18 Sep 14
Originally posted by RJHindsLet's get this straight shall we?
Your comment:So we SAY where the Bible SAYS.
And where it is silent we may be SILENT also.
Then the Holy Bible is silent on your secret rapture before the Great Tribulation.
Therefore, you should be silent about a secret rapture too.
Here are what I wished to recommend along with those quotations you omitted concerning the Trinity:
"Affirmation and Critique: A Journal of Christian Thought"
Volume I — 1996
Volume II — 1997
Volume III — 1998
Volume IV — 1999
Volume IX — 2004
Volume X — 2005
Volume XIII — 2008
http://affcrit.com/archives.html
"The Testimony of local churches and Living Stream Ministry"
Topics
In Response to “An Open Letter to the Leadership of Living Stream Ministry and the ‘Local Churches’”
Dialogue with Fuller Theological Seminary
Dialogue with Answers in Action (AIA)
http://lctestimony.org/
Defense Confirmation Project (DCP)
Topical Index–The Triune God (the Trinity)
http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/topics/trinity.html
Brothers, Hear Our Defense (2): Concerning the Divine Trinity discusses:
The difficulties associated with using the word “person” in relation to the Divine Trinity;
The error of confusing affirmation of the co-working of the Divine Trinity with patripassianism;
The biblical truths undergirding the statement in Isaiah 9:6 that the Son given to us is called “eternal Father”; and
The apostle Paul’s teaching in 2 Corinthians 3:17 that the Lord is the Spirit.
http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/ebooks.html
Triune God
http://triunegod.org/
We Were Wrong | Christian Research Institute
http://www.equip.org/articles/we-were-wrong/
THE TRIUNE GOD
http://an-open-letter.org/resources/the-triune-god/
Shortcomings Of An Open Letter (2)
Elliot Miller speaks about the local churches’ teaching on the Trinity. He said that Western Christianity tends to oversimplify the Trinity while the teaching of Witness Lee and the local churches “actually are bringing a correction to a problem within Western evangelicalism.”
19 Sep 14
2 edits
Originally posted by Kevin Lee PoracanThat is all well and good, but Hank also teaches that there is no pre-tribulation rapture in scripture.
Let's get this straight shall we?
Here are what I wished to recommend along with those quotations you omitted concerning the Trinity:
"Affirmation and Critique: A Journal of Christian Thought"
Volume I — 1996
Volume II — 1997
Volume III — 1998
Volume IV — 1999
Volume IX — 2004
Volume X — 2005
Volume XIII — 2008
http://aff ...[text shortened]... rection to a problem within Western evangelicalism.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFQg3GRZCMc
And the seven year great tribulation is not Biblical
19 Sep 14
Originally posted by RJHindsWe are talking about the Trinity, not pre-tribulation rapture.
That is all well and good, but Hank also teaches that there is no pre-tribulation rapture in scripture.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eje2FjlAkVo
And the seven year great tribulation is not Biblical
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX8zOwuIrCQ
19 Sep 14
Originally posted by Kevin Lee PoracanSonship started this thread about Revelation 12 in reference to the interpretation of the woman and the male child. He interprets the male child as being a group of believers that are raptured, whereas, I believe the male child represents Jesus Christ. I beleive this thread is not about the trinity, but about the rapture and whether it occurs before or after the Tribulation.
We are talking about the Trinity, not pre-tribulation rapture.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
21 Sep 14
3 edits
Your answer represents a false dichotomy, ie. "a group of believers" VERSES Jesus Christ.
You believe the man-child is Jesus Christ in Himself alone.
But it is Jesus Christ dispensed INTO a corporate group of believers.
You think it brings most honor to Christ to view the manchild as the babT Jesus (who incidently was not caught up to the throne of God at birth). But God knows, and some of His people have come to know that it brings ever greater honor to Jesus Christ to see that the sign is of Jesus Christ imparted into a group of believers unto full maturity.
22 Sep 14
Originally posted by sonshipThat is another made up cult idea. Nothing is said about the male child being caught up to heaven at birth or that the male child is a bunch of believers with Jesus Christ dispensed into them. The Holy Bible reveals a dispensation of grace, but that does not mean Jesus Christ is dispensed into believers. Besides, the rapture still takes place after the tribulation.
Your answer represents a false dichotomy, ie. "a group of believers" VERSES Jesus Christ.
You believe the man-child is Jesus Christ in [b]Himself alone.
But it is Jesus Christ dispensed INTO a corporate group of believers.
