[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]

Author Topic: The Battle of Armageddon  (Read 12311 times)

Dan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 252
  • Gender: Male
  • Dan the Man
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #75 on: June 14, 2019, 12:39:30 PM »
Spiritualizing is what leads to liberal thinking and non-literal beliefs concerning Israel. If you start taking God's word literally you start respecting borders and nations and people. You are just a few centimeters away from being spiritualists thinking the way you do.

Joe, I think it is quite telling that Tony Warren has writings from hundreds of expositors about eschatology on his site, but not one single article by the world's most premier prophecy and eschatology scholar, the honorable professor John F. Walvoord. That in itself shows his bias and unfairness against certain theologies. Professor John F. Walvoord, the long-time president and chancellor emeritus at Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS) was one of the most prominent eschatological scholars of the 20th century, and yet Warren refuses to give him the respect and credit that other excellent Reformed theologians do. Legitimate scholars disagree, but they don't make other faithful Christians seem like a pariah or an outcast from faithful theology. That's the problem I have with Warren. He thinks dispensationalism, the most celebrated, popular and widely held Christianity is false. Why? Because he says so? It's just like you said. It's his spiritualizing that leads to this liberal thinking and non-literal interpretations concerning Israel.

 

Erik Diamond

  • Affiliate Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2454
  • Gender: Male
  • We are to God the aroma of Christ. (Eph 5:2)
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #76 on: June 14, 2019, 01:29:54 PM »
Quote
That's the problem I have with Warren. He thinks dispensationalism, the most celebrated, popular and widely held Christianity is false. Why? Because he says so?

No, because Scripture said so. And because of the way Mr. Walvoord and the dispensationalists mis-interpreted Scripture.  We have refuted the doctrine of dispensationalism many times here that I wondered why are you still visiting here to promote the name of "Mr John F. Walvoord" on this forum championed by amillennialists who are mostly ex-dispensationalists? 

I was once hardcore dispensational premillennialist who believed and taught pretribulation rapture and have been reading the books of John Walvoord, Charles Ryrie, Dwight Pentecost, Dave Hunt, Jack Van Impe, etc. etc.  However, I felt that based on their writings, I felt that they all are theological liberals who didn't take the Bible very seriously.

Then I immersed myself in a study of all aspects and schools of eschatological thought, I have found the amillennialist to be more biblical sound.  My departure from premillennialism was long and slow gradual and eventually become amillennialist.  I was only a baby amillennialist when I first met Tony Warren on his ancient BBS forum. I did have some heated debates with Tony Warren until I noticed how honest and consistent Tony was with comparing Scripture with Scripture that helped me learn how to SURRENDER to Scripture, instead of feelings and personal opinions, in order to know the Truth. I believe that the Holy Spirit had me start with dispensationalism first before came to the Truth so I will be better equipped to help those to get out of false dispensational/premillennial teaching.

I believe it is Tony's decision on which studies he allowed to post on his site and I agreed with him for not posting the studies of "professor" John F. Walvoord as anyone can easily find some on Google already, not because he is the "world's most premier prophecy and eschatology scholar," but his interpretations were NOT biblical. Yes, his doctrine is popular among many church, thanks to the birth of national Israel, the obsessive search for the Antichrist, and date setting of pre-tribulation rapture, however, I personally believe it is part of big delusion that is attacking God's congregation.
"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:8-9)

R. Anspach

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 62
  • Gender: Male
  • No condemnation for those who are in Christ
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #77 on: June 14, 2019, 02:34:01 PM »

Great Testimony Erik.  ]ThUmBsUp[

 I have a question I would like to ask everyone concerning this subject. How are the nations gathered together for this battle od Armageddon? I know it's after Satan is loosed, but what then in practical terms?
"But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." Galatians 3:11

Erik Diamond

  • Affiliate Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2454
  • Gender: Male
  • We are to God the aroma of Christ. (Eph 5:2)
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #78 on: June 14, 2019, 05:36:30 PM »
Quote
How are the nations gathered together for this battle od Armageddon? I know it's after Satan is loosed, but what then in practical terms?

I believe you asked about these verses:


Rev 16:12-16
(12)  And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.
(13)  And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
(14)  For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.
(15)  Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.
(16)  And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.


