PDA

View Full Version : Preterism



coldfire136
Dec 3rd 2007, 09:53 AM
Some people claim to a preterist view of the world (i.e., the things in Revelation have already happened). What do you say to this?

Firstfruits
Dec 3rd 2007, 11:25 AM
Some people claim to a preterist view of the world (i.e., the things in Revelation have already happened). What do you say to this?

If the things in Revelation have already happened, then all the questions and debates an all the forums and posts are pointless since Jesus would have already come, and there is a new Jerusalem, the first resurrection and the second has passed. We could go on, and on, but the proof is according to what is written all the things in revelation have not yet happened.

Rev 21:6 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=66&CHAP=21&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=6) And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha And Omega, the beginning And the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

Rev 22:6 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=66&CHAP=22&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=6) And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful And true: And the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.


Firstfruits

Kahtar
Dec 3rd 2007, 02:39 PM
Just a reminder at the outset of this thread:


The teaching of 'Full Preterism' is not allowed to be advanced in ETC.

(also called Hyper-Preterism, and Hymenean-Preterism).

Summarily, this is the view that all prophecy was concluded by 70 AD, and that the 2nd Coming occurred in 70 AD, and all 'end time events' were fulfilled by 70 AD.
Choose your words carefully.................;)

markedward
Dec 3rd 2007, 02:48 PM
I believe so because the apostles seemed to believe so. If people of this board consider it crazy to take the words of the apostles and not change "soon" to "distant future" or change "us" into "them" or change "now" into "later," then by God, call me a crazy man, but I stand firm with my belief in the apostles' words.

Matthew 3:2 Repent of your sins and turn to God, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near.
Matthew 4:17 From then on Jesus began to preach, 'Repent of your sins and turn to God, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near.'
Matthew 16:28 “And I tell you the truth, some standing here right now will not die before they see the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom.”
Matthew 24:14 And the Good News about the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, so that all nations will hear it; and then the end will come.
(This “preached to the whole world” statement was confirmed in the first century, in Acts 24:5, Romans 1:8, Romans 10:18, and Colossians 1:6,23. "And then the end will come.")
Mark 1:15 'The time promised by God has come at last!' he announced. 'The Kingdom of God is near! Repent of your sins and believe the Good News!'
Luke 10:9 'Heal the sick, and tell them, "The Kingdom of God is near you now."
Luke 10:11 'We wipe even the dust of your town from our feet to show that we have abandoned you to your fate. And know this—the Kingdom of God is near!'
Luke 17:21 You won’t be able to say, ‘Here it is!’ or ‘It’s over there!’ For the Kingdom of God is within your grasp.
Matthew 10:23When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.
John 21:23 Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?"
Romans 13:11-12 And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light.
Romans 16:20 The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you.
1 Corinthians 7:29-31 What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away.
1 Corinthians 10:11 These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come.
Philippians 4:5 Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near.
Hebrew 1:1-2 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.
Hebrews 8:13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.
Hebrews 9:26Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Hebrews 10:25 Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
Hebrews 10:37 For in just a very little while, “He who is coming will come and will not delay.”
James 5:3 Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days.
James 5:8 You too, be patient and stand firm, because the Lord's coming is near.
1 Peter 1:20 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.
1 Peter 4:7 The end of all things isnear. Therefore be clear minded and self-controlled so that you can pray.
1 Peter 4:17 For it is time for judgment to begin with the family of God; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
1 John 2:18 Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.
Jude 1:17-19 But, dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. They said to you, "In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires." These are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit.
Revelation 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place.
Revelation 1:3 Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.
Revelation 1:19 Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later.
Revelation 3:11 I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown.
Revelation 22:6 The angel said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place."
Revelation 22:7 "Behold, I am coming soon! Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy in this book."
Revelation 22:10 Then he told me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, because the time is near.”
Revelation 22:12 “Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done.”
Revelation 22:20 He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.

Allegra
Dec 3rd 2007, 04:24 PM
I agree with markedward.
And based on the Apostles creed, preterism is orthodox.
The other 3 creeds which came after the first century weren't as concerned or focused with eschatology, so the "votes" just prolonged the beliefs of the original creed.
As a non-denominational Christian who came to the church a little later than some, I have learned that it is those creeds which is the basis of tradition, division & denominations in Christianity. This is the opposite of what Jesus taught.
Teachers & Christian students are in a better position today to understand Sola Scripture or Tota Scripture, & to learn from the reformers like Luther & Calvin, who understood some things better than any generation before them.

Preterists certainly believe the NT taught a future coming, resurrection, judgment and end. We are not denying the events themselves, just that their fulfillment is still future. The wording of the creeds could be amended to indicate that they are merely reflecting the NT’s original futurist perspective, but not necessarily imposing a futurist approach upon anyone after the first century.

I hope I chose my words carefully enough.
Have a good day.:)

Firstfruits
Dec 3rd 2007, 05:16 PM
I believe so because the apostles seemed to believe so. If people of this board consider it crazy to take the words of the apostles and not change "soon" to "distant future" or change "us" into "them" or change "now" into "later," then by God, call me a crazy man, but I stand firm with my belief in the apostles' words.

Matthew 3:2 Repent of your sins and turn to God, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near.
Matthew 4:17 From then on Jesus began to preach, 'Repent of your sins and turn to God, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near.'
Matthew 16:28 “And I tell you the truth, some standing here right now will not die before they see the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom.”
Matthew 24:14 And the Good News about the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, so that all nations will hear it; and then the end will come.
(This “preached to the whole world” statement was confirmed in the first century, in Acts 24:5, Romans 1:8, Romans 10:18, and Colossians 1:6,23. "And then the end will come.")
Mark 1:15 'The time promised by God has come at last!' he announced. 'The Kingdom of God is near! Repent of your sins and believe the Good News!'
Luke 10:9 'Heal the sick, and tell them, "The Kingdom of God is near you now."
Luke 10:11 'We wipe even the dust of your town from our feet to show that we have abandoned you to your fate. And know this—the Kingdom of God is near!'
Luke 17:21 You won’t be able to say, ‘Here it is!’ or ‘It’s over there!’ For the Kingdom of God is within your grasp.
Matthew 10:23When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.
John 21:23 Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?"
Romans 13:11-12 And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light.
Romans 16:20 The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you.
1 Corinthians 7:29-31 What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away.
1 Corinthians 10:11 These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come.
Philippians 4:5 Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near.
Hebrew 1:1-2 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.
Hebrews 8:13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.
Hebrews 9:26Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Hebrews 10:25 Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
Hebrews 10:37 For in just a very little while, “He who is coming will come and will not delay.”
James 5:3 Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days.
James 5:8 You too, be patient and stand firm, because the Lord's coming is near.
1 Peter 1:20 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.
1 Peter 4:7 The end of all things isnear. Therefore be clear minded and self-controlled so that you can pray.
1 Peter 4:17 For it is time for judgment to begin with the family of God; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
1 John 2:18 Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.
Jude 1:17-19 But, dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. They said to you, "In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires." These are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit.
Revelation 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place.
Revelation 1:3 Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.
Revelation 1:19 Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later.
Revelation 3:11 I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown.
Revelation 22:6 The angel said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place."
Revelation 22:7 "Behold, I am coming soon! Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy in this book."
Revelation 22:10 Then he told me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, because the time is near.”
Revelation 22:12 “Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done.”
Revelation 22:20 He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.


If the thing in Revelation have already happened/fulfilled then what I am asking is already past, so please according to scripture can you answer the following?

When did the 144000 get sealed?
What happened after the beast's reign?
What was the mark of the beast?
What happened to those that did not take the mark?
What happened to those that did take the mark?
When was the first resurrection?
When was the second resurrection?

Please note the questions are in past tense since All that is in Revelation is complete, so as yo can imagine there are more that will come after you have answered these.

Thanks

Firstfruits

matthew94
Dec 3rd 2007, 05:50 PM
Just a note of clarification, most orthodox preterists believe Revelation has been fulfilled up to 20:5. They still believe the rest of Revelation awaits future fulfillment.

Kahtar
Dec 3rd 2007, 06:03 PM
A further note of clarification. This thread can now be found in Controversial Forum.

Allegra
Dec 3rd 2007, 06:49 PM
Just a note of clarification, most orthodox preterists believe Revelation has been fulfilled up to 20:5. They still believe the rest of Revelation awaits future fulfillment.
matthew94, not from what I've read so far. And the from some excerpts from multiple books I've just ordered.
The description you gave still falls into the partial-preterist camp.
From the preterists I have read on, we are in the New Jerusalem now spiritually. Do you mean the part about the N.J. pertaining spiritually to those in heaven only. This would be those who died or were raptured(both OT saints & 1st century Christians).??? Full preterists believe the N.J. applies to Christ's/ God's kingdom now also. Surely the "dwelling of God is with men"(REV.21:3) after the establishment of the New Covenant. Jesus has handed up the kingdom He established in His first advent, but of course He still reigns in us seated at the right hand of God.
I don't believe you are correct about preterists. The judgment(sheep & goats) wheat & tares) already took place at Christ's return in 70AD. The resurrection, one resurrection- already took place- which was immediately before the judgment.
This is for all mankind. Believers today when they die they go to heaven with glorified bodies. The wicked, since the judgment has already been established, go directly to the lake of fire.
Most preterists, including myself do not believe in another "group" resurrection at the end of mankind. It's all individual at the last day of a person's life. Once again the conditions for heaven was set.
The rest of Rev., is also symbolic. But Jesus came to destroy death & hades, which He did. He also came to destroy the works of the devil.
Does that mean that the fallen angel is in the lake of fire?
Yes! But sin still exists. Sin exists, but has no REIGN over believers. Evil lives on in the hearts of men.

I don't mean to say "you are wrong!" matthew94, you know I like you, but I'm just not getting the same impression as you from what I've been reading!

Steve M
Dec 3rd 2007, 09:20 PM
matthew94, not from what I've read so far. And the from some excerpts from multiple books I've just ordered.
The description you gave still falls into the partial-preterist camp.
From the preterists I have read on, we are in the New Jerusalem now spiritually. Do you mean the part about the N.J. pertaining spiritually to those in heaven only. This would be those who died or were raptured(both OT saints & 1st century Christians).??? Full preterists believe the N.J. applies to Christ's/ God's kingdom now also. Surely the "dwelling of God is with men"(REV.21:3) after the establishment of the New Covenant. Jesus has handed up the kingdom He established in His first advent, but of course He still reigns in us seated at the right hand of God.
I don't believe you are correct about preterists. The judgment(sheep & goats) wheat & tares) already took place at Christ's return in 70AD. The resurrection, one resurrection- already took place- which was immediately before the judgment.
This is for all mankind. Believers today when they die they go to heaven with glorified bodies. The wicked, since the judgment has already been established, go directly to the lake of fire.
Most preterists, including myself do not believe in another "group" resurrection at the end of mankind. It's all individual at the last day of a person's life. Once again the conditions for heaven was set.
The rest of Rev., is also symbolic. But Jesus came to destroy death & hades, which He did. He also came to destroy the works of the devil.
Does that mean that the fallen angel is in the lake of fire?
Yes! But sin still exists. Sin exists, but has no REIGN over believers. Evil lives on in the hearts of men.

I don't mean to say "you are wrong!" matthew94, you know I like you, but I'm just not getting the same impression as you from what I've been reading!
Please note the usage of the words 'orthodox' behind his use of 'preterist.' Matthew was pointing out a distinction within the camps of preterism...

markedward
Dec 3rd 2007, 09:20 PM
If the thing in Revelation have already happened/fulfilled then what I am asking is already past, so please according to scripture can you answer the following?I'll explain myself fully if a Mod gives me permission to, but for the time being, I'll say this:

Daniel prophesied that once the Kingdom of God was established that it would not end.

Jesus prophesied that the Kingdom of God was near; He was constantly telling people that the Kingdom was close by, and even went so far to say that the Kingdom was not, I repeat, Jesus said that the Kingdom was not visible, but that it was within people. Jesus even stated that people standing right in front of Him would not die before He returned in His Kingdom, before He "came on the clouds."

Luke (the author of Acts), Peter, Paul, John, Jude, and the author of Hebrews all believed that "the end" was close to their time. They stated things such as "Satan will soon be crushed," "The old covenant is soon to pass away," "Now is the time for judgment," "We are in the last hour," "These are the last days," "The Lord is returning soon," "On us the fulfillment of the ages has come."

Personally, I can't even comprehend how people can intentionally twist "us" into "them" or "soon" into "the distant future" or "now" into "later" or "we" into "they" or "these" into "those" and so on. Look at some of the verses I quoted above:


Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.Some would have you believe that the phrase "this is the last hour" is referring to our post-2000 AD time. How is that possible? Since when did "this is the last hour" suddenly mean "the last hour is 2000 years in our future"?

I am being very blunt: the New Testament is filled with passages like this, and there are people in our current day who intentionally ignore or even change the meanings of the passages to fit their Futurist views. Jesus and His apostles were not prophesying about our modern age! They were speaking plainly and specificly about their own time period! How can such a Futurist view reconcile with what Jesus said? It's considered borderline-heretical on these boards to be a full Preterist; why? Jesus Christ our God said that people standing right in front of Him would not die before He returned on the clouds! I'm a heretic to believe the words of our Savior?

Now, if you think I'm coming off harshly, I apologize for that, but I get very riled up when people tell me I'm speaking lies, when my beliefs come directly from the words of my Messiah.

I couldn't care less when the exact timing of something was, so long as I hold fast to my beliefs in Jesus' words that "this generation will not pass before all these things happen," that "some standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom." Jesus placed "the end" within the lifespan of His generation, of people standing directly in front of Him. I believe His words. I believe "soon" actually means "soon" and "we" means "we" and "us" means "us" and "now" means "now."

Some would have you believe "well, God is just speaking in His terms, not ours." No. Our God is not a God of confusion; He is going to speak to us in a way we can understand. He is going to use words we know, and if He says "soon" and every other instance of the word suggests "soon" and if He says "now" and every other instance of that word suggests "now," then I'm going to take the word at its plain meaning, not intentionally change the definition to make it fit our modern day.

So, Daniel prophesied one eternal kingdom with one beginning. Jesus prophesied that that kingdom was near. Jesus also prophesied that "the end" was coming within the lifetimes of His contemporaries. His apostles declared that they were a part of the kingdom. His apostles prophesied that "the end" was close upon them. Everything about what they said would point to a major eschatological event in their time period. Jesus prophesied, "the end" was accompanied by the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. And "soon" after His apostles prophesied the "soon" to come "end," the temple was destroyed. All of the events surrounding that are speculation, but what Jesus prophesied would happen, happened, and I believe His words, and I believe His apostles' words. The specifics are debatable, but I know for sure His words and His apostles' words happened in the timeframe they set; the first century.

[/endrant]

Allegra
Dec 3rd 2007, 11:46 PM
Please note the usage of the words 'orthodox' behind his use of 'preterist.' Matthew was pointing out a distinction within the camps of preterism...
Noted Steve M. I understood the adjective. And who's the judge of what is Orthodox? Man's prejudices? The Pope? lol.
I stick by my claim that full preterism is Orthodox. The main points of preterism are: The Second coming(70AD) the First Resurrection(Apostles & 1st century Christians(70AD) Daniel's "people"-Judgment throne-70AD) The New Heavens & New Earth-70 AD & beyond...............
End of the Old earth. (symbolically of course)

Love & Peace.:)

Mograce2U
Dec 4th 2007, 04:07 AM
Hi MarkEdward,
There is much you say that I agree with. But if we keep in mind that Jesus is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending - then we ought to know that it ain't all over yet! I agree there was an end for Israel - an end that brought them (& us) salvation. But we who remain have yet to see the fullness of that salvation, so there remains a rest for us too.

What I see in the NT era is that their salvation was not yet sealed, which is why we read about their having to stand fast, keep sanctifiied, etc. In other words it was still a time of NOSAS - only those who abided in the Lord would be included in the marriage about to take place. There was a line being drawn in Israel and in Jerusalem in particular which is not unlike the line we see previously in the OT (in the BC). It was therefore imperative that they remain believing until their salvation was secured.

So what I see that was accomplished in the generation that witnessed Jesus' arrival, is that we now have assurance that when we are absent from this body we will be present with the Lord and will never be unclothed or left sleeping as was the case before. But abiding is still required in this life until death us do part - or the Lord comes to put an end to it all.

Firstfruits
Dec 4th 2007, 08:47 AM
I'll explain myself fully if a Mod gives me permission to, but for the time being, I'll say this:

Daniel prophesied that once the Kingdom of God was established that it would not end.

Jesus prophesied that the Kingdom of God was near; He was constantly telling people that the Kingdom was close by, and even went so far to say that the Kingdom was not, I repeat, Jesus said that the Kingdom was not visible, but that it was within people. Jesus even stated that people standing right in front of Him would not die before He returned in His Kingdom, before He "came on the clouds."

Luke (the author of Acts), Peter, Paul, John, Jude, and the author of Hebrews all believed that "the end" was close to their time. They stated things such as "Satan will soon be crushed," "The old covenant is soon to pass away," "Now is the time for judgment," "We are in the last hour," "These are the last days," "The Lord is returning soon," "On us the fulfillment of the ages has come."

Personally, I can't even comprehend how people can intentionally twist "us" into "them" or "soon" into "the distant future" or "now" into "later" or "we" into "they" or "these" into "those" and so on. Look at some of the verses I quoted above:

Some would have you believe that the phrase "this is the last hour" is referring to our post-2000 AD time. How is that possible? Since when did "this is the last hour" suddenly mean "the last hour is 2000 years in our future"?

I am being very blunt: the New Testament is filled with passages like this, and there are people in our current day who intentionally ignore or even change the meanings of the passages to fit their Futurist views. Jesus and His apostles were not prophesying about our modern age! They were speaking plainly and specificly about their own time period! How can such a Futurist view reconcile with what Jesus said? It's considered borderline-heretical on these boards to be a full Preterist; why? Jesus Christ our God said that people standing right in front of Him would not die before He returned on the clouds! I'm a heretic to believe the words of our Savior?

Now, if you think I'm coming off harshly, I apologize for that, but I get very riled up when people tell me I'm speaking lies, when my beliefs come directly from the words of my Messiah.

I couldn't care less when the exact timing of something was, so long as I hold fast to my beliefs in Jesus' words that "this generation will not pass before all these things happen," that "some standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom." Jesus placed "the end" within the lifespan of His generation, of people standing directly in front of Him. I believe His words. I believe "soon" actually means "soon" and "we" means "we" and "us" means "us" and "now" means "now."

Some would have you believe "well, God is just speaking in His terms, not ours." No. Our God is not a God of confusion; He is going to speak to us in a way we can understand. He is going to use words we know, and if He says "soon" and every other instance of the word suggests "soon" and if He says "now" and every other instance of that word suggests "now," then I'm going to take the word at its plain meaning, not intentionally change the definition to make it fit our modern day.

So, Daniel prophesied one eternal kingdom with one beginning. Jesus prophesied that that kingdom was near. Jesus also prophesied that "the end" was coming within the lifetimes of His contemporaries. His apostles declared that they were a part of the kingdom. His apostles prophesied that "the end" was close upon them. Everything about what they said would point to a major eschatological event in their time period. Jesus prophesied, "the end" was accompanied by the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. And "soon" after His apostles prophesied the "soon" to come "end," the temple was destroyed. All of the events surrounding that are speculation, but what Jesus prophesied would happen, happened, and I believe His words, and I believe His apostles' words. The specifics are debatable, but I know for sure His words and His apostles' words happened in the timeframe they set; the first century.

[/endrant]

Thanks for your reply, however, can you answer the questions I have asked, since they have already been fulfilled?

When did the 144000 get sealed?
What happened after the beast's reign?
What was the mark of the beast?
What happened to those that did not take the mark?
What happened to those that did take the mark?
When was the first resurrection?
When was the second resurrection?

Thanks

Duane Morse
Dec 4th 2007, 09:58 AM
If the things in Revelation have already happened...


Then we are the lost, and we are all in hell - and damned for all time.

Forevermore. Until the end of ultimate 'time'.

So then, what is the point in discussing anything (or even hoping) to any further extent?

Steve M
Dec 4th 2007, 01:16 PM
Noted Steve M. I understood the adjective. And who's the judge of what is Orthodox? Man's prejudices? The Pope? lol.
I stick by my claim that full preterism is Orthodox. The main points of preterism are: The Second coming(70AD) the First Resurrection(Apostles & 1st century Christians(70AD) Daniel's "people"-Judgment throne-70AD) The New Heavens & New Earth-70 AD & beyond...............
End of the Old earth. (symbolically of course)

Love & Peace.:)
Well, it's the label that partial-to-the-edge Preterists have carried for a very long time. If we're going to throw away all the labels, then why not throw away Preterist? I'm sure some man applied that label too at some point.

The labels are only helpful insofar as they help us keep these things straight in our mind. If you throw away the difference between 'orthodox' and 'hyper' Preterism, how am I to know where you lie when I jump into the argument to ask you when and how the earth and all the works therein were melted and destroyed?

Romulus
Dec 4th 2007, 02:34 PM
If you throw away the difference between 'orthodox' and 'hyper' Preterism, how am I to know where you lie when I jump into the argument to ask you when and how the earth and all the works therein were melted and destroyed?

Hi Steve M,

Take a look at the scriptures below:


Isaiah 51(KJV)

15But I am the LORD thy God, that divided the sea, whose waves roared: The LORD of hosts is his name.
16And I have put my words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people.

