Revelation 4-19 represents the 70th 7 in Daniels prophecy of the 70 sevens or sevety weeks of years in Da 9.
The plagues that will be poured out on the kingdom of the anti-christ were typified by the encounter God had with Pharoah back in Egypt when he delivered Israel from his iron and persecuting claw by the hand of Moses who typified Christ. So, Revelation is the anti-type when the real clash of two kingdoms take place with winner take all.
The end of the week finds Satan and his man, the anti christ soundly defeated and cast into prison and the earth a devastation as Egypt was after the plagues in Exodus.
Then we see the nation established and the laws of God established like it was when Israel was led out of Egypt and . There will need to be laws if Christ reigns in perfect righteousness with a rod of iron.
It is interesting that God miraculously destroyed Pharoah's army at once in the RED Sea and when Christ comes back to the valley of Megeddo, his destruction of Anti-christ's army will be such that the blood will run for some 180 miles to the depth of the horses bridle. This is surely like a Red Sea and an immersion of an army.
God deals with a perfect word and the correctanswer to the survey question is "pre-millennial!"
Here is what God said was the reason he chose Israel:
The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: 8 But because the LORD loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the LORD brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. 9 Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;
God did not choose Isreal from before the foundation of the world and this election was not individual election and never were all of these Israelites believers
But God loved and chose Israel. But why?
6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. When did he choose them?
When they were in the land of Egypt. Ez 20:5.
In Israel, God has shown that he loves people who never become believers.
The church of Jesus Christ is likewise elect corporately.
I guess I do not know what your point is but I do not attempt to validate the word of God by personalities of the past. I do not quote them but sometimes I comment on what others say about them. The bible, which I consider to be the KJV, can stand on its own without a need to look into the past to see what other men thought about it. My defence of the KJV is mainly from it's internal testimony and while it is profitable to study the manuscript evidence, I think, it is not essential for me to conclude that the KJV is the ONLY word of God in the English.
I really don't care about Wesley, whether he was good or bad. I care about what is going on today and this article says that watered down translations are the major part of the problem. MurryA and men like him are today's enemies of the word of God and I am in the battle on the side of the KJV and I am defending it and marking those who are against it and warning against fellowship with them.
John Wesley had his opportunity and now it is past and he is gone on to his reward. Now, it is my turn.
However, there are plenty of heretics from the past who used a KJV. Many Calvinists used it! Conversion is essential to understanding it and possession of a copy is not enough.
I certainly would not purposely slander Mr Wesley. I have an admiration for the man. He certainly was used of God but my point is that whatever decisions he made had consequences and PILUT and you both are just using him as an example of the things he did to validate your positions, which are opposites.
But this is your question:
JD, you just don't get it, do you. I am not denying that the Word is our authority, but a line of argument was first raised by PILUT further down, that God's use of the KJV in revivals of the past somehow vindicates it. Now, for you is this a valid line of argument, or not?
I would say "no" IF there are instances of revivals breaking out under the ministries of someone using other translations. However, if you cannot cite any, then you must agree that the KJV does make the difference. That would only be logical.
But did you read the artoicle?
"THE church faces a "crisis" as the number of people bothering to read the Bible plummets, research has found."
What? One of the main arguments is that the modern translations are easier to read? But the history of the English bible shows that mens writings can never compete with God's.
No one should ever correct something that is perfect. If Wesly did that, he can be blamed for it
John Wesley and his work and what he did and their results are not the standard for truth, the word of God is. The fruits of Wesleyism has given us the mordern day Pentecostal and Charismatic movements to contend with and to further confuse the issues. That is not to say that John Wesley was not used of God or that some good came out of his personal ministry but it does prove that actions and decisions and attitudes do have consequences.
Perhaps if he would have taken a stronger stand on the Word of God his legacy would have reaped better rewards.
This bible version argument did not exist for centuries but when modern day scholars found themselves a new manuscript and began to translate from the text of the world, Egypt, and they found out there was much money to be made for their troubles, then, wallah, we have about a hundred different ones and arguments and divisions and contentions and we must now wonder if God really is the author of confusion. That is if he had anything to do with it!
Antioch was the headquarters of the Church of Jesus Christ and Paul launced his missionary efforts from there and returned to give his account. It is far better to have the word of God that originated from there and to reject the rest!
Have it your way MurrayA, but his view from heaven of events on the earth did not include the church of Jesus Christ. It did include a false church that bears a strange resemblance to one that has murdered and persecuted the true church throughout the church history even to the colors of Scarlet and Purple and from the fact she is portrayed as a woman and a whore, who has borne whorish daughters from her fornication with the kings of the earth. It is fitting that she be judged with capital punishment!
