Posted on 01/24/2015 3:23:43 PM PST by NYer
Are you offering to take that wager now based on what I typed?
Has this not been beaten to death already?
Why SPECULATE further?
I'm sure the ECFs have a TRADITION or two about them.
That's after the tribulation and during the thousand year reign. The ekklesia, the bride of Christ will be ruling with Him.
I thought you said they were on the cross.
If I came across an English teacher that said that “on the cross” was the same as “at the cross” I would know he’s either a fraud or disillusion.
That is just one more of those bizarre twists of words. All scripture is NOT prophesy.
It's beyond comprehension how anyone can think that while on the cross Jesus was drinking wine with the disciples in His Father's Kingdom. First of all, He was not drinking with the apostles and second, He surely was NOT in His Father's kingdom".
The word pope derives from Greek πάππας meaning "Father". In the early centuries of Christianity, this title was applied, especially in the east, to all bishops and other senior clergy, and later became reserved in the west to the Bishop of Rome, a reservation made official only in the 11th century." [Greer, Thomas H.; Gavin Lewis (2004). A Brief History of the Western World. Cengage Learning. p. 172. ISBN 9780534642365.]
Even the Catholic encyclopedia admits such. The most noteworthy of the titles are Papa, Summus Pontifex, Pontifex Maximus, Servus servorum Dei. The title pope (papa) was, as has been stated, at one time employed with far more latitude. In the East it has always been used to designate simple priests. In the Western Church, however, it seems from the beginning to have been restricted to bishops (Tertullian, On Modesty 13). It was apparently in the fourth century that it began to become a distinctive title of the Roman Pontiff. Pope Siricius (d. 398) seems so to use it (Ep. vi in P.L., XIII, 1164), and Ennodius of Pavia (d. 473) employs it still more clearly in this sense in a letter to Pope Symmachus (P.L., LXIII, 69). Yet as late as the seventh century St. Gall (d. 640) addresses Desiderius of Cahors as papa (P.L., LXXXVII, 265). Gregory VII (1073-1085) finally prescribed that it should be confined to the successors of Peter. [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12260a.htm#V]
Not until the eleventh century was the title "pope" restricted to a single individual. This whole "single pope" from Peter on is pure fallacy.
No, it was fulfilled in this text:
After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfil the scripture), “I thirst.” A bowl full of vinegar stood there; so they put a sponge full of the vinegar on hyssop and held it to his mouth. When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished”; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit. John 19:28-30
So let's look at 'em...
Mat 26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.
AND
Joh 19:28 After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.
Joh 19:29 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth.
Joh 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
In Matthew, Jesus says he will not drink NEW wine (fresh off the vine) until he drinks it WITH THOSE PRESENT AT THE LAST SUPPER and he won't drink it until he is present IN HIS FATHER'S KINGDOM...
Not a single one of the N.T. prophecies was fulfilled the next day after Jesus proclaimed the prophecy...
Mat 27:34 They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.
Drinking poisonous, bitter vinegar is NOT drinking the fruit of the vine, new...
Drinking this poisonous wine while hanging on the Cross just mere seconds before dying is not drinking new wine with the apostles...
And drinking poisonous wine while dying on the Cross with only one apostle present is not drinking/sharing new wine with his apostles, or in his Father's Kingdom...
There is not a single point that would connect those scriptures together...Absolutely none...
People are being deceived by being taught that one refers to the other...
Very Interesting
And that is when the Orthodox Church kicked out the Catholic Church...
Wrong place!
Ezekiel wrote of millennial events, not New Heaven/New Earth.
.
Just showing the difference between then and soon to be...
During which Christ rules the nations with a rod of Iron!
You have an extremely vivid imagination
No, but with the imaginations that Protestants have about what really happened, I'm sure you'll think of something. Metmom told me earlier that because we knew what Moses and Elias looked like at the transfiguration, we knew what those raised from the dead looked like....
I'll be Lazarus had a ball with his new body...walking through walls and the like. Probably didn't have to eat or sleep either and could be transported immediately to wherever he wanted to go....Maybe.
You weren't paying attention...we were discussing the 10 hundreds, 11 hundreds and 12 hundreds..The reformation hadn't even been thought of then....Everyone knows that the Bible became easy to get after the Catholic Gutenberg invented the press...that wasn't the discussion....sheesh
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.