Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. Verse Tool: show

The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

End Times

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Postby robbyyoung » Fri Oct 04, 2013 1:44 am

steve7150 wrote:I think there are times God speaks either in a present tense like Isa 53 when this prophecy took place 750 years later or Gen 3.15 where it sounds soon but took place thousands of years later. I have trouble understanding the purpose of Revelation if the Full Preterist or Partial Preterist view is true. It doesn't seem like a Revelation since it's repeating things already previously clearly stated. It's also possible the beginning of Revelation is about the destruction of Jerusalem but not the entire book.


Hi Steve,

I think we can agree that Old Covenant passages, such as Isa 53, are full of types and shadows of better things to come. This IS NOT speculation but a biblical truth supported by scripture. Therefore, when the Anti-Type, Jesus and NT Prophets arrived, Types and Shadows were completely done away with. Jesus, the Church, and the New Age IS NOT nor EVER WILL be a Type or Shadow. The real deal has arrived!

This is the marvelous prophetic difference between the two testaments. Not distinguishing what is spiritual reality from the earthly type or shadow is why the Jews in the 1st century, who knew the Old Covenant bettter than you or I ever could, missed its fulfillment altogether. Basically, if we are still holding on to earthly types and shadows when trying to understand the NT, we too will miss the mark altogether.

Your Gen 3:15 comparison is a presupposition. God doesn't indicate a time qualifier in the text. And when God does give us humans a qualifier, we should not say IT"S NOT NEAR or IT"S NOT FAR OFF, or that Near means Far Off and Far Off means Near. This kind of hermeneutic isn't supported by scripture when God is dealing with mankind to know his prophetic timeline.

Steve, you said, "I have trouble understanding the purpose of Revelation if the Full Preterist or Partial Preterist view is true. It doesn't seem like a Revelation since it's repeating things already previously clearly stated." You may have to clarify this for me, so that I don't misrepresent your understanding. So I'll just say this:

1. Revelation = a disclosure of truth, instruction or concerning things before unknown
2. If things are being repeated, it's not the Preterist who's doing it, it's the Father; and The Father said it's The Revelation of Jesus Christ.

Steve, I am not speculating concerning who the prophecy was written to. Neither am I speculating concerning when the events foretold would happen. I have context and exegisis regarding these facts. Those who oppose the context must provide exegisis to make the case, that The Father wasn't talking to an audience almost 2000 years ago, the time statements didn't apply to them, Jesus himself is a TYPE or SHADOW and we're waiting for a greater fulfillment, and this new age we are in will be destroyed or replaced by another age.

1 Cor 14:56 is typical of the two testaments. Until we grasps the power of Jesus words, John 6:63, we will continue to be utterly baffled by spiritual fulfillment, just as the unbelieving Jews were. I am also reminded of passages in Hebrews:

"Heb 5:12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat... Heb 6:1-2 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment."

Here we are, almost 2000 years into the New Age, and still questioning some of the basic principles of Christ:

Repentance
Faith
Baptisms
Laying on of Hands
Resurrection
Judgement

Paul urged his readers to MOVE ON. Why? Because maturity is needed to discern good and evil. "Heb 5:13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe." This is another reason why I believe the biblical account concerning eschatology. Almost 2000 years ago they were told to move on, the end is near, mature to discern the good and the evil of the events about to take place. There's so many reasons why AD 70 need be understood as prophecy fulfilled, but I went too long as it is. As always, God Bless!
User avatar
robbyyoung
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Postby steve7150 » Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:41 am

Your Gen 3:15 comparison is a presupposition. God doesn't indicate a time qualifier in the text. And when God does give us humans a qualifier, we should not say IT"S NOT NEAR or IT"S NOT FAR OFF, or that Near means Far Off and Far Off means Near. This kind of hermeneutic isn't supported by scripture when God is dealing with mankind to know his prophetic timeline.

Steve, you said, "I have trouble understanding the purpose of Revelation if the Full Preterist or Partial Preterist view is true. It doesn't seem like a Revelation since it's repeating things already previously clearly stated." You may have to clarify this for me, so that I don't misrepresent your understanding. So I'll just say this:

1. Revelation = a disclosure of truth, instruction or concerning things before unknown
2. If things are being repeated, it's not the Preterist who's doing it, it's the Father; and The Father said it's The Revelation of Jesus Christ.

Steve, I am not speculating concerning who the prophecy was written to. Neither am I speculating concerning when the events foretold would happen. I have context and exegisis regarding these facts. Those who oppose the context must provide exegisis to make the case,









Robby,
I'm not opposing Full Preterism , it's just that as of now it doesn't square with my logic. However i may be wrong and i may change my mind later as this is not a mountain for me to die on. I listened to several Don K. Preston You Tube videos to try to grasp this better and i personally like listening to him as he seems like a folksy type of guy.
I said i have trouble understanding the purpose of Revelation within Preterism because it's repeating major points symbolically after they were clearly spelled out before Revelation. The word Revelation in my understanding is an "unveiling" of something previously not known, whereas in Preterism the opposite is the case for the book of Revelation.
Gen 3.15 is just an example of what Paul said in Rom 4 which is that God speaks of things that are not yet as though they are. So when God speaks using time descriptions they may seem cut and dry , but may mean something broader then original audience might take it.
I understand your point about "relevant audience" but i'm not decided if the original readers are the only relevant audience.
steve7150
 
Posts: 2505
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Postby robbyyoung » Fri Oct 04, 2013 9:46 am

Steve,

As my dear brother in the Lord, I absolutely agree with you concerning this topic being a mountain in my life. But I really enjoy the tremendous effort of people way smarter than me putting forth their ideas. Love ya bro, thanks for the chat :D
User avatar
robbyyoung
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Postby steve7150 » Thu Feb 01, 2018 1:15 pm

bump
steve7150
 
Posts: 2505
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Postby steve7150 » Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:27 pm

He also has British Israelite beliefs and thinks that Jesus was 40 years old when crucified. Altogether, I think his concluding theory falls down under Biblical scrutiny.