Rev 20:7-9
(7)  And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
(8 )  And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
(9)  And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

I know some people believe that the verses are talking about God bringing together all physical geopolitical nations to a literal battle of Armageddon in the Middle East.  I used to think that way but this is NOT what Scripture talked about.  Rather it is a spiritual battle.

In the book of Revelation, the Kings of the Earth represent ALL the people of the Congregation of God, the Church, both faithful Elect and professed believers. It depends on the context.  In Revelation 16, it speaks of the Kings of the Earth as false prophets and christs into an army of unrighteous men, used by God (through Satan) to plague the unfaithful people IN THE CHURCH as a judgment. This is where the battle of Armageddon can be found...not in a single location on earth, but all over the Earth, Gog and Magog, wherever the churches are under attack.


2Th 2:8-11
(8 ) And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
(9)  Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
(10)  And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
(11)  Andfor this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:


The plague is that the unfaithful people will believe whatever comes out of the mouths of growing number of false prophets and christs in their congregation. They will believe the lies of Free Will, dispensationalism, prosperity gospel, Homosexuality is not a sin, divorce and remarriage, God loves everyone, women pastors, Your Best Life Now Gospel, don't preach hell, etc. etc. etc. It is because the people do not love the truth but lip-serving Christ.

The battle of Armageddon will not be fought with guns and missiles between physical nations, rather the false prophets and Christs coming into churches with all power of lying signs and wonders (word of Satan) against the True Testimony of the Elect, silenced them, and deceive many people who have not yet sealed by God (Revelation 9:3-6) within the congregation to believe a lie. It is a spiritual battle that many people do not realize that is taking place... right now, IMHO, based on what I am witnessing today.

The Elect are blessed because they can "see" the abomination of desolation, keep their garments of Salvation (sealed of God), and will come out of Babylon the Great.  They will, then, wait until the battle of Armageddon ends on 1,335th day which is the Blessed Second Coming of Lord Jesus Christ which I believe may take place soon.


Dan 12:11-12
(11)  And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
(12)  Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

No man, including myself, know exact when Christ will come, but God allowed us to "see" the signs that is taking place. We need to watch and be prepared as wise virgins of Matthew 25.

That is my understanding based on what I read in Scripture. Blessings.
"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:8-9)

Reggie Matthews

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • Gender: Male
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #79 on: June 15, 2019, 02:19:18 AM »

Great Testimony Erik.  ]ThUmBsUp[


 )iagree(  I also came out of a false doctrine, which proves that people can change given the truth and the testimony of facts and reasons for change.
"Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?" -Ecclesiastes 8:4

Eugene Coburn

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 45
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #80 on: June 21, 2019, 02:59:27 AM »
Joe, I think it is quite telling that Tony Warren has writings from hundreds of expositors about eschatology on his site, but not one single article by the world's most premier prophecy and eschatology scholar, the honorable professor John F. Walvoord.

And we thank God for that. At least we can say we have one faithful site that doesn't place articles on his site by popularity, but by faithfulness to the Bible. I have always never understood why some Christians have need to publicize false teachings because they feel they should have some sense of equal opportunity for authors. This is PC gone wild. If you dearly love the Lord, you don't place false teachings in your house for his children to read. That would make you a false teacher.

Proverbs 19:9
"A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall perish."

 Armageddon is not an earthly war. Claiming that God says it is, is a false witness.

Quote
It's his spiritualizing that leads to this liberal thinking and non-literal interpretations concerning Israel.

You sound like a broken record, the same nonsense post after post. We don't follow your beliefs, we follow the words of the bible, and that means Israel is not who you say it is, but whom God says it is.

Isaiah 44:1
"Yet now hear, O Jacob my servant; and Israel, whom I have chosen:"

Halle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 194
  • "Because He Lives"
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #81 on: June 21, 2019, 05:08:33 AM »
Joe, I think it is quite telling that Tony Warren has writings from hundreds of expositors about eschatology on his site, but not one single article by the world's most premier prophecy and eschatology scholar, the honorable professor John F. Walvoord.

And we thank God for that.

 &TY Now back to  )Bible-Red(

Tony Warren

  • Administrator
  • Affiliate Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2280
  • Gender: Male
    • The Mountain Retreat
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #82 on: June 23, 2019, 10:18:17 AM »
>>>
Joe, I think it is quite telling that Tony Warren has writings from hundreds of expositors about eschatology on his site, but not one single article by the world's most premier prophecy and eschatology scholar, the honorable professor John F. Walvoord.
<<<

Correct. Which is as it should be, because the alleged "world's most premier prophecy and eschatology scholar" is most certainly not a faithful witness of the word itself, nor the authority and faithful interpreter of God's Holy inspired word--the Bible itself is. So that means that any writer that doesn't hold to this most fundamental of rules in rightly understanding Scripture, will not have any of his writing placed in any site I administer. Sola Scriptura--the word of God alone is our ultimate source for interpretation and understanding the Bible.

Genesis 40:8
  • "And they said unto him, We have dreamed a dream, and there is no interpreter of it. And Joseph said unto them, Do not interpretations belong to God? tell me them, I pray you."

So then, don't interpretations belong to God? Isn't He the author and final authority over what is and is not valid exposition or inference? Isn't His word defined by the references to His word? All information necessary for the truth, understanding, and interpretation of the Scriptures are taught either explicitly or implicitly in the Scripture alone (Sola Scriptura). The Bible in its entirety. In other words, interpretations don't belong to John Calvin, Tony Warren or John Walvoord, they belong to God. "He" is the only one who can answer our Biblical questions, and today He does so through His Spirit via His word.

Genesis 41:16
  • " And Joseph answered Pharaoh, saying, It is not in me: God shall give Pharaoh an answer of peace."

By the Spirit of God Joseph knew this most basic concept, and so should all faithful Christians. John Walvoord can't teach anyone the truth about Prophecy anymore than I can. It is the Holy Spirit of God working in us and through the Scriptures that does that. We can "merely" bear witness or testimony to what was inspired written in Scripture by God.

John 16:13
  • "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."

Proper interpretation means that we don't speak of ourselves, but bear witness to the word of God who will by His Spirit reveal the truth. If we study and defer to God's word alone faithfully, we are faithful witnesses (2nd Timothy 2:15). If we forebear to define by His witness that we might remain in harmony with God's word, then we are being unfaithful and unapproved by God. It's not rocket science. If theologians are teaching things "from outside" of the Scriptures as God's word, then they are false witnesses and false prophets. If God didn't say it, and we teach it as God's word, then we are putting words into His mouth (Ezekiel 22:28), and are thus subject to the judgment. The minimum requirement for me to place an article on this site is that the author is teaching from the Scripture, not teaching something into Scripture of earthly nations, wars, and governments. 


Quote
>>>
That in itself shows his bias and unfairness against certain theologies.
<<<

If by bias and unfair you mean slanted, unbalanced or arbitrary, you are incorrect. I gave Dispensationalism a "fair" hearing and having weighed it in a just balance I found it not only to be wanting but unsound, untenable and fatally flawed. It has nothing to do with prejudice against it, it has to do with it being Biblically indefensible and contradictory to the word of God it purports to represent. You're implying that I should suspend sound determination and reasoning because a vaunted author and scholar say Dispensationalism is valid? Should the Apostle Paul have changed his beliefs because the learned men, vaunted Priests, lawyers and high rulers of Israel disagreed with the Biblical understanding of the kingdom? ...God forbid!

Acts 23:3
  • "Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law?"

Not only did he reject the doctrines of the vaunted high priest Ananias, and learned scholars of Israel, but he called Ananias a "whited wall" inferring not only his disrespect for his teachings, but his abject hypocrisy. For like many today who feign teaching the law of God, in reality, he teaches doctrines contrary to the laws of God. A whited wall is that which appears righteous on the outside, when hidden within is where the uncleanness is. So if you want to be a respecter of certain theologians and of the popular vaunted teachers, that's your right. As for me and my house, we have respect for the word of the living God and we hold the authority of that Scripture over the words men.


Quote
>>>
 Professor John F. Walvoord, the long-time president and chancellor emeritus at Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS) was one of the most prominent eschatological scholars of the 20th century...
<<<

He is one of the most prominent eschatological scholars of the 20th century according to whom? Men of course. My definition of a faithful eschatological scholar differs "greatly" from man's because it is based upon harmony with the word of God itself. In my belief system, holding degrees and receiving accolades don't make for a faithful or learned scholar. Faithful adherence to the authority of the Holy Bible does.

