Posted on 12/23/2013 7:16:44 PM PST by Uri’el-2012
Nope, can’t be. The Hebrew word that you have quoted as “arise” actually means “stand up”. It’s Michael who “stands up” to protect the 144,000 that God promised to protect those elect. Michael wasn’t “taken out of the way”, he is on duty protecting those Israelites. Besides, it’s not Michael protects the “church”. Each church has a different angel, see Revelation.
>> Please provide 1 verse that even suggests Satan or the Antichrist confirms or makes a covenant with Israel.<<
I just did. "
Circular reasoning. There are two persons in in the text, the Messiah, and the prince who is to come, in the same verse!
Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. 27And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week...
I provided several NT scriptures regarding Jesus and the new covenant in His blood. Provide just one verse OUTSIDE of this passage in Daniel to demonstrate that Satan or the Beast confirms or establishes a covenant with Israel.
OK, provide another scripture that identifies the "he" in 2 Thessalonians 2:7.
Best I can tell, and I reread your post twice, I answered every question/assertion you made with scriptural evidence, and you reply they are somehow injected or misappropriated. That is the typical response of those who don't have any scriptural evidence for their assertions, and refuse to evaluate the scriptures that refute their assertions. I have answered everything with scripture, not opinion or theory.
Such is the pre-tribulational belief system: interpret ALL scripture based on the theory, rather than the plain reading of the text.
For example, to assert that John 6:35-40 refers only to the Jews, and not all believers, if disingenuous at best. There is absolutely nothing in the context that confirms your assertion, except the assumption of a pre-trib rapture, the belief in imminence, and the concept that the tribulation is for the Jews. Since those assumption are "true" in your mind, you must reinterpret John 6 (and Matthew 24 and 1 Cor 15 and 2 Thess 2) to mean something other than it plainly says.
When I took of the pre-trib glasses, I could plainly see what the scriptures say. I challenge you to do the same, if you can.
Isaiah 28:15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
Isaiah 28:18 And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.
Israel thinks they have made covenant that will protect them from their enemies. They think they are living in safety because of the covenant and have taken their walls of protection down.
I’ll just give you a hint. The Thessalonians already knew who it was.
2 Thessalonians 2: 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
You can rebuke anything you wish but you will answer to Yeshua for rebuking what he has revealed in his words.
Yeshua said, in Matthew 24 in plain terms, that his sheep will go through the trib.
From post 251.
“Show me from scripture where that means the “church” and the “church” only is what Jesus was “given” if that’s what you believe.”
>>For example, to assert that John 6:35-40 refers only to the Jews, and not all believers, if disingenuous at best.<<
Who ever said it referred to Jews only? It was you who eliminated one of the aspects of “all which he hath given me”. Jesus was after all to be “King of the Jews”. That hasn’t happened yet.
>>When I took of the pre-trib glasses,<<
I didn’t come “from” pre trib through study. I came to the belief in pre trib through study. Your belief that there is not distinction between the Covenant with the Nation of Israel and the church denies the truth of prophecy. While there is not difference between Jew and Gentile in this age of grace or the church there most certainly is when it comes to the NATION of Israel and God’s covenant with them.
Did I not ask you not to ping me with that error? Please don’t do it again.
>> “Isaiah 28:18 And your covenant with death shall be disannulled...” <<
.
The Oslo accord was disannuled by Shimon Peres on it’s last day. The prophesied violence commenced the very next day, read the history if you don’t remember it.
.
If you wish not to be pinged, do not comment on my posts.
>> “The two witnesses stump me” <<
.
Yes they are actual persons that come in the spirit of Elijah and Moshe.
I have come to believe that I even know who those persons are, one a Karaite Jew in Jerusalem, and the other a black Christian minister in North Carolina, based on the powerful work of the Holy Spirit in their lives.
>> “BTW, the prophecy in Revelation may or may not be in linear time.” <<
.
I believe that the Revelation taken as a whole is fully chronological, but there are parenthetical ‘flash-back’ overviews that interrupt the chronology.
Rev 12:1 begins a ‘parenthesis’ that ends at Rev 15:5.
Is the Karaite Jew a Christian? Or should I say does he believe Yeshua is the Messiah?
Not yet.
What leads you to this assertion? Has he published something that shows he believes the Messiah has already come?
>> “ Has he published something that shows he believes the Messiah has already come?” <<
.
Absolutely not.
Dynamic revivals and astounding providential things have occurred in his presence several times.
He is a full believer in the OT scriptures, and is presently a very involved student of the NT. He is the son of a 15th generation Rabbi and abandoned Pharisee-ism when he became a Karaite. The Holy Spirit is constantly active in his presence in remarkable ways.
Then, after reading my response in 255 that John 6:35-47 clearly refers to believers, i.e. the church, you wrote in 268:
Who ever said it referred to Jews only?
I would argue Jews are not even in view in John 6:35-47, rather, it is believers in Christ. Who, incidentally, will be raised at the last day. To wit:
John 6:40 For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
This is all BELIEVERS in Christ, for, as Galatians 3:28 says,
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
All of your obsession with the Nation of Israel is moot, for they will only be saved when they believe on Christ. As it is written:
Acts 4:11"He is the stone whcih was rejected by you, the builders, but which became the chief corner stone. 12"And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."
Here's the rub, dispensationalism, as set up by Darby in the early 1800's, and perpetuated by Scofield's notes.
Salvation has always been by faith, period. All believers are Abaraham's children, by faith.
As Paul stated in Galations 3:7 Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham.
Paul clarified this in
Romans 2:28For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
The remnant in Israel will only be saved when they turn to the one whom they have pierced, and become believers, and will thus be grafted back into the good vine, which is Christ.
2 Thessalonians 2: 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
That's no hint, you simply retyped the scripture in question, and implied since the Thessalonians knew who it was, then you do too. Is still provides no evidence whatsoever of the the identity of "he". I provided scriptural evidence it was Michael who is removed as the protector of national Israel, and you say no. Scripture, please.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.