Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Ezra

Pages: 1 2 »
1
Religious Discussions / Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
« on: December 09, 2014, 04:44:54 pm »
Quote from: Danger Mouse on December 09, 2014, 01:01:29 pm

Danger Mouse,

I am getting the impression that your sole objective is to challenge everything that I am posting. If that satisfies your ego, so be it.  But I am posting for the edification of all, therefore I am going to strongly refute what you say here. But I will not get into endless disputes with someone whose sole purpose is to dispute everything, whether true or false.  Therefore I will not respond to any further responses from you.  We're not playing "debating games" here.

Quote
How do you know it is?  Because the Catholic Church said it is?

How do you know that this was not established before the Catholic Church was established?  Do you know anything about the Muratori Canon?  If you did, you would not have challenged this. And the very fact that it is an intergral part of the New Testament is sufficient proof (unless you do not believe that the NT is the Word of God).   

Quote
Moved means moved.  It does not mean that God dictated things word by word.
That is how a "natural man" would respond, not how a "spiritual man" would respond to Scripture.  So now you should ask yourself seriously if you are still a natural man, or are you really a spiritual man.  The natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit, because they are foolishness to him (1 Cor 2:14).

Quote
You seem to be asserting that all the prophets were like Moses, speaking with God face to face, mouth to mouth. Paul showed modesty when he admitted that his vision was "dark."
I have not suggested that all the prophets spoke "face to face" with God.  Some did and some did not.  I have given you Scripture to establish that every word they wrote was a word from God and a word of God.  We are not told about the process.  We are told about the product.

Quote
1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
Don't misapply Scripture.  This is an entirely different issue.  And you can ignore Warfield if you want, but if you are willing to learn from others, you would be willing to learn from Warfield, since he has much to say which is helpful.

Quote
A further objection is that while the Old Testament prophets often tell us that they were inspired by saying so,  few  books in the New Testament make that claim.
That is hardly an objection.  We are not told in Genesis that Moses wrote that book. However, there is absolutely no one who disputes it, and Christ Himself quoted from "Moses" when He quotes from the Torah.  You are free to disregard the whole Bible as Scripture (as do theological liberals) but that does not change what Scripture is, and what has been accepted as Scripture for over 3,500 years.   

Quote
It was centuries after they had written that the Catholic Church began to say they were inspired Scriptures on a par with the Torah and the Prophets.
You have failed to do your research diligently.  Please do so and then respond.

Quote
I can also tell you that Luke said he talked to eyewitnesses to let his readers know he was not relying on rumors but had gone to people who had been there and seen these things.
Luke was not relying on either eyewitnesses or rumors.  When you read the phrase "from the very first" in Luke 1:3 in the KJV, that is the Greek word anothen which literally means "from above". Check Strong's Concordance. And what else does "from above" mean other than "from Heaven"?  So once again, do your proper research and then respond.

2
Religious Discussions / Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
« on: December 09, 2014, 12:25:19 pm »
Quote from: Danger Mouse on December 09, 2014, 07:11:09 am
I wonder why Luke consulted eyewitnesses.

Only God knows why Luke cosusulted eye-witnesses. 

However, the Gospel of Luke is Scripture, and ALL SCRIPTURE is God-breathed (theopneustos) -- the breath of God, the product of the activity of the Holy Spirit.  Ultimately every word written by every prophet and apostle is a word of God.   That is "plenary verbal inspiration" and if we cannot believe it, we can never be sure which is man's word and which is God's Word.  Please note these words carefully (2 Pet 1:21):

"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost".

That word "moved" is the Greek word pheromenoi, which means to be carried or borne or driven.  The writers of inspired Scripture were controlled completely by the Holy Spirit in every word that they wrote.  For further understanding of this please consult The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible by B. B. Warfield.




3
Religious Discussions / Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
« on: December 09, 2014, 12:10:25 pm »
Quote from: A nonny mouse on December 09, 2014, 04:15:14 am

No longer would the real 'Israel' be by national birthright, involving all the Jewish stuff about 12's and 144000's etc., but thereon would be by a new birthright based upon 'faith' (at least that's how I see things).