Psalms 119:99
  • "I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation."

Why did the Psalmist have more understanding or wisdom than all his teachers? God tells us right there in the context that it was because God's testimony or witness was what he meditated on. Not men's words, but the Scriptures received or listened [siychah] to were what made him wise and brought him understanding. Nothing has changed from then to now. Yes, vaunted authors such as John Walvoord have brought the dubious doctrines of Dispensationalism into mainstream acceptance, however, the Bible instructs us that teachers are only as good as what they teach. Is it their own private interpretations or is it the testimonies of God directly from the wholly inspired word of God. It's the difference between Biblically validated interpretations and private interpretations.


Quote
>>>
...and yet Warren refuses to give him the respect and credit that other excellent Reformed theologians do.
<<<

I would ask what "excellent" Reformed Theologian respect Dispensationalism? Except I don't want to know, because it's irrelevant. What someone thinks about doctrine is immaterial "unless" his thoughts proceed from the Scriptures themselves. Are we as Gentiles a separate people of God or were we once separated, but now joined together in one body? That's what is relevant, not what men claim--but what God says.

Ephesians 2:13-14
  • "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
  • For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;"

Through the flesh of Christ, we who were once two, have been made both one. Jews and Gentiles once separated but now together as one body in Christ. One people of God, one Holy Temple, one Church. The pertinent questions really are, what does the Bible say about the doctrine of Dispensationalism? How does Dispensationalism agree or disagree with the Scriptures? How does the Battle of Armageddon fit into God's magnificent program and Covenant with Israel? How does a separation of Jews and Gentiles square with God's declarations of one body and of equality of all peoples of the earth in Him? Those are just a few of the only things that I wish to know from you. Not what excellent credentialed theologians support Dispensationalism, but does God support it. That is my only query.


Quote
>>>
 Legitimate scholars disagree, but they don't make other faithful Christians seem like a pariah or an outcast from faithful theology. That's the problem I have with Warren.
<<<

I'm sorry it so disturbs you, but Dispensational teachers actually are a pariah or outcast from the faithful church. Else there would be no separation, no dispensational versus Covenant church. No one body kingdom reign versus a totally diverse kingdom and reign in two separate bodies. No two separate people of God versus one people of God made up of Jews and Gentiles alike. And so on and so forth. I make no apologies for stating what should be obvious. Either they are teaching the truth about the separation of Jews and Gentiles, or its a false teaching that no faithful Christian should be a part of should give assent to. Either we've all be grafted into the same Covenanted Olive Tree Israel, or that is all just a lie and we should be a pariah or an outcast to you who insist we are separate. Are we far off from faithful theology or near as the word of God says?  We can't have it both ways, though many professing Christians attempt to.

Galatians 3:28
  • "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

How then does the Desensationalist retort that in Christ we are Jew and Gentile and we are not one nation, but two separate people of God? How is it Christ can have two bodies, one Jew and one Gentile? As the Apostle Paul rhetorically asked, is Christ divided? That is a very good question, conundrum, and paradox for the Dispensationalist.


Quote
>>>
He thinks dispensationalism, the most celebrated, popular and widely held Christianity is false.
<<<

Actually, to not put too fine a point on it, I "know" Dispensationalism is false. Everyone should because it is not only "not Biblically validated" by Scripture, it is contradictory to almost everything within Scripture. ...contradictions that many Christians have posted again and again here over the years. Physical seed or genealogy does not determine who the Israel of God is, Christ is the Seed that determines who is a son of God and who has an inheritance of this promised land.

Hebrews 11:13
  • "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth."

The physical land of Israel was just a type, the true promised land God gave and gives to all His people they saw by faith in Christ Jesus. Because it's a Spiritual land. Likewise, we are all strangers and pilgrims in this physical land, and we also look to the promised land whose builder and maker is God. Certainly, a temporary plot of dirt in the middle east is not the eternal land promised. That's not an everlasting land. Neither the teachings of Dispensationalism. Nor can the most celebrated, popular and widely held version of a worldly, carnal, earthly Christianity, change that.