This was spoken by God after He led Israel away from bondage in Egypt, this was not Genesis. The physical foundations of the heavens and earth were not created at this time but God said He would lay them, so what was being layed? God was not talking about the physical but of the spiritual or what I believe to be the Old Covenant age. This was the foundation He was laying since He was about to establish the Old Covenant with Israel. The physical is not what is referenced here.

Matthew 5

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Matthew now states that until the heavens and the earth disappear the Old Covenant law is still in effect. If the physical is spoken of here which obviously has not happened, then we are still in the Old Covenant and under the Law. There cannot be a dispute here, this must have been fulfilled already or we are still under the law. Isaiah was clear that the heavens and the earth were layed at the time of the establishment of the Old Covenant. The dissapearance of the same heavens and the earth was not physical but signified the fulfillment of the Old Covenant in the New Covenant in Christ.

If Matthew 5 has not occurred we are still in our sins and under the Old Covenant law. Isaiah I believe is the key to the answer.

God Bless!

Mograce2U
Dec 4th 2007, 03:36 PM
If the things in Revelation have already happened...

Then we are the lost, and we are all in hell - and damned for all time.

Forevermore. Until the end of ultimate 'time'.

So then, what is the point in discussing anything (or even hoping) to any further extent?Now why would you say that? The truths we hold to are spiritual truths which the Lord has revealed to us. Were not your sins forgiven by His blood spilt at the cross? Did not His resurrection give us hope that we too would be raised in His likeness? Did not the Holy Spirit come to indwell us and plant the seed of the new life whereby we can live forever? What 70 AD accomplished was the culmination of our salvation hope so that we can know that the spiritual kingdom is present and is operating under the Lord's power - whom we cannot yet see.

We can know that upon death in this life we will be granted an abundant entrance into that kingdom (2 Pet 1:11). We have peace with God now, we have access to His throne now, we have power over sin now - and we shall overcome death, all because He is risen! This IS our hope.

However the idea that is so prevalent today is that we have none of these things until the Lord appears visibly to us. It is denied that the sign He gave to those who saw it, accomplished anything of significance to us - when it was the very thing they were told to wait for. He went to prepare a place for them (and us) so that they could be where He is always. That city has been built and those who slept in Christ at that time are now in it. If this is not already true, then where is our hope when we die? It is not in the grave, because our Lord is not in the grave.

The gospel that is being preached today is denying the very kingdom that Jesus brought to us. It has many looking for another earthly kingdom, and a yet future resurrection, when only the unjust remain to be raised, and a future judgment that we have no part in. It is denying the salvation that Jesus promised is our present reality or that it is finished as He proclaimed.

And in that kingdom, they see sin and death still reigning under Moses law and a devil coming to deceive the majority of the citizens who have been obedient to Christ for 1000 years. That means that neither sin, nor death, nor the devil have been overcome by Jesus at all, and that we are without this power even now. This is the gospel that is undermining the cross and denying that Jesus is the Messiah - the Savior of the world.

If Revelation has not been fulfilled then we are still in our sins and have no hope of life after death at all because the dead in Christ have not been raised and we therefore have no real assurance that we will be when we die.

I don't know which doctrine I hate more, Dispensationalism or Futurism since they seem to be bound up together. I do not think Preterism has all the answers either, but they are a lot closer to the truth than these others which are working to destroy our hope in Christ and that to give us another which is no hope at all.

Duane Morse
Dec 4th 2007, 04:58 PM
Sorry, I disagree.
Your logic is flawed, and there are things that clearly have not happened yet.

This statement alone:

If Revelation has not been fulfilled then we are still in our sins and have no hope of life after death at all because the dead in Christ have not been raised and we therefore have no real assurance that we will be when we die.

Makes absolutely no sense.

We are not living in New Jerusalem yet either, as far as I know.

Steve M
Dec 4th 2007, 05:40 PM
Matthew 5

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Matthew now states that until the heavens and the earth disappear the Old Covenant law is still in effect.


No, he didn't....he said that until the heavens and earth pass away not one word will pass away. Whether they're binding or not, those words are most assuredly still there and most assuredly still powerful. "If not for the Law, how would I know I am a sinner?" asked Paul.


If the physical is spoken of here which obviously has not happened, then we are still in the Old Covenant and under the Law. There cannot be a dispute here, this must have been fulfilled already or we are still under the law. Isaiah was clear that the heavens and the earth were layed at the time of the establishment of the Old Covenant. The dissapearance of the same heavens and the earth was not physical but signified the fulfillment of the Old Covenant in the New Covenant in Christ.

If Matthew 5 has not occurred we are still in our sins and under the Old Covenant law. Isaiah I believe is the key to the answer.

God Bless!

I do believe Isaiah has quite a bit to say that does help out here, yes... But probably you and I would completely disagree on just what Isaiah was talking about, anyway.

Not to mention you just fell afoul of all the Judaizers on the board, to complicate that too... :P We'll never stay on just one topic at this rate!

Romulus
Dec 4th 2007, 05:59 PM
No, he didn't....he said that until the heavens and earth pass away not one word will pass away. Whether they're binding or not, those words are most assuredly still there and most assuredly still powerful. "If not for the Law, how would I know I am a sinner?" asked Paul.


Jesus said he came to fulfill the law. That I believe to be the point of the removing of the heavens and the earth. Do you believe he meant something else? I see the removal of the heavens and the earth as the fulfillment of the Old Covenant and the establishment of the New. If he didn't remove the heavens and the earth then the Old Covenant remains unfulfilled.



I do believe Isaiah has quite a bit to say that does help out here, yes... But probably you and I would completely disagree on just what Isaiah was talking about, anyway.


I am curious as to what you believe Isaiah was saying.



Not to mention you just fell afoul of all the Judaizers on the board, to complicate that too... :P We'll never stay on just one topic at this rate!


Not the first time I have run afoul :) Actually preterism(full and partial) at the heart of the view is the fulfillment of the Old Covenant in the establishment of the New. Many partial preterists believe this to be in either 30 A.D. or 70 A.D. while Full preterists believe it to be in 70 A.D. In either case Preterism believes a major event happened at that time so it does relate to the discussion. You are right though we can go through many topics on this subject.

God Bless! :)

Steve M
Dec 4th 2007, 06:09 PM
Jesus said he came to fulfill the law. That I believe to be the point of the removing of the heavens and the earth. Do you believe he meant something else? I see the removal of the heavens and the earth as the fulfillment of the Old Covenant and the establishment of the New. If he didn't remove the heavens and the earth then the Old Covenant remains unfulfilled.


Well, I tell ya... that's a long story.

But, yes, I believe the Old Law has been fulfilled, and that which is waxed aged is nigh unto vanishing away.

...but the practice of it has not vanished away, I notice, even if the efficacy has. (hmph... now you've got me ticking off the Judaizing points... are you trying to get me in trouble?)

But I think that if the heavens and earth pass away... we might just notice it.



I am curious as to what you believe Isaiah was saying.


....


...


Well, suffice it to say that my lunchbreak is almost over, and my employer doesn't want me to spend the rest of my day talking about the over-arching themes of Isaiah and how that comes back to this.

In a nut; I think part of what Isaiah was talking about has already happened, or is in the process of happening, and I think the heavens and earth are passing away right now.

And that's a woefully inadequate sentence. I need a book, really, to bring out what I think Isaiah was saying.



Not the first time I have run afoul :) Actually preterism(full and partial) at the heart of the view is the fulfillment of the Old Covenant in the establishment of the New. Many partial preterists believe this to be in either 30 A.D. or 70 A.D. while Full preterists believe it to be in 70 A.D. In either case Preterism believes a major event happened at that time so it does relate to the discussion. You are right though we can go through many topics on this subject.

God Bless! :)


Very much so. A note on my personal history; I started out life as an extremely partial preterist, with only the 'day of the Lord as a thief in the night' left to go, at the very end. No tribulation, no nothing.

I've been chipping and eroding that as I went... not in your direction, unfortunately. :)

I do agree with you for the most part about the fulfillment of the Old and establishment of the New. (for the most part... I know Romans 11 doesn't say to you what it says to me, a major movement by God of the physical nation of Abraham's children, the dry bones of Ezekiel coming back to the nation and the regathering of the children in unbelief... and later drawing them into the New Covenant as life is breathed in) Actually, that's probably where our beliefs are the closest; where we talk about His ending the Old and starting the New.

Then things get all screwy as I talk about the earth and all the works therein being melted. (because I of course start running to all sorts of places you'll mark as fulfilled separately)

Anyways. I'll have to see if I can come back and revisit the question of what Isaiah was specifically saying and how it fits into his larger themes sometime--hopefully this thread doesn't explode to life and leave this behind and forgotten, because it is a good question. I just can't answer it quickly or easily.

markedward
Dec 4th 2007, 07:30 PM
If the things in Revelation have already happened...


Then we are the lost, and we are all in hell - and damned for all time.

Forevermore. Until the end of ultimate 'time'.Says who? Just because Revelation may have been fulfilled has nothing to do with our salvation being taken from us. This argument is weak, because you didn't even use any evidence to support it.


Sorry, I disagree.
Your logic is flawed, and there are things that clearly have not happened yet."Clearly" depends on how you interpret it.


We are not living in New Jerusalem yet either, as far as I know.Again, that depends on how you interpret Scripture. Just because one interpretation differs from your own doesn't mean that that interpretation means we're all eternally condemned case-closed.

You say that if Revelation has already been fulfilled, then we're eternally condemned. Do you have any Scripture that could justify such a position, or are you telling others how to interpret Scripture?

markedward
Dec 4th 2007, 07:57 PM
When I first became a Christian, I had no idea what the Revelation was even about. Then I was given the occasional idea through sermons at church. Then I was "taught" my beliefs through the Left Behind series and other similar "end-times" novels.

This is the case for a lot of Christians. They're barely taught anything about the Revelation in church, and what they do learn they learn from pop-fiction. Then those ideas become engrained in their mind, so that anything different is "wrong."

I was like that for a long time. I believed in the Futurist theory wholeheartedly. I had never even heard of Preterism. And when I found out about Preterism, I was convinced it was just plain wrong.

BUT

The biggest argument that can be made against Futurism is presenting the verses I pulled up (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1459264&postcount=4) in the first page of the thread. Biblically speaking, an entirely Futurist fulfillment requires ignoring those verses. And if an interpretation requires ignoring Scripture in order to make sense, then that interpretation is simply wrong.

You may disagree with Preterism because it's "too spiritual" and not "literal enough." I disagree with Futurism because it requires pick-and-choosing what Scripture to use and what to ignore. So...

Challenge
If you hold to an entirely future fulfillment of the Revelation, how can your interpretion possibly reconcile with those verses (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1459264&postcount=4), without arbitrarily deciding "'soon' doesn't really mean 'soon'" or "'us' really means 'they.'"

(SIDENOTE: You might pull up that "a thousand years is as a day to the Lord" bit... but guess what? That verse is from 2 Peter, in which Peter was giving an answer to "scoffers" who would be in the last days. In the epistle from Jude, Jude directly quotes Peter's epistle and outright said that those "scoffers" from the last days were already around. The whole "a thousand years is as a day to the Lord" can't really help out a Futurist view if Jude said that those days had already arrived.)

Mograce2U
Dec 4th 2007, 08:51 PM
Sorry, I disagree.
Your logic is flawed, and there are things that clearly have not happened yet.

This statement alone:

If Revelation has not been fulfilled then we are still in our sins and have no hope of life after death at all because the dead in Christ have not been raised and we therefore have no real assurance that we will be when we die.

Makes absolutely no sense.

We are not living in New Jerusalem yet either, as far as I know.A little parsing of the verb tense in the Greek might come in handy here if you look at 1 Cor 15:16. The rising of the dead is in the present indicative passive (showing the action taking place) while the raising of Christ is in the perfect indicative passive (showing completion of the action). The Greek is using these two statements to prove each other. If Christ is not raised then the dead are not rising as he speaks is the gist of what he is saying. And coversely, if the dead be not rising then Christ has not risen either. You can put 2000 years into this statement I suppose, but Paul does not seem to be.

And if you are not one of the stones that the walls of the New Jerusalem are being built upon the foundation already laid by the apostles, then I suppose you might think you do not have a part in this city yet? But of course you do! And you will not be the first to have arrived - the dead in Christ are already there!

DanDMan64
Dec 4th 2007, 09:10 PM
...I was like that for a long time. I believed in the Futurist theory wholeheartedly. I had never even heard of Preterism. And when I found out about Preterism, I was convinced it was just plain wrong...

... Biblically speaking, an entirely Futurist fulfillment requires ignoring those verses. And if an interpretation requires ignoring Scripture in order to make sense, then that interpretation is simply wrong.

You may disagree with Preterism because it's "too spiritual" and not "literal enough." I disagree with Futurism because it requires pick-and-choosing what Scripture to use and what to ignore. So...

Challenge
If you hold to an entirely future fulfillment of the Revelation, how can your interpretion possibly reconcile with those verses (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1459264&postcount=4), without arbitrarily deciding "'soon' doesn't really mean 'soon'" or "'us' really means 'they.'"

(SIDENOTE: You might pull up that "a thousand years is as a day to the Lord" bit... but guess what? That verse is from 2 Peter, in which Peter was giving an answer to "scoffers" who would be in the last days. In the epistle from Jude, Jude directly quotes Peter's epistle and outright said that those "scoffers" from the last days were already around. The whole "a thousand years is as a day to the Lord" can't really help out a Futurist view if Jude said that those days had already arrived.)Markedward, I have been PMing back and forth with Allegra because I find myself in the same situation you mentioned you were, I hadn't even heard of "Preterism" until a couple of days ago. I have alway been a futurist and dispensationalist and I've always been comfortable with it because I never felt a need to question the scriptures. The thing about Preterism that bothers me is that, for example, the things that FirstFruits brought-up, quote:

"When did the 144000 get sealed?
What happened after the beast's reign?
What was the mark of the beast?
What happened to those that did not take the mark?
What happened to those that did take the mark?
When was the first resurrection?
When was the second resurrection?"

If this things already happened, not to mention all the world wide catastrophic events John wrote about on Revelation, such as mountains being leveled, islands getting wiped away, stars falling from the Sky, the Sun and Moon being darkened and eventually removed, The New Jerusalem coming down from the Sky, if all these things already happened and they should be "ancient" history to us by now, why are there no historical accounts of these "Earth shattering and unmistakable" signs of Christ's second coming even mentioned? and I don't mean as obscure and questionable accounts by some Jewish historians, but as works that should by now be an undeniable and universally accepted declaration of our planet's world history.

I personally don't have a problem with Jesus declaring that some would not die until they were witness to His Kingdom being established, I believe God has the power to preserve people alive and healthy for as long as He wants them to. I don't have a problem with all the statements about Him coming "soon" and the urgency of being ready, those statements are even more valid today than they were back them, and if The Lord tarries longer they will become even more so, and yes that is because I do believe that a day is as a thousand years for God, and a thousand years are as a day, the fact being that His dimension is eternity where time has no meaning, so as I think of time in His terms, what's another day or two.

Bottom line is, as I mentioned to Allegra, all our views and discussions are futile and foolish, some things we can keep arguing about because they are not meant for us to know them until we reach "perfection" and until then they're just "our opinions". What we really should be focusing on is how to get more people into "the Kingdom" regardless of whether we believe it's already here or still to come.

And on that note I would say this, no need to reply, now that I think about it I have my view and you have yours and I respect it, I can see that you Love The Lord same as I do, so that's all that matters to me. :hug:

markedward
Dec 4th 2007, 10:18 PM
I can understand the concerns you have in regards to those events. I had those when I first heard of Preterism as well. The thing is, to even try to understand those things requires a massive paradigm shift. The first of which is actually studying and understanding the words spoken in the NT. The exact dating and timing of the events in question are, as I said, up for debate. I can give you my personal opinion and interpretation of Revelation if you like, but whether you accept my opinion as credible does not change the fact that the NT constantly looks upon "the end" as being in their time period.

For example. You say that you have no problem with Jesus saying some people staying alive for even two millenia, because God would sustain them in order to fulfill the prophecy. Okay... that raises two more questions: 1) What would be the purpose of confusing us like that? Jesus' words don't suggest that those people would be sustained for centuries upon centuries until He returned 2000 years later. All He said was they would "not taste death before" He returned. He was speaking in plain terms, so the people in front of Him could only have interpreted His words to mean "He's saying He'll return with His so-called kingdom before we die?" 2) Jesus said people standing right in front of Him wouldn't die before He arrived with His kingdom, and if His hasn't come in His kingdom yet, that would require such people to still be alive, in which case, why haven't we heard of these apparent immortals? In our world of fast-paced news, someone would surely have discovered these people who couldn't have died for the last two millenia. 3) At the end of the Gospel of John, Jesus tells Peter that the disciple whom Jesus loved would "remain alive until [He] returns." Okay, if you go along with the idea of them being sustained for two millenia. But if you read the entire passage, Jesus' other disciples began to spread the rumor that the disciple whom Jesus loved would not die, which the author of the Gospel states Jesus didn't say that, only that the disciple would live until His return. The author specifically goes out of his way to tell us that Jesus did not say the disciple would not die. The author of the Gospel, as He records Jesus words, is telling us that "the disciple whom Jesus loved" would die, but that he wouldn't die before Jesus returned. If Jesus' return is accompanied by everyone suddenly going to heaven (the "Rapture" as so many Futurist views suppose), wouldn't the disciple not die then? Yet Jesus' words and the words of the author of the Gospel of John tell us that the disciple would die, but only after Jesus had returned.

The average Futurist doesn't even know such verses like the ones I quoted before even exist, and the Futurist who has done his studying has probably come upon them but either intentionally ignored them or intentionally changed their mental definition of certain words in order to make them fit into a Futurist view.

The point I'm making is; my opinion of the specifics of the end-times doesn't matter. What matters is realizing that the authors of Scripture all believed "the end" was their time, and if they believed it, we should do. It's more important to realized the Truth of the whole before diving in to the specifics.

But I have to say; if you don't even care for an answer, why even bother asking?

DanDMan64
Dec 4th 2007, 11:09 PM
...But I have to say; if you don't even care for an answer, why even bother asking?My point exactly, I mean I do appreciate your reply, but as I came to realize as I was typing my reply, end time debates, and many other debates about many topics on these boards, are purely exercises on futility because it seems people are already convinced in their minds how they believe certain doctrines, and all my trying to convince them that my view is right is only going to cause them to be angry at me, and in turn they might reply with anger, and ultimately nobody is going to leave the debate convinced that they made headway in furthering their view over someone else's view.

I think this is all driven by either one of two things: selfishness or pride, both of which are not Godly traits but fleshly and even "evil" traits of the enemy. It's good to have a zeal for the truth and to expose heretical views, but too often on this threads we get that confused and we don't realize all we're doing is being selfish in wanting to force others to see things our way and proud in our ability to use scripture to debate and further our views, and in the meantime the enemy is laughing his head-off watching as we waste our time engaging in endless debates, instead of spending more time edifying one another and going to the "prayer requests" board to see how we can help others with their real problems.

All this to say, I'm done with arguing, I love you all, and I'll keep my views to myself from now on, as I work on building-up the Body of Christ in the counseling threads or the prayer requests threads. God bless us, everyone! :pray:

Mograce2U
Dec 5th 2007, 04:16 AM
DanDman,
I suppose in our zeal we are coming off as argumentative, but no one here that I see is trying to win a debate. Rather we desire that you would consider what and why we are saying these things. It is not because we don't know or understand your view - because most of us were there first. But few from your side have considered the Preterist view because it has been labeled heresy - which it is not.

I hope you will be refreshed and join the discussion at a later time. When I first began looking into these things it gave me a headache! Confusion can do that when it begins unraveling!

markedward
Dec 5th 2007, 04:26 AM
Yeah... my small look into the 'heresies' of Preterism wound up taking nearly a full year of studies for that one topic.

DanDMan64
Dec 5th 2007, 04:19 PM
Thanks Mark and Mograce2u, as I told Allegra I have visited the preterist.org site and even ordered the information packet, so I am interested in learning more about this "new" view I hadn't even considered before, though right now I'm driven more by curiosity than a belief that what I believe is somehow "wrong".

I will approach this as I do all views on the scriptures, with prayer and a desire to allow The Holy Spirit be my teacher and lead me into all truth, but still I'm fairly certain this will be my last post here or any more end times debates or otherwise "contentious" threads, as I feel led of the Spirit to spend more time "edifying" the body of Christ, and I think that would be a wise thing for all of us to do.

In the Love of Christ, Dan. :kiss::hug:

Mograce2U
Dec 5th 2007, 07:04 PM
DanDMan64,
Just a last word on "Edify" - if you have Quickverse or E-Sword, there are 20 passages that come up from a search on EDIF* in the KJV, and it is worth looking at them all to see what it is that edifies - if you want I can list them. Prophecy is definitely in there!

(Rev 19:10 KJV) And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

DanDMan64
Dec 5th 2007, 09:49 PM
DanDMan64,
Just a last word on "Edify" - if you have Quickverse or E-Sword, there are 20 passages that come up from a search on EDIF* in the KJV, and it is worth looking at them all to see what it is that edifies - if you want I can list them. Prophecy is definitely in there!

(Rev 19:10 KJV) And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.I feel like Al Pacino in one of the Godfather movies, "just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!".

I'm sure prophesy is linked to edification, but not in the way you seem to believe, that is if you believe that endless threads on discussions with other "believers" that seem to lead nowhere is edification.