You might want to do a thorough study of of ALL the OT prophecies before concluding that "all the Jewish stuff" is obsolete.  Christ will redeem and restore Israel on earth after His Second Coming.   You seem to forget that it was Christ Himself who promised those 12 thrones to His 12 apostles, and Jesus Christ is the Truth.

4
Religious Discussions / Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
« on: December 08, 2014, 11:44:59 pm »
I trust you will take these comments as edification for all, and not a personal "attack".  We need to be as accurate as possible.

Quote from: A nonny mouse on December 08, 2014, 12:18:55 am
That sent me on a mental 'paper chase'; the thought being that everything we read in the Bible is so deeply entrenched in the Jewish religion.
  "Hebrew Scriptures" rather than "Jewish religion", bearing in mind that the Jews were generally attempting to create and maintain their own righteousness apart from faith.

Quote
For example (am I right in saying this) each of the 13 Apostles were Jews, and each would have been so totally steeped in the Jewish scriptures (the Old Testament) that whatever they said or wrote would be conditioned by their devotion to those scriptures.
Since Christ promised 12 thrones to 12 apostles over the 12 tribes of Israel, then just 12 apostles, with Paul definitely a replacement for the temporary Matthias (Acts 1:26).  Scripture was not dependent on the writers but on the Holy Spirit giving them the precise words (2 Pet 1:21).

Quote
That set me thinking about Revelation.  Would not a 90 year old man, imprisoned on an Island, with a cave for solitary shelter, and with only a rock shelf for a bed, fall into almost mental delusion and hark back to what had dominated his past life (namely the Jewish scriptures)?  Is that not why most of what was recorded in Revelation so closely paralleled the prophesies of Daniel and other Old Testament writings?
If we always remember that ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God, and since Revelation is Scripture, it was not what John was imagining or desiring to put down, but rather that the Holy Spirit gave him every word of every verse of  Revelation. That is what we mean by "plenary verbal inspiration".

Back to the topic.  Christ descended into Hades (the place of departed souls and spirits) for 3 days and 3 nights in order to proclaim His victory over sin, Hell, death, Hades, and Satan.  It is unfortunate that the word "hell" was used in the KJV for Hades.  So the answer to the OP is Christ did indeed go to Hades, and afterwards brought out all the OT saints from "Abraham's bosom" and took them to Heaven.  They are called "the spirits of just [justified] men made perfect" (Heb 12:23).

5
Religious Discussions / Re: The Early Days
« on: December 07, 2014, 03:11:35 pm »
Quote from: Danger Mouse on December 07, 2014, 08:07:29 am
I'd say you're failing that passage.  Paul is saying the reason to read the Scriptures is so it encourages good works in us...  

That's not all he's saying.  Just as he puts doctrine first, he also puts "that the man of God may be perfect" first. So exactly what does that mean? It is the Greek word ARTIOS which means "complete".  So the next question is complete in what sense? When we go to Eph 4:12 we see the connection: "For the perfecting of the saints...". Here the Greek word is KATARTISMOS which means to complete thoroughly or to furnish completely.  The context (Eph 4:11-16) shows us that the ministry gifts (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers) are give to the Church to completely furnish every Christian with "the knowledge of the Son of God" and this knowledge is to ensure "That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about by every wind of DOCTRINE".

So we are back to doctrine as one aspect of the knowledge of the Son of God.  If Bible doctrine is important to God, then Christians do not have the option of shrugging it off, and saying "All you need is love". The real issue today is the appalling apostasy that has crept into the churches, because Bible doctrine has been neglected.  In this context, there are no apostles and prophets today, and those who make such claims are bogus.  We have the apostles and prophets in Scripture -- the complete written Word of God.


6
Religious Discussions / Re: The Early Days
« on: December 07, 2014, 01:50:37 am »
Quote from: Helen on November 26, 2014, 12:13:55 am
The idea that Bible study is an absolute necessity to the Christian Life is so entrenched in the mentality of the twentieth-century believer that to question it is almost an invitation to be burned at the stake...
Gene Edwards (or any Christian for that matter) must support his thoughts with Scripture (which he has not done).
 
He suggests that Bible study is not an absolute necessity.  However, the Holy Spirit exhorts us that it is indeed an absolute necessity (2 Timothy 2:15).  Not only are we to study the Word of Truth, we are to labour in it so that we can interpret it correctly.  Thus Mr. Edwards is already off the mark.

Quote
if you ever really get to know the Lord in a deep, abiding experience, it will suddenly dawn on you that teaching doctrines was something invented by men who just didn't know the Lord all that well. Gene Edwards/ from " THE EARLY CHURCH"
Once again, he is off the mark. We read in 2 Timothy 3:16,17: "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for DOCTRINE, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.  That the man of God may be perfect [complete], throughly furnished unto all good works.

What we see here is that the Holy Spirit puts Bible doctrine at the top of the list.  Why?  Because if we do not know the doctrines of the faith, (a) we cannot "earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:3) and (b) we ourselves will be "carried about by every wind of doctrine" (Eph 4:14).

Today, more than ever before, we need to know what we believe and why we believe it, based upon the Word of God, not our own ideas or inventions.  Mr. Edwards has done a great disservice by making such statements, since we live in the last days, and there is more and more false doctrine being promoted.


7
Religious Discussions / Re: Thoughts
« on: December 06, 2014, 09:47:19 pm »
Helen,

The best way to understand the doctrine of the Trinity (or the triune Godhead) is to believe that in Scripture God has indeed revealed Himself, but we cannot fully understand "the mystery of God" (Col 2:2; Rev 10:7), which is "the essence" of God.

The Bible clearly teaches that within the Godhead we have:
God the FATHER
God the SON (God the WORD)
God the HOLY SPIRIT

In Hebrews 1:8-14, God the Father addressed God the Son as God, and tells us that the Son is the Creator of this universe (Jn 1:1-3). The Holy Spirit is called "the Spirit of God" at the creation (Gen 1:2) and God the Father is Himself also the Creator (Gen 1:1).  There are numerous Scriptures which corroborate the fact that there is one God, eternally existent as three Divine Persons (Mt 28:19).

The reason this doctrine has become a stumbling block is because it defies human reason and humanistic reasoning. Thus we have false Christianity and false cults teaching Unitarianism.  Also, both Judaism and Islam reject this truth, as well as the truth about the Deity of Christ.  But anyone who rejects these doctrines cannot be saved (1 Jn 5:1-21).

8
Religious Discussions / Re: What sort of bodies will we have in Heaven ?
« on: December 06, 2014, 09:28:26 pm »
Quote from: Deborah on December 04, 2014, 02:04:20 am
We won't have bodies "in heaven".
We shall have new bodies (like Christ's glorified body) when we are resurrected onto the new earth.

You might want to take a close look at 1 Thess 4:13-18 which reveals the Resurrection/Rapture of the saints.  The Lord descends from Heaven for His saints and then returns to Heaven with His saints, because He has prepared a place for them in Heaven (Jn 14:1-3) and there is an inheritance reserved for them in Heaven (1 Pet 1:4).  The entire Church -- those washed in the blood of the Lamb and clothed with His righteousness -- is seen in Heaven (Rev 7:9-17).

That is not to say that the earth will not be inhabited.  But that would be a subject for another thread.

9
Religious Discussions / Re: Salvation~for some or for all?
« on: December 06, 2014, 07:09:13 pm »
Quote from: A nonny mouse on December 03, 2014, 02:18:49 am

If you were in a remote part of our world, racially isolated from 'civilisation', speaking a language other than English, without education to inform you about other peoples and their religions, and consequently died without ever reading a Bible or hearing about Christ,
a) would every member of your race be tormented in hellfire for eternity?
Not a very likely scenario in this day and age.  However, Scripture is very clear -- "Except a man be born again, he CANNOT see or enter into the Kingdom of God" (Jn 3:3-5).  At the same time God tells us that His creation points to Him (Rom 1:19-20) so those who would have a genuine desire to know the Creator and Savior would also be provided with an opportunity to hear the Gospel (Acts 17:15-34).

Quote
b) would some or all end up in God's New Jerusalem?
Those who obeyed the Gospel would be saved, and those who did not or would not believe the Gospel would be damned (Mark 16:15,16; Jn 3:36).

Quote
c) and if the answer is 'some' then what would determine the distinction?
See John 1:12,13.

Universalism is a man-made doctrine which ignores the plain teaching of Scripture.  It is God's express will that ALL men should repent and ALL should be saved, but only those who believe the Gospel -- who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and receive Him as Lord and Saviour --  will be saved.

10
Religious Discussions / Re: overcome verus understood {john one:5}
« on: December 06, 2014, 06:50:42 pm »
Al,

It is generally a good idea to try and grasp the meaning of the English word by going back to the Greek (or Hebrew) to determine the range of meanings and what is applicable in the context of the verse.

In the KJV, the word is "comprehended" but could also be "apprehended" in John 1:5.  "The darkness apprehended it not".  That is a translation of katalambano, "which properly signifies to lay hold of" (Vine) and is Strong's 2638 (KJV) where it is defined as to take eagerly, to seize, to possess, to apprehend, to comprehend, to perceive, or to overtake. ("overcome" is not really a correct translation).

So now we have to determine what applies in the context of the battle between Light (God) and Darkness (Satan).  "Apprehend" means to arrest, capture or seize.  It also means to understand, but in this context that would not be applicable. "Comprehend" means either to understand or to grasp.

So now we have to look at the entire Bible narrative with a focus on the enmity of Satan against God and against men.  God is Light (1 Jn 1:5) and Satan is "the power of darkness" (Lk 22:53).  Ever since Satan rebelled against God and caused the Fall of mankind, he has been working tirelessly to quench the Light of the Gospel and the Light of Christ Himself, so that  human beings would be eternally damned.  He has done this by attacking God's Word, attacking God's people, and provoking people to sin and go into idolatry. When the tower of Babel was erected, it was a work of Satan to make the whole world idolatrous (and so it is today).  He has also been trying to ensure that Messiah -- the Light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel (Lk 2:32) --  would be killed before His time.  Thus we have the slaughter of the innocents by king Herod and the flight of Christ into Egypt (Mt 2:13-18).

So what Darkness has been trying to do is to "arrest, capture or seize" (apprehend) Light by attacking the Messiah and His Gospel.  But because Christ is God, that is impossible for Darkness, and indeed Darkness was defeated at the Cross (Heb 2:14,15).

11
Religious Discussions / Re: Traditions
« on: December 06, 2014, 03:10:12 pm »
Quote
You appear to fallen into the sola scriptura tradition established only a few hundred years ago by Protestants rebelling against Catholic authority.

Actually that is a fallacy in itself.  Sola Scriptura was not invented by the Protestants. It is exactly what the Lord Jesus Christ taught and what the apostles taught and practised. Please note well, and meditate on this passage (2 Timothy 3:14-17):

14But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Because Scripture is "God-breathed" (Gk theopneustos) it is completely sufficient in and of itself for "life and godliness" (2 Pet 1:3).  That is why evangelical and fundamentalist churches state that it is the final authority is all matters pertaining to doctrine and practice.  It is the Word of God.
 
Roman Catholic "authority" was fundamentally bogus, because it contradicted Scripture. Even the Eastern Orthodox churches rejected papal infallibility and authority.
 

12
Religious Discussions / Re: Can salvation be lost?
« on: December 06, 2014, 02:55:42 pm »
Salvation is the GIFT of eternal life.  It is also the GIFT of Christ within the believer.  It is also the GIFT of the Holy Spirit within the believer.  It is also the GIFT of God within the believer.  It is also the GIFT on the New Birth. 