Quote
>>>
Why? Because he says so?
<<<

Romans 3:4
  • "God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged."

Not because I said so. I never seek to justify myself or my words, I caution all to trust only the word of God concerning the things I bear witness to. No one should reject Dispensationalism because I say so, but because everything the Holy word of God says is in direct contradiction to the doctrines of Dispensationalism. My word is not the authority, God's word is. This truth is what has always seemed to escape Dispensational theologians. God's word is the ultimate authority on doctrine. Not John Darby, Not C.I. Scofield, not John Walvoord, and most certainly not me. We stand and fall against what the Bible says, not on what men say. The word is the only solid ground upon which man can stand before God.


Quote
>>>
It's just like you said. It's his spiritualizing that leads to this liberal thinking and non-literal interpretations concerning Israel.
<<<

My methodology is the "exact" same methodology and interpretation that Himself Christ used and that is used "all" throughout the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation. i.e., the Serpent, the Plagues, the Flood, the blood sacrifices, the Ablutions, the Fig Tree, the Temple, the Wold and sheep, the Candlesticks, Stars, locusts, chains, and Horsemen. What you disdainfully call Spiritualizing is what God has done consistently throughout the whole Bible. What you call liberal thinking is the Kingdom of God that Christ described as a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls,  a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind, a man that is a householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old, and on and on. A Temple that would be destroyed and raised again in 3 days, a roaring lion, an Olive Tree, a fold of sheep. The fact is, you are simply not listening. Concerning national Israel, Christ said the Kingdom was taken from them and given to another, which you label replacement theology. ...it's not that these very "literal" things have not been said, it's that you are not listening with ears of the Spirit.

Matthew 21:19
  • "And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away."

Liberal Christ Spiritualizing or authoritative Spiritual truth? All I know is that no more fruit has grown on that tree since then, and they are as opposed to Christ now as they ever were, and that was over 2000 years ago. The Kingdom representation is not returning to the nation of Israel, it is the New Covenant with Israel in Christ. A non-literal interpretation concerning Israel? That depends on what you mean by literal. Because though the physical nation of Israel is not regenerated (and was never prophesied to be), the New Covenant with Israel is definitely literally fulfilled, established and being maintained as we write.

"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"i acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

David Knoles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
  • I'm a llama!
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #83 on: June 23, 2019, 02:35:08 PM »
Tony, with all due respect, you just call everyone a false teacher who disagrees with you. Dispensationalism is a valid Christian doctrine as you've already been shown. We've even demonstrated that many Reformed Christians have debated with and respected John Walvoord, but you just will not listen. For those of you who will listen, let's go over some of the biblical facts.

It is held by the church that the battle of Armageddon is a war that takes place in Israel and transpires just prior to the second advent of Christ to the earth. This is when God deals with the kings of the earth and the nations of the whole world (Rev. 16:14). This war extends over the last half of the great tribulation period.

The great Dispensational theologian J. Dwight says The Greek word "polemo", translated "battle" in Revelation 16:14, signifies a war or campaign, while "machē" signifies a battle, and sometimes even single combat. This distinction is observed by Trench, (see Richard C. Trench, New Testament Synonyms, pp.301-2) and is followed by Thayer (see Joseph Henry Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 528) and Vincent (see Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament, II, 541). The use of the word polemos (campaign) in Revelation 16:14 would signify that the events that culminate in the gathering at Armageddon at the second advent are viewed by God as one connected campaign in the nation of Israel.

This great war takes place in Israel on the hill of Megiddo and the valley of Jehoshaphat. This covers the entire land of Israel and confirms what Ezekiel said about the invaders will cover the land. It has to take place with the 70th week of Daniel and has nothing to do with your spiritualized visions about the church. It has to do with the invasion of Israel by the Northern Confederacy (Dan. 11:40b-45). So the event is fully explained if you would just take the bible literally as most Christians do.


Granny

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 93
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #84 on: June 23, 2019, 05:54:25 PM »
Thanks Tony  ]ThUmBsUp[

ZeroCool

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #85 on: June 24, 2019, 02:54:22 AM »
It is held by the church that the battle of Armageddon is a war that takes place in Israel and transpires just prior to the second advent of Christ to the earth. This is when God deals with the kings of the earth and the nations of the whole world (Rev. 16:14). This war extends over the last half of the great tribulation period.

The question you continually seem to stumble upon is, what Israel? The people who despise him and reject any relationship to his name, or the people who worship him and are called by his name? At least attempt to think logically. When has God ever blessed those who hate him?

ZeroCool

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #86 on: June 24, 2019, 02:59:13 AM »
Through the flesh of Christ, we who were once two, have been made both one. Jews and Gentiles once separated but now together as one body in Christ. One people of God, one Holy Temple, one Church. The pertinent questions really are, what does the Bible say about the doctrine of Dispensationalism? How does Dispensationalism agree or disagree with the Scriptures? How does the Battle of Armageddon fit into God's magnificent program and Covenant with Israel? How does a separation of Jews and Gentiles square with God's declarations of one body and of equality of all peoples of the earth in Him? Those are just a few of the only things that I wish to know from you. Not what excellent credentialed theologians support Dispensationalism, but does God support it. That is my only query.

 )preach_(   As usual Tony, a very learned, biblical and intelligent response.

I have a question concerning Armageddon. Why the city of Megiddo? I understand why Babbylon but am coming up short on Megiddo.

Lower

  • Higgaion ሂጋዮን
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 41
  • Gender: Male
  • putting on the breastplate of FAITH and LOVE
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #87 on: June 24, 2019, 03:08:12 AM »
... let's go over some of the biblical facts.

It is held by the church that the battle of Armageddon is a war that takes place in Israel and transpires just prior to the second advent of Christ to the earth. This is when God deals with the kings of the earth and the nations of the whole world (Rev. 16:14). This war extends over the last half of the great tribulation period.

If by great tribulation period you were referring to that one briefly described such as in Matthew chapter 24; then 'with all due respect' can you tell me when did that period become divided in to two halves? Where are the biblical references that specifically speak about a "last half" (or a previous half if you want to conveniently include in your proof, for that matter of instance)? Show me, I am listening, can you bring biblical facts to support your belief of the GT being subdivided into a first half and a last half? Is there any change of event between the two, characteristically? Apart from tribulation what and what conditions define each event? Support your discussion with biblical references please.

Quote
... in Revelation 16:14 would signify that the events that culminate in the gathering at Armageddon at the second advent are viewed by God as one connected campaign in the nation of Israel.

This great war takes place in Israel on the hill of Megiddo and the valley of Jehoshaphat. This covers the entire land of Israel ... invaders will cover the land. It ... has nothing to do with your spiritualized visions about the church. ... So the event is fully explained if you would just take the bible literally as most Christians do.

OK, you are asking the bible be taken literally. But why do ask when you, yourself a literal interpretation guru, is not brave enough to take the whole bible literally. Read these verses that include your used verse Rev 16:14, for example: 

Rev 16:12  And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.
Rev 16:13  And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
Rev 16:14  For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.
Rev 16:15  Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.
Rev 16:16  And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.
Rev 16:17  And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air; and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, It is done.

And then explain for yourself how do you expect the "three unclean spirits like frogs" be taken literally? Why are they three, and explain how this 'literal' gathering, which according to you is surrounding a physical nation in the middle east, is accomplished by these three "frogs" that come out of the three "figures" which we understand are the ones to be found in Rev chs 12 and 13? What is a vial and being poured out, literally? Or how to explain if a vial (in biblical sense) poured out into the air, would only just means 'poured out in to the air"? Without seeking for the spiritual meaning, how can you find its connection to and understand the meaning of the saying of the subsequent great voice that came out of the temple of heaven from the throne?

If you go literal interpretation of these verses, you won't be able to see the connection between the temple of heaven here in Rev 16 and the meaning of Kingdom of God as described such as in the gospels (cf. Mat 24:15, Col 1:13, Mat 13:47). Do you still want to cling to your: "has nothing to do with your spiritualized visions about the church" when the "Book of Revelation" is sent to the church, and speaks, quoting from your words in a 'spiritualized visions', not to any physical nation in the planet but to the one and only "place" that God prepared to be inhabited by those that are given ear by God the Spirit therefore are able to bear the teachings of His mouth (Mar 4:11). An that place is none other than the church. The battle is not literal conflict between physical nations in this world, but a conflict of spiritual nature between true believers and false ones in and surrounding the church" (cf. Rev 17:14).

Rev 16:14  For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

So how do you want to see this gathering of the spirits of devils, who go forth working miracles, then to be a literal alliance of armies of governments and peoples armed with guns and heavy artilleries, modern weaponry and missiles and all ... turn out to be against the physical nation of Israel, which is not even found in Revelation chapter 16?

You have spent a great deal of your time forming some discussion about what some people say of the word translated "gather" so as to conclude in your own terms that the whole idea of the scripture verse means literally gathering in physical Israel. But, even your selected verse is resisting against your own conclusion. If you have ear to hear it is telling you, no David: to where they go forth is where they end piled up. Nothing less than that. The whole idea of the text when looked in its context (with a humble heart of seeking the spiritual meaning of God's word) clearly is speaking about the armies of Satan that will go forth into the whole world as a result they will be found gathered together in this world (Rev 12:12-b) to fight against God and the Kingdom of His Son (Rev 12:12-a). Thus the battle of Armageddon is a war between:

  • truth and lie, between the children of God and the children of Satan, ... is one of a New Testament type of hostility that God has foreordained to come to pass in this world because of who the Son of God is and because of His gospel (cf. 1Jn 3:8, Luk 6:46-49, Isa 33:3) ...
  • between the seat of Satan (Mat 24:15) and between the temple of Heaven (the later is the throne of God from which the great voice "IT IS DONE" is heard - Rev 16:17).
  • each of the opposing groups above is composed of all types people, both men and women, from the Jews, the Gentiles, Arabs, Africans, Chinese, Russians, ... except the fact that as enemies as they are the unbelievers and false ones gather under their leader Satan while the true believers (the elect of God) are with Christ their Lord. They fight this spiritual fight in Armageddon --- It is a spiritual message from God to be understood spiritually like the rest of the figurative words throughout the quoted chapter of revelation or the bible as a whole.


Act 4:26  The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together "against" the Lord, and against his Christ.
Act 4:27  For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
Act 4:28  For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

Again and again it is clear from the Bible that the battle of Armageddon is not literal war between Israel and its enemies, but between God and His enemies! A war between two spiritual kingdoms fought in a spiritual manner! Between the Kingdom of Satan that will be piled up by the work of the three unclean spirits like frogs that came out of the mouth of the dragon, and of the beast, and of the false prophet, and, the Kingdom of Christ the Lord. Period. I don't know why, but I have learned from the scriptures that unless it is in the head of the 'day-dreamers' Lord Christ Jesus has never been a literal King over the land of Israel in the middle east. But He is Sovereign Lord over the whole earth ruling through the temple of God (i.e. the spiritual nation of Israel, the Church) and His Spirit (Rev 22:17).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is interesting that you mentioned the GREAT TRIBULATION because the references to the great tribulation such as those I copied below are written in relation to the Church (the Kingdom of Heaven in the world). These words are written to give warning to the Church of an upcoming great danger; more so than anything else, again in the end time, it is the Church that is let to pass through the great tribulation for trial of their faith (cf. 2Co 7:4, Luk 21:27).

Mat 24:21  For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Rev 2:22  Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.

Rev 7:14  And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Fools say how could their robes be made white if they are washed in His blood? It is spiritually discerned, fools. The good news is the figurative messages and parables given in the bible are made easy by God for those that have ears to understand. Like it is said: "For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel", "Except a few, all people in the world who are born with ears do not have listening-ears to the word of God. A spiritual ear is a gift of God - Selah"

Is it not a blessing to learn from God about the identity of those dressed in white robes being His redeemed people, the elect? Rev 7:14 teaches that the holy nation of God (true believers, the eternal church of the elect - 1Pe 2:9) as seen figured wearing the white robes are also the ones subjected to the GREAT TRIBULATION; that being an end time spiritual trouble of the redeemed remnant (Mat 24:25-26, 22). Hence the warning letter is headed to the Church (Rev 16:15) because the battle is surely going to occur worldwide "in the Church" and that is characterized by the buildup of abomination of desolation "in the Church" (Luk 17:37, Rev 2:22).