I believe the kind of prophesy that works edification is as Paul describes it in I Corinthians 14, particularly verse 5, "I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, execept he interpret, that the church may receive edifying." In other words, it's about the gift of prophesy which is comparable to the gifts of tongues combined with the gift of interpretation of tongues.

As I mentioned on another thread, these gifts are not to be confused with the "Office of the Prophet" as in the OT prophets up to John the Baptist, whom was declared by Jesus to be the last Prophet. The gifts are given to believers who are to use them in the congregation to edify, or to bring words of encouragement and personal revelation of God to build-up an individual, to declare the secrets in their heart in order to rebuke them if need be, or to get them to repent from some sin they were not aware of in their lives, or to call them into a ministry.

These gifts have nothing to do with new revelations of future events, and rarely have to do with discussion of already declared prophecies, though they might from time to time bring new light as to the proper interpretation of certain prophesies, though we are always commanded to "test the spirits" to see if they're form God.

Which brings me to this point, Preterism contends that the futurist or dispensationalist's view didn't exist or begin to be proclaimed until the late 1800s, isn't it peculiar though that this was the exact time when the revivals that rekindled or brought back into practice "the gifts of the Spirit" as described in Acts and the letters of Paul, or what we call today "The Pentecostal Movement", began to sweep the world? So isn't it possible that as a result of this "revival" is that we now have a more perfect understanding of the prophesies declared in the word, with a more renewed sense of our place in history as being in the very last days where the final prophecies of Revelation are about to be fulfilled?

I know you'll probably say "no way", but if you asked believers in the "dead" ages before the 1900s if they believed the active use of the gifts of the Spirit where for us to use and benefit from today, they'd probably have said "no way" too.

Regardless of how you view this or not, my point is this, let it all be done in the spirit of love, or more precisely "Agape" as described by Paul on I Corinthians 13, interestingly enough; whether it be exercising gifts of The Spirit, or studying the scriptures, or posting on these boards, if it's not done in God's perfect love, it is all in vain, it's just works, and it's not pleasing to God. Edification in love is the key.

Now please let me get back to my study of Revelation, and I hope I didn't offend you in any way, I love you and I hope you can love me enough to forgive me if I did. :hug::hug:.

markedward
Dec 5th 2007, 10:08 PM
Which brings me to this point, Preterism contends that the futurist or dispensationalist's view didn't exist or begin to be proclaimed until the late 1800s, isn't it peculiar though that this was the exact time when the revivals that rekindled or brought back into practice "the gifts of the Spirit" as described in Acts and the letters of Paul, or what we call today "The Pentecostal Movement", began to sweep the world? So isn't it possible that as a result of this "revival" is that we now have a more perfect understanding of the prophesies declared in the word, with a more renewed sense of our place in history as being in the very last days where the final prophecies of Revelation are about to be fulfilled?No more coincidental than the rise of Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Mormonism in that time as well. Couldn't it simply be that this revival, which looked into the gifts of the Spirit, also brought about a misguided interpretation of the "end-times"? Just because there was a "revival" doesn't mean everything was made "more perfect." If anything, I'd say this "revival," at least in part, was the cause of so many unBiblical 'sects' of Christianity that we see nowadays.

Just keep in mind: Preterism was at one point Futurism in itself.

I know I've said this before, but keeping that in mind, if you like, reread the verses I quoted from the epistles. The apostles were looking to the future. Their future. They kept calling it "soon" and "near" and such, so how does it make any sense to arbitrarily apply those words to our time except for ignoring the "soon" and "near" stuff? It was their future, but if we're constantly looking to a future fulfillment, it'll constantly be in our future and never be fulfilled. Eventually, it's going to be "Preterist" in nature. Just because we have the prophecies with us today doesn't mean it wasn't fulfilled, and it also doesn't mean our modern understanding is the correct understanding simply because it's the most recent.

DanDMan64
Dec 5th 2007, 10:47 PM
No more coincidental than the rise of Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Mormonism in that time as well. Couldn't it simply be that this revival, which looked into the gifts of the Spirit, also brought about a misguided interpretation of the "end-times"? Just because there was a "revival" doesn't mean everything was made "more perfect." If anything, I'd say this "revival," at least in part, was the cause of so many unBiblical 'sects' of Christianity that we see nowadays... Good points , but now I would counter with this, "Matthew 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.", so doesn't this sound like our times today with all these false churches of the deceived being founded by false prophets.?

Then you'll probably counter with "But there were false prophets by 70 A.D.", and then I'll counter with: "blahh, blahh, blahh", you get my point?

What do we gain by all these endless debates, I've already said I'll look into the literature I get, but I'm 43 years old and pretty set in my ways, so I'll keep looking-up, more likely than not. You gave-up looking up and now you favor looking back, and you know what? that's fine with me, as long as we both keep pointing to the real Jesus who died on a cross as the author and finisher of our faith, that's all that matters really. :hug:

The moment you start pointing to a different Jesus, then I'm going to be all over you like mud on a pig. :mad:

markedward
Dec 5th 2007, 11:21 PM
You gave-up looking up and now you favor looking backYou make it sound like I turned to Preterism because I "gave up" looking for Truth.

I didn't turn to Christ because I "gave up" looking for Truth. I turned to Christ because I found Truth in Him.
I didn't turn to Preterism because I "gave up" looking for Truth. I turned to Preterism because I found Truth in it.

DanDMan64
Dec 6th 2007, 12:49 AM
You make it sound like I turned to Preterism because I "gave up" looking for Truth.

I didn't turn to Christ because I "gave up" looking for Truth. I turned to Christ because I found Truth in Him.
I didn't turn to Preterism because I "gave up" looking for Truth. I turned to Preterism because I found Truth in it.See, this is what I mean, :B I'm trying to do my best to come across to you as a loving brother, respectful of your views, trying to get you to agree with me on what should be common ground for us both as "brethren", and yet just because I'm not willing to fully subscribe to your views you can only see me as an enemy that is trying to put you down?

I'm sorry, I think you're not understanding what I'm trying to say, when I said you "gave up" I don't mean you gave-up looking for Truth either, I just meant that apparently you came to believe that all of us that were "looking-up" for Christ to return a second time in the clouds are being deceived, because you now found a view of prophesy that tells you He already came the second time, now you're "looking back", and you believe that's the proper way to interpret the prophesies so to you that's the real truth.

I understand that, and I don't have a problem with that because ultimately I don't believe that affects in any way your salvation, and I hope you don't believe that my continuing to "look-up" in any way affects my salvation. And if our salvation is not affected then why keep arguing about it, Id rather love you as a brother in Christ than hate you as an enemy because you wave the "Preterist" flag. Does that make more sense now?

Now, my salvation is very important to me, and if you believe my keeping to "look-up" is somehow going to cause me to loose my salvation, I'm all ears, but if not then just accept me as a brother who's "wrong" about a point of view and love me anyway, ultimately one day we'll meet-up on the other side and look back on this life and just, LOL. :lol: at how wrong or right we were, and how silly it was to keep arguing about it. :giveup:

Allegra
Dec 6th 2007, 12:52 AM
Hi y'all!

Well, like I said, I am new to Preterism. My 1st batch of books came today!
I kinda surveyed one & it looks like I had the right concepts for the big 3 -
The Second Coming(Parousia), The Resurrection, & The Judgment.

As far as The New Jerusalem, I'm seeing a better concept already.
As far as the N.J. saying, "coming down" from heaven, well, this just means its being revealed. It's not coming down. When God says, Behold, I make everything new!" in Rev.21, He means exactly that. But it has already been opened up to those saints -this "Heavenly Jerusalem."
Here's a quote from "Taken To Heaven in A.D.70" by Ian D. Harding
Post-Parousia Christians. Since the Parousia in AD70, the perfect state of things comes for all post-Parousia saints when they physically die. At their death they individually enter the same perfect consummated state and condition in heaven that the pre-Parousia saints entered en-masse at the Parousia. Until their death, all post-Parousia Christians partake of the new covenant in a deposit/firstfruits measure, & their lives involve the partial & imperfect elements, just as the pre-Parousia Christians prior to their change at the Parousia.
Post-Parousia Christians are still in the state described in Romans 8:10, "And if Christ(be) in you, the body (is) dead because of sin; but the Spirit (is) life because of righteousness." And as long as we remain in this earthly physical realm, we still await our spiritual, glorified, heavenly bodies.
The Lord Jesus, at his Parousia, formally set up for his people the state of glory, his consummated kingdom: & firstly, all believers who had ever lived prior to the Parousia(millions since creation) entered that heavenly glory at the Parousia. Secondly all believers who would ever live consequent to the Parousia enter their perfect blessedness individually upon their death (that is , when their allotted time on earth is finished) "Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from hence forth" (i.e., from the time of the Parousia)
(Rev.14:13)"

Now that's what I'm talking about! Thank you Lord for Your discernment!:pray:
H e l l o Jesus! H E l l o moomsie!

Ok, so this whole new preterism concept needs some studying & fine-tuning on my part. In about a week, you can ask me anything! lol!
But for now, you can ask me anything in this Preterist thread about Daniel.

Sooo glad I have another month off from work to be a bookworm with a Christmas tree! :)
Take care, God Bless.

markedward
Dec 6th 2007, 01:19 AM
See, this is what I mean, :B I'm trying to do my best to come across to you as a loving brother, respectful of your views, trying to get you to agree with me on what should be common ground for us both as "brethren", and yet just because I'm not willing to fully subscribe to your views you can only see me as an enemy that is trying to put you down?I don't see you as an enemy. But the words "gave-up" carry a negative tone regardless of who the words come from. Sorry if I misinterpreted what you said. It has nothing to do with you "not willing to fully subscribe" to my views, it was simply the choice of words that put the negative tone on what you were saying.

Allegra
Jan 4th 2008, 06:08 AM
If the things in Revelation have already happened...


Then we are the lost, and we are all in hell - and damned for all time.

Forevermore. Until the end of ultimate 'time'.

So then, what is the point in discussing anything (or even hoping) to any further extent?
Why do you say that?
We are not in hell, nor are we destined for hell! (as believers)
What does the fact that Revelation occurred in the 1st century make one feel doomed today?
I rejoice that Jesus returned to vindicate & glorify all the saints that had the highest expectations that He would. It was a theme He & the Holy Spirit used throughout the New Testament.
The Lord Himself said thrice over, in the most explicit terms, "Behold I come quickly; Behold I come quickly; Yea, I come quickly.
And there's a great deal to talk about! It's late tonight, but I would like to share anything I can with y'all about this, & interpret all of Revelation, etc. from a preterist viewpoint.
I would never guess that I would study "end times." I came to the the Faith a little later (31) than some. I didn't read the Bible till I was 47! The church I learned the most from at that time never spoke about eschatology. I matured in the faith by God bestowing the blessing of these Spiritually gifted church leaders. The first time I read Revelation, it appeared that that was past & had happened to someone else. That was the end of Revelation reading for me.
Now, 8 yrs later, I discovered a "big hype" about it. I bought a premil book or 2, but nothing was adding up. My head wasn't buying the stories. The Spirit kept telling me, "It was like it was before." And what was before is what I discerned & always knew- That Jesus had returned.
I didn't know the exact history surrounding that return- but since I never expected or ever thought about a return- that had something to do with being able to "see" in Rev.19, the description of how He returned.

There's still a lot to hope & pray for!
The fact that the Judgment, (Rev20) has taken place., we now have access to heaven upon death. What I mean is there are no more "group" resurrections as was before the Parousia in 70AD. It's all individual now.
But the difference is that as soon as we die, we receive our glorified bodies in heaven. There is no non-sense "waiting" till the end of human history for some event or whatever, to be raised bodily from the dead.
Do you realize that we receive this immediately, whereas the O.T. saints had to wait in Hades thousands of years for the Judgment & establishment of the New kingdom?!!
"The destruction of Jerusalem was not a mere thrilling incident in the drama of history, like the siege of Troy or the downfall of Carthage, closing a chapter in the annals of a state or a people. It was an event which has no parallel in history. It was the outward & visible sign of a great epoch in the divine government of the world. It was the close of one dispensation & the commencement of another. It marked a new order of things. The Mosaic economy,- which had been ushered in by the miracles in Egypt, the lightnings & thunderings of Sinai, & the glorious manifestations of Jehovah to Israel,- after subsisting for more than 15 centuries, was now abolished.
The peculiar relation between the Most High & the covenant nation was dissolved. The Messianic kingdom, that is, the administration of the divine government by the Mediator, so far, at least, as Israel was concerned, reached its culminating point.
The kingdom so long predicted, hoped for, prayed for, was now fully come.
The final act of the King was to sit upon the throne of His glory & judge His people. He could then 'deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father.'
This is the significance of the final destruction of Jerusalem according to the showing of the Word of God." (James Stewart Russell's-The Parousia-1878)

To be continued.....

Duane Morse
Jan 4th 2008, 07:05 AM
Why do you say that?
We are not in hell, nor are we destined for hell! (as believers)
What does the fact that Revelation occurred in the 1st century make one feel doomed today?


How would you know if you were in hell?
And feeling doomed is not the same as being doomed.

And I say it because there is no indication that there is anyone left on the old earth after the white throne judgement, and after death and hell are cast into the lake of fire along with all that are not found in the Book of Life, because the old earth and heaven have passed away.

Anyone found in the Book of Life at that judgement will be occupying the new earth, and there is no more death in that world.

So if we are in a place that still has death, and all those events have already happened - then we are among those in the lake of fire suffering our eternal torment.

Soj
Jan 4th 2008, 08:11 AM
I believe so because the apostles seemed to believe so. If people of this board consider it crazy to take the words of the apostles and not change "soon" to "distant future" or change "us" into "them" or change "now" into "later," then by God, call me a crazy man, but I stand firm with my belief in the apostles' words.Ok I'm diving into this thread at the deep end first...

Firstly, I find the Preterist belief quite bizarre. To say that the prophecies in the Book of Revelation were all concluded at 70 AD is only possible if you make most of the book symbolic and spiritualize it's events, which I won't do because I believe much of it to be literal and yet to take place.

Mark, you say the apostles "seemed" to believe so, and that's partly why you have embraced Preterism? So did they believe Jesus was returning in their lifetime or didn't they?

I believe they did, and that just confirms the doctrine of the 'imminent' return of Christ, that it could happen at any time, and that no man would know the day or the hour except the Father in Heaven (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:6-7).

Now, the point you are missing about the return of Jesus Christ to set up his physical kingdom on earth, is that He POSTPONED it! In the gospels Jesus was saying that it was "at hand" at that time, and if Israel had accepted him as their Messiah and King it would have all been fulfilled then, but they didn't did they, instead they rejected Him and in doing so rejected His kingdom!

There are two elements to God's kingdom, the spiritual (Romans 14:17 - righteousness, joy, and peace in the Holy Ghost) and the physical...

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

The spiritual element of God's kingdom has been established on this earth, within each born-again believer in Christ in the Church, the body of Christ, but the physical element is YET TO COME.


Yes, the NT writers were looking for Christ to come back then, but He didn't because He postponed the physical element of His kingdom coming down to earth until the fulness of the Gentiles came in...

Romans 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. 26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

The fulness of the Gentiles relates to the Church, which is filled with mainly Gentile believers, and this was a MYSTERY to Israel and to the world until it was revealed through Peter, then Paul the Apostle. So while those NT writers believed that the return of Christ was imminent, like most Christians do, they didn't comprehend that it would be delayed as long as it has been, yet that's the will of God. They were still living and preaching it like it would happen any day, and so have faithful Christians ever since, that is a part of THE FAITH.


To summarize:

Jesus, while on the earth, preached that the kingdom of God was "at hand", but because Israel rejected Him as their Messiah and King He postponed the physical kingdom over Israel on this earth and established His spiritual kingdom on earth within the Church.

The Apostles did believe that the return of Christ was imminent during their lifetime.

The times of the Gentiles was a mystery which was revealed through Peter and Paul, that God would cause blindness in part to happen to Israel while He deals with the Gentiles. So while the writers of the NT believed in the imminent return of Christ, God has tarried in heaven ever since, hence why Christians today are still eagerly awaiting His return, and this does NOT contradict the scripture.

markedward
Jan 4th 2008, 03:03 PM
Ok I'm diving into this thread at the deep end first...

[QUOTE]Firstly, I find the Preterist belief quite bizarre. To say that the prophecies in the Book of Revelation were all concluded at 70 AD is only possible if you make most of the book symbolic and spiritualize it's events, which I won't do because I believe much of it to be literal and yet to take place.To each his own, I suppose. (Though, I must point out, I don't believe all of the Revelation has happened. Just all of the Olivet Discourse.) Though I insist on pointing out the non-literal fulfillment of the same imagery in the Old Testament prophets. Pull up... what chapter is it... 2 Samuel 22 I think, where David sings a psalm (the psalm can be found in the book of psalms as well) of praise to God for God helping him defeat Saul and his other enemies. In the psalm David describes how God literally rode on clouds down to the earth, how the sky was blacked by clouds, etc. etc. It's incredibly imagery if you take it literally. But the book never describes God as actually coming down on clouds to smite Saul or David's other enemies. If we recognize that most of the prophecies upon nations during the time of the Old Testament (read Isaiah or Ezekiel or Jeremiah, for instance) is fulfilled but not literally, why do so many people think the Revelation is supposed to be interpreted literally when it comes right out of the same non-literal-prophetic culture that Isaiah or Ezekiel came from? The "locusts" of chapter 9 for instance. Most people say "oh, it's a 1st century description of 21st century helicopters" or "they're demons locusts from hell under control of Satan." You could say that if you insist on it being literalistic or "first century" literalistic of a twenty-first century contraption. But pull open the book of Joel. Locusts are described as descending upon Jerusalem destroying everything in front of them. But despite that they're called "locusts" the passages make it incredibly obvious they're soldiers, with horses and chariots, and that the "locusts" are just a prophetic term used to describe them. The Revelation's imagery is almost completely derived from the Old Testament prophetic books, yet no one takes them literally.


Mark, you say the apostles "seemed" to believe so, and that's partly why you have embraced Preterism? So did they believe Jesus was returning in their lifetime or didn't they?I just used the word "seemed" because they do seem to. I believe that they "seemed" to because they actually did. So yes, I do believe the apostles believed Jesus was returning to them in their lifetime. But no, that does not make me a "full Preterist." The Old Testament, again, days of judgment upon ancient nations in very similar ways to how Jesus is described by Himself and His apostles and the Revelation. When David's psalm, as mentioned before, described God as "coming on the clouds," God didn't actually come; it was metaphoric for His judgment. In the book of Daniel 7, when the Son of Man "comes on the clouds" look at where He is "coming" to: it's not earth, it's the throne in heaven! Daniel 7 depicts Christ's "inaugeration" as king, not His return to earth. Read the Revelation: chapter 11, the world is now Christ's kingdom, "the time for judging the dead has come." If you read the Revelation so strictly chronologically, why is there an announcement that the judging of the dead (seen in chapter 20) is supposed to take place at the end of the chapter 11? Even if the "end of the ages" was "postponed" it could still only be "postponed" to a time period within Christ's "generation" prophecy ("this generation shall not pass away until all these things happen"). Daniel shows us the "coming on the clouds" event is the coronation of Christ, and that that is the timing of the throne judgment. Revelation 11 depicts that "coronation" ("the world is now Christ's kingdom"), and Revelation 20 depicts the throne judgment that Revelation 11 announces "has come."


I believe they did, and that just confirms the doctrine of the 'imminent' return of Christ, that it could happen at any time, and that no man would know the day or the hour except the Father in Heaven (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:6-7).No man would know the day or hour, yet Jesus clearly taught His disciples they would recognize the season by the signs of the "end of the age." Jesus prophecied numerous things would happen (false prophets, persecution, famines, Jerusalem's destruction, etc.) within a generation, and when it all did, no one thinks anything of it? He prophecied the temple's destruction would happen within His generation's lifetime and it did. Isn't that worth considering?

Mograce2U
Jan 4th 2008, 04:35 PM
How would you know if you were in hell?
And feeling doomed is not the same as being doomed.

And I say it because there is no indication that there is anyone left on the old earth after the white throne judgement, and after death and hell are cast into the lake of fire along with all that are not found in the Book of Life, because the old earth and heaven have passed away.

Anyone found in the Book of Life at that judgement will be occupying the new earth, and there is no more death in that world.

So if we are in a place that still has death, and all those events have already happened - then we are among those in the lake of fire suffering our eternal torment.
Well, I think if we were in the lake of fire we would know it. But given that death is still present in this world, we do live in the land that was called the abussos - a land still filled with graves, while the living walk the earth. Satan was cast down to this pit where he has no further access to heaven since the cross. Therefore he cannot come before God to accuse the brethren and tempt God to judge us. Instead, we have been access to God and have authority over him.

It is in this new world that the quick dwell amongst the dead, and that a new order has been set in place as the old has passed away. It may not have the physical markings that changed Noah's world by the flood; but its spiritual markings are present. We are living in the times of reformation - but it is the nature of men that are being changed, while the world goes on much the same. It is a new heaven and new earth now because Jesus is upon the throne of His Father ruling over the kingdoms of men. And that change in the spiritual realm is even more powerful than the change made when the flood covered the earth.

That is because as we work with Christ to gather men into this spiritual kingdom, the Holy Spirit works to change their hearts; and the world is being populated with new creatures who are obedient to Christ. The new heavens is thus Christ's rule there, and the new earth is the population of the sons of God here, ruling & serving by His authority.

Does this change the world that is not abiding in Christ? No doubt it does to a great extent because good is what has power to overcome evil. And the prayer of faith is where we "wield" this authority we have been given. Prayer and preaching the word of God are the "foolish" means that God is using to extend forgiveness & mercy to men. And there is no greater power in the earth today to accomplish the impossible thing that only God can do - which is change the heart of man.

And by bringing men into this kingdom that is here now, they are given life everlasting. If we could get our minds around that truth, we would no doubt see a greater manifestation of the power that the children of God have been given in the world today. Because perfect love would cast out not only our fear of condemnation before God, but the fear that we have of men as well as of death.

If there is one common denominator that is holding Christians back from realizing what it means to have this new standing in the presence of a holy God, it can only be that they continue to hold onto doctrines whereby they deny what Christ has done for us. And they do this by putting it all off to a future time when it is present and available to us now. "Jesus is Lord" ought to be our proclamation with a boldness uncommon to men because we know He is risen and come to dwell in hearts.

Allegra
Jan 4th 2008, 05:05 PM
How would you know if you were in hell?
And feeling doomed is not the same as being doomed.

And I say it because there is no indication that there is anyone left on the old earth after the white throne judgement, and after death and hell are cast into the lake of fire along with all that are not found in the Book of Life, because the old earth and heaven have passed away.

Anyone found in the Book of Life at that judgement will be occupying the new earth, and there is no more death in that world.

So if we are in a place that still has death, and all those events have already happened - then we are among those in the lake of fire suffering our eternal torment.
DM,
Hell is in a general sense eternal separation from God. And feeling & being doomed come from the same negative thought. If I don't TRUST in the Lord, who made the promise of eternal life to "me" than what is my faith worth? What was anyone's faith worth, except to be pitied?
(as the apostle Paul says in 2 Corinthians)
Why do you think Revelation 14:13 says: 13Then I heard a voice from heaven say, "Write: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on."
"Yes," says the Spirit, "they will rest from their labor, for their deeds will follow them."
This is a major prophetic statement. Many overlook its importance. Just as I see many Christians literalizing Revelation & other symbolic books with erroneous interpretations of the symbols. There are literal meanings to the symbols, but from what I've seen from all the other camps (premil, dispens. premil, amil, postmil) they do not have the right meanings to the symbols at all. That only creates an interpretation to maintain their theology-which is inconsistent scripturally & historically.

I have done an extensive study on prophetic symbols. Take for instance 2 Peter 3:5-7 5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. 7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
First of all , with this passage, let me ask you- God destroyed the wicked within the earth by flood, but did not destroy the foundations of the earth, agree?
Same prediction was for the "present" heavens & earth (which was the present in Peter's day) were reserved for "fire."
Here one needs to know upfront that God does not destroy His creation. As per Isaiah we can parallel this with later. But 1st let's continue with some prophetic definitions of "heavens & earth," "the end of the aeon"(age); & "fire" destruction. What lead me to the research was the fact that these statements were including "heaven or heavens." To take that super-literally made no good sense. Why would God destroy heaven? So, here is why the prophetic meaning is emphatically required:
Heaven & earth- the whole universe, political or religious. Heaven is always a symbol of government, the higher places in the political universe."Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall not pass away." (Matt 24:35) Here the Jewish power is represented as the heaven & earth, & the symbol denotes its passing away. "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished."
One peculiar thing stands out regarding this symbol. Many Christians today regard this passage as the end of the world, when heaven & earth shall pass away. The same persons deny that we are still under the Law of Moses, so again, there is inconsistency. Jesus said that no part of the Law would pass away until heaven & earth passed away! But if the symbol represents the passing away of Theocratic Israel, not at the cross, but in 70AD when Rome left Israel without means of worship or nation identity, then we have perfect consistency.
We know by fact, not assumption, that we are not under the Law! The Law passed away as Peter described in 2Peter 3. The powers to be shaken in Mt. 24:29 would denote the rulers of Israel; no other meaning fits the context. Notice also that this shaking occurs at the Second Advent of Christ.
Fire- Signifies fierce destruction, judgment while living, & that by the divine sanction of God. "For He is like the refiners fire" to consume the dross.(Mal.3:2) "For behold the Lord will come with fire, to render His anger with fury," (Isa. 66:15). "For by fire and sword will the Lord plead with all flesh; and the slain of the Lord shall be many," (Isa.66:16)
To Babylon, God shall burn them; their hearts shall melt from the fire! The means of destruction,( Isa. 13:1-13.)
In speaking to Judah & Jerusalem respecting the coming down of King Nebuchadnezzar in 586 B.C. God said, "For all the earth shall be devoured by the fire of My Zeal," (Zeph.3:8)
2Thess 1:1-10, & 2Peter 3:1-16 stands as a classic example of earth burning & the Lord coming in flaming fire, as a judgment upon the land of Israel in 70AD.
Fire from heaven- In Sodom's case, it was literal fiery destruction out of the sky (either thunderbolts or flaming sulfuric meteors)
In Elijah's case, fire licked up the whole altar & sacrifices in front of the Baal prophets. At Sinai, fir from heaven came down visibly upon Mt. Sinai. In Jerusalem's case, it was the fiery tar & pitch-laden missiles & ballistae that the besieging armies hurled at her to destroy her gates & walls by fire.
(compare with Rev.18) the destruction of Mystery Babylon, & ( Rev.20:9) Fire coming down from heaven.

Allegra
Jan 4th 2008, 09:48 PM
If the things in Revelation have already happened, then all the questions and debates an all the forums and posts are pointless since Jesus would have already come, and there is a new Jerusalem, the first resurrection and the second has passed. We could go on, and on, but the proof is according to what is written all the things in revelation have not yet happened.

Rev 21:6 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=66&CHAP=21&SEARCH=jesus%20king%20lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=6) And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha And Omega, the beginning And the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

Rev 22:6 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=66&CHAP=22&SEARCH=jesus%20king%20lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=6) And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful And true: And the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.


Firstfruits
FF,
Since I disagree with your state above- I believe ALL the things in Revelation have occurred- I took your questions from another post & will answer them here, since it is allowed here.

Quote FF: Where is the evidence of the 4th kingdom, the evidence of the beast, the false prophet, the mark of the beast, Armageddon,etc.?The 4th kingdom (Daniel 7) was Rome. And this is why you may continue to have major questions on these prophecies- bc history lines up with the Bible when they are proved as a past event.
Evidence of the beast? The beast in Rev13 came from the Roman Empire.
In Hebrew the 666 was determined to be Nero Caesar (the man of sin). His persecution of the saints & the war with the Jews is seen in Revelation. No other emperor from a later date turned on the Jews as seen in Rev. 17, where the beast will hate the harlot.
More like a wild beast & tyrant than a man, Nero glutted his bloodthirsty propensities with the murder of his brother, his mother & his wife. He falsely imputed his crime to innocent Christians, whom he put to death in vast numbers & with unheard of barbarities.
He arrogated to himself the prerogatives of deity, & claimed & received the worship due God. As a matter of course, that the Roman emperor received the homage of the whole world, & idolatrous worship would be paid to him.
As far as the mark of the beast, the citizens had to hail Caesar & light incense on a regular basis. The mark I don't believe to be literal. The forehead represents "thoughts" & the right hand "works." These would have to conform with the Caesar worship or they could not buy or sell. The duration of that 1st & bitter persecution accords with the period of "42 months." As a matter of fact, the persecution by Nero began in Nov.AD64 & ended with his death in June AD68. That is as nearly as possible 3 yrs & 1/2.
I'll be back in just a bit to describe the false prophet & Armageddon.
(my back is aching in this chair!)

Allegra
Jan 5th 2008, 12:16 AM
OK, the false prophet (Rev.13:11-17,NKJV)
The Beast from the Earth


11 Then I saw another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb and spoke like a dragon. 12 And he exercises all the authority of the first beast in his presence, and causes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. 13 He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. 14 And he deceives those[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rev%2013:11-17;&version=50;#fen-NKJV-30917a)] who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived. 15 He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed. 16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
[B]Footnotes:
Revelation 13:14 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rev%2013:11-17;&version=50;#en-NKJV-30917) M-Text reads my own people.
Revelation 13:17 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rev%2013:11-17;&version=50;#en-NKJV-30920) NU-Text and M-Text omit or.Looking at these characteristics to this symbolic figure it is evident he is the alter ego of the emperor, though one is supreme & the 2nd beast a subordinate.
1.He rises out of the land, while the 1st beast rises out of the sea, denotes the 2nd beast is a domestic or home authority, ruling in Judea; while the other is a foreign power.
2. His having 2 horns like a lamb, while the 1st beast has 10, denotes that his sphere of government is small, & his power limited, compared to the other.
3. He speaks as a dragon, or serpent, denotes his crafty & deceitful character.
4. His being clothed with the authority of the 1st beast indicates that he is the official representative & delegate of Nero in Judea.
5. He excludes from civil rights all who refuse abject submission to the beast.
6. He pretends to exercise miraculous powers. (see definition above for "fire destruction")
7.He rules with tyrannical force & cruelty.
At this point the individual is revealed to us. He can be no other than the Roman procurator or governor of Judea under Nero, & the particular governor must be sought at or near the outbreak of the Jewish war; & here the history of the time throws a flood of light upon the inquiry.
Gessius Florus is the 2nd beast. He was the worst governor who ever came into office. The Jews counted him him a fit servant worthy of such a master(Nero)
Josephus tells the story of of the of the enormous & incredible profligacy, fraud, treachery & tyranny of this last & worst of all the governors of Judea, & will see how the historian traces to the misrule of this infamous man the ruin that fell upon the nation. It was his Draconic oppression that goaded the unhappy Jews into rebellion, & was the proximate cause of the war which ended in the utter overthrow of Jerusalem & her people.

Now as far as Armageddon. To brief, I will skip Rev. 15 for now & go right to
Rev.19:11-21(KJV) where the Lord's return is pictured.
11And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
17And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
18That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.
19And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
20And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
21And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.



This magnificent passage is descriptive of the the great event which occupies so prominent a place in New Testament prophecy, the Parousia, or coming in glory of the Lord Jesus Christ. He comes from heaven; He comes in His kingdom; 'on His head are many crowns;' He comes with His holy angels; 'the armies of heaven follow him;' He comes to execute judgment on His enemies; He comes in glory.
It may be said, Why is the Parousia placed after the judgment of the harlot city, & not before? It must be remembered that it is a poem rather than a history that we are now reading; a drama rather than a journal of transactions, at there is no book in which poetical & dramatic effect is more studied than in the Apocalypse. These episodical visions are often taken out of their strict chronological order that they may be displayed in fuller detail & make an adequate impression on the mind of the reader.
At the same time, there is not an anachronism in the place which the Parousia occupies. (See Mt.24:29,30) It is immediately after the great tribulation that the sign of the Son of man appears in heaven, and they 'see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory'. The scene represented in this vision is that very event.

Assuredly no literal conflict with carnal weapons are involved (the symbols)
'slain with the sword of Him that sitteth on the horse, whose sword goeth out of his mouth.'
Again, not exact with episodical events- for Nero killed himself 2 yrs. prior to 70AD (the beast) It is reported that Gessius Florus died a violent death also.
So endeth the drama.

Now. I will next take on the task of describing the millennium (Revelation 20.)
:)

Allegra
Jan 5th 2008, 02:24 AM
Please note the usage of the words 'orthodox' behind his use of 'preterist.' Matthew was pointing out a distinction within the camps of preterism...
Wonderful. But I found the official definitions of both camps.
1.Hyper-preterists are full preterists.
2. Orthodox preterists are partial preterists.
Oh that imo isn't a preterist (a partial preterist) They can be Amils or Postmils(Like Mr. Gentry-who we challenge all the time)

Nope. I only believe in the Holy Writ. Not what the Apostolic fathers (70AD-120AD) claimed. The only one I trust who was agenda-free was Clement, who probably wrote pre-AD70.
No, the Creeds perpetuate "soon" to a slight delay, to nothing but delay as far as eschatological fulfillment.
I believe (not kidding) that Jesus was speaking to me personally(maybe some others do too) when he said in Mt.23:9,
9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.

But partial-preterists are just that imo, part this & part that.

Soj
Jan 5th 2008, 03:08 AM
To each his own, I suppose.You better believe it! How long have you been a Christian for? You look quite young.


Even if the "end of the ages" was "postponed" it could still only be "postponed" to a time period within Christ's "generation" prophecy ("this generation shall not pass away until all these things happen").And that's the part you misunderstand Mark. The "generation" Chirst was talking about were the ones who would see all the things in Matt 24:15, 20-21, 24, 27, 29, and 31 come to pass, and none of those He was speaking to saw any of those events, and Christ knew it.

Matthew 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

"Know that it is near, even at the doors" can only refer to the Second Advent of Christ. That is, "When you see the events taking place that I have just described, you can be certain that the end of the age and my coming (Matt 24:3) are just around the corner - right at the doors."

"This generation shall not pass" refers to the generation who witnesses the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel, the false prophets showing great signs and wonders, the Tribulation! Now these things HAVE NOT YET HAPPENED so the generation Christ was referring to could well be OUR GENERATION! Considering that Israel are back in their land as a ruling nation (1948) then I believe we ARE in that generation!

Allegra
Jan 5th 2008, 05:04 AM
"This generation shall not pass" refers to the generation who witnesses the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel, the false prophets showing great signs and wonders, the Tribulation! Now these things HAVE NOT YET HAPPENED so the generation Christ was referring to could well be OUR GENERATION! Considering that Israel are back in their land as a ruling nation (1948) then I believe we ARE in that generation!
Holy heaven.
I disagree with dispensationalism more than any other end-time doctrine.
The Zionism in Israel today has nothing to do with the Bible. All the O.T. prophesies were fulfilled in Christ. The "time of the end" WAS the end of the Jewish dispensation in 70AD. Only the remnant accepted the new covenant( & the old covenant faithful were part of that remnant) Those were resurrected/glorified & are the Lord's presence & rest (as per Daniel 12- when the power of the holy people was shattered>AD70)
God gave the Israel 3 chances to be obedient to the covenants. First the curse came upon them from Nebuchadnezzar for disobedience(destruction of Jerusalem) Second , more disobedience & the penalty caused by Antiochus Epiphanes (destruction of Jerusalem) Third strike- to merge with Christianity & the New Covenant, whose mediator was Christ. Consequence & final penalty, God used the Romans (to destroy Jerusalem & the temple made with hands)
Now, the Zionists took advantage afforded them politically to establish Israel. And they obtained the land because of the humanitarian guilt of the holocaust! They've gotten our money for decades to build their military, & they don't even have to report the details of their spending.
It's a win-win situation for them, both politically & financially.
All that is ok for democracy's sake. But the Zionists of modern day Israel are extra biblical.
All is fine until you hear why they don't accept that Jesus was the Messiah.
Just search online sometime. Guaranteed to make you angry.
They do not accept Jesus like some of the Messianic Jews I knew at my church. These had revelation about the OT prophecies of the Messiah, & believed that those scriptures were speaking about Jesus, the Son of God.
They are.

Soj
Jan 5th 2008, 05:27 AM
I disagree with dispensationalism more than any other end-time doctrine.Dispensationalsim in not an "end-time doctrine", it's a systematic way of understanding the entire Bible! Shows how much you know about it.


The "time of the end" WAS the end of the Jewish dispensation in 70AD.So you DO believe in dispensations then?? Strange.

As to what Zionism has to do with anything I said, I'm mystified?

There are still 100's of OT prophecies left unfulfilled relating to the time of Jacob's trouble (Tribulation), the Second Advent of Christ, the literal Millennial kingdom of heaven on earth, and the new heavens and earth.

Allegra
Jan 5th 2008, 06:33 AM
Dispensationalsim in not an "end-time doctrine", it's a systematic way of understanding the entire Bible! Shows how much you know about it.

So you DO believe in dispensations then?? Strange.

As to what Zionism has to do with anything I said, I'm mystified?

There are still 100's of OT prophecies left unfulfilled relating to the time of Jacob's trouble (Tribulation), the Second Advent of Christ, the literal Millennial kingdom of heaven on earth, and the new heavens and earth.
Dispensation is just another word for administration.
Dispensationalism only started in the 1880's.
Shows what I know about it. Been there, did that (for a whole month) Dispensationalism is unscriptural. I refused to remain ignorant about it.
Mystified? Then you don't really know much about modern Israel, bc Zionists they are.
Oh, the fable of the millennium kingdom again? That's what the unbelieving Jews in the 1st century held out for. Even when the Great tribulation was upon them, there were false prophets telling them to "hang on in the temple, God will rescue you!" They stubbornly held on believing the delusion that God would give them an earthly kingdom, when Jesus clearly said His kingdom was not of this world and would be taken away from them and given to a people who would bear fruit! Yea, God had something else in mind.
You should try reading Josephus' Wars sometime.
I disagree with over-literalizing the Bible. Especially the New Testament.
Your "system" is probably in strict chronological order & literalizing symbols that dispensationalists have a field day making up the meanings of.
Sorry, I don't believe it. It's boring.

markedward
Jan 6th 2008, 05:17 AM
You better believe it! How long have you been a Christian for? You look quite young.


And that's the part you misunderstand Mark. The "generation" Chirst was talking about were the ones who would see all the things in Matt 24:15, The Gospel of Luke replaces "abomination of desolation" with "armies surrounding Jerusalem." He is equating the "abomination" with the armies that would surround the city and destroy the temple. Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem, people fleed the city when they took the chance, the Romans (oh, and armies from beyond the Euphrates) took the city and destroyed the temple, exactly as Jesus prophesied at the beginning of the chapter.


20-21,See above. Jesus wasn't saying the destruction would be on the Sabbath, He only said "pray that it isn't." As for the "never to be equaled again" line, that's a "prophetic hyperbole." Read Ezekeil 5. God promises He will do something to Jerusalem that He would never do again, that He would "scatter all [Jerusalem's] survivors to the wind." Mind you, this prophecy was concerning Jerusalem's captivity under Nebuchadnezzar. And yet, it happened again in 70 AD when the Romans conquered Jerusalem. So was God lying when He prophesied that He would "never" do it again, or was it hyperbole? "Hyperbolic" prophecies are all throughout the Bible.


24I recommend reading Josephus. Some people go so far to call Josephus a liar or exaggerator simply because he just might have actually recorded the fulfillment of prophecies (take note that Josephus was not a Christian, and in fact seemed to believe, according to some modern historians, that Emperor Vespasian was the promised messiah of Scripture). But regardless of whether you believe that or not, Josephus is an accurate and contemporary historian during that day and age, and he recorded quite a lot of false prophets and false messiahs showing up over the years preceeding Jerusalem's destruction.


27Christ is stating how obvious His "coming" would be. Lightning as an obvious thing, it's something everyone notices. When Jerusalem fell, Jews were mourning left and right because they knew God had come against them. Even the Romans, who were completely foreign to the religion of Jews or Christians, claimed that the destruction could only have been the work of God's hand. Imagine being a Jew that had heard the prophecies of Christ, or a Christian who had been taught Jesus' prophecies. "Within a generation" and all that, right? Imagine being one of those Jews inside the city on the day the Roman armies finally broke through the walls, cutting through people on every side. Imagine being a Christian standing on the hills outside of the city, watching it being destroyed from far away. It would be incredibly obvious that Jesus' prophecies came true, because the city and the temple had been destroyed within a generation as plain as day. It would as obvious as lightning in the sky. Jesus didn't say the "sign of the Son of Man" would actually be lightning, He claimed it would be as lightning.


29This isn't anymore literal than the "locusts." Trust me: go and find all prophecies in the Old Testament. Many of them contain words talking about the sun and moon being darkened, the stars falling, the heavens receding, days of darkness and gloom, etc. You'll also find those prophecies were made against nations that existed before Jesus was even born as a man. And those prophecies came true, but most of those "darkness" prophecies were never fulfilled literally. Just as "it's raining cats and dogs" is an idiom of the English language referring to how hard it is raining outside, the darkening sun or moon or stars or the heavens rolling up and the like, those are ancient Hebrew idioms referring to divine judgment, not literal events.


and 31 come to passDid Christ literally "draw all men" to Himself when He was crucified? He claimed He would draw all men to Himself when He was on the cross, but He didn't literally reach out His hand and grab "all men" from the earth and pull them up to Himself while He was hanging on the cross.


Considering that Israel are back in their land as a ruling nationIt isn't the same. Modern-day Israel isn't the same at all as the ancient kingdom of Israel of David's day. It has no temple (the location is controlled by the Muslims, so unless you want a worldwide jihad, it's going to say in control of the Muslims). It is not a nation run by the Laws of the Torah, it's run by secular laws. It has no king. It may be "independent" and it may have the name "Nation of Israel," but just because it bears the same name doesn't mean it's the same thing as the ancient nation that was around before Nebuchadnezzar came around. Modern Israel is secular. Christ stated His kingdom could not be seen by the eye, and that a person could not claim it was "here" or "there." One of the epistles states that there was once "physical" Jerusalem but there would soon be a "spiritual" Jerusalem; it was making the point that God's kingdom was once characterized by a physical nation but that it trascended to a spiritual "community." "New Jerusalem" of Revelation is not a literal city. The city is called the bride. The bride is the church, and the church is made up of people, not buildings. Christ is our temple. Christ is our priest. Christ is our one and only sacrifice. The temples of ancient Israel were only built when God gave favor. The temples of ancient Israel were only destroyed when God took away His hand. So why would God allow a third physical temple to be built when such an act would blaspheme Christ as our temple? How could a third physical temple be profaned when God would never even have dwelled in it? A third physical temple is not found anywhere in Scripture, and even if one were built, it would defy the Scriptural reasoning or consistency behind the building (God's hand) and destruction (God's hand) of both the first and second temples.