Since these are all gifts of God grace, it is impossible for salvation to be "lost".  What is possible is for sinners to be self-deceived and believe they are saved because of something they have done.  It is "NOT BY WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS WHICH WE HAVE DONE" but "according to God's mercy" that we are saved (Tit 3:5).

13
Religious Discussions / Re: What do these passages from John mean?
« on: December 05, 2014, 09:42:13 pm »
Quote from: A nonny mouse on December 05, 2014, 09:16:14 pm
Personally, I may be with you on that, and particularly with the linking of the 'first resurrection' with the recently coined word 'rapture' rather than 'parousia' (as per 1 Thess.4) although Danger Mouse seems not to agree.

A nonny mouse,

It is really unfortunate that Christians are divided over this doctrine of the Blessed Hope.  But what is even more disturbing is that the opponents of a pretribulation Resurrection/Rapture keep on promoting the false notion that this is a "new" doctrine (or as you have said for the Rapture "a recently coined word").

That is simply not the case.  When you turn 1 Thess 4:17 in the Greek Textus Receptus (Stephens 1550 ed) you will find the Greek word harpagesometha which is literally "shall be caught away" and translated (KJV) as "shall be caught up together". 

Now when you turn to Jerome's Vulgate (c. 400 AD) you will find the Latin verb rapiemur (first-person plural future passive indicative of rapiō which is Anglicized to "Rapture".  Rapiemur = harpagesometha.  So Rapture goes back to a period over 1600 years.

I am certainly not "recommending" Jerome's Vulgate. But this helps us to undertand that the doctrine of the Rapture is not new, and as a matter of fact some of the Early Church Fathers clearly held to it.

14
Religious Discussions / Re: What do these passages from John mean?
« on: December 05, 2014, 06:28:48 pm »
Quote from: Danger Mouse on December 05, 2014, 07:35:54 am
I was not asking about the many generations of Jews that came after Jesus' day.  I was asking about the people he was talking to specifically.   Who is the "ye" in this sentence?
Before we answer that question, we must ask ourselves "What was the attitude of the Jews being addressed towards their present King-Messiah?"  If it was totally negative, they would certainly not be seeking for Yeshua at all.  As a matter of fact, the Bible record tells us that all the unbelieving Jews joined together to condemn Him to death.  So the"ye" is generic for all unbelieving Jews, and what they would be seeking (as noted in their history and prophesied by Christ) is false Messiahs.

Quote
I also ask what happened to Caiaphas in your opinion?
We need not rely on opinion. We are told in Scripture (Jn 18:14) that it was Caiphas who "gave counsel" to the Jews that Jesus should be put to death.  So Caiphas in in Hades awaiting his final judgement and confinement in the Lake of Fire (Hell).

Quote
Matthew 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

In your opinion, has Caiaphas seen this yet?  If not, where is he now?   Is he looking for Jesus now and can't find him?   And when will this be fulfilled?    I'm trying to sort your concepts out.   Will Caiaphas be resurrected later and be saved?   Again, your chronology confuses me.   The entire chapter of Matthew 24 is about events that would happen before the destruction of the Temple.
No, Caiaphas never saw this, and never will, since he is in Hades.  That prophecy is for the nation of Israel per se (Rev 1:7).  As to the entire chapter of Matthew 24, it is a summary of major events between the first coming of Christ (in humility) and His second coming in power and great glory.  The destruction of the temple took place in 70 AD, but those prophecies encompass everything in the book of Revelation.  There is much more to come in the future, and the kingdom of Israel will be redeemed and restored by Christ after His second coming. 

Quote
Matthew 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

The rest of the chapter is about the things that would precede the destruction of the Temple.  This leaves me wondering how you fit this into the overall picture.

Addressed above. The Preterist position (which fails to take everything into account) claims that everything was fulfilled in 70 AD.  We know from Scripture, as well as world history, that that is not the case.    We are certainly not in the Millenium.

