Fellow Christian answerers, how much merit does this explanation have of the threefold coming of the Lord?

sorry, but your link appears to be defective

I think most eschatology is utter nonsense. Although I must admit that I would be delighted by the shock and horror of people surprised to be left behind if the Rapture actually happens.

(I’m a small-U universalist, so I think issues like the Rapture are irrelevant anyway, and people have been proclaiming that the end of the world is at hand since Paul walked the Earth.)

This is whatt I think. Jesus said that you will not be able to predict when he will return so I don’t try. He was not recognized by his own people when he came the first time so I would expect that only those who know him well will really recognize him at his second coming. I don’t know that for a fact, but as for me, my job in all of this is to get to know him and who he is by prayer and study for two reasons. One is to reflect him to a hurting world, and two is so I will recognize him when he comes.
It is important for me to know what the Bible says because I want to know the heart of Jesus. What I have learned is that it is not my job to predict his behavior as much as it’s my job to recognize it. Post millenial, pre millenial, I really don’t care. All I care about is spending eternity with my Lord and savior.

Very eloquent, Judi.

Amen to sister Judi

These two postings are seriously promoting an agenda.

proper link

i prefer eschatology of a more hopeful flavor, one that includes the restoration of all things instead of the annihilation of all things.
Historicist and (partial) preterism have much to say I think
something about the whole “99%” of God’s children are screwed….just sounds like God loses…
My God doesn’t lose.
My God is bigger than that.
:D

@patg7590

Thanks for your input.

I feel quite confident that many will feel screwed when they are blotted out of existence, but are the screwed?

Is a child really screwed if the parent just says that XBOX time is over? Sure, they might gnash their teeth in a tantrum, but any parent knows they were lucky to have the time, and a more mature response would be gratefulness.

Yet, what is revealed is that as many are as taken to the destruction that they chose, will whine and complain on the way to the fire… and shortly thereafter are utterly destroyed, blotted out and have inherited the second death having no more part in life and having an inheritance that they cannot know if they have received it or not.

God doesn’t lose, but what a loss He would have to endure to take people into His love who would rather not be there. For a gift to be a gift it must not be forced upon the recipients… my God is bigger than to be like that kind of giver.

@GraceHead

Ah, touche´

A great blog post that has greatly influenced me on this issue

http://suzeiteo.blogspot.com/2008/12/problem-of-evil-is-problem-for-me.html

Let me know what you think of it.

Thanks for the dialogue

Peace and Grace

@patq7590,

I thought that was a fine piece of bloggy-blog! Thanks for sharing.
I agree with his / her criticism of modern teaching… especially with the eternal torment teaching (which I why I described “perishing” rather than torment in my last message in this thread.)

I don’t like the teaching of “original sin” ... why lay at the feet of a baby all the sin that has come before. How could God create that which is impure though it has done nothing? Let the children stand before we claim they have fallen.

I don’t like the teaching of “only this life” ... we do not lock the doors on people who had the misfortune of living in a culture that is devoid of the gospel. So, let it be known that all those resurrected into judgment will give answer to their willingness with the revelation of Christ and His gospel standing before them… and many will come to Him during that day who during this life never wanted to or never knew.

I don’t like the teaching of everlasting torment. No parent gets tired of talking to their children so they just whip up some torment instead. We throw folk like that in prison and what a poor witness to warp scripture in such a way that makes it seem as if torture is God’s hobby. Annihilation is everlasting punishment, but it is not everlasting torture.

However…
I don’t really care for the teaching of universalism either. Not only do you need to cut whole sections of the Bible out, but most universalists do bold mental calisthenics to make words like “destroy” to mean “preserve and refine.”

The fact of the matter is that all will stand before the Lord and see Him as He is… and hearts will be revealed. Nobody that wants to belong to the Lord with humility and willingness will ever be denied. Ignorance, rebellion, youth, mental handicaps, etc. ... none of that stuff will cause the process or the revelation of hearts to be obscured.

I love hanging out with universalists, for the record. I think they have their heart in the right place even though I would contend respectfully with them on a few minor things.

Ripening,
Trent

@GraceHead

I dont see much of a difference between punishment and torture.

also, as everyone has sinned, I don’t really see the point of even having a doctrine of “original sin”, regardless of this issue, we are all guilty, we need no help inheriting sin, we find it well enough on our own.

“The fact of the matter is that all will stand before the Lord and see Him as He is… and hearts will be revealed. Nobody that wants to belong to the Lord with humility and willingness will ever be denied. Ignorance, rebellion, youth, mental handicaps, etc. ... none of that stuff will cause the process or the revelation of hearts to be obscured.”

This claim, i hope this claim is true. This is what I want God to be like. I’m unsure how much of this is found in Scripture, but is God bound to scripture?-Hmm…...

I agree universalists have a hard time getting the bible to support them, with one obvious exception:
if the bible is read as a theatrical narrative, one in which the main character is in control, rather than those reading.
This God who keeps finding ways to save his created beloved who keep finding more ways to screw everything up….
Couldn’t he very well just give everyone a clean slate?
Couldn’t he abolish Hell?
a better question, if he has….what would it look like?
Would he send his son to bleed and be nailed to a tree? To show us that he’s not angry anymore? That he’s not asking for anymore sacrifices?

How can I put it….

In Jesus Christ, Our Lord and Our Light…..

could God have gone any farther at all?

If universalism is true….
if Gods mercy outweighs his justice….
is there anything more he couldve done to show it that he hasnt already?

not saying i beleive all this….
I tend to think its neither of these extremes….but its interesting to consider, no?

yes, it is interesting and you stated it well.
Nice visiting with you and nice visiting about this topic.
:-)

g’day mate
=D

@GraceHead Remember Acts 1:11, the two angels stated to the apostles, ”...this same Jesus that you see taken away into heaven shall so return in like manner…”
So the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost was not the coming of the LORD Jesus of course, it was the fulfillment of the LORDs Word that He would send ”...another Comforter… [‘paracletos’]”
There is the coming of the LORD as described in 1 Thessalonians 4:16 and 1 Corinthians 15:51–52, that is, the parousia: the appearing, where He comes for His church, the bride of Christ, but this occurs in the clouds (first heaven) where we meet Him in the air. He doesn’t return to Earth, specifically Mt of Olives as stated in Acts 1:11 (which is where the apostles were standing when the LORDs ascension took place).
He returns to Mt of Olives after the event known as Armageddon which takes place at Bozra, and once His foot touches down, that Mount will split in half and become a valley, specifically the Valley of Decision where He will judge the nations of the world based on how they treated His brethren, Israel. Once that is completed, the Millennium commences wherein the adversary Satan is bound for that time, and the entire world is rejuvenated into an Edenic state.
Can’t WAIT!
0 : )

@patg7590 the doctrine of original sin is fundamental to the necessity of the cross. If there were no original sin, then none of us would have inherited a sin nature.
Scripture speaks of “sins” and of “sin”, the former relating to the acts and conduct of sinning, the latter (for the most part) being the nature of the rebellious attitudes and motivations of sin.
Its been said, Its not fair that I should be held accountable for my sin nature if I did nothing to acquire it!
The fault and responsibility is Adam’s for he was established as the corporate head of the human race, and like many CEOs and Presidents, we often inherit consequences not of our own making. Consider our present predicament in this country.
Yet we will not pay for the penalty of sin, that fallen Adamic nature that resides in all of us, if we seek out and receive the remedy for this miasmatic mishap, Jesus Christ and Him crucified, the propiation for our sin.
So, we can do nothing about what we inherited from Adam, but we can do something about acquiring the inheritance from the second Adam, Christ Jesus, via His Cross, Resurrection and Ascension. Thus we have our clean slate by the grace of God!
: )

@TheKNYHT , First Jesus says that the Father will give them the Holy Spirit (vs 16,) then Jesus says that He, Himself, will come to them (vs 18) and that they will see Him when the world does not (vs 19.)

http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+15&section=0&version=nas&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavPreviousChapter=%3C%3C&NavGo=15&NavCurrentChapter=15

John 16 “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; 17 that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.
18 “I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. 19 “After a little while the world will no longer see Me, but you will see Me;

“I WILL COME TO YOU” ... He says.
Am I reading this right to draw the conclusion that Jesus is communicating to the disciples that He and the Holy Spirit are one and the same?

