless he obeyed his father. This can be found in any number of Jewish culture books. And that is who God gave his instruction to, not the pagans nations of later generations. So when Jesus said this, they understood exactly what he meant.

It took hundreds of years for the RCC to evolve ito what the so-called 'Church Fathers' wanted it to be. And they had a great impact on what was put into the Authorized Version of scripture.

Proof. The word Lucifer for example, is a Latin word. How did it find it's way into the Hebrew Old Testament, BEFORE the Latin language? Because of a Catholic translator.

Believe GOD, not man. All men are is corrupted dust.

a mathetes.

Snake-

The "my friend" diatribe is unnecessary.It sounds very belittling. I'm not your friend obviously, if I do not agree with you. I do believe in the parousia (physical arrival) of Jesus Christ so let's just clear that up first.

I will take my time looking over and studying all that you wrote, and reply in a day or two.

Till then.

After reading all four pages of this topic, I am left a little confused. Because to main topic got replaced.

Who says that the anti-Christ is a he? The original text, (interlinear Bible) says 'it' not he, or him. And this was the stand of the Church until the mid-eighteen hundreds or so. Which once again puts in question the so-called infalliblity of the KJV. But that is a locked forum, so I won't go there.
But has anyone even considered that it could just as easily, and more probably be figurative language? Not literal, at all.
The early scholars didn't believe what the mainstream teaches about the book of Revelation today. It's not in chronological order, it's not literal obviously because not one so-called prophecy teacher has ever been right, or even close. It's been a guessing game based on presuppositions.
I can't remember for sure who it was, but someone wrote a book called 88 Reasons Why Jesus will Return in Eighty Eight. Or something like that. Well, it didn't happen obviously. That book, as so many that proceeded it are just fuel for the fire.

If you already have a preconcieved idea about anything, it's next to impossible to be taught or accept anything new regardless of the abundance of information presented. Because it enters the comfort zone, and therefore is labeled heresy by those who have made up their minds, who think they understand Revelation. I don't, and am not claiming to.
But I do know some things through long and tedious study, and from having a good teacher.

No one here even stayed on the subject, it went from Revelation to whether or not we will have a physical body at the ressurection.
Is it okay to revive the original topic? I'll give it a shot.

Firstly, the Bible does not teach pre-trib rapture, that is a total lie. The bible says that we are going to be changed AT THE LAST TRUMP. I Cor 15:52

I'm no rocket scientist, but if I had one cookie on a plate, and my wife ate it. That's it no more cookies for me after that. Seven more cookies don't appear out of thin air. It's illogical. Or three and 1/2 if your a mid-tribber.

Figurative, NOT literal.

Revelation 17:1,3,5,9,15,18 -- I will show unto thee the Judgement of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters -- and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast -- having seven heads and ten horns - and upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS -- the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sitteth -- the waters which thou sawest,

where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues -- the woman which thou sawest is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

harlot - Greek: porne - idolator; to sell

Genesis 11:1,4 --The whole earth was of one language and one speech -- they said let us build us a city and a tower and let us make us a name

language - Hebrew: sepheth - lip or- boundary line.

speech - Hebrew: dabar - arrangement; spoken commandment

city and tower - considered a sovereign kingdom with its own boundary and law (commandment/instruction) (called a mountain)

name - Hebrew: shem - authority; honor; fame

Genesis 2:16 17 -- of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat - But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shall not eat of it.

Genesis 3:1,5 The serpent was more subtil than any beast -- (the serpent said) in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and "ye shalt be as gods" --