DanDMan64
Jan 10th 2008, 11:59 PM
Some people claim to a preterist view of the world (i.e., the things in Revelation have already happened). What do you say to this?
NOTE: The following comments are mine and mine alone, and in response to the OP’s question about “preterism” I submit these thoughts in the spirit of love and understanding that I believe all posters on these blessed boards should always attempt to follow and abide by, and they’re not meant to show disrespect or contempt for any one person’s own views, and specifically to those that may disagree with me.

About this “view” of preterism, as I mentioned to Allegra and some others, I have looked into it with much prayer since in the surface it does look like a reasonable argument.

After having considered the possibility that perhaps all Bible prophesy has indeed been fulfilled, and that we now live “by faith” under the rulership of Jesus Christ under a Spiritual Kingdom which will only become physically evident as we move on from this world into that spiritual realm, I must conclude that there is insufficient evidence in both approved versions of scripture as well as in historical volumes and archives to back-up that claim.

Even though the Preterist view, that all prophesies Jesus declared during His ministry period on Earth, regarding the destruction of Herod’s Temple, were indeed fulfilled by 70AD, I see no accounts in history that many other prophesies regarding His second coming, and the state of the world in general, made in both the old and new testaments by Jesus and many other contributors, have been fulfilled as of yet and ever since 70AD to the present day.

Furthermore I tend to agree with the view of most biblical historians, that the book of Revelation was written by John “The beloved Apostle” during His imprisonment in the Isle of Patmos by the Roman Emperor Dominitian in 95AD. This date being some 25 years after the destruction of the Temple in 70AD clearly rules-out the possibility that “all prophesies” were fulfilled by 70AD since the whole of Revelation had not even been written at that time.

About the prophesies in the book of Revelation, the Holy Spirit is quite clear that even though there is a lot of symbolism involved, it would be foolish for us to “spiritualize away” the whole of the vision, without understanding that the purpose of it, just as the Book of Genesis denotes the beginning of the world and God’s relation to His creation, in Revelation the story of creation is brought to a close as the world is transformed from corruptible to incorruptible, and humans of all ages are judged to be found either worthy to continue in eternal fellowship with Him, or eternally punished for rejecting Him and His plan for salvation from said punishment, along with all the fallen angels that chose to rebel against Him long before the story began.

The judgments described in the book of Revelation and the events that lead-up to them, many of which were also foretold by many OT Prophets, are so definitive and unequivocally “real” and catastrophic in nature, that their effects would have left such an unmistakable and undeniable impression in the annals of human history, that the whole world would have no choice but to acknowledge the preterits’ view as not just a point of view among other viable views, but as the only real and historically accurate view.

In conclusion I will close with this, that the nature of prophesy is that until it is fulfilled and it becomes a historical fact it remains a “futuristic” declaration, but once fulfilled it can be declared to have been a true prophesy, since what was declared came to pass and now it has the benefit of historical record to prove the prophet was telling the truth. This is why we know that the Word of God is reliable, as it is a source of prophesy that enjoys a one hundred percent success rate of historical record to back-up the ninety-eight percent or so of prophesies contained within it’s pages that have been fulfilled. The problem with preterism, or more precisely “full preterism” is that it declares that the full one hundred percent of biblical prophesy has been fulfilled, but only ninety-eight percent or so of historical record exist to show for it, so are we then to take their word for it, that the other two percent of history we haven’t experienced yet already has taken place, but historians somehow were blinded so that we the church, and the hole world in general including they themselves, could not know that it did happen? I’m sorry my Preterist brothers, but I believe God is still working, and if He is working He Himself has not entered into His own rest, so if that’s true how can you claim so boldly that He has already entered into that rest by declaring “…It is done.” (Revelation 21:6). I love you, but I just don’t buy it. :cool:

Allegra
Jan 12th 2008, 06:24 AM
Sorry, but Revelation was written at an earlier date. John was exiled at the time of Nero's persecution of the saints. The "tyrant" spoken of was Nero. Mr. 666 in Hebrew.
Domitian persecuted Christians, but not Jews. The Jews were gone in 70AD.
Whatever Jew survived the Great Tribulation were sold as slaves to other areas in the Roman empire.
Revelation's prophetic symbols are all interpreted as having Jerusalem(the Harlot) The temple in Rev11, is still standing also.
That's why it had to be written in the time of Nero's rule (54AD-68AD) 1) because the temple wasn't destroyed until AD70 & most importantly, Mystery Babylon, which was unfaithful Jerusalem is depicted in Revelation as a major focal point of God's wrath for her full cup of sin.
Domitian's reign had nothing to do with the Jews & the Jewish rebellion that lead to the Romans destroying the city & the temple. They weren't around anymore after AD70.

I will follow up soon showing the book of Revelation, chapter by chapter.

Jesus returned, just like he promised his faithful Apostles He would "soon!"
:kiss:

DanDMan64
Jan 14th 2008, 09:21 PM
Allegra, Thank you for the rebuttal, I know you hold to this view and will defend it tooth and nail because you are convinced it's the truth, but I must point-out that it is still just a view, and though I could rebut your rebuttals, (in love) so you could perhaps see why I believe they are flawed, I'd rather just re-state what I said before, about my comments being what I have concluded about the preterits view, knowing that you're too far gone into the beliefs of "preterism" to even want to begin to see things as I see them.

I wish you well with you're explanation of Revelation, but having no further interest in trying to see things from your point of view I will now unsubscribe from this thread and move on to my own study of scripture, as I feel led of The Spirit to concentrate and focus on things that edify the body of Christ instead of things that tear it apart. :cry:

markedward
Jan 14th 2008, 09:35 PM
DanDMan, I've noticed on a few occasions that you tend to join in a Preterist discussion only to make an "exit" from the thread claiming that you are on your way to "edify the body of Christ," not "tear it apart."

Though you don't say it in as few words, you're essentially claiming that Preterism is "tearing apart" the body of Christ. Your comments like "you're too far gone" and "it is just a view" are intentionally painting Preterism as negative and harmful to the body of Christ, even if you're not saying it explicitly. Isn't Futurism "just a view"? Aren't you "too far gone" in your beliefs to "even begin to want to see things" as a Preterist sees them?

As I said before, I've noticed you join Preterist-related discussions only to make an exit with a comment on how the discussion does not edify the Church. Here's a few responses to that:

1) In the future, why not just desist from joining Preterist-related discussions to begin with if you're only going to make the exact same comments as you did in similar threads?

2) That particular topic may not "edify" you, but you cannot claim that it "tears apart" the body of Christ, because you do not represent the entire body of Christ, in which case, maybe that particular thread topic has "edified" someone in the body of Christ.

threebigrocks
Jan 14th 2008, 09:41 PM
Lay out the scripture to prove or disprove, but let's leave the personal comments out of the discussion.

threebigrocks
Jan 14th 2008, 09:43 PM
Isn't Futurism "just a view"?

Futurism?

Generally there are too many isms, not enough truth. ;)

Warrior4God
Jan 15th 2008, 12:31 AM
If all end time events have happened, (second coming of Christ, the rapture, the rule of the anti-christ, the judging and sending to hell of Satan and his demons) where does that leave us who consider ourselves to be Christians? Are we really not Christians, seeing as how we are here on earth and haven't been taken up to Heaven? Is this our final destiny, to be stuck on earth while the real Christians are in Heaven? There are several reasons why I don't believe the end time events have all been completed. There has been no rapture of people throughout the planet. If millions of people simply vanished in the twinkling of an eye, why have we not heard of it? During the return of Christ, the Bible states every eye will see him and all knees will bow and every tongue will confess He is Lord. That hasn't happened yet. There has been no anti-christ that has ruled over the entire earth. There has been no "mark of the beast" that has been forced on the entire earth in order for there to be selling and buying. There are still demons on earth causing all kinds of problems, (possessions, "haunted houses," paranormal/occult activity) so apparently they aren't languishing in hell like the Bible indicates. Sorry. There is just so much stuff, BIG STUFF, that has not happened.

markedward
Jan 15th 2008, 12:36 AM
If all end time events have happened (second coming of Christ, the rapture, the rule of the anti-christ, the judging and sending to hell of Satan and his demons) where does that leave us who consider ourselves to be Christians? Are we really not Christians, seeing as how we are here on earth and haven't been taken up to Heaven? Is this our final destiny, to be stuck on earth while the real Christians are in Heaven? ... There is just so much stuff, BIG STUFF, that has not happened.Not to say what you believe is wrong, but what you think Preterists believe isn't what they actually believe. For instance, you assume that Preterists believe "this [is] our final destiny, to be stuck on earth while the 'real' Christians are in Heaven." Few, if any at all, Christians who are Preterists believe that.

What has or hasn't happened yet depends on how you interpret Scripture, but if you believe Preterism is wrong, at least know what a Preterist-view actually believes before saying it's wrong.

Warrior4God
Jan 15th 2008, 01:54 PM
Not to say what you believe is wrong, but what you think Preterists believe isn't what they actually believe. For instance, you assume that Preterists believe "this [is] our final destiny, to be stuck on earth while the 'real' Christians are in Heaven." Few, if any at all, Christians who are Preterists believe that.

What has or hasn't happened yet depends on how you interpret Scripture, but if you believe Preterism is wrong, at least know what a Preterist-view actually believes before saying it's wrong.

Ok. Fair enough. Feel free, or somebody else feel free, to enlighten me as to what preterists believe. I am humble enough to admit that it's possible I have preconceived notions as to what they believe and it's entirely possible I am in error about those beliefs. Somebody give me a general overview, please.

Semi-tortured
Jan 15th 2008, 11:40 PM
So to the preterists, what state of being are we in? Are we in the millenium? Is this a state that is not referred to in the Bible at all? Is everything that happened in Revelation completely spiritual and not evident in any part of the last 2000 years (mostly talking about the 7 seals and trumpets)? Will this world here last forever and constantly feed the New Kingdom with fresh souls?

Ya see, some of it makes sense. Nero, the destruction of the temple and other things COULD be the correct viewpoint, but for them to be correct other things need to be explained.

I guess the main question I have is where are we now if the preterist view is correct?

Allegra
Jan 16th 2008, 02:06 AM
So to the preterists, what state of being are we in? Are we in the millenium? Is this a state that is not referred to in the Bible at all? Is everything that happened in Revelation completely spiritual and not evident in any part of the last 2000 years (mostly talking about the 7 seals and trumpets)? Will this world here last forever and constantly feed the New Kingdom with fresh souls?

Ya see, some of it makes sense. Nero, the destruction of the temple and other things COULD be the correct viewpoint, but for them to be correct other things need to be explained.

I guess the main question I have is where are we now if the preterist view is correct?
From the full preterist view, we are in the New Jerusalem spiritually. We have the new covenant blessings & the Holy Spirit. The heavenly Jerusalem is just that, in heaven. I believe the millennium was when Christ began His ministry & ended in 70AD when Christ destroyed the last enemy, death (spiritual death) That was Satan's power.
There was one group judgment of believers & unbelievers at that time also.
Everything is the same. We are individually glorified with the Lord in heaven immediately after we die. The judgment is immediate also for unbelievers. They go to the Lake of Fire.

Mograce2U
Jan 16th 2008, 03:23 AM
From the full preterist view, we are in the New Jerusalem spiritually. We have the new covenant blessings & the Holy Spirit. The heavenly Jerusalem is just that, in heaven. I believe the millennium was when Christ began His ministry & ended in 70AD when Christ destroyed the last enemy, death (spiritual death) That was Satan's power.
There was one group judgment of believers & unbelievers at that time also.
Everything is the same. We are individually glorified with the Lord in heaven immediately after we die. The judgment is immediate also for unbelievers. They go to the Lake of Fire.Thanks Allegra,
That helps me to know why I do not agree with the full preterist view!;)

Edit: Ok, I won't end on that note.

There is a reason that 1,000 years is emphasized in Rev 20 and it is because it is a much longer time than one generation - a time which does encompass those of us living beyond the 1st century. I do agree with your understanding that believers are raised at death to eternal life as we come. But I think the resurrection of the unjust is yet future and will be at the same time - at least for those who were not Israel. As for spiritual death being ended for the saints, I do agree with that, but I doubt that the 1st century believers would have understood it that way. I think they would have also expected physical death to be ended as well, which has not happened yet. That curse is still in the world.

There is a dispensational context which concerns Israel which I think many overlook, in that the promises made to them were fulfilled in their spiritual glory in Christ. There was a lifting up to heaven of the spiritual Jerusalem before the earthly city was destroyed, but we see that there is also to be a descending down again, and that has not happened yet either.

And that one passage about Satan's little season near the end of it all, is hard to reconcile as having already occurred when deception seems to be the state of things today.

Allegra
Jan 16th 2008, 05:49 AM
Thanks Allegra,
That helps me to know why I do not agree with the full preterist view!;)

Edit: Ok, I won't end on that note.

There is a reason that 1,000 years is emphasized in Rev 20 and it is because it is a much longer time than one generation - a time which does encompass those of us living beyond the 1st century. I do agree with your understanding that believers are raised at death to eternal life as we come. But I think the resurrection of the unjust is yet future and will be at the same time - at least for those who were not Israel. As for spiritual death being ended for the saints, I do agree with that, but I doubt that the 1st century believers would have understood it that way. I think they would have also expected physical death to be ended as well, which has not happened yet. That curse is still in the world.

There is a dispensational context which concerns Israel which I think many overlook, in that the promises made to them were fulfilled in their spiritual glory in Christ. There was a lifting up to heaven of the spiritual Jerusalem before the earthly city was destroyed, but we see that there is also to be a descending down again, and that has not happened yet either.

And that one passage about Satan's little season near the end of it all, is hard to reconcile as having already occurred when deception seems to be the state of things today.
Satan's "little season" was same as the Great tribulation. Rev.20 is a recap of the N.T. era. Ending with "fire coming down on "God's enemies" or Gog & Magog. The martyrs were priests of God & Christ in their earthly life in Rev20. That's why Rev.20 does not follow a chronological order. It's a summary of Revelation. At the 7th trumpet they were resurrected. That coincides with the Great Throne judgment in Rev20. The millennium is the part in scripture from Rev.20:1, when Satan's bound for a "thousand years" to where he's thrown in the lake of fire. The 3 1/2 yrs. was his "little season" which ended at the end of the age -of Biblical Judaism-& the harlot Jerusalem in AD70.
St. Paul said "God will crush Satan under your feet shortly." This is after Jesus already "bound" Satan in His 1st advent. Satan had the power of death. This was spiritual death from rejecting Christ. In this sense Christ destroyed Satan's power over spiritual death- which leads to eternal death. If you are waiting for physical death to cease when we are on this earth, I can tell you that that's not what is written. That only happens in eternity. That's what the promise of eternal life was & is!
Is Satan still around? Probably. But what Jesus did was end Satan's power over us in regards to death so that we may live abundantly & eternally.
The Judgment was not just the rebellious Jews. Pagan Rome, or more specifically, the beast (Nero) & the false prophet (Gessius Florus-the Roman governor of Judea under Nero who incited the Jews into rebellion) they were destroyed also "by the brightness of His Coming."
Ezekiel's vision of the temple-city on the high & holy mount was fulfilled at the Parousia in Rev.14:1. The redeemed on Mt. Zion. Mt. Zion represents the kingdom of God.
The Parousia, which is said in Rev. to be soon, would bring the consummation consisting of the heavenly Jerusalem coming to rest on the holy & heavenly Mt. Zion. The greatest symbol of earthly Israel - the capital city of Jerusalem situated on Mt. Zion-is now revealed in its infinitely higher antitype. Ezekiel's vision of the fully restored fellowship with God & man. That which was lost in the earthly Eden situated on its mount, & which was symbolically pictured in the earthly Jerusalem on its mountain, is now fully restored in the consummated, heavenly, New Jerusalem on its mountain of the new covenant kingdom of the Messiah.

markedward
Jan 16th 2008, 07:15 AM
So to the preterists, what state of being are we in? Are we in the millenium?Personally, I believe we are. I don't see the "thousand years" as a literal one-thousand years, but symbolic for a large, undefined amount of time. Scripture says God owns the cattle on only "a thousand hills," but do we take that "thousand" literally? Of course not, we interpret it as saying God owns all of the cattle, while the exact number of them is a large, undefined number.


Is everything that happened in Revelation completely spiritual and not evident in any part of the last 2000 years (mostly talking about the 7 seals and trumpets)?I think it's a combination of both. I mean, you don't believe a literal seven-headed beast is going to walk out of the sea do you? The only difference between my personal Preterist interpretation of the Revelation and the overall Futurist interpretation is what symbols we believe represent what, and when they were fulfilled.


Will this world here last forever and constantly feed the New Kingdom with fresh souls?Well, scientifically speaking, no, the world is not going to last forever.


Ya see, some of it makes sense. Nero, the destruction of the temple and other things COULD be the correct viewpoint, but for them to be correct other things need to be explained. I'd be happy to explain these "other things" to you through PM or even an IM chat.


I guess the main question I have is where are we now if the preterist view is correct?That is going to get a varied response from different types of Preterists. After all, the same question would get many different responses from different types of Futurists as well.

Nihil Obstat
Jan 16th 2008, 07:20 AM
Does Preterism's foundation lay solely upon an early writing date of Revelation? What would happen if Revelation was not written before 70 AD, but (as I believe) was written after - like around the early 90s? Would Preterism still exist?

markedward
Jan 16th 2008, 07:31 AM
Does Preterism's foundation lay solely upon an early writing date of Revelation? What would happen if Revelation was not written before 70 AD, but (as I believe) was written after - like around the early 90s? Would Preterism still exist?In response, I would like to turn the question around: does Futurism's foundation rely solely upon a late writing date of Revelation?

I don't want to get too into it, but from all that I've read, just about every late-date source (even the ones of ancient history) relies upon one source that was ambiguous in what it was even saying.

On the other hand, instead of relying upon external sources, I tend to rely upon the internal evidence found in the Revelation (and the epistles) to come to my conclusions for an early writing date.

The early-date/late-date argument can be debated both ways with good external evidence on both sides, but the best way to go is to use internal evidence to determine whether an early- or a late-date is more likely. In all honesty, I was once a Futurist, but when I was presented the internal evidence first (and then the external evidence later) I became convinced of a Preterist viewtype. In my personal experience, I weighed both sides of the debate (and was biased for the late-date on top of that), but I still found the early-date more believable.

Nihil Obstat
Jan 16th 2008, 07:41 AM
That's nice, but you side stepped my question - I'm really only looking for a "yes" or "no", though some explanation wouldn't hurt...
but from your own testimony, it sounds as if that may be the case.

And the evidence that Revelation was written after 70 AD is internal evidence, found in the book of Revelation (11:1)...
but let's say for fun that it was written before 70 AD - I'd still believe that it's fulfillment is yet future... so that's a "no" to your question.

markedward
Jan 16th 2008, 04:21 PM
but from your own testimony, it sounds as if that may be the case.What "may be the case"?


And the evidence that Revelation was written after 70 AD is internal evidence, found in the book of Revelation (11:1)...How is Revelation 11:1 evidence? Because John is told to measure the temple? Two problems with this being used as evidence for a late-date:

1 - It could equally be used as evidence for an early-date (pre-70 AD) writing, in that a person would say John is being told to measure a temple that is described as standing, which was standing pre-70 AD.

2 - Even if it is used to provide evidence for a late-date writing, such an interpretation then assumes that there will be a third temple, which is consistently wrong with the Bible in itself. The first and second temples were only built by God's permission. The purpose of the first and second temples was to perform the daily sacrifices as atonement for sins. Since Scripture states Jesus is our one and only sacrifice and that He is our Temple, then a third temple built for the same purpose as the first two temples would blaspheme Jesus' sacrifice. The first and second temples were literally only built when God allowed them to be built, so if a third temple is built, it wouldn't be by God's hand as the previous two were, because the construction of a third temple would undermine Jesus' one and only sacrifice. In that case, if a third temple would be blaspheming the true sacrifice (Jesus) by performing the "shadow" sacrifices, how could that temple be desecrated to begin with?


but let's say for fun that it was written before 70 AD - I'd still believe that it's fulfillment is yet future... so that's a "no" to your question.Yet, if it was 70 AD, it would have been future... to the John and the people of his time. When we read prophecies from Isaiah concerning Babylon or Egypt or Edom or Assyria, we don't read those and say they're in our future... they were in the future, but not ours. It could easily have been the same way with John's Revelation.