Quote
I read the pronouns simply.  "Me" means Jesus and "ye" means the people he was talking to.  Your interpretation seems to be vastly different.   The "me" means people other than Jesus and not him when he used the word "me."  And you also may be applying the "ye" to future generations and not to the people Jesus was talking to.

We should remember that John the Baptist had proclaimed Messiah's advent  to the whole population of Judea.  Thus when Christ said "Me" He was referring to His official role as King-Messiah.   When He said "Ye" He was speaking not only of those unbelieving Jews standing in front of Him, but all unbelieving Jews until His second coming.

Quote
You seem to have ideas about what "coming in power" and "coming in glory" mean.   Has it occurred to you that many Christians could be looking for the wrong thing just the way many Jews were and still are?...  "
If we take "coming in power and great glory" in its plain literal sense, it can only correspond to Rev 19:11-21 (and many other passages), which has simply not occurred. There is no speculation here.  Scripture (OT and NT) is very clear that Christ will physically return to deal with His enemies and to deal with unbelieving Israel.  And we cannot be looking "for the wrong thing" since Christ has Himself said again and again, that He will come in power and great glory.   

Quote
There are  many Scriptures that promise he would return soon.  How many passages would you like me to quote?

"Soon" or "quickly" for God is not the same as it is for man, since "a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night" (Ps 90:4).  Peter tells us the same thing in 2 Pet 3:8.  So for God about 2 days have elapsed since the ascension of Christ.
 
Quote
  Corinthians 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Since this is speaking about the Rapture of the Church, and the Church is still on earth, this is yet future.

Quote
He was writing to them not to us.  If it is a true statement, it should be true for them; and if it was true for them, perhaps it could be true also for us; but if it was not true for them, why bother with it?   Yet people will say they all died -- they all slept -- and none of them heard the last trump, no one was raised, and no one was changed.
All the saints who have died since the resurrection of Christ are presently with Him, since to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.  Their bodies are still in their graves.  When the Resurrection/Rapture occurs, their souls and spirits will be brought from Heaven to join their transformed bodies, and all the saints will return to Heaven with Christ (the ones which are alive at that point will also be transformed and taken up, and all will be together). 

Quote
I also stoutly deny that Satan is "firmly in control of the world."  Dominion of the earth was given to man; and it's always been man's.   Satan's influence has always been established by fraud and deceit, and by inspiring violence to make people believe he has real power.  He has no  power at all except that which people give him.
It is never a good thing for Christians to go into denial. When Adam disobeyed, mankind lost dominion over the earth. That is why Satan could offer ALL the kingdoms of the world and their glory to Christ during His temptations (Mt 4:8,9). All one has to do is read and listen to the news, observe what is currently happening in the world, and recognize that sin and evil is actually increasing under Satan's control.  Islam was created by Satan and is being used by Satan. Paul calls him "the god of this world" AFTER the resurrection of Christ. The goal of Islamists is world domination under a Caliphate, and they are making good progress with their evil deeds.. So to deny that Satan is controlling the kingdoms of the world is to deny reality.  Since Paul also calls him (AFTER the resurrection) "the prince of the power of the air" it is God who has allowed this evil angel to have power even after the resurrection of Christ.  Indeed, for 3 1/2 years in the future, Satan will dominate this world completely through the Antichrist (the Beast out of the Sea, Rev. 13:1-18).   

15
Religious Discussions / Re: What do these passages from John mean?
« on: December 05, 2014, 05:18:19 pm »
Quote from: A nonny mouse on December 05, 2014, 03:05:28 am
What about scriptures that appear to point towards a pre tribulation coming in order to select those account worthy to live and reign with Christ for 1000 years?

Because we were discussing Messiah in relation to unbelieving Jews, the pre-tribulation coming of Christ was not in view. However, I do believe that the Second Coming of Christ is in two stages (1) at the Resurrection/Rapture FOR His saints before the Tribulation and (2) at the Revelation in power and great glory WITH His saints after the Great Tribulation.  But those are matters for another thread.

Pages: 1 2 »