You think it brings most honor to Christ to view the manchild as the babT Jesus (who incidently was not cau ...[text shortened]... t to see that the sign is of Jesus Christ imparted into a group of believers unto full maturity.[/b]
22 Sep 14
Originally posted by RJHindsGo with your one-sided thought
That is another made up cult idea. Nothing is said about the male child being caught up to heaven at birth or that the male child is a bunch of believers with Jesus Christ dispensed into them. The Holy Bible reveals a dispensation of grace, but that does not mean Jesus Christ is dispensed into believers. Besides, the rapture still takes place after the tribulation.
23 Sep 14
Originally posted by sonshipThe great sign you speak of represents two things that are one. The woman clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet, is the Church established by Jesus to Peter. These symbols also represent Mary, the mother of Jesus. They are both the Ark of the Covenant.
[b] Revelation 12:1,2
And a great sign was seen in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon underneath her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars;
And she was with child, and she cried out, travailing in birth and being in pain to bring forth."
Three light giving aspects of this woman reveal that she is a totality of spi ...[text shortened]... l the ages.
This woman becomes the New Jerusalem in chapters 21 and 22 of Revelation.[/b]
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
23 Sep 14
3 edits
Originally posted by Pudgenik
The great sign you speak of represents two things that are one. The woman clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet, is the Church established by Jesus to Peter. These symbols also represent Mary, the mother of Jesus. They are both the Ark of the Covenant.
This woman should not be Mary. The first born shild of Mary was Jesus. All the other brothers and sisters of Jesus were younger than Jesus was. Right?
But when the woman gives birth to the man-child, her other children are immediately persecuted on the earth.
" And when the dragon saw that he was cast to the earth, he persecuted the woman who brought forth the man-child." (v.13) ... And the dragon became angry with the woman and went away to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of god and have the testimony of Jesus." (v.17)
These actions do not fit the well with the life of Mary the mother of Jesus. She was not particularly persecuted. And there were no older siblings as "the rest of her seed" even living yet.
Of course Mary did in the years to follow, have other children. These siblings of Jesus could not be yet said to "have the testimony of Jesus" while Jesus was still growing into manhood and before His death and resurrection.
Also not all of His own brothers believed in Him at the beginning of His ministry. Ascertaining the Universal Bright Woman to be the virgin Mary is not reliable.
To say that the Universal Bright Woman stands for the church is at least closer. But it too is not as good as saying she represents the totality of God's people from all three ages - the patriarchs before the Law, the saints under the Law in the Old Testament, and the new covenant saints of the age of grace.
This is better than just saying the Woman is the church.
1.) Saying the woman is the church yet brings forth Jesus Christ, is problematic. It should be the other way around. The church did not give birth to the baby Jesus.
2.) Though the church was persecuted after the ascension of Christ the period of one thousand two hundred and sixty days is no special time of persecution in the first century.
3.) There is no record of the earth opening up to swallow something in order to protect the church from Satan's persecution. Even symbolically it is hard to locate what this would mean in history.
4.) It makes more sense that the man-child is not the birth of Jesus from the church that He founded but the " birth " of some overcoming saints from the church.
5.) The proper Spirit waking and living church people are really "the Israel of God" (Gal. 6:16)
"And as many walk by this rule, peace be upon them and mercy, even upon the Israel of God." (Gal. 6:16)
This shows that the saints walking in the Holy Spirit and living Christ are seamlessly connected with the saints of the Israel and the patriarchs of the Old Testament. Concerning God's heart's desire the patriarchs, the first covenant Israelites, and the new covnant churching people are one unbroken line in His economy.
Now this would make perfect sense. That is that the totality of God's people represented by the Universal Bright Woman, would at the end of this age bring forth a collective group of overcomers who in the past ages had died for God's will loving not their soul-life even unto death.
Those of the Old Testament would have been living unto Christ in anticipation of His coming. Those of the New Testament would have been living unto Christ in His having come.
In them Christ has been matured and manifested. So the man-child is really not the Jesus Christ alone but the Jesus Christ dispensed INTO these overcoming saints.
I think this is clearer than confusing Mary and the church. And it is better to view the visions as pertaining to the last three and one half years of the great tribulation than trying to figure out what in the past church history could be meant by this one thousand two hundred and sixty days.
Now I think the Jewish year in John's and Daniel's thought is 360 days not 365 days.