Re 18:3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
Re 18:19 And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, Alas, alas, that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness! for in one hour is she made desolate.
Re 18:20 Rejoice over her, [thou] heaven, and [ye] holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her.
The Revelation is a consummation of all the great doctrines that have originated in previous books in the Scriptures. This queen of heaven is spoken about in OT prophets but this is her end!
There is no real mystery here concerning the new bible versions. The world is quickly movimg towards globalism and when it is complete all the traditional definitions, including what is truth, will be redefined. In America the family is being redefined as we speak by the federal and supreme judges, the abortions laws have redefined what a human being is and the arguments about capital crimes constantly favor the perpetrators, and on and on.
In this kind of economy there cannot be one standard for truth like the KJV and a mindset that would be prone to insist on it would not be good and would not be tolerated. If you are going to have such a system, you must have toleration and the KJV and it's condemnation of certain life styles with words like "sodomites" will just not fit in the collective scenario.
One thing is sure, the KJV is not the preferred translation of the liberal churches. That should tell us something.
Someone is missing the point. My question is "why are they missing the point"? Because from the outset of this epistle we are told these three things.
1) This book is signified Re 1:1 2) This book is a prophecy Re 1:3 3) This book is attested to by a faithful witness, Jesus Christ Re 1:5
As to point one, it is expected in the epistle for one thing to picture another. In Re 4, John pictures the church and for him the scence changes fromn earth to heaven but there were still things going on in the earth, and he recorded them as well as some heavenly happenings.
On point 2, it should not surprise us that God knows and can see the end from the beginning. He did say he was the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending and he did say it was he that was giving this vision to John and it was not a product of John's imagination.
He gave him the division of the book in Re 1:19
1) Write the things which thou hast seen - The vision of the glorified Christ in Chapt 1 2) the things which are - The seven churches - (John, to the seven churches WHICH ARE in Asia, Re 1:4) 3)Things which SHALL BE HEREAFTER. (here after the churches) - Re 4:1B and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.
It is not unusual for God to give prophecy of his intentions.
No MurrayA, there is a chronological order to the book. In Chapter 4 the chruch is taken up, translated and then the judgment of God that has been reserved. At the end of that the glorious appearing of Jesus Christ, his 1000 year rule and the New Heaven and New Earth, and the eternal state.
1Jo 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. 1Jo 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 2Jo 1:3 Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.
The English word love is in the KJV NT 212 times and the word grace is in the KJV NT 131 times. There is more love than grace. However, in the Pauline epistles the word grace is used 91 times and the word love is used 82 times.
It looks like the gentiles needs more grace than love.
In the whole bible it is love 350 and 170 for grace. More than twice as much love as grace. For the record, hate is in there 92 times. Lots more love and grace than hate.
Some have said that pronouns like the "us" in 1 Jn 4:10 is referring just to the believers and those who were elected. That of course could be argued but that argument would not hold up in 2 Cor 5:14-21 where we elect are constrained by the love of Christ whose love has been shed abroad in our hearts to be an ambassador to the lost.
It is good to know that God loves the whole world! I am comforted in that fa
I think you could look at it that way if God were pouring from a fruit jar but I doubt a fruit jar would hold the Holy Ghost, don't you?
But if God poured him out in such abundance that he covered every Jew in the world? Would that not be more in line with what our Lord said here, quoting John?
4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. 5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
Wouldn't you think Jesus baptized in the Holy Ghost in the same way John baptized in water? If John sprinkled water, then Jesus probably sprinkled the Holy Ghost. Of course we know both John and Jesus Immersed, don't we?
You would agree that both John's and Jesus' baptism was a national baptism, would'nt you?
The world was immersed in the Spirit too according to Peter in Acts 11.
If this is true then truly what Paul told the Athenians in Acts 17 that God was not far from any one of us takes on new meaning and if he is like water he can be received by anyone because he is everywhere
And whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely!
An interesting thought concerning my comments on the Spirit being poured out on the Jews and then on the gentiles.
It seems God has oft times typified salvation and deliverance by water. The flood was a type of Israel being delivered through the persecution of the anti christ. They were baptized in the Red Sea, a deliverance just anead of Pharoah's army. They were called to the Jordan River by John the Baptist in anticipation of the Messiah because there was much water there and all Israel could be immersed in it with plenty left over. This pictured the pouring out of the Holy Ghost, who is typified as water and when he was poured out it was in such abundance that all Israel could be immersed and were commanded to be Acts 2:38 with plenty left over to immerse the gentiles as well. Our Lord himself was baptized in the Jordan and immediately coming up out of the water the Holy Spirit lit upon him as a dove. This is a sure sign of what God intended by this baptism. It was a type!