Mograce2U
Jan 16th 2008, 04:56 PM
Satan's "little season" was same as the Great tribulation. Rev.20 is a recap of the N.T. era. Ending with "fire coming down on "God's enemies" or Gog & Magog. The martyrs were priests of God & Christ in their earthly life in Rev20. That's why Rev.20 does not follow a chronological order. It's a summary of Revelation. At the 7th trumpet they were resurrected. That coincides with the Great Throne judgment in Rev20. The millennium is the part in scripture from Rev.20:1, when Satan's bound for a "thousand years" to where he's thrown in the lake of fire. The 3 1/2 yrs. was his "little season" which ended at the end of the age -of Biblical Judaism-& the harlot Jerusalem in AD70.
St. Paul said "God will crush Satan under your feet shortly." This is after Jesus already "bound" Satan in His 1st advent. Satan had the power of death. This was spiritual death from rejecting Christ. In this sense Christ destroyed Satan's power over spiritual death- which leads to eternal death. If you are waiting for physical death to cease when we are on this earth, I can tell you that that's not what is written. That only happens in eternity. That's what the promise of eternal life was & is!
Is Satan still around? Probably. But what Jesus did was end Satan's power over us in regards to death so that we may live abundantly & eternally.
The Judgment was not just the rebellious Jews. Pagan Rome, or more specifically, the beast (Nero) & the false prophet (Gessius Florus-the Roman governor of Judea under Nero who incited the Jews into rebellion) they were destroyed also "by the brightness of His Coming."
Ezekiel's vision of the temple-city on the high & holy mount was fulfilled at the Parousia in Rev.14:1. The redeemed on Mt. Zion. Mt. Zion represents the kingdom of God.
The Parousia, which is said in Rev. to be soon, would bring the consummation consisting of the heavenly Jerusalem coming to rest on the holy & heavenly Mt. Zion. The greatest symbol of earthly Israel - the capital city of Jerusalem situated on Mt. Zion-is now revealed in its infinitely higher antitype. Ezekiel's vision of the fully restored fellowship with God & man. That which was lost in the earthly Eden situated on its mount, & which was symbolically pictured in the earthly Jerusalem on its mountain, is now fully restored in the consummated, heavenly, New Jerusalem on its mountain of the new covenant kingdom of the Messiah.Rev 20 could be a recap except that Rev 12 & 13 show the devil as the dragon, as anything but bound in the 1st century. He is the power working behind both beasts who are deceiving the nations. It is only after the battle in ch 19 that we see the beast and false prophet thrown into the lake of fire, and it is then that Satan too is captured and bound and imprisoned. Rev 20 is the time of the millenial kingdom which 1000 years shows is an unspecified period of time in which the first resurrection has begun.

You cannot escape that prior to 70 AD the saints were warned in the NT to hold fast in the face of his actions while he was prowling about as a roaring lion, lest they lose what they had gained. There is no release of Satan once he is thrown in the lake with the other two, only from his "prison". His little season is therefore another far future time which the 1000 years indicates. Everything else in Rev is "soon" and "near at hand" - except this. When he is tossed into the lake it specifically points to his joining the other two who are already there but after this 1000 years is ended.

When the 2 beasts and the kings in the battle in Rev 19 are slain it is by the sword that comes from the mouth of the Lord. This is prophecy being fulfilled, not a fire from heaven. In that battle the slain are everywhere - where the vultures are gathered. In Rev 20 the fire consumes Magog and Satan is cast into the lake and it is ALL over. I don't see that these are parallel accounts of the same event, but two different times. What makes them similar is the activity of Satan is resumed in his being able to deceive on a mass scale once again. There was no ceasing of his activity during the 40 yrs from the cross to 70 AD, which is why the saints were warned.

What had happened was that Satan was cast out of heaven and into the earth, where he could no longer accuse the brethren before God. It is during this period his wrath increased because he knew his time was short. Yet he was not able to touch the remnant of Israel but was able to afflict the saints who already believed in Jesus. And he did this by deceiving the rest to persecute the saints. That tribulation we see is over.

The saints are in the camp in ch 20 where they have been kept safe for that unspecified period of 1000 years when he is released. But we don't see anything to relate us back to the trib which is since over other than his ability to deceive the world to come against us. The mention of Gog & Magog is to point us to Ezekiel and those ancient enemies of Israel provide a type for the enemies of the Church which is now on a much grander scale. Rev 19's battle was localized upon the nation and Jerusalem, but the final battle is global. And that is what we see today as the saints are scattered in all the earth as well.

Full preterism is failing to prepare the saints for what they must face in the world during Satan's little season. A season in which no specific antichrist is going to rise up to world dominance, but whose spiritual evil permeates it none the less.

Nihil Obstat
Jan 16th 2008, 08:38 PM
Yet, if it was 70 AD, it would have been future... to the John and the people of his time.

So is that a "yes"? Why won't you answer my question?

If the book of Revelation was seen and written by John after 70 AD, would Preterism still stand?

markedward
Jan 16th 2008, 08:47 PM
If the book of Revelation was seen and written by John after 70 AD, would Preterism still stand?A direct answer to your question is "no."

But you seem to underemphasize the "if" as if it's been proven to be otherwise. Again, there is strong external evidence for both early- and late-dates... but not proof. Try to remember that.

Something you seem to imply is that:

Late-date: Revelation applies to the distant future.

Early-date: Revelation applies to 70 AD or the distant future.

You seem to be convinced that even if the Revelation was written at an early-date that it would still automatically refer to the distant future. But if the Revelation was written at an early-date, keep in mind that the epistles and the Revelation itself continually prophesy "soon" and in that case they would definitely have happened "soon" after the words were written, exactly as the prophesies said (even moreso, within the generation of the disciples as Jesus said). A Preterist view emphasizes those verses to show that an early-fulfillment was believed by the apostles. A Futurist view drastically de-emphasizes those verses, sometimes outright ignoring them, in order to make it fit into a distant-future view.

Allegra
Jan 16th 2008, 08:49 PM
[QUOTE]Rev 20 could be a recap except that Rev 12 & 13 show the devil as the dragon, as anything but bound in the 1st century. He is the power working behind both beasts who are deceiving the nations.
That's bc in Rev 12 & 13, Satan has been thrown down from heaven for his "little season."

It is only after the battle in ch 19 that we see the beast and false prophet thrown into the lake of fire, and it is then that Satan too is captured and bound and imprisoned.
When the beast & the f. prophet are destroyed (ch.19) it is the same time as Satan except Satan's gets more attention by being in the next chapter alone. It is for emphasis that Satan is last of the 3 to be mentioned going into the Lake of Fire.

Rev 20 is the time of the millenial kingdom which 1000 years shows is an unspecified period of time in which the first resurrection has begun.
We agree that the "thousand yrs." is figurative. But this millennium is introduced with Satan being bound for that period. Since he was destroyed (or at least his power over spiritual death was symbolically destroyed in the L.O.F.) Then the "millennium" or "thousand yrs." would be over. More on this ,I think below.


You cannot escape that prior to 70 AD the saints were warned in the NT to hold fast in the face of his actions while he was prowling about as a roaring lion, lest they lose what they had gained. There is no release of Satan once he is thrown in the lake with the other two, only from his "prison". His little season is therefore another far future time which the 1000 years indicates. Everything else in Rev is "soon" and "near at hand" - except this. When he is tossed into the lake it specifically points to his joining the other two who are already there but after this 1000 years is ended.
Yes, but" Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil. " During His ministry, He gave an undeniable exhortation. Mt.12:28-29, 28 But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you. 29 Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house.
From the time Jesus said that phrase, we believers, have the power, in Jesus' name, to bind any bad thing on earth! The disciples too did learn that. They came back & excitedly reported to Jesus that "even demons were subject to them." This is why at the time of Christ's ministry (since He appeared on earth the 1st time) until "Satan's little season," the devil was bound (per Rev.20:1-3) Before Jesus came on the scene, the devil had "free reign."


When the 2 beasts and the kings in the battle in Rev 19 are slain it is by the sword that comes from the mouth of the Lord. This is prophecy being fulfilled, not a fire from heaven. In that battle the slain are everywhere - where the vultures are gathered. In Rev 20 the fire consumes Magog and Satan is cast into the lake and it is ALL over. I don't see that these are parallel accounts of the same event, but two different times. What makes them similar is the activity of Satan is resumed in his being able to deceive on a mass scale once again. There was no ceasing of his activity during the 40 yrs from the cross to 70 AD, which is why the saints were warned.
The text tells us that "Satan was bound from deceiving the nations."
The souls of all from Adam to the cross were held in bondage.(Heb.2:14)
Then from the time of Christ till the last 3 1/2 yrs of the "millennium" Satan's power & influence of sin & death is curtailed, repressed, & restricted. Satan's "little season" exemplifies the heightened or escalated power of the evil one to influence those who turned away from Christ, & were then destroyed eternally. John 1:6-9, 6There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. 7He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. 8He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.
"Fire coming down from heaven" is symbolic & is parallel to the destruction of Babylon. It's the same as Christ coming ch.19. They all are the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. Gog & Magog is representative of "the enemies of God"." Not the same as in Ezekiel. But the same theme as it would be against God's true people. (Ezekiel's Gog was the king of the North as in Daniel 11. That was Antiochus Epiphanes IV. But that also was when "the faithful of Israel was the good guy)
Fire coming down from heaven is symbolic. It has prophetic meaning to give us the reality of the symbols.
In Jerusalem's case, it was the the fiery tar & pitch-laden missiles that the Roman army hurled at her to destroy the gates & walls by fire.
The same scene in Rev 19 is representative of God's enemies being destroyed. The beast(Nero) & the f. prophet both had a violent death.



What had happened was that Satan was cast out of heaven and into the earth, where he could no longer accuse the brethren before God. It is during this period his wrath increased because he knew his time was short. Yet he was not able to touch the remnant of Israel but was able to afflict the saints who already believed in Jesus. And he did this by deceiving the rest to persecute the saints. That tribulation we see is over.
If the righteous remnant in Jerusalem & the gentile Christians that were in Jerusalem fled the city during the escalation of the tribulation period, then they were not subjected that persecution. This they did, from history, they heeded Christ's words from the Mt. of Olives discourse. Many Christians(both Jew & Gentile) left the city. Those saints that were subjected to persecution would be those, both Jew & Gentile saints. The text just infers that if they didn't worship the emperor, both in deeds(right hand) & thoughts(forehead) "mark" they were killed.
Actually Nero began persecuting Christians in 64 AD-68 AD, almost 42 months exactly-till he died.
And "the sealed on the forehead" is symbolic of their destiny only, not that they necessarily wouldn't be killed- if they were there in the midst of the great tribulation.


The saints are in the camp in ch 20 where they have been kept safe for that unspecified period of 1000 years when he is released. But we don't see anything to relate us back to the trib which is since over other than his ability to deceive the world to come against us. The mention of Gog & Magog is to point us to Ezekiel and those ancient enemies of Israel provide a type for the enemies of the Church which is now on a much grander scale. Rev 19's battle was localized upon the nation and Jerusalem, but the final battle is global. And that is what we see today as the saints are scattered in all the earth as well.
I only see speculation with these kinds of theories. Jerusalem was the harlot in 70AD.
It was the end of the Jewish commonwealth, the end of the age, time for the new covenant to be ushered in. But first, the old had to be removed, just as written in Hebrews.


Full preterism is failing to prepare the saints for what they must face in the world during Satan's little season. A season in which no specific antichrist is going to rise up to world dominance, but whose spiritual evil permeates it none the less.
That too is like fiction to me. If one believes that Satan's short time happened & ended in 70AD, then I can say (I speak for myself obviously) that I have full peace about reality. Jesus' message of the blessings in Him resonate in my mind & life. I don't ever want to take those promises of God's will for us for granted. I will be thankful in all things. And the precious give of the Holy Spirit is enough for me.
Life is a test. He who runs a good race is ultimately rewarded in the next life.
The only thief in the night I ever considered was taken care of. I have an alarm system & a nice s/s .380 handgun. I pray regularly that either one of them will serve me well!

Cheers MoGrace2U!

Nihil Obstat
Jan 17th 2008, 12:44 AM
A direct answer to your question is "no."

Thank you.

Now, I'd still like to know though what would happen to Preterism if it was known beyond doubt that Revelation was written after 70 AD?

Clifton
Jan 17th 2008, 01:34 AM
Thank you.

Now, I'd still like to know though what would happen to Preterism if it was known beyond doubt that Revelation was written after 70 AD?

The Founder of Preterism was Spanish Jesuit Luis de Alcazar (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Luis+De+Alcazar+%22&btnG=Google+Search) ;

Since Irenaeus (of the late 2nd Century) spoke to people to who spoke to John The Presbyter face to face, I do not see the finalizing of the product that early (70 A.D.). Also, a 25 year research by R.H. Charles reveals that basicially speaking, it was "first penned" from centuries before Christ, on up to the mid of the 90's A.D.

http://www.dabar.org/RHCharles/Revelation/intro-VII.htm

Of course, if the final coming/parasousia is to take everyone by surprise ("unexpectedly"), maybe the world will have all turned preterist by then.:D

Allegra
Jan 17th 2008, 01:48 AM
Thank you.

Now, I'd still like to know though what would happen to Preterism if it was known beyond doubt that Revelation was written after 70 AD?

The day that 666 means Domitian in Hebrew. The day that Domitian stirred up Vespasian to destroy the harlot(Jerusalem) which is written in Revelation-when the Jews were no longer after AD70.
The day the Jesus' words are removed from Rev.3:7-13 or I can't read:
To the Church in Philadelphia

7"To the angel of the church in Philadelphia write:
These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. 8I know your deeds. See, I have placed before you an open door that no one can shut. I know that you have little strength, yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. 9I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. 10Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth. 11I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown. 12Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on him my new name. 13He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. (emph. mine)
Where were the Jews again after AD70? Non-existent. Sold as slaves.

Preterism is just now outselling futurism. It is needed to dispel the fables & fiction put forth by uninspired & sensational writers.
After all, Revelation says:"this calls for a mind with wisdom." In Daniel 12 it's said "but the wise will understand" (the end time)
To me there is nothing wise about futurism when you study history & line in it up perfectly with the Holy Writ.
Sorry astrongerthanhe, I believe your time frame is wrong. :(

But I still luvya. :)
P.S. I Only trust Clement's writings. The rest of the apostolic fathers (70-120AD) miscommunicated, were misinformed, & or had an ecclesiastical agenda. "And do not call any man on earth father." (Mt.23:9)

Nihil Obstat
Jan 17th 2008, 03:33 AM
I will not get into a debate now about when Revelation was written - I just want a simple answer to my question: If Revelation was written after 70 AD, what would happen to Preterism? From the way the Preterists here have been responding to my simple questions, with much defense concerning an early date, or claiming that we cannot know, or dancing around it, I can only but conclude that a late date would deal a fatal blow to Preterism... am I right to think this? Anyone here willing to give it to me plain? I feel as if I've struck a nerve, and it's encouraging me...

Nihil Obstat
Jan 17th 2008, 04:12 AM
Ah. See, that's an example of a short coming of this type of medium: human error. I misunderstood markedward. I apologize. You did answer me plainly. And that must be then why Preterists are so die-hard about an early date for Revelation, because a late date would destroy Preterism; it could no longer stand if Revelation was written (as I believe it was) after 70 AD. Sorry for mis-reading your post.

Just think: if we'd been having this conversation face-to-face, we'd be on to bigger and better things!

Nihil Obstat
Jan 17th 2008, 04:14 AM
Well, now I will begin to prove that Revelation was written after 70 AD! Get your rebuttals ready...

Mograce2U
Jan 17th 2008, 04:50 AM
Allegra,
Thanks for the detailed answer, but I am unconvinced that the "1000 years" while unspecified, is such a short period of time as to equal one generation. John uses the same term when counting out the 1260 days. There it surely means 1000.

Clifton
Jan 17th 2008, 04:54 AM
I will not get into a debate now about when Revelation was written - I just want a simple answer to my question: If Revelation was written after 70 AD, what would happen to Preterism? From the way the Preterists here have been responding to my simple questions, with much defense concerning an early date, or claiming that we cannot know, or dancing around it, I can only but conclude that a late date would deal a fatal blow to Preterism... am I right to think this? Anyone here willing to give it to me plain? I feel as if I've struck a nerve, and it's encouraging me...


The evidence is out there, and has always been - including newer discoveries, though in this case, about the same, though perhaps more clearer. If it is a smack-in-the face thing, and more like a knock to the floor, then preterism will just have to return back to the way it started when Spanish Jesuit Luis de Alcazar (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Luis+De+Alcazar+%22&btnG=Google+Search) invented the preterist system, and that is, that "the book of revelation" ended with Domanitia (I can't spell it right now) - like many futurists - they change with the times ;-)

Clifton
Jan 17th 2008, 05:00 AM
Allegra,
Thanks for the detailed answer, but I am unconvinced that the "1000 years" while unspecified, is such a short period of time as to equal one generation. John uses the same term when counting out the 1260 days. There it surely means 1000.

I believe the 1260 days refer to when Mary/Joseph fled to Egypt with the Baby Christ, to avoid the wrath of Herod. OTOH, the verb shifts in Rev. will drive one nuts - it could be The Seer used those particular documents (in re of Mary, etc.), to cast it into a future molding. Who knows with Revelation. We are all right and wrong :)

Clifton
Jan 17th 2008, 05:03 AM
Preterism is just now outselling futurism.

But that won't phase Hollywood writers :lol:

Mograce2U
Jan 17th 2008, 05:06 AM
I believe the 1260 days refer to when Mary/Joseph fled to Egypt with the Baby Christ, to avoid the wrath of Herod. OTOH, the verb shifts in Rev. will drive one nuts - it could be The Seer used those particular documents (in re of Mary, etc.), to cast it into a future molding. Who knows with Revelation. We are all right and wrong :)
Hi Clinton,
Well the book is written as though we are supposed to know. What makes it more cryptic to me is to think of those things as yet future. Prophecy is never about speculation - which futurism is full of. There is something there we ought to be able to see and know, and yet - to me - both futurism and full preterism fails to reveal.

I think I will sit on this fence a bit longer...

matthew94
Jan 17th 2008, 06:04 AM
Actually, preterism does NOT stand or fall on the early date. I used to think it did. But I have some minister friends who are preterists who think Revelation wasn't written until toward the end of the 1st century or even later. I disagree with them, but in their view Revelation is a de-facto (after the fact) prophecy. This type of prophecy is not meant to predict what is about to take place, but is a commentary on what has taken place using the language of predictive prophecy. Many Christians feel the same way about the book of Daniel.

So while I do not personally endorse this view, it is quite possible for preterism to stand even with the late date.

Nihil Obstat
Jan 17th 2008, 06:52 AM
Actually, preterism does NOT stand or fall on the early date. I used to think it did. But I have some minister friends who are preterists who think Revelation wasn't written until toward the end of the 1st century or even later. I disagree with them, but in their view Revelation is a de-facto (after the fact) prophecy. This type of prophecy is not meant to predict what is about to take place, but is a commentary on what has taken place using the language of predictive prophecy. Many Christians feel the same way about the book of Daniel.

So while I do not personally endorse this view, it is quite possible for preterism to stand even with the late date.

So it's a "de-facto prophecy"...? And how's that considered prophecy? Isn't that an oxymoron?

Nihil Obstat
Jan 17th 2008, 09:58 AM
When John wrote Revelation - who's understanding was opened by Jesus to comprehend the OT Scriptures (Luke 24:45) - he wrote what he saw as it played out before him, and the vision given him by God was in the "language" of many OT passages. John recognized what he was seeing to be references to specific verses in the OT, and these were not to be divorced from the context surrounding those verses. Does Preterism acknowledge this?

If so, would Preterism agree that Rev. 11:1 is a reference to Eze. 40:1-4?

Mograce2U
Jan 17th 2008, 03:31 PM
When John wrote Revelation - who's understanding was opened by Jesus to comprehend the OT Scriptures (Luke 24:45) - he wrote what he saw as it played out before him, and the vision given him by God was in the "language" of many OT passages. John recognized what he was seeing to be references to specific verses in the OT, and these were not to be divorced from the context surrounding those verses. Does Preterism acknowledge this?

If so, would Preterism agree that Rev. 11:1 is a reference to Eze. 40:1-4?It might be of note to see that who is doing the measuring in Ezek 40 or Zec 2 is an angel, while John is told to measure the temple in Rev 11. In Ezek & Zec there was not a temple or city in existence, while in Rev there was a temple still standing in John's day.

Clifton
Jan 17th 2008, 03:35 PM
Hi Clinton,
Well the book is written as though we are supposed to know. What makes it more cryptic to me is to think of those things as yet future. Prophecy is never about speculation - which futurism is full of. There is something there we ought to be able to see and know, and yet - to me - both futurism and full preterism fails to reveal.

I think I will sit on this fence a bit longer...


As for me, I venture for a more balanced position. According to what I read in the End Times forum, there are preterists, Historicist, and Futurists.

So now I am all 3 and in between and the outers of the 3. :D

Mograce2U
Jan 17th 2008, 03:41 PM
Actually, preterism does NOT stand or fall on the early date. I used to think it did. But I have some minister friends who are preterists who think Revelation wasn't written until toward the end of the 1st century or even later. I disagree with them, but in their view Revelation is a de-facto (after the fact) prophecy. This type of prophecy is not meant to predict what is about to take place, but is a commentary on what has taken place using the language of predictive prophecy. Many Christians feel the same way about the book of Daniel.

So while I do not personally endorse this view, it is quite possible for preterism to stand even with the late date.That doesn't seem to make sense since John was told to write these things down and send them to the churches about things that were soon to take place. What would be the point in his writing it after the fact? Doesn't sound like obedience on his part to the vision he was given. Daniel either, who makes a point of giving us historical markers for when he received his visions.

Clifton
Jan 17th 2008, 03:43 PM
Well, now I will begin to prove that Revelation was written after 70 AD! Get your rebuttals ready...


Before and After;) Or do you mean, when the product when put together?

Did you check the link I gave you, which is a preface of R.H. Charles work? The copyright to those 2 volumes have expired, and are available in various formats - though, the PDF format is really the only one I can see as readable - each volume is over 500 pages (though they be short pages), and includes the reordered passages in English as well. I would stick the dabar website postings of the preface of Charles work for now, but if you want the two volumes, let me know, and I will provide the two links.;)

What about DSS Revelation? Which conveys a pre-Christian text, and makes the Book Of Revelation in the Bible look like a "plagiarism rip-off" (some people's opinion)?