Therefore it is undeniable truth that the battle of Armageddon is not about the trouble of any physical nation on earth, it is not about the trouble of carnal Israel, not of tribulation in Ethiopia, not the trouble of African Americans or Africans or Chinese or Syrians in particular. But of the tribulation of those redeemed by the blood of Christ in particular caused by the false ones who are sent forth to the whole world when Satan is released from his prison.

No, not the political theory that originated from the heart of men and adopted by Dispensationalists who are known for taking few from the bible that seemed good for their ears and output a remix that they say is well to go with their agenda. All kind of conflict or battles in the New Testament time is spiritual; plus, God is Spirit Who is leading ahead of His Spiritual Nation of Israel to the battle of Armageddon (Mat 24:25, Luk 21:15, Joh 14:30, Joh 15:26, Rev 17:14).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, i would like to tell you that this reply I wrote is because I thought you seemed genuine when you included the phrase "with all due respect" in your comments writing to Tony and that at least you looked ready to defend or biblically show your Dispensational view of the battle of Armageddon. I know most part of the issues you have discussed have been dealt with in many related threads by many people in the group. But since you kind of 're-tweeted' them now I ask you to try answering my questions, ... indeed if you think those you so called literally-understood views are 'biblical facts' then discuss the problems I have found of them.

Quote
... you just call everyone a false teacher who disagrees with you.
I haven't seen in any place he had written, correct me if I am wrong, where Tony called a person false teacher for the reason of disagreement with him. His studies and his replies are full of scripture, and has never in a minute forgot to mention his "'word of God alone' is the truth, not my words" concept. But I am just saying this only if you can hear me. Never mind ...

I don't know about you but if a person teaches contrary to the word of God I would call them everything God calls them. They are referred to as false teachers, ministers of Satan, brute beasts, broken clay that has no use for or can not be used to hold anything, carnal men whose god being their belly, hypocrites, Anti-Christs, consumed of fire, weary who labour in vain, workers of iniquity, pleasurers of men ... . This is simply part of the spiritual fight, and as long as anyone remains opposed to the word of God, it is good to tell them they are in error so God may forgive them. But speaking of giving them names (2Th 3:14), I cannot call them true teachers if they teach is lie! When we have nothing in common with them and that should be the beginning of separating from each-other (2Th 3:6, Mat 24:4).

PS: Dispensationlists please be reasonable, avoid writing the unwanted fables repeatedly and stay on topic whenever you respond. This forum is provided for us to have "Biblical Discussions" to get the help we need from each-other as brothers and sisters in Christ through sharing the knowledge of truth we have gained from study of the word of God.
እግዚኣብሄር ኣቦ ብወዱ ብጐይታ ክርስቶስ የሱስ ዓብዪ ግብሪ ምድሓን ገይሩልና ። ክብርን ምስጋናን ፡ ብስም ክርስቶስ የሱስ ንዕኡ ይኹኖ ። ኣሜን ።

ናይ ዘልኣለም ህይወት ፣ ብናይ ኣምላኽና ዘልኣለማዊ ጸጋ ። ንሱ ርእሲ ኹሉ ኮይኑ ፣ ንዘልኣለም ይነግስ ።

Mark

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 23
  • Gender: Male
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #88 on: June 24, 2019, 05:03:49 AM »
Quote
I have a question concerning Armageddon. Why the city of Megiddo? I understand why Babbylon but am coming up short on Megiddo.

Zerocool, 

I read somewhere on this forum (sorry donít have the link) that Armageddon is from two Hebrew words, har meaning mountain/hill (kingdom) and Megiddo which means Assembly.


Reformer

  • Affiliate Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1752
  • Reformed and Evangelical
Re: The Battle of Armageddon
« Reply #89 on: June 24, 2019, 11:21:43 AM »
Quote
I have a question concerning Armageddon. Why the city of Megiddo? I understand why Babbylon but am coming up short on Megiddo.

Zerocool, 

I read somewhere on this forum (sorry donít have the link) that Armageddon is from two Hebrew words, har meaning mountain/hill (kingdom) and Megiddo which means Assembly.

...yes  ]ThUmBsUp[, and represents the church that is the final battleground and source of the great tribulation.

 


[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]