Jerry wrote:

"Why do you wing it on your Bible interpretation. Paul is describing what is going to happen some day. Some Christians were upset because they thought he had already come, but Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians to set them straight."

I didn't make it clear that by "future" I meant that far off future (2000 or more years). You're right. Paul was describing what was to happen some day. But that "some day" was closer to the end time of Israel (AD70) rather than some arbitrary time period thousands of years in the future..

Jerry wrote:

"Some Christians were upset because they thought he had already come, but Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians to set them straight."

Slight error: the Christians weren't upset thinking that the Day of Christ had already come;
They were all shook up thinking that the Day was near ("at hand" according to the correct Bible). If the Day of Christ, the Day of the Lord, i.e., the Great Tribulation Jesus spoke about in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, had already come, believe me, they would have known about it. They would have had no need to ask Paul anything.

Jerry wrote:

"The devil hasn't already set himself up in the temple."

This is a dispensational concoction. The legitimate Bible doesn't say that the devil is ever going to set himself up in the temple.


Jerry wrote:

"Pentecost was wrong on many things. This passage also teaches he was a man under the influence of the Devil and was not the Devil:"

We agree on at least one thing: Pentecost and his cohorts were wrong on many things.
I'm not sure which passage you're referring to, but yes. Any time the Bible speaks of man and the devil in the same breath, so to speak, usually the man is under the influence of the devil. Sometimes the devil cannot be distinguished from the man, and vice versa.

Jerry wrote:

Revelation 13:1-2 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

The dragon is stated to be the Devil in chapter 12.

Quite true. But the beast rising up out of the sea is not the "Antichrist." This beast was
the Roman Empire. The ten horns were the same as the "ten toes" in Daniel. They were the smaller kingdoms which Rome had conquered in the past, and of which the empire was made of . And true indeed. It was a heathen nation, God used it to judge Israel for its wickedness and unbelief, and the Dragon gave it his power (long story).

Did you notice something else(it has nothing to do with our discussion) in Revelation 12?
The dragon and his angels were kicked out of heaven at about the time Jesus brought salvation to the world, received all power in the universe, and the kingdom of God was set up. Scofield, charter member of dispensationalism, really got that one wrong.

The chief reason I know futurism is wrong is because the Lord Jesus Christ said so in Luke 21:22, "For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled." The "days of vengeance" was the destructon of the temple, the city, and the nation in AD70. There are therefore, no specific O.T. prophecies which were not fulfilled before that date.

cpmac
www.tribulationhoax.com

You're right. Paul was describing what was to happen some day. But that "some day" was closer to the end time of Israel (AD70) rather than some arbitrary time period thousands of years in the future..

Unless you totally spiritualize and explain away the literal reading of the book of Revelation, there is no way you can arrive at the conclusion that the events already happened in the first century.

"The devil hasn't already set himself up in the temple."

This is a dispensational concoction. The legitimate Bible doesn't say that the devil is ever going to set himself up in the temple.

I guess you can't make up your mind then, because YOU stated this:

"Sitting in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God," is something Satan himself tried; I doubt if he would let any of his flunkies get by with it.

Isaiah 14:12-14 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High."

I may be wrong, but I say that Paul was talking about the above Scripture.

cpmac
www.tribulationhoax.com

Paul doesn't refer to a throne - but to the temple. He is referring to Daniel 9 and 11 - which Jesus also refers to in Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21 - as a future event that had not happened yet.

Paul doesn't refer to a throne - but to the temple. He is referring to Daniel 9 and 11 - which Jesus also refers to in Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21 - as a future event that had not happened yet.

Jerry, I think that you're splitting hairs; it's not so much what he sat on, but that he makes himself to be God. The overall language of Isaiah 14 and Paul is similar enough.

Daniel could not have prophesied anything to happen after AD70, which was the "days of vengeance" Jesus spoke about in Luke 21:22, "when all things which are written shall be fulfilled." What wasn't fulfilled by then is not going to be fulfilled, the Old Testament notwithstanding.

cpmac
www.tribulationhoax.com

Could not have? Well, apparently he did, but you refuse to accept it because it doesn't fit your pre-conceived theology. Jesus referred to Daniel 9 (and several other places):

Matthew 24:15 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

Daniel 9:27 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.

Daniel 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

This next part was a type of the Antichrist (this is referring to Antiochus Epiphanes) - which was not fulfilled in the OT because Jesus still referred to it as a future event:

Daniel 8:11-14 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered. Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Luke 21 refers to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, Matthew 24 and Mark 13 refer to the endtime Tribulation period - there are certain things in those chapters that have not happened yet, including the 7 year Tribulation itself, the peace treaty with Israel, the desecration of the temple by the Antichrist - which Paul refers to as a yet future event. There is NO record of a one-world leader desecrating the temple with an idol of himself in AD 70, nor of the mark of the beast being established worldwide - nor of the seals, trumpets, and vials being poured out worldwide. Armageddon has not happened, the devil has not been cast into the bottomless pit or even into the Lake of fire yet, Christ is not physically reigning from Jerusalem yet. It is just wishful thinking to think otherwise.

Matthew 24 and Mark 13 refer to the endtime Tribulation period - there are certain things in those chapters that have not happened yet, including the 7 year Tribulation itself, the peace treaty with Israel, the desecration of the temple by the Antichrist - which Paul refers to as a yet future event.

It looks as it I waded in too deep! Explain to me in detail how the seven year tribulation came about. Where did the name "Great Tribulation" come from, and also the seven year duration?

cpmac
www.tribulationhoax.com

Daniel 9:27 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.

Week = years in this context

Jeremiah 30:7 Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it.

This could be 7 years, or only 3 1/2 years since Revelation deals with the last 3 1/2 years of the tribulation, God's judgment. See next 2 verses:

Revelation 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
Revelation 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.


Just a sample of tribulation references, and where the 7 years comes from.

Great Tribulation:

Revelation 2:22 Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.
Revelation 7:14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Willie wrote:

Daniel 9:27 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.

According to dispensational futurism (and other Pre-mils) this "he" is the Antichrist who will make a "firm" covenant with Israel in the beginning of the "Tribulation." Then in the midst of the tribulation (three and a half years) he will sit down in the temple and declare himself to be God, and ending the sacrifice and oblation. That will be the "abomination of desolation," initiating the second half of the Tribulation, "and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate." Now all the actions in this verse are by the same person, the famous "he" of Daniel 9:27. And this, we are told, is the Antichrist, who is the very embodiment of abominations.

But the verse says that, "for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate." But who can believe that this wicked, evil, abominable, Antichrist will have such an attack of righteousness that he will desolate the temple, or city, or whatever, because of all their abominations? That does not fit his character at all. And what is the "consummation?"

cpmac
www.tribulationhoax.com