Clifton
Jan 17th 2008, 03:49 PM
Actually, preterism does NOT stand or fall on the early date. I used to think it did. But I have some minister friends who are preterists who think Revelation wasn't written until toward the end of the 1st century or even later. I disagree with them, but in their view Revelation is a de-facto (after the fact) prophecy. This type of prophecy is not meant to predict what is about to take place, but is a commentary on what has taken place using the language of predictive prophecy. Many Christians feel the same way about the book of Daniel.

I have learned this in my studies as well. When Alcazar started this mode of interpretation, the students that followed adhered that the book was put together in the 90's, and it's writings ended with Domitian.


So while I do not personally endorse this view, it is quite possible for preterism to stand even with the late date.

Oh well, we live, learn and progress throughout our lives, and adjust our beliefs about such things as eschatology, but the important thing is, our faith holds all the more strongly. ;)

Mograce2U
Jan 17th 2008, 03:58 PM
I am wondering if anybody in this thread would like to list some of the things that were keys that helped bring them over to the Preterist point of view?

One similarity I discovered was in seeing how Paul wrote to the Thessalonians about the man of sin was very much like how John writes about the identity of the name of the beast. These were volatile political times and both writers seem to make a point of not spelling out in writing who they are speaking about. Paul says enough to remind his audience of what he had discussed with them when was with them. And John seems also to expect his audience to know by the symbolism he uses rather than to name his name.

To me this shows that current events were in view.

Clifton
Jan 17th 2008, 04:25 PM
Just a reminder at the outset of this thread:
Choose your words carefully.................;)



(also called Hyper-Preterism, and Hymenean-Preterism).

And Pantelism as well, i.e. Pantelists, as some of them preferred to be called ;)

Clifton
Jan 17th 2008, 07:39 PM
Fasten your seat belts...

For ye preterists, historicists, and futurists, I refer to you to Post 1504083.

...and soar on wings of glory.

matthew94
Jan 17th 2008, 09:17 PM
So it's a "de-facto prophecy"...? And how's that considered prophecy? Isn't that an oxymoron?

As I said, I don't take this view, but I do think I can describe their position.

In their view....a writer (John) saw the events surrounding AD70 and lived on to the end of the 1st century. Those who lived through these events found them very confusing and wondered if God had a plan through all of this. John was then inspired to write an account in an apocalyptic and prophetic genre AS IF he were writing prior to the event. WHY? To show that all of this was ordered and controlled by the Lord, that God had a plan that He was working on through this history.

Those who take this view also view Daniel this way. They think Daniel was written around the time of Antiochus Ephiphanes. This was a very confusing time for the Jews and they needed a message from the Lord to convey to them that He was in control of history despite the circumstances. From this perspective, the author of Daniel wasn't PREDICTING a babylonian and then Persian and the Greek Empire. He was living in the midst of the Greek Empire. He only provided the de-facto prophecies to show God's sovereign control through those years. They say this explains why Daniel's 'predictions' are so clear cut for the Babylonian and Persian empires, but become more cloudy for the period of Antiochus Ephiphanes (the author didn't actually know what would happen yet).

Obviously this view is considered extremely liberal by many evangelicals. But I mentioned it b/c I have relatively conservative evangelical friends who are indeed preterists and late date the book of Revelation.

Partaker of Christ
Jan 24th 2008, 11:10 PM
Forgive me for not yet reading any of the previous posts, but a thought occured to me that I need to ask, before I log off.

If the view is that all of prophesy regarding Christ second coming was fulfilled in AD70, why would Jesus and the angels (even those who spoke to Daniel) not know the day or the hour?
Jesus knew when He was to lay down His life, so all He would have to do is calculate the days given in prophecy, and say AD70.
If Jesus did not know, and the angels did not know, then it had not been prophesied anywhere in scripture, before His death.

Allegra
Jan 25th 2008, 02:53 AM
Forgive me for not yet reading any of the previous posts, but a thought occured to me that I need to ask, before I log off.

If the view is that all of prophesy regarding Christ second coming was fulfilled in AD70, why would Jesus and the angels (even those who spoke to Daniel) not know the day or the hour?
Jesus knew when He was to lay down His life, so all He would have to do is calculate the days given in prophecy, and say AD70.
If Jesus did not know, and the angels did not know, then it had not been prophesied anywhere in scripture, before His death.
Hi partaker,
I'm glad you asked bc I have a beautiful answer for you. I agreed with this author's main points, but he elaborates on it so well, that I will quote from his book, "Who is this Babylon" by Don K.Preston (2006)
quote:One of the most common attempts to off-set the time statements of the nearness of Christ's return is an appeal to Matthew 24:36, "But of that day and hour knows no man, not the angels in heaven, but the Father only." It is maintained because Jesus did not know the time, it is evident that no one today could know the time. If Jesus did not know when He was to come, then surely the disciples who wrote the Bible could not have known if the Day was truly near.
To maintain that the New Testament statements about the nearness of Christ's parousia cannot be taken at face value, because in Matthew 24 Jesus did not know the time himself, is to be guilty of the worst sort of anachronistic error. The authors of the epistles most assuredly thoughtthey knew that the end was near,"Little children, it is the last hour!" (1John 2:18). To suggest that the NT does not contain revelatio about when the parousia was to occur is patently false.
This argument totally ignores the fact that Jesus' statement in Matthew was before His ascension to the Father, and before the sending of the Spirit to inspire the apostolic revelation of the Word.
In John 14:26, Jesus told His disciples that the Father was going to send the Spirit to them. This is critical, for it is not Jesus in his humanity that was to inspire them, but the Father that knew the day and hour!
Jesus promised, "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things." Jesus was telling them that the Father would send the Spirit to guide them. Thus, when the disciples, after receiving the Spirit, wrote that the Day of the Lord was at hand, we can rest assured that the Father, who knew the Day and Hour, was causing them to tell the truth on the matter!
Jesus further told His disciples that when the Spirit came, "He will guide you into all truth, and show you things to come" (John16:13). It is undeniable, therefore, that the function of the Spirit, sent from the Father, was to reveal the events of the future to the disciples.
This is particularly relevant in Revelation where we read, "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to Him to show to His servants- things which must shortly take place....the time is near" (Revelation 1:1-3).
end quote.

I hope that helps to answer your question, partaker of Christ.

BTW, Preston's book is excellent. One of my favorites.

Clifton
Jan 25th 2008, 02:53 PM
Hi partaker,
... This is particularly relevant in Revelation where we read, "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to Him to show to His servants- things which must shortly take place....the time is near" (Revelation 1:1-3).
end quote.

I hope that helps to answer your question, partaker of Christ.

BTW, Preston's book is excellent. One of my favorites.


There is nothing in the Greek of Revelation 1:1-3 that reads the way you, and/or the one you quote from, conveyed it. The Greek, "en taxei" (your rendering appears to have dropped the "en") literally means "with speed" - IOW, "with quickness / shortness", and is in regards to rapidity of motion.
It means when the things do take place, they will occur quickly; re: with speed / quickness (compared to thousands of years of history, that is true).

"Shortly" itself is a valid word for the Greek, because it can mean "briefly; in an abrupt manner"; The phrase "take place shortly" would be valid to convey the Greek, but no better than the phrase "shortly take place" when it comes to rendering the meaning(s) and thought(s) into English for the reader".

1 ¶ "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to Him to show to His slaves what things are necessary to occur with quickness. And He made it known, having sent through His angel to His slave John," (Rev 1:1 ALT (http://www.dtl.org/alt/))

The following two translation give good renderings, but the meaning can be innocently misconstrued, and I do not see the Greek "en" being translated, unless they are just translating "en taxei" as "quickly":

1 ¶ A Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to Him to show to His slaves things which must occur quickly. And He signified by sending through His angel to His slave, John, (LITV)

1 ¶ The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His servants; things which must happen quickly. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John, (VW (http://www.a-voice.org/))

But even so, when understood properly in accordance with the Greek, it conveys that when the things being spoke of are to happen, they will happen "quickly'.;)

Mograce2U
Jan 25th 2008, 04:09 PM
And then there is the phrase in Rev 1:3 and 22:10 "at hand" which shows us that those things which were going to happen quickly were ready to come, and were near by. Which is speaking about the fulfillment of the prophecy.

(Mat 4:17 KJV) From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

(Mat 10:7 KJV) And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

(Mat 26:18 KJV) And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.

(Mat 26:45-46 KJV) Then cometh he to his disciples, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. {46} Rise, let us be going: behold, he is at hand that doth betray me.

(Mark 1:15 KJV) And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

etc.

Allegra
Jan 25th 2008, 05:53 PM
There is nothing in the Greek of Revelation 1:1-3 that reads the way you, and/or the one you quote from, conveyed it. The Greek, "en taxei" (your rendering appears to have dropped the "en") literally means "with speed" - IOW, "with quickness / shortness", and is in regards to rapidity of motion.
It means when the things do take place, they will occur quickly; re: with speed / quickness (compared to thousands of years of history, that is true).

"Shortly" itself is a valid word for the Greek, because it can mean "briefly; in an abrupt manner"; The phrase "take place shortly" would be valid to convey the Greek, but no better than the phrase "shortly take place" when it comes to rendering the meaning(s) and thought(s) into English for the reader".
http://books.google.com/books?id=HjKUiljUwcUC&pg=PA137&lpg=PA137&dq=septuagint+daniel+%222+28+29%22&source=web&ots=fcaBZUfpaq&sig=iTH1ScWfCR7QzUHx9GGuxCaujNI

Not accurate. And you are clinging to one verse only & still ignoring all the other imminent phrases in the gospels & epistles. Sit down & read them sometime with the "audience related" mindset in their present time & you just may have new revelation about the time implied.

I don't know what versions or commentaries you are trying to use to support what I call "the Latin" view of the Bible. But I can assure you that Jesus nor John was writing to the Romans. John thought in Hebrew, but wrote mostly in Greek. And it is well known by scholars that his Greek was of the poorest grammar in Revelation.

John was told that the fulfillment of his vision "must shortly come to pass" (v.1) The Greek term is en taxei (you're right about that), & is used only a few times in the NT. Contrary to what some claim, the term never indicates rapidity of action, to the exclusion of when an event was to occur. This Greek term means that the predicted events were in fact to come to fulfillment very soon.
John may very well be deliberately deriving his statement from Daniel 2:28-29 & the prophecy of the last days. However, whereas Daniel's prediction was for the last days, John's use of en taxei, instead of using Daniel's wording, connotes neither the speedy manner in which the prophecy of Daniel was to be fulfilled nor the mere possibility that it could be fulfilled at any time, but the definite, imminent time of fulfillment which likely has already begun in the present.
John's use in the verse en taxei implies his expectation that the final tribulation & establishment of the kingdom, which Daniel expected to occur distantly "in the latter days, " would begin in his own generation, & , that it had already begun to happen."

In Revelation, John was also told,"the time is near."The Greek word for time here is kairos. In the NT, kairos normally refers to one, critical & divinely ordained moment in the line of history. In another words, kairos is the appointed time for the fulfillment of the Apocalypse had come!

Just in Revelation alone:
1) 1:1-"things which must shortly take place!"
2) 1:3- "the time is at hand!"
3) 2:5- "I come quickly!"
4) 10:6- "No more delay"
5) 11:14- "Third woe comes quickly"
6) 12:12- "Knows he has a short time"
7) 14:7- "The hour of His judgment has come"
8) 22:6- "Must shortly come to pass!"
9) 22:10- "Do not seal the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand!"
10)22:20- "Surely I come quickly!"

There endeth the lesson.;)

Teke
Jan 25th 2008, 06:26 PM
Some people claim to a preterist view of the world (i.e., the things in Revelation have already happened). What do you say to this?

There is more than one way to understand Revelation.
I believe with the bible, one has to ask themselves, why did the church give these scriptures to us. Was it because they wanted people to know what had happened and the mission of Christ and His Church, or because they wanted people to think something would happen even tho they didn't have an answer to that question. IOW was it to show what had happened or the sensation that something might happen.

threebigrocks
Jan 25th 2008, 06:32 PM
There is more than one way to understand Revelation.
I believe with the bible, one has to ask themselves, why did the church give these scriptures to us. Was it because they wanted people to know what had happened and the mission of Christ and His Church, or because they wanted people to think something would happen even tho they didn't have an answer to that question. IOW was it to show what had happened or the sensation that something might happen.

The church gave us scripture? :confused Honestly, I can't believe what my eyes just read.

Mograce2U
Jan 25th 2008, 06:33 PM
There is more than one way to understand Revelation.
I believe with the bible, one has to ask themselves, why did the church give these scriptures to us. Was it because they wanted people to know what had happened and the mission of Christ and His Church, or because they wanted people to think something would happen even tho they didn't have an answer to that question. IOW was it to show what had happened or the sensation that something might happen.I think it was to show us the fullness of the salvation that we have in Christ. No detail of prophecy is left unfufilled now that these things have come to pass. Jesus did ALL that He came to do to secure our salvation just as was promised.

(1 Cor 15:12-17 KJV) Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? {13} But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: {14} And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. {15} Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. {16} For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: {17} And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

The tense in the Greek is that the dead are rising even as Paul speaks.

Teke
Jan 25th 2008, 06:51 PM
The church gave us scripture? :confused Honestly, I can't believe what my eyes just read.

Scripture is the testimony of the saints of Christ's Church. Scripture didn't come from non believers.

You can't believe the Holy Spirit inspired the saints to leave their testament?:confused

threebigrocks
Jan 25th 2008, 06:55 PM
Scripture is the testimony of the saints of Christ's Church. Scripture didn't come from non believers.

You can't believe the Holy Spirit inspired the saints to leave their testament?:confused

Okay, heart attack over. :rolleyes: I misread or something there and thought you were saying the opposite from scripture being inspired by God through the Spirit. Sorry 'bout that.

Teke
Jan 25th 2008, 07:01 PM
I think it was to show us the fullness of the salvation that we have in Christ. No detail of prophecy is left unfufilled now that these things have come to pass. Jesus did ALL that He came to do to secure our salvation just as was promised.

(1 Cor 15:12-17 KJV) Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? {13} But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: {14} And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. {15} Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. {16} For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: {17} And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

The tense in the Greek is that the dead are rising even as Paul speaks.

:amen:
Amen, or He isn't the Alpha (beginning) and Omega (end).

It's now a matter of the people of God to understand themselves as His Church, the Ecclesia, within that context.

There are those who would say it isn't so because they don't see it, but then neither did the lil prophet with Elijah see all those angels round about them (2 Kings 6:17).;)

Clifton
Jan 25th 2008, 08:27 PM
http://books.google.com/books?id=HjKUiljUwcUC&pg=PA137&lpg=PA137&dq=septuagint+daniel+%222+28+29%22&source=web&ots=fcaBZUfpaq&sig=iTH1ScWfCR7QzUHx9GGuxCaujNI

Not accurate.

But oh, it is quite accurate in it's correct grammar form. I began to learn Koine Greek over a dozen years ago. And BTW, about the link you provided...The Author’s statement in the Book, which you referred to, which states, “which is PROBABLY and alteration of the LXX’s...” is ludicrous. John did not use any known providence for Revelation 1:1 - that's not until 1:7b where sources are used, Zech 12:10, 12:

http://www.dabar.org/RHCharles/Revelation/intro-VII.htm

And some people, though I am not one of them, feels that the Orthodox was a plagiaristic and altered rip-off of DSS Revelation (http://clifton-hodges.com/faith/Revelation_Q_Columns.pdf), hallucinating from wormwood.

Speaking of the LXX, the phrase, (the DATIVE Form), εν ταχει was used in it:
# De 11:17 28:20
# Jos 8:18,19
# 1Sa 23:22
# Ps 2:12
# Eze 29:5

Also, the word “soon” is an Adverb, not a Noun or Adjective. It that case, of an Adverb, ταχεως could be used as”soon”, like telling the kids to clean up their rooms soon (do not beat around the bush:D). The Stem, ταχ, is the stem for “speed, hurry, quick”. From that stem, ταχ, other words are formed, and their meanings are given (depending on which form).


And you are clinging to one verse only & still ignoring all the other imminent phrases in the gospels & epistles.Not at all, I was just pointing out that the particular verse you referencing, with εν ταχει in it, means, literally,
“the things which must come to pass with quickness”, not
“must SOON (νυν, pronounced "nun") come to pass with quickness, (or quickly)”. In the current GNTs (Greek New Testaments), εν ταχει is only used in Revelation 1:1, so I went back to Westcott and Hort's GNT, and it was only in 1:1 as well, so I went back to 1872 and looked at Tischendorf's GNT, and it did appear in it a handful of times. I will supply those verses where the phrase appears if you wish. Even without the εν preposition, the singular DATIVE neuter still means the same, "+ quickly, + shortly, + speedily".

What I do is provide you with this information to balance out other things in relation to what you believe. What I speak here can be confirmed with Greek Education Classes, Greek Learning Books, and/or Greek Dictionaries.


Sit down & read them sometime with the "audience related" mindset in their present time & you just may have new revelation about the time implied.My fine friend, I have been dealing with the Book Of Revelation and other books for decades. When The Book Of Revelation is used along with the Memoirs/Gospels and Epistles, interpretations are counted beyond the count of generations A.D. ;) But, while people's view vary, I can help in the Greek Department to aid what the words are. But when it comes to the Book Of Revelation, it's up to ya'll how you view it - the good views are those based upon what the text says.


I don't know what versions or commentaries you are trying to use to support what I call "the Latin" view of the Bible.My goodness, what is it with the business of "commentaries" being alluded to towards me from folks. Is my ISP changing Dictionaries to commentaries by the time it leaves here, or what? I in no way referenced any commentary when I replied to your post, but just the Greek itself. And I am not using the Latin Bible either. Try the following:
Stephanus 1550
Scrivener 1894 (Artificial Construction)
Tischendorf 1872
Westcott & Hort 1881 (UBS and NU is based upon this)
Byzantine-Majority 1991, 2002[?].
and they vary in regards to the book of Revelation.
and of course, the English Bibles based upon those as well.


But I can assure you that Jesus nor John was writing to the Romans. John thought in Hebrew, but wrote mostly in Greek. And it is well known by scholars that his Greek was of the poorest grammar in Revelation.Yes, and that is why it is believed there are interpolations by an Editor and copyists - they are "good" Greek.


John was told that the fulfillment of his vision "must shortly come to pass"But not "must shortly come to pass SOON"


(v.1) The Greek term is en taxei (you're right about that), & is used only a few times in the NT. I knew I was right about that - there's only one way to learn it when you learn the Greek.


Contrary to what some claim, the term never indicates rapidity of action, to the exclusion of when an event was to occur. "Contrary" to the Greeks whom used Koine for what, 700 years? They were wrong all those centuries since the creation of the word? Now honestly, do you seriously believe that? That would change the LXX a lot, not to mention, anywhere where taxei appears.

Sounds like someone's wishful thinking to promote a home-based doctrine, or doctrines that do not align up with the underlying languages of the scriptures.


This Greek term means that the predicted events were in fact to come to fulfillment very soon.See above reply in regards to the adverb "soon". I gotta go and will come back to the rest of your message - my dad needs my help now. In the meantime, as an exercise of grammer, tell me what you see in Revelation 1:7... do you see it saying
"He is (PRESENT TENSE) coming with clouds", or
"He will/shall (FUTURE TENSE) come with clouds" ???

I may shock your senses with a tad bit abundance of joy and love that will embrace you peacefully and warmly ;)

Clifton
Jan 25th 2008, 10:10 PM
I don't know what versions or commentaries

Well, ya know, you surely do not have a problem with commentaries since you refer me to a book, which in itself is a commentary, right? ;)

Do you have time to read those books? If so, then why not take that time and put it into learning Koine Greek, a little a day, or a few days a week? Just think to yourself, if you are still here in this life, how far you will have progress in Koine Greek by the end of this! Yes? ;)


In Revelation, John was also told,"the time is near."The “time” for what is “near”? Of which context do you feel this addresses? What does “is near” or “At hand” mean to you, and for which context(s)?


The Greek word for time here is kairos. In the NT, kairos normally refers to one, critical & divinely ordained moment in the line of history. In another words, kairos is the appointed time for.... And what Greek Dictionary are you using? WDNT? BDAG? Or what?


...the fulfillment of the Apocalypse had come!You hold to the Pantelist view of “John’s Apocalypse” ? :hmm: If you take up on my suggestion on Learning Koine Greek, than you are gonna slide out of that position. There’s too much verb shifts in “John’s Apocalypse” to hold on to the Pantelist view. Of course, Futurists are also guilty of grammar and history alterations as well.


Just in Revelation alone:
1) 1:1-"things which must shortly take place!"
2) 1:3- "the time is at hand!"
3) 2:5- "I come quickly!"
4) 10:6- "No more delay"
5) 11:14- "Third woe comes quickly"
6) 12:12- "Knows he has a short time"
7) 14:7- "The hour of His judgment has come"
8) 22:6- "Must shortly come to pass!"
9) 22:10- "Do not seal the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand!"
10)22:20- "Surely I come quickly!"I have already addressed the forms where the words “shortly” and “quickly” appear in the previous post, and that according to the Greek and as we are taught in Greek, that the word represents rapidity of motion and quick action. Now, we might put a rubber band on 2:5, since the word there is ταχυ, but still note that it comes from the stem, ταχ stem. However, onto you this question I implore: What does the WHOLE verse of 2:5 say, if you would be so kind?