Well ES thinks Jesus was 40 because in Luke 2.2 it says Qurinius was pro-council in Syria when Jesus was born. There is an inscription struck in stone that states Quirinius was in Syria at this time and it's a generally accepted date of 7BC re Qurinius being pro-council. It's generally accepted Jesus died around 33AD , so 7BC - 33AD = 40 years.

According to ES there are at least 15 Biblical uses of the number 40 because they are "types of the life of Christ."

1) Rained 40 days
2) Noah remained in the ark 40 days after dry land appeared
3) Moses was in the wilderness 40 years
4) Moses was on the mountain 40 days
5) Criminals were scourged with 40 stripes
6) Israelites were fed manna for 40 years
7) Tabernacle had 40 silver sockets
8) There were 40 year periods of peace
9) Eli judged Israel for 40 years
10) Elijah was in the mountain 40 days
11) David ruled Israel 40 years
12) Solomon ruled Israel 40 years
13) Temple nave 40 cubits
14) Jesus in wilderness 40 days
15) Jesus appeared to disciples for 40 days
steve7150
 
Posts: 2505
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Postby 3Resurrections » Sun Jan 13, 2019 12:02 am

There's one fact that entirely deflates anybody's paradigm which has the Dome of the Rock being an Islamic fulfillment of Daniel's "abomination". The current Dome of the Rock location is NOT the site where Jerusalem's temple used to be. The Dome of the Rock is situated on the site of what used to be the Fortress of Antonia, which provided enough space for the Roman legion's headquarters and barracks. The "Wailing Wall" is part of the foundation base for that Fortress of Antonia which used to be above it. The actual Jerusalem temple site itself was further south, in the city of David, with the Gihon Spring waters channeled through Hezekiah's tunnel to serve the needs of the temple for ceremonially pure "living water".

To prove this, one only has to look in Nehemiah's narrative of the people assembled for worship in the 7th month to hear the law read. In Nehemiah 8:1,3, it says they were all assembled as one man in the street before the WATER GATE (related to the waters coming from the Gihon Spring to the temple). This is the same water gate described in Nehemiah 3:26 (ESV), "And the temple servants living on Ophel repaired to a point opposite the Water Gate on the east, and the projecting tower." It was in this section of the wall that the priests also were repairing every one of them the portion that was over against his own house. So all this tells us that the temple was next to this water gate facing eastward - NOT further north, since there is no source of water flowing anywhere near the Dome of the Rock location, which the temple would have needed in order to operate. Other proofs abound to prove this connection of the Gihon Spring to the temple's location, both archaeological and scriptural.

If it were not for the Gihon Spring, we would never have even heard of a city called Jerusalem. The Gihon Spring is the sole reason Jerusalem developed into a viable city in the first place. Jerusalem exists because the Gihon Spring exists.

Actually, the spiritual, symbolic implications of this fact are quite profound. The saints, we are told, are God's temple under the New Covenant. The old, physical temple of Jerusalem could not function without a spring of "living water" to service its operations. In the same manner, the saints which are the "living stones" of God's temple made without hands exist only because of our source of "living water" supplied to us by the Spirit of God dwelling within us. Without the Spirit of God providing us the "living water" that Christ spoke of in John 4:14 and 7:38, we have no inherent life of our own. This inexhaustible supply implanted within us speaks of our salvation's eternal security. A spring of living water might have all kinds of debris thrown into it at times that can muddy the water, but it cannot dry up the source, since it is an everlasting one.

So, I'm afraid all the eschatology and mathematical formulas pointing to the year the Dome of the Rock was built are meaningless, if one thinks that edifice is what Daniel's "abomination" term was referring to. Jesus told us exactly what that "abomination" was in Luke 21:20 (compared to its parallel passage in Matt. 24:15). It was "Jerusalem compassed with armies". The flight of the Christians to Pella just after Cestius Gallus and his armies arrived and squared off against the Zealot armies in AD 66 proves to us that Christians well understood Christ's warning about this "abomination", and when to flee Jerusalem and Judea to avoid it.

In fact, we can examine the casualty lists given to us from this period and arrive at a pretty fair estimate of just how many people did understand and obey Christ's warning to flee from Jerusalem and Judea. It amounted to roughly 1 1/4 million people that escaped and survived those "days of vengeance" in Luke 21:22. If anyone is interested in how we can arrive at that estimated figure of 1 1/4 million escapees, I can show them where to look.
3Resurrections
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:32 am

Previous

Return to Eschatology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests