| Author | Message | ||
| Jrt Registered user Username: Jrt Post Number: 23 Registered: 10-2008 |
Just a quick question . . . I'm a newbie and in the process of learning what mainstream Christianity believes . . . Colleen referred to something in her Israel post that I am unfamiliar with . . . Could any of you expound on it? "We walked to the Eastern Gate, the gate through which the prophecies say the Messiah will come into the city." I have heard that mainstream Christianity believes that Jesus will reign 1000 years on earth . . . hmm. I know there are different interpretations for the "millinium" - - but what is this prophesy in scripture that says the Messiah will come through the eastern gate? Also, what/where does it say in scripture that the plagues at the end of time last 7 years . . . ? - something else I've come across recently. Anyone, willing to dive into mainstream Christianities eschatology? - and would you mind including scripture references  Thanks - "Learning" JRT | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 1160 Registered: 5-2007  |
Jrt, Here are some verses to consider: “The next day, the news that Jesus was on the way to Jerusalem swept through the city. A large crowd of Passover visitors took palm branches and went down the road to meet him. They shouted, ‘Praise God! Blessings on the one who comes in the name of the Lord! Hail to the King of Israel!’ Jesus found a young donkey and rode on it, fulfilling the prophecy that said: ‘Don’t be afraid, people of Jerusalem. Look, your King is coming, riding on a donkey’s colt.’ His disciples didn’t understand at the time that this was a fulfillment of prophecy. But after Jesus entered into his glory, they remembered what had happened and realized that these things had been written about him.” John 12:12-16 NLT “After saying this, he was taken up into a cloud while they were watching, and they could no longer see him. As they strained to see him rising into heaven, two white-robed men suddenly stood among them. ‘Men of Galilee,’ they said, ‘why are you standing here staring into heaven? Jesus has been taken from you into heaven, but someday he will return from heaven in the same way you saw him go!’” Acts 1:9-11 NLT “After this, the man brought me back around to the east gateway. Suddenly, the glory of the God of Israel appeared from the east. The sound of his coming was like the roar of rushing waters, and the whole landscape shone with His glory. This vision was just like the others I had seen, first by the Kebar River and then when he came to destroy Jerusalem. I fell face down on the ground. And the glory of the Lord came into the Temple through the east gateway.” Ezekiel 43:1-4 NLT “Then the man brought me back to the east gateway in the outer wall of the Temple area, but it was closed. And the Lord said to me, “This gate must remain closed; it will never again be opened. No one will ever open it and pass through, for the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered here. Therefore, it must always remain shut. Only the prince himself may sit inside this gateway to feast in the Lord’s presence. But he may come and go only through the entry room of the gateway.” Ezekiel 44:1-3 NLT “Open up, ancient gates! Open up, ancient doors, and let the King of glory enter. Who is the King of glory? The Lord, strong and mighty; the Lord, invincible in battle. Open up, ancient gates! Open up, ancient doors, and let the King of glory enter. Who is the King of glory? The Lord of Heaven’s Armies – He is the King of glory” Psalm 24:7-10 NLT Phil | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1637 Registered: 10-2002  |
It seems to work basically off of the final chapters of Ezekiel, which means that it's exegetically poor interpretation to say that Christ is going to come through the eastern gate upon His return -- because in context there are a lot of other things in there which scream of symbolism instead of literal interpretations (the Prince making sacrifices, etc.). I need to find the Robert Brinsmead article in which he compared Dispensationalism's treatment of the Prophets with Adventism's treatment of the Law. Just as Adventism looked to physical fulfillment of the letter of the Law (not recognizing that it a shadow), so in the same way Dispensationalism looks to a literal, physical future fulfillment of the OT Prophets' prophecies in the actual Land of Israel --not recognizing that the land, its places and cities were also shadows of eternal realities. (I.g., the "promised land" is Christ, heaven and the new earth, not a strip of land in Palestine; and a literal river will not flow to the "seas" from the literal Mount of Olives because as Revelation states, "there will be no more sea".) | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 1163 Registered: 5-2007 |
Well Ramone, Unless you can give a Biblical base for thinking these verses are only figurative, why not take them simply as stated? The Eastern Gate is sitting there all walled up exactly as prophesied in Scripture, awaiting the return of the Messiah, Jesus Christ. And, why call it “Palestine” when the Bible calls it “The Promised Land” for the nation of Israel? There is much prophecy concerning Israel which is yet to be fulfilled…..and in God’s timing, it will be! Phil | ||
| Jrt Registered user Username: Jrt Post Number: 24 Registered: 10-2008 |
Phil, Thank you for the verses ---- I was unaware of them and your post was very helpful . . . I plan to read Ezekiel through in the coming days . . . Ramone . . . you got me searching/googling about what dispensationalism is . . . so I continue to learn . . . Thanks for taking the time to respond, JRT | ||
| Lifeanew Registered user Username: Lifeanew Post Number: 157 Registered: 10-2007 |
JRT, Thank you for asking this question, we were also wondering about this statement Coleen wrote in her last post. I am sure she will shed more light on this statement. "We walked to the Eastern Gate, the gate through which the prophecies say the Messiah will come into the city." Phil, Thanks for the texts about the east gate, I was just getting ready to do a search on this. Agapetos, Thank you for your comments and am curious about the Robert Brinsmead article, hope you can find it. Still learning too. Jan | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1638 Registered: 10-2002 |
Hi Phil, The Biblical basis is what I'd mentioned. You had cited Ezekiel 43:1-4, but scroll down just a bit further in the same chapter and you hear that "temple" described, beginning with the altar for sacrificing burnt offerings and sprinkling blood... (v.18). Verse 19 then goes on to speak of how the priests (who are Levites) need to give a young bull for their sin offerings. This is different than what we have in the book of Hebrews where it says our High Priest did not need to offer sacrifices for Himself. Ezekiel's closing chapters are simply laid out in the same 'shadow' imagery that is seen in Exodus through Deuteronomy. You then quoted Ezekiel 44:1-3, about the Prince. But the same "prince" shows up in 45:17 where it says it will be his duty to provide burnt offerings, grain offerings and drink offerings at the festivals, New Moons and Sabbaths... and "He will provide sin offerings, grain offerings, burnt offerings and fellowship offerings to make atonement for the house of Israel." And in verse 22, it says that on first day of the Passover, "the prince is to provide a bull as a sin offering for himself and for all the people in the land" and so on. Again, Hebrews speaks of Christ needing to make no sacrifice for Himself. Read further about the duties of this "prince" in Ezekiel 46 and what goes on in that "east gate" where he must sit and bring sacrifices... that gate will be closed six days, but opened only on Sabbaths and New Moons, when the prince will bring sacrifices there. It also speaks of that prince's specific descendants & sons (46:16-18) which does not include all the people of Israel. Are you beginning to see the picture bro? Again another discrepancy arises with what's revealed in the New Covenant because in 44:16, it says that the priests (descendants of Zadok) alone are allowed to "come near My table and minister before Me". The New Covenant in contrast invites all to come near, all to come into the Most Holy Place. Ah, but maybe the "priests" here represent the priesthood of all believers? Probably so. But saying this means we have admitted it is figurative (symbolic), not literal. The same thing may go for other parts of the passage. Remember how in Adventism we wanted to say that the Sabbath needed to be literally kept, but other things were shadows (sacrifices, festivals, etc.)? We almost randomly went through and arbitrarily decided which were "literal" (Sabbath day, "food" laws) and which were no longer binding. Adventists are not the only ones who have done this kind of exegetical exercise. Dispensationalists have simply been doing the same thing with the Prophets, saying that this part (something to do with literal Jerusalem or the land) was literal, and that the following sentence (something with sacrifices, etc.) was not literal. **** Now after looking at these closing chapters of Ezekiel which describe a literal "temple", compare to Revelation 21:22, where it says that there is no temple in the holy city! What do we make of this literal temple, literal altar, literal east gate, and literal sacrifices? And that Revelation contradicts Ezekiel by saying that there will be no temple? I believe the answer is simple. Much of Ezekiel is written in shadow, and as such we need to understand the language of shadow and fulfillment lest we end up arbitrarily forcing literal interpretations on one half a passage and then arguing that the second half of a passage is not literal. Unless we understand we are looking at shadows which are fulfilled in the New Covenant or are symbolic of the things to come, we will continue to end up doing Adventist-like injustice to the context. Bless you in Jesus, brother! Ramone | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 1167 Registered: 5-2007 |
Ramone, Well, I asked for it! Thank you, you have given me much to ponder. P.S. I've printed out your reply so I can do some serious study. Phil | ||
| Lifeanew Registered user Username: Lifeanew Post Number: 159 Registered: 10-2007 |
Oh Ramone...we have printed your post too. Wow! This is just what we have been waiting to hear. Can't wait to jump in and study tonight. Thanks for your thoughts. JnB | ||
| Benevento Registered user Username: Benevento Post Number: 233 Registered: 4-2005 |
I'm way behind on this, I haven't seen Colleen's Israelite posts--where can I find them? Peggy | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 1168 Registered: 5-2007 |
Peggy, Scroll on down. They are in the thread titled; 'Israel Journal'. Phil | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1639 Registered: 10-2002 |
You're welcome, Phil (and others). Study away! God is good. Having stuff we thought was sure turn out to be ...not so sure... is something most of us are familiar with having come from Adventism. I believe this is one of the greatests gifts we bring to the Body of Christ at large -- the healthy ability to realize we've all been wrong about some things, and that it's not about us being right, but rather about Jesus being right! On the note of the "promised land", I don't have time to type tonight, but please look up these passages: Galatians 4:25-26 Hebrews 11:10,13-16 Hebrews 13:14 2 Peter 3:7,10 and especially Hebrews 3-4 Hebrews 3-4 is something we use to talk about "Sabbath", but the original context is about the children of Israel entering the promised land -- the curse in chapter 3 comes from Psalm 95, which is like a re-read of His original statement in the book of Numbers. But the word "land" was changed to "rest" in the Psalm version. In other words, God juxtaposed two things --the proimsed land and the promised rest-- and said that they are both fulfilled and entered by faith in Jesus Christ! Finally, see also Psalms 2, which speaks of "Christ's inheritance"... which is also our our inheritance, since we are co-heirs with Him. Bless you in Jesus! Ramone | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1640 Registered: 10-2002 |
Found the article! http://www.quango.net/brinsmead/Sabbatarian.htm#Two%20Forms%20ofChristian%20JudaismChapter%207 | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1641 Registered: 10-2002 |
Phil & JRT and others -- The whole chapter is worth posting, about the commonalities in Dispensational and Adventist interpretations: I believe that as we recognize these things and share them with our evangelical brothers & sisters, we (former Adventists) can be a great blessing and aid to the Body of Christ. However, if we fail to apply the same hermeneutics to the Prophets that we applied to the Law in our exodus from Adventism, then we are in effect looking back into the mirror and forgetting what we looked like before. It is a great comfort coming out of Adventism and finding Christian brothers and sisters in agreement. It is a great comfort to find ourselves in the mainstream of Christianity instead of opposing it. But if that comfort keeps us from seeing, acknowledging, or confronting such a great and obvious hermeneutical error as Dispensationalism, then we need to place our own comfort-in-agreement-with-evangelicalism on the altar for the benefit of our Christian brothers & sisters, and for the sake of the truth of the Gospel. Bless you all in Jesus Christ! Ramone | ||
| 8thday Registered user Username: 8thday Post Number: 556 Registered: 11-2007  |
A wild fling of a thought - I've struggled with these issues for a long time - especially coming out of the HRM which is basically preparing for a very literal Ezekiel, temple, sacrifices and all. So do the dispensationalists that I now fellowship with. I still lean toward a literal fulfillment because I cannot discount the miraculous existence of the modern nation of Israel, and so many things that seem to be in the process of fulfilling what I believe were UNconditional promises to Israel. I see the literal descriptions taking place during the millennium. The account is SO detailed it's hard for me to imagine it's all symbolic, although I'm open to learning more about both sides. I don't even fully understand the system of theology that is "dispensationalism", but it smells of the same proof texting mess I grew up with. I'm just trying to read the scripture and understand it without the boxes of theology men have created about future events we don't yet truly know about. The passages in Revelation that talk about no temple, and all of that which seems to contradict Ezekiel I always thought related to after the 1000 year reign - the "olam haba" - time after time. As far as sacrifices and temples, and holy days - I also see evidence for unbelieving peoples to still be alive during the millennium and we who are glorified will be reigning with Christ during that period. Scripture says that Christ will rule with a rod of iron, and that nations that don't go up to worship God in Jerusalem will have no rain (Zech 14). Just as unregnerated Israel needed an external taskmaster of the law until Christ and the new birth worked things from the inside and did what the law could not do, maybe God will deal with the remaining unbelievers in a very similar manner during this period of His reign. If Satan's final, failing assult comes at the end of the 1000 years as I see in Rev., then he must have a willing army from somewhere. Is it just the wicked dead resurrected? I don't know - and I don't know much of nothing. Just pondering. I'm sure there are other explanations for all that as well. Just taking things at face value - and not seeing any reason to see God is talking in "code" when he is speaking to the ancient Israelites and giving THEM (not us) promises about their future. Just my rambling questions. Must be time to do some more studyin. I have read Rev. so many times I couldn't count - and Ezekiel alot too. I don't really think I'll ever have a satisfactory answer really - but very anxious to see what IS going to happen!! Very anxious to be with Jesus and free from this body of death!! =) Sondra | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 2519 Registered: 10-2004  |
Sondra, I see these things pretty much as you do. Regarding Satan's army at the end of the 1,000 years--I think it is clear from Revelation 20 that this occurs before the resurrection of the wicked, and that the army consists of people who've lived during the Millennial reign of Christ and yet still reject Him. Adventism, of course, teaches that it is the resurrected wicked--but they really change the order of events (not to mention the events themselves!) from how Revelation 20 has them! Ramone, I don't understand why you are trying to say that Revelation contradicts the OT prophets (if taken literally), when, as Sondra pointed out, they are speaking of two separate periods--the 1,000 year reign of Christ on this present Earth, and then, after that, when God creates the New Earth (also known as the eternal state). For those of us who believe in a literal Millennial reign of Christ on Earth (I'm not sure what you believe about that), there is no contradiction. So, really it's unfair to say that those who interpret the OT prophecies literally are making the Scriptures contradict each other, when they are speaking of two different periods. Of course there will be no seas on the New Earth. Of course there will be no temple on the New Earth. But those facts have no bearing on the period of the 1,000 year reign of Christ on this present earth. Jeremy | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 1175 Registered: 5-2007 |
Well, I am with Sondra in that "I cannot discount the miraculous existence of the modern nation of Israel, and so many things that seem to be in the process of fulfilling what I believe were UNconditional promises to Israel." And, I don't see where a literal rendering of Old Testament prophecies are in conflect with the book of Revelation. Not having heard of Robert D. Brinsmead, who Ramone is quoting, I desided to research him a little. Apparently, he is an ex-Adventist theologian who is no longer accepted by Adventist or main-line evangelicals. Anybody else know anything about him? Phil | ||
| 8thday Registered user Username: 8thday Post Number: 558 Registered: 11-2007 |
Well, my dad has an audiotape of him angrily preaching about the fact that the book of Revelation should not even be in the Bible, (it shook me so bad I had to leave the house and actually started bawling - I guess because my dad was so caught up in this man's hostile spirit to the Word of God) and I have another article by him where he is arguing against the "biblicism" of fundamentalists. He is the primary reason I cannot discuss religion with my father because he's followed Brinsmead all the way off the cliff. He'll talk about Jesus, but you can't quote scripture or he gets furious. I'm not saying he may or may not have a valid point above, but he as definitely taken a different road than I'm on. Also, not only is modern Israel something of a miracle (and I have put many many hours of study into their history and culture, and can't come up with any other reason for them to exist other than God must have a reason.) But the fact that the world even still knows what a Jew is after 2000 years of dispersion with no country, no land and intense persecution in every place they went and in every period of history (also a fulfillment of prophecy). Any other people that have been dislocated in such a way do not retain their identity. Isa 66:22 "For as the new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me, says the LORD, so shall your offspring and your name remain. I have made the mistake of oversimplifying before and come to wrong conclusions, and I may be doing this with this issue as well - but for now, I have not seen enough evidence to change my mind. I don't know why, or how it all works together, but from Rom. 11 it seems that Paul also believed they would not be cast off forever. Sondra | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 8975 Registered: 12-2003  |
Sondra and Jeremy, I agree with you. Now, I know how upsetting it can be to think the Bible might actually foretell an earthly millennium before the end of days and the recreation of the heavens and the earth. I have two very close friends who, when they first considered this possibility as they read Revelation, rationalized desperately, and one even was reduced to tears to think that there might be a whole other "age" before the restoration of all things. Revelation, however, is very clear that this kingdom and this reign of the Lord Jesus happens AFTER the resurrection of the righteous and BEFORE the resurrection of the wicked. No matter how much I've tried, I can't explain away that time frame. As Jeremy pointed out, Revelation does not contradict the OT prophecies if one takes the plain meaning of the words and allows for an earthly millennial kingdom. As for how it will "work", God has chosen not to explain that to us fully. But for that matter, He did not explain in advance how the church would "work", either. Paul speaks in Ephesians and Colossians about the "mystery" of the church which is now revealed. Before Jesus came, no one could have possibly understood how there could be people on earth who were spiritually dead working alongside those who were spiritually alive and literally indwelt with God Himself. The living and the dead—not merely the saved and the unsaved—living and working together. I'm willing not to know the details—but I'm not willing at this point to decide that a literal earthly kingdom cannot be. I've spiritualized away far too many literal words of the Bible over the years to assume it's safe to do so regarding this subject. Colleen | ||
| Jeremiah Registered user Username: Jeremiah Post Number: 413 Registered: 1-2004  |
The explanation of the 1000 years held by Eastern Orthodoxy is that we are currently in the 1000 years. The righteous are those who have experienced the first resurrection. The first resurrection is when we are raised with Christ in baptism, when we are born again. Since those who are followers of Christ will never die, they are living and reigning with Christ even if they have passed from this life. There is a second resurrection which would be the general resurrection. There is also a second death. Anyone who has taken part in the first resurrection does not need to fear the second death. So yes, the resurrection of the righteous happens first. It is the first resurrection. Evangelicals would relate to it as the moment our dead spirits become alive. The wicked don't participate in the first resurrection. This makes a difference in death; thus the phrase "rest of the dead" in Revelation 20:5. The first resurrection began as Jesus plundered Hades. So chronologically, it is before the 1000 years even though every Christian participates in it. The end of the 1000 years is when Christ returns in glory to judge the living and the dead. This is the second and physical resurrection. This resurrection happens to everyone, because Christ defeated death for everyone. But those wicked who show by their actions that they want death, recieve death again; they experience eternity in a state of spiritual death. This is the second death, and you can't be hurt by it if you are alive with Christ. Jeremiah |