The sin of the harlot (self-worship) started with Eve and the original beast (the serpent). He ruled Eve and Adam by causing them to move the boundary of God (thou shalt) taking in forbidden boundary (thou shalt not). This established a new law of self-esteem (pride). Eve, the original harlot (idolator), rode upon the beast (serpent), polluting the people (Adam). After the flood, Nimrod reinstituted, at Babel (Babylon), the rebellion of Eden, setting up a new boundary (city and tower), and a new commandment (name or authority). Pride (let us make a name) is the foundation of "all" idolatry (spiritual harlotry) that has polluted the world for all time. It is the system of self-worship. (Repent means to turn from self to God). Babel began a series of "world order" beast (ruling) systems (Dan. 2:31-45; 7:3-7). These empires, (beasts) ruled all the civilized world and fell as one conquered the other (Babylon, Persia/Medes, Greece, Rome. etc). The harlot was the ancient Chaldean idolatry passed down through the empires in the form of Greek and Roman gods (mystery religions). Outlawed in Rome, the worship of idols was reinstituted in the Roman church by Constantine (the deadly wound healed - Rev. 13:3). America has dispensed with icon (statue) worship and retained the "self-esteem" (pride) system of Rome/Babylon and is polluting the world with it. Babylon fell once as a literal empire never to rise again (Jer. 51:26). The second time she will fall as a wicked idolatrous religious system of "self-esteem" and "pride". (Babylon is fallen, is fallen - Rev. 18:2). Revelation 18 shows that it is a material system of wealth and self. America is "New Babylon". The beast (world order), the waters (peoples, multitudes, nations, tongues) and the 7 heads (7 mountains- 7 world systems) are all the same throne where the harlot sits. A mountain was the seat of a ruling empire (Jer. 51:25). Throughout scripture, Babylon is a system of pride. Paul said that covetousness (wanting more for self) is idolatry (Eph. 5:5; Col. 3:5). The "new world order" will be the last "beast" that God will destroy. (Rev. 13:1; 19:19-20)

Anti-Christ, mean anyone, or any (system) that opposes God's boundry. His word, ALL of it is his boundry for us who believe in Him as our only savior. If we change, or try to move that boundry set up by God, we are by definition a Satan (an adversary one who withstands) as in Ps 109:6, or an anti-Christ!


This is enough for now. Any comments, rebuttals, name-calling, whatever. welcome.

a mathetes of Jesus.

[that we walk after his commandments.]

Hello all-

This is in response primarily to Acedia, the one who started the thread. I agree with this person, and I encourage you to keep studying the koine Greek.
There is a huge difference between the Kione Greek, and the English. People that deny this are not even thinking logically. Just look at how much English changes, our street language is acceptable. Words like bootylicious, phat, and a plethora of other so-called words, violate English consistantly, even though it's not proper English at all. It's the gradual dumbing down of society. But it has become acceptable to talk like an idiot.
Koine, was the common (street language) of the 1st century Church and the general public. And Jesus, used their expressions, vernacular, and so on. To communicate with them, yet without sin.

Touching on the brief comment that someone made  on the word love, or agapeo in the Kione;
English tranlates this word into one general definition, when in fact there are at least 24 different meanings for this word in the Koine Greek. The same is true of many, many other words in the Bible.
We (English) use two of the 24 words for "love". And people interpret them both to mean the basic same thing, and they are not at all the same.
Proof is also in the context, not just the word itself.

Example: And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it. II Jon 1:6

This is the agape that God demands of the true believer. Allegance to Him is commanded by Him, regardless of what others say, do, think, or teach.

Do we (all professing Christ) have this kind of love? Clearly, NO.

If we did, there wouldn't be over 250 + denominations, and splinter groups of them.

Jesus, taught the apostles to not phileo the world. Or show affection for it. Churchianity says that we must 'phileo' everyone, God doesn't say this at all, but it has become accepted as what God said. He didn't teach "agreeing to disagree" That is a false teaching incorporated into the faith.

So yes, there is a difference in the translations. And this is only one example. If I am wrong, then someone will have to disprove it from the bible.

For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. Gal 1:10

This scripture also alludes to the meaning of true love.

There are many mistranlated words in the English versions, even the AV (KJV) because half of the translators where Catholic. So their imputations have greatly impaired the true meanings of words. Because their theology was opposing the protestant translators. The result was a compromised text which had to be approved by King James.

I applaud Acedia for wanting to study the koine Greek, it does make a difference in understanding the word of God, if it didn't the great scholars of the past would not have bothered compiling a Concordance, or a parsing guide.

God has hidden things in plain sight, and tells us to dig for them. If you don't desire truth, you will not bother with original definitions of words.

And look at the difference in their teaching, and understand, compared to today?
Again, if this is wrong, you need to disprove it.

A mathetes of The Lord