23 Sep 14
1 edit
Originally posted by sonshipThe scripture is both physical and spiritual at the same time, as God is. "The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us." Jesus is the Word of God, Jesus is God.The great sign you speak of represents two things that are one. The woman clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet, is the Church established by Jesus to Peter. These symbols also represent Mary, the mother of Jesus. They are both the Ark of the Covenant.
This woman should not be Mary. The first born shild of Mary was Jesus. All ...[text shortened]... days.
Now I think the Jewish year in John's and Daniel's thought is 360 days not 365 days.
On a side note, by Jewish law, Joseph will never have sexual relations with Mary. This is something Joseph also knew. Mary was pregnant, not with his child. After the birth of Jesus, Joseph, still could not have sexual relations with Mary. For Jewish law would not permit it. It would be adultery.
The Angel told Joseph to marry Mary, but in doing so, Joseph knew he would have to remain celebate.
It is common thinking among protestant churches that Joseph and Mary had other children. They are wrong. Both Joseph and Mary were devout in their thinking of the Laws of Moses.
23 Sep 14
2 edits
Originally posted by PudgenikThe woman, sun, moon, and 12 stars represents the nation of Israel (see Genesis 39:9-10). Mary and Jesus, of course are part of the nation of Israel. The nation of Israel by way of Mary gave birth to the Son, the male child, who is destined to rule all the nations with a rod of iron. This Son, who was caught up to the throne of God, is none other than Jesus Christ, the Son of God. When the Son of God returns to earth, then He will rule all nations with a rod of iron.
The great sign you speak of represents two things that are one. The woman clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet, is the Church established by Jesus to Peter. These symbols also represent Mary, the mother of Jesus. They are both the Ark of the Covenant.
By the way, Jacob was renamed Israel in Genesis 32:28. So this family mentioned in Genesis 39:9-10 that I mentioned above became the nation of Israel.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
24 Sep 14
2 edits
Originally posted by Pudgenik
The scripture is both physical and spiritual at the same time, as God is. "The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us." Jesus is the Word of God, Jesus is God.
We praise the Lord for His incarnation.
And we praise Him for His dispensing His divine nature into the believers making us "partakers of the divine nature" ( 2 Peter 1:4)
On a side note, by Jewish law, Joseph will never have sexual relations with Mary. This is something Joseph also knew. Mary was pregnant, not with his child. After the birth of Jesus, Joseph, still could not have sexual relations with Mary. For Jewish law would not permit it. It would be adultery.
The Angel told Joseph to marry Mary, but in doing so, Joseph knew he would have to remain celebate.
It is common thinking among protestant churches that Joseph and Mary had other children. They are wrong. Both Joseph and Mary were devout in their thinking of the Laws of Moses.
What Jewish law are you referring to?
The Scripture says that "before they came together" Mary was found with child (Matthew 1:18) . Why don't you take that to mean that eventually they did come together after the birth of Mary's firstborn son miraculously ?
The Scripture also says - " And He did not know her until she brought forth a Son; and he called His name Jesus." (Matt. 1:25)
Why do you not understand that to mean that eventually he did know her, but only after the miraculous birth of Jesus ?
Matthew 1:18 and 25 indicate that I should understand the marriage of Joseph and Mary to be in all other respects a normal marriage. And that would explain where the brothers and sisters of Jesus came from.
Whatever your complaint against protestant denominations, I don't see how it gives any credence to the belief that Joseph and Mary had no other children through typical and normal marital relations.
I don't know what it is you think it will do for the Gospel of Christ to teach that Mary had no normal marriage life after her miracle.
But Joseph - "did not know her UNTIL she brought forth a Son; and he called His name Jesus." So after the birth of Jesus Joseph must have known [had sexual relations] with his wife Mary.
I will comment some more on the Universal Bright Woman latter.
25 Sep 14
1 edit
Originally posted by sonshipJoseph and Mary could not have typical relations as husband and wife, EVER. Mary is the spouse of God. Jesus is the Son of God.The scripture is both physical and spiritual at the same time, as God is. "The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us." Jesus is the Word of God, Jesus is God.
We praise the Lord for His incarnation.
And we praise Him for His dispensing His divine nature into the believers making us [b]"partakers of the divine nature" ( 2 Peter 1:4 ...[text shortened]... elations] with his wife Mary.
I will comment some more on the Universal Bright Woman latter.
According to Jewish law, the woman can not have children by anyone else or it would be adultery. This is why Joseph wanted to divorce her quietly. As scripture states.
Joseph knew the law.