@GraceHead all true, but your question is about the Three fold coming of the Lord; no where is the Holy Spirit referred to as ‘the LORD’ and its Jesus whose name is above every name, and at His name all will bow and declare Him ‘LORD’ to the glory of God the Father.
Scripture never mentions a third coming of the ‘LORD’; just the first and then the second.
The doctrine of the Trinity is also somewhat controversial today (although I don’t understand why). The Godhead is made up of Three exact Persons, identical in every way: perfect in all aspects, indistinguishable from each other, except for the fact that they are indeed, THREE persons.
People arguing against the Trinity say “So when Jesus was praying to the Father, then He was talking to Himself?”
To which I respond, “No, God the Son was talking with God the Father: both are God in their deity, but seperate in their Persons.” Psalm Two expresses a kind of ‘trialogue’ between the members of the Godhead.

@TheKNYHT – This might sound insincere, but it isn’t… I was looking for the reference in scripture to which you referred saying “second” coming… as in #2 in a sequence. I had no luck finding it. I know it is something we all talk about. I’m just wondering where it is in scripture. Does it say “coming” and we assume “second?” Just wondering.

@GraceHead That doesn’t sound at all insincere, it sounds entirely honest, and thank you for asking that question. No where in scripture does it actually say “second coming” (unless I’m overlooking some verse) but taking scripture as a whole, and making inferences based on these, its fairly clear that there is a second coming. Note everywhere in the New Testament that the coming of the LORD is mentioned, its always in the future tense, and yet all of these writings are post-Ascension, thus they must refer to a second Coming.
Also there is a verse that mentions a “second time”...
Hebrews 9:28 “So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.”
Hosea 5:15 has a bit of a cryptic tone to it, but if you unravel it, this verse indicates a second coming as well.
God is speaking here and says, “I will go and return to My place until they acknowledge their offense.Then they will seek My face: in their affliction they will earnestly seek Me.”
If God is returning to His place, He must have left it, and there He will remain UNTIL they acknowledge their offense (sin in the singular). That is, once they do acknowledge, He will come back (second time).
Again Acts 1:11 states that ”...this same Jesus who is taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.”
In John chapter 14:3, Jesus states, “And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto Myself; that where I am, you may be also.”
Obviously the Beast of Revelation is someone who appears in the Last days, and in 2 Thessalonians 2:8 it states that the LORD
”... will consume with the breath of His mouth and the brightness of His Coming.”
Once the LORD does come back, we will always remain with Him, and He will never depart from us, as stated in 1 Thess.4:17, so this rules out any 3rd, or 4th Coming.
I hope this helps and may God bless ya brother! : )

@TheKNYHT You said: ””“Once the LORD does come back, we will always remain with Him, and He will never depart from us, as stated in 1 Thess.4:17, so this rules out any 3rd, or 4th Coming.”””
Right…
... unless 1 Thess 4:17 is the 3rd or 4th coming.
Understand, that I am NOT saying anything against Acts 1:11, or John 14:3 nor that 2 Thess 2:8 doesn’t depict His coming (at least “a” coming.)
What I AM saying is this: How do we KNOW that we KNOW that we KNOW that there is but two comings? I’ve already demonstrated that John 16 is “a” coming when Jesus admits the sending of the Helper is one of His comings… uttering the very words: “I will come to you” when talking about the “Spirit of truth.”

Maybe we should be careful to dogmatically say there are only two comings. Isn’t that shaky ground? Couldn’t the Word depict more than two comings, since none of them are labeled “second coming?”

I propose that if Jesus says the sending of the Holy Spirit is when “I will come to you” then we must at least give careful consideration building a doctrine that makes Him out to be a liar… saying that such a coming is not really a coming because it doesn’t match another passage about coming in the clouds, etc. It seems to me that it isn’t one or the other. Perhaps it is both… and all of the above.

Its just that Jesus doesn’t say one thing an mean another, nor does He operate in deception or half-truths.

Ripening,
Trent