5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; 6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded
I have already proven it to everyone but you and your hard-core hyper-calvinist friends. Actually, it is something that does not need to be proven if one has the ability to read on the 5th grade level and has the capacity to reason on the 3rd grade level.
Acts 11:15 is part of Peter's defense to the Jews after the fact. You say he spoke 3 words and the Holy Spirit fell on them. Peter says as he began to speak the Holy Ghost fell on them. This means he did not finish his sermon but Luke told us what was said and when the Holy Spirit actually fell on them. It was after they heard the gospel of Jesus Christ. No one is saved without believing the gospel of Jesus Christ. The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. see 1 cor 15:1-4
Now, if you insist that the giving of the Holy Spirit is a two-stage affair, like you are implying, you must show where the Scripture teaches that and then make the application in this affair.
You may be too emotional for a conversation that challenges your core beliefs and shows how they are suspect at the very least.
Concerning the Spirit being given and your comment here
"God orchestrated the ENTIRE Cornelius/Peter episode [Acts 10:1 - 11:18] for the purpose of revealing to Peter and his Jewish believers that the Gentiles were ALSO INCLUDED in God's New Covenant"
If you mean that God gave them his Holy Spirit to save them, well, but I doubt that is what you mean
You seem to forget that I have conversed here with many and sundry calvinists on a variety of subjects and we have had long conversations about the indwelling Holy Spirit and what it means. Your friends have insisited that the ministry of the Holy Spirit is the same in the OT as it is in the NT. They see very little significance to God sending his Holy Spirit to the earth and they have said it certainly wasn't to indwell men and give them eternal life. They cannot reconcile justification by faith in the OT without the indwelling Spirit with God sending him in the NT to do that very thing for the believers in Christ
The Spirit is the Spirit of Christ!
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [was made] a quickening (life giving) spirit
When Peter was recounting and defending his ministering to the Cornelius hosehold to the Jews in Jerusalem, he said this:
Ac 11:14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved. 16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, (IN ACTS 1:4) how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. 17 Forasmuch then as God gave them (the gentiles) the like gift (The Spirit) as he did unto us, WHO BELIEVED ON JESUS CHRIST; what was I, that I could withstand God?
Two things here: 1) The receiving of the gift is salvation 2)Receiving the gift is by believing the gospel of Christ
The reaction of the Jews who were with Peter when the Spirit was given to the gentiles:
Ac 10:44 While Peter YET SPAKE THESE WORDS, (He had already spoken the gospel see v39-41)) the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. Ac 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also WAS POURED OUT THE GIFT OF THE HOLY GHOST.
First, the Spirit of Christ that gives life is poured out on the Jews and then, later, he is poured out on the gentiles, of whom was Cornelius the representative.
I addressed it in my last post but you just missed it.
But you totally miss the point.
Not only is Acts 10 an account of God's beginning of the evangelizing the gentiles, it is the fulfillment of a prophecy to that end. This will better help you understand the significance of the Cornelius account.
Here is the prophecy:
Mr 1:8 I (John) indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
Ac 1:4 And, (Jesus) being assembled together with [them], commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the PROMISE of the Father, which, [saith he], ye have heard of me. (In Jn 14-16) 5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be BAPTIZED WITH THE HOLY GHOST not many days hence.
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; 17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh:
This is that baptism of ISRAEL by the Spirit and they were immersed by his presence.
He was POURED out on them.
This pouring out happened TWICE in history and both times it fulfilled Johns prophecy. So, not only was it an account of Cornelius' personal salvation but it marked the historical pouring out of the Spirit on the gentiles.
You have not addressed the subject of Acts 10 at all. You are wasting my time. Maybe you have not understood my claim. Let me state it again for you:
The historical narrative of God extending grace to the gentiles in Acts 10 is a pivot point in God's unfolding drama of redemption and exposes the tulip as being false. It begins with an unsaved man doing things that tulip says an unsaved and so called totally depraved man cannot do. It is an historical and a practical account of how God saves men and it agrees in total and confirms the doctrinal utterances of God given in the epistles where he expains salvation and the ministry of the Holy Spirit.
The purpose of the account of Cornelius receiving the Holy Ghost and being born again is not to refute calvinism and it's tulip, it just does and any honest reader will admit that it does. The purpose is to explain how, when, and on what basis God includes the gentiles in his predetermined plan of salvation through the gospel of Christ which is his death, burial, and resurrection.
Eph 2:13 But NOW in Christ Jesus ye (gentiles in context) who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
I want you to read Ep 2 V12 to see what was the condition of Cornelius and the gentiles before the BLOOD OF CHRIST.