Here is one of many Bibles that I got:
‘Therefore, remember from where you have fallen, and repent, and do the first works; but if not {fig., or else} I am coming to you quickly, and I will remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent.

This has nothing to do with the last stage or final παρου·σια (Parousia) of Christ, in any shape, way, or form. Hardly ever does a Greek word attached to Strong's 2064 do.

In others words, shortening it:
“If you do not repent, I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place”.

In others words, if they repented, Christ would NOT come and remove their lampstand.

Was there other verses you listed that you wanted me to address, or feel I did not address?

Time for dinner! :pp

Allegra
Jan 25th 2008, 10:30 PM
Well, ya know, you surely do not have a problem with commentaries since you refer me to a book, which in itself is a commentary, right? ;)

Do you have time to read those books? If so, then why not take that time and put it into learning Koine Greek, a little a day, or a few days a week? Just think to yourself, if you are still here in this life, how far you will have progress in Koine Greek by the end of this! Yes? ;)

The “time” for what is “near”? Of which context do you feel this addresses? What does “is near” or “At hand” mean to you, and for which context(s)?

And what Greek Dictionary are you using? WDNT? BDAG? Or what?

You hold to the Pantelist view of “John’s Apocalypse” ? :hmm: If you take up on my suggestion on Learning Koine Greek, than you are gonna slide out of that position. There’s too much verb shifts in “John’s Apocalypse” to hold on to the Pantelist view. Of course, Futurists are also guilty of grammar and history alterations as well.

I have already addressed the forms where the words “shortly” and “quickly” appear in the previous post, and that according to the Greek and as we are taught in Greek, that the word represents rapidity of motion and quick action. Now, we might put a rubber band on 2:5, since the word there is ταχυ, but still note that it comes from the stem, ταχ stem. However, onto you this question I implore: What does the WHOLE verse of 2:5 say, if you would be so kind?

Here is one of many Bibles that I got:
‘Therefore, remember from where you have fallen, and repent, and do the first works; but if not {fig., or else} I am coming to you quickly, and I will remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent.

This has nothing to do with the last stage or final παρου·σια (Parousia) of Christ, in any shape, way, or form. Hardly ever does a Greek word attached to Strong's 2064 do.

In others words, shortening it:
“If you do not repent, I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place”.

In others words, if they repented, Christ would NOT come and remove their lampstand.

Was there other verses you listed that you wanted me to address, or feel I did not address?

Time for dinner! :pp

Sorry, I have more important reading to do. If I really want something translated from Greek, I'll ask my nephew!
We can agree to disagree.
You keep trying so hard to ignore the imminence not only in Rev., but in the entire NT writings.
Jesus appeared a second time to those who the Bible was written to. It wasn't written to us. It was written for us. That you can put in your salt shaker & digest it, bc that's the reality of the Bible. The eschatological events were fulfilled.
End of conversation
Take care.:)

Partaker of Christ
Jan 25th 2008, 10:31 PM
Hi partaker,
I'm glad you asked bc I have a beautiful answer for you. I agreed with this author's main points, but he elaborates on it so well, that I will quote from his book, "Who is this Babylon" by Don K.Preston (2006)
quote:One of the most common attempts to off-set the time statements of the nearness of Christ's return is an appeal to Matthew 24:36, "But of that day and hour knows no man, not the angels in heaven, but the Father only." It is maintained because Jesus did not know the time, it is evident that no one today could know the time. If Jesus did not know when He was to come, then surely the disciples who wrote the Bible could not have known if the Day was truly near.
To maintain that the New Testament statements about the nearness of Christ's parousia cannot be taken at face value, because in Matthew 24 Jesus did not know the time himself, is to be guilty of the worst sort of anachronistic error. The authors of the epistles most assuredly thoughtthey knew that the end was near,"Little children, it is the last hour!" (1John 2:18). To suggest that the NT does not contain revelatio about when the parousia was to occur is patently false.
This argument totally ignores the fact that Jesus' statement in Matthew was before His ascension to the Father, and before the sending of the Spirit to inspire the apostolic revelation of the Word.
In John 14:26, Jesus told His disciples that the Father was going to send the Spirit to them. This is critical, for it is not Jesus in his humanity that was to inspire them, but the Father that knew the day and hour!
Jesus promised, "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things." Jesus was telling them that the Father would send the Spirit to guide them. Thus, when the disciples, after receiving the Spirit, wrote that the Day of the Lord was at hand, we can rest assured that the Father, who knew the Day and Hour, was causing them to tell the truth on the matter!
Jesus further told His disciples that when the Spirit came, "He will guide you into all truth, and show you things to come" (John16:13). It is undeniable, therefore, that the function of the Spirit, sent from the Father, was to reveal the events of the future to the disciples.
This is particularly relevant in Revelation where we read, "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to Him to show to His servants- things which must shortly take place....the time is near" (Revelation 1:1-3).
end quote.

I hope that helps to answer your question, partaker of Christ.

BTW, Preston's book is excellent. One of my favorites.


Hi Allegra!
Thanks for the reply.

The answer is no. It does not help.
It may be a clever answer, but I just cannot see it as correct.

If after the Holy Spirit had come, the disciples then new all things, and when the day and the hour was, why did they then not say?
The other fact is that Jesus said that He did not know the day or the hour. Jesus had the same Holy Spirit in Him and with Him, even before He went to the cross.

Jesus also said to His disciples:
Matt 24:42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come

Mat 24:43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
Matt 24:44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
Matt 24:45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
Matt 24:46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
Matt 24:47 Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.

How can Jesus say, "Matt 24:44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh." When 'as is claimed' after the Holy Spirit had come, then they would know?

My opinion of Preterism, is that this teaching is what will take the eyes of many, off watching and being ready.
Preterism is "for such an hour as ye think not"

Clifton
Jan 25th 2008, 11:27 PM
Sorry, I have more important reading to do. If I really want something translated from Greek, I'll ask my nephew!
We can agree to disagree.
You keep trying so hard to ignore the imminence not only in Rev., but in the entire NT writings.
Jesus appeared a second time to those who the Bible was written to. It wasn't written to us. It was written for us. That you can put in your salt shaker & digest it, bc that's the reality of the Bible. The eschatological events were fulfilled.
End of conversation
Take care.:)


I ignore nothing - I adhere to the underlying languages of the Bible, Hebrew and Greek (did not learn Aramaic though). I began with Hebrew about 27 years ago, and later on the Greek. Because word order is not so strict in Koine Greek, we are forced to read the whole passage to account for each tittle and jot, and verb parsings.

I do not knock various eschatology views, not even Pantelism. I studied them and explored them myself as well. But there is more beauty and finer points in Greek than just Eschatology issues. In John 8:59, you may not note it, but Christ became, literally, INVISIBLE, and went right through the midst of those of thought to kill him - He REAPPEARED elsewhere.

What do you think of Revelation Q (http://clifton-hodges.com/faith/Revelation_Q_Columns.pdf)? I'd be interesting in knowing any parallels to the Orthodox Revelation I may have missed.

You take care too,.:)
Clifton Hodges

P.S. I've started a project on the Revelation a couple of years ago, and will be ready for public consumption soon - it is called "Jap Consecution". It won't matter of one's eschatology view, most people would like any disordered book in better sequence. I'll give the WP Format of the project as well the PDF Format, so people can edit it into any way they want - edit, remove, add footnotes, endnotes, sub-headings, etc.

Clifton
Jan 25th 2008, 11:31 PM
Hi Allegra!
Thanks for the reply.

The answer is no. It does not help.
It may be a clever answer, but I just cannot see it as correct.

If after the Holy Spirit had come, the disciples then new all things, and when the day and the hour was, why did they then not say?
The other fact is that Jesus said that He did not know the day or the hour. Jesus had the same Holy Spirit in Him and with Him, even before He went to the cross.

Jesus also said to His disciples:
Matt 24:42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come

Mat 24:43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
Matt 24:44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
Matt 24:45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
Matt 24:46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
Matt 24:47 Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.

How can Jesus say, "Matt 24:44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh." When 'as is claimed' after the Holy Spirit had come, then they would know?

My opinion of Preterism, is that this teaching is what will take the eyes of many, off watching and being ready.
Preterism is "for such an hour as ye think not"

Could be a prophecy that the world will go Preterism (or Pantelism) - since at the final stage of the Parousia (the last coming) will come suddenly and when no one expects it :D

Partaker of Christ
Jan 25th 2008, 11:40 PM
Act 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

Act 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
Act 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

When was the kingdom restored again to Israel?
Though the Jews were in Israel at that time, they did not have yet the kingdom. They were ruled by the Romans.

The disciples were not asking about the spiritual kingdom, but the physical kingdom being 'restored'
Jesus did not say 'It will not happen' He did not say 'it is near you and in your mouth'.

He said (to His disciples) "It is not for you to know the times or the seasons".
Not only would they not know the day or the hour, but they would not know the "times or the seasons"

Matt 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Surely this also means that 'this generation' did not mean the generation He was then speaking to, but the generation that would 'see all these things fulfilled'

Did Jesus lie?
Did Jesus deceive?

Clifton
Jan 25th 2008, 11:46 PM
Act 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

Act 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
Act 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

When was the kingdom restored again to Israel?
Though the Jews were in Israel at that time, they did not have yet the kingdom. They were ruled by the Romans.

The disciples were not asking about the spiritual kingdom, but the physical kingdom being 'restored'
Jesus did not say 'It will not happen' He did not say 'it is near you and in your mouth'.

He said (to His disciples) "It is not for you to know the times or the seasons".
Not only would they not know the day or the hour, but they would not know the "times or the seasons"

Did Jesus lie?
Did Jesus deceive?

No, not at all.;)

Teke
Jan 26th 2008, 01:52 AM
What do you think of Revelation Q (http://clifton-hodges..com/faith/Revelation_Q_Columns.pdf)? I'd be interesting in knowing any parallels to the Orthodox Revelation I may have missed.



The link won't work Clifton, so I can't look at it. Why is it called "Orthodox Revelation"? I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian and have never heard of this before.:hmm:

Teke
Jan 26th 2008, 02:01 AM
Act 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

Act 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
Act 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

When was the kingdom restored again to Israel?
Though the Jews were in Israel at that time, they did not have yet the kingdom. They were ruled by the Romans.

The disciples were not asking about the spiritual kingdom, but the physical kingdom being 'restored'
Jesus did not say 'It will not happen' He did not say 'it is near you and in your mouth'.

He said (to His disciples) "It is not for you to know the times or the seasons".
Not only would they not know the day or the hour, but they would not know the "times or the seasons"

Matt 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Surely this also means that 'this generation' did not mean the generation He was then speaking to, but the generation that would 'see all these things fulfilled'

Did Jesus lie?
Did Jesus deceive?



Do you think Jesus is talking about something other than what the disciples are thinking at the time. ;) Verse 8 should clue you on this. This is before Pentecost when they received the Holy Spirit. He told them before this that the kingdom was within them. :)

Jhn 14:26 But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Clifton
Jan 26th 2008, 03:04 AM
The link won't work Clifton, so I can't look at it. Why is it called "Orthodox Revelation"? I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian and have never heard of this before.:hmm:

Sorry about that. That was my fault. I had 2 dots before the "com" part, so I have corrected posts 110 and 114 in this thread, and checked them.

Revelation Q (http://clifton-hodges.com/faith/Revelation_Q_Columns.pdf) is my update of the DSS/Essene Revelation. I have a post on this, 1504083 in the Qumran, Dead Sea Scrolls, Oxyrynchus, Etc. (Post #14 in the thread). It is more than just a language update - it provides possible and similar parallels to John's Apocalypse.

Orthodox Revelation refers to "John's Apocalypse", the last book in most Bibles today. Having been galloping on the Internet for so many years, the term Orthodox Revelation starting getting used to distinguish that from the DSS Revelation (it is called by a handful of names, which I note in the PDF file of Revelation Q.), so I picked up the terminology from the others.

I was hoping hard-core readers of John's Apocalypse might help show me any parallels I may have overlooked or missed;

here is an example (where "(º)" means no similar parallel found):

50.(19:11) And I saw Heaven open, and
beheld a white horse; And he that
sat upon him was called “Faithful and
True”, and in righteousness he does
judge.
(19:12)‡ His eyes were like a flame
of fire{18}, and on his head were many
crowns, and he was cloaked in
blazing light, and his feet were bare.
(19:13) And his name is called the
Word of God.
(19:14)‡ And the holy brotherhood{19}
followed him upon white horses,
clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
(º) And they entered the Eternal
Infinite Garden, in whose midst stood
the Tree Of Life.
51.(º) And the rain washed naked
throngs came before them, trembling
to receive their judgment. For their
sins were many, and they had
defiled the Earth, Yea, they had
destroyed the creatures of the land
and sea, poisoned the ground,
fouled the air, and buried alive the
mother who had given them birth.
Acrobat Logical Page# 11.
Footnotes:
{18} cf. also JAP (John's Apocalypse) 1:14
{19} In JAP, "armies of Heaven."

Next 2 things coming up in the Qumran, Dead Sea Scrolls, Oxyrynchus, Etc. thread within a month:
1) Acts 29, Amen!
2) A New Canon Of A New Era?

Teke
Jan 26th 2008, 04:20 PM
Clifton you'd have to be more specific of what your relating from. For instance, are you talking about "Messianic Apocalypse" (4Q521). Or is your Revelation Q a compilation of a number of scrolls.

I believe the Coptic Orthodox have researched them. For the Coptic Orthodox, Linda Morris is one who may have some online on the subject.

Mograce2U
Jan 26th 2008, 04:40 PM
Clifton, #114 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1513818&postcount=114)
(John 8:59 KJV) Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

Note the continuation with the verse that follows - Jesus was not "invisible" to His disciples:

(John 9:1-2 KJV) And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. {2} And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?

It is more likely that Jesus' ability to hide Himself from recognition has more to do the minds of men, since after the resurrection we see He could do this too among the disciples, yet He was quite visible to them. Ex: Mary at the tomb and the disciples on the road to Emmaus.

threebigrocks
Jan 26th 2008, 04:48 PM
Mary at the tomb thought he was the gardner at first. On the road to Emmaus they just thought he was a traveler until He ate. ;)

They could not see until He revealed himself. When he does reveal Himself at the second coming, all will know. We are told as such in scripture. Until then ears won't hear and eyes won't see, sin will continue.

Clifton
Jan 26th 2008, 06:51 PM
Clifton you'd have to be more specific of what your relating from. For instance, are you talking about "Messianic Apocalypse" (4Q521). Or is your Revelation Q a compilation of a number of scrolls.

I believe the Coptic Orthodox have researched them. For the Coptic Orthodox, Linda Morris is one who may have some online on the subject.

Thanks for the info. Revelation Q, or DSS Revelation, is not related to 4Q521 as far as I can see, though the term "brotherhood" is used. What Revelation Q is, an "update to an update" of the Essene(s) Book Of Revelation(s) as translated by Edmond Bordeaux Szekely (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Bordeaux_Szekely). This is the primary one that circulates on the Internet. Someone had inserted missing crucial phrases / information, regarding the identity of "The Prophesied Coming One" that were not showing up on the versions on the Internet. Szekely's copyright has expired.

I did two things:
First, there was a discrepancy in regards to the numerics of the angels after the "Second angel". The next angel list in the following the paragraph was the "fourth angel" (I'll provide a link for ya'll to see it for yourself). The dilemma was, where is the Third Angel and what does it do? I observed that the Seventh Angel does not come unto the very end of time, so saw the numbers offset by +1 starting with the Third Angel on up to the first mention of the Seventh Angel; Thus, the next mention of a Seventh Angel, is indeed the Seventh Angel. I'm sure Szekely recognize this, but was just providing a translation off the MS he claimed to have access to. With some research, I found a translation that had the Angels numbers correctly (I think it comes it out of "The Sevenfold Peace"), and it has a few readings within the text which I collated into Revelation Q.

Second, I wanted to see what John The Presbyter (or The Seer) may have used for his Revelation, or even The Editor from the so-called DSS Revelation. The hypothesis of an Editor, was proposed by Robert Henry Charles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._H._Charles) in his 25+ year of studies in Revelation: John died before he was able to get things in order and complete his work (though John probably did get the 7 letters sent out first). The Editor was better at Greek than his master, but made a mess of some things - but not too bad, but interpolating things that set some things out of order (at least Hollywood is happy :D). The last 3 chapters of John's Revelation was the worst clumsily redacted and disordered parts.

Anyway, so far as similar Parallels with Revelation, I have noted them, so that is the additional work I did...

27. And the sixth angel sounded.
(10:1) And I saw a mighty Being
come down from Heaven, clothed
with a cloud; And a rainbow on his
head, and his face was as is it were
the Sun, and his feet were pillars of
fire.

We find this part in Revelation 10:1.

On the Link I mentioned alluded to above, it is:
http://www.global.org/Pub/DSS_Revelation.asp

I guess you are already aware that there is debate on as to whether the Qumran Community was Essene or not. There seems to have developed a Modernized group of Essenes - I should note that I'm not part of them.;)

BTW, the Epilogue in DSS Revelation is the same as the DSS Book Of Hymns.:)

Clifton
Jan 26th 2008, 07:28 PM
Clifton, #114 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1513818&postcount=114)
(John 8:59 KJV) Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

Note the continuation with the verse that follows - Jesus was not "invisible" to His disciples:

(John 9:1-2 KJV) And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. {2} And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?

It is more likely that Jesus' ability to hide Himself from recognition has more to do the minds of men, since after the resurrection we see He could do this too among the disciples, yet He was quite visible to them. Ex: Mary at the tomb and the disciples on the road to Emmaus.

Very excellent thoughts and input;)

The issue of Y'Shua becoming invisible comes from Jay P. Green, Sr. of Sovereign Grace Publishers and Christian Literature World, which was a Bible Translator for about 40 years - if he still living, he is 90+ years of age. Last I heard, he was pretty ill. He brought us MKJV, KJV For Children, The Literal Translation Of The Bible (LITV), KJII, and the final one, though I do not think it has reached publication yet, if ever, is KJ3 (which combined MKJV and LITV by requests of others).

He mentions that in the Greek, it conveys that Christ became "invisible" and that some translations had lost that in their versions. He mentioned it in "Unholy Hands On The Bible, Vol. 2".

Though while John 9:1 starts out, "And as Jesus passed by", and it is a good point since Chapter and Verse Numbering did not come until the 2nd Millennia A.D. - perhaps I can help, by mentioning why a new chapter starts here - it is due to that the Chapter Divider (Knew his name last night, but can't remember it now) was deciding the Greek Word "kai" has started out a new context. There are cases where "kai" does that, and other times it does not. Thus, we don't know how long time passed by between 8:59 and 9:1, minutes, hours, or a day or more. The statement "And as Jesus passed by"
in 9:1 can certainly make us think the times are quite close, even quickly;

Let's look at 8:59 in a analytical literal version:

John 8:59 (ALT) Therefore, they took up stones that they should cast on Him. But Jesus was hidden. And He went out from the temple, having passed through the middle of them, and so He passed by. cp. Luke 24:16; John 12:36

We see here at the end of the verse, "and so He passed by".

Putting that end with the beginning of 9:1;

"and so He passed by. And passing by, He saw a man blind from birth."
The "He passed by. And passing by" together makes it look quite consecutively, doesn't it? But let us note, there would have to be enough time for Christ to be "out of reach of those whom sought to stone Him", and be free to heal the blind man and give him sight.

And Back to the Topic of this Thread, it is interesting that the Book Of John would be referenced very much, if at all, on Eschatology issues, because, as noted in the Wikipedia (with a citation provided):

No parousia

The gospel contains "no explicit reference to the parousia (second coming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_coming))", and some scholars have suggested that John portrays Jesus as having already "come again" in spirit.[28] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John#_note-stephenharris)

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John

Thanks for the great input!:)

Partaker of Christ
Jan 27th 2008, 11:02 PM
Do you think Jesus is talking about something other than what the disciples are thinking at the time. ;) Verse 8 should clue you on this. This is before Pentecost when they received the Holy Spirit. He told them before this that the kingdom was within them. :)

Sorry but this is just plain wrong.
The disciples were asking about the 'physical' kingdom being 'RESTORED' to Israel.
They would not have been asking about the Kingdom of Heaven in you, because Jesus had already spoken plenty about that.

Had Jesus been referring to the 'kingdom within you', He would have answered 'When the comforter comes'
They knew that would be after only a few day's, so why then say;

Act 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power

Act 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.



Jhn 14:26 But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Yes! He said It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power

So, I guess the Holy Spirit brought that to their remembrance.

Now again I ask the question, when was the 'physical' kingdom restored to Israel, that Jesus said, it is not for you (HIS DISCIPLES, and that included John) to know when.

Mograce2U
Jan 27th 2008, 11:43 PM
Sorry but this is just plain wrong.
The disciples were asking about the 'physical' kingdom being 'RESTORED' to Israel.
They would not have been asking about the Kingdom of Heaven in you, because Jesus had already spoken plenty about that.

Had Jesus been referring to the 'kingdom within you', He would have answered 'When the comforter comes'
They knew that would be after only a few day's, so why then say;

Act 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power

Act 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.



Yes! He said It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power

So, I guess the Holy Spirit brought that to their remembrance.

Now again I ask the question, when was the 'physical' kingdom restored to Israel, that Jesus said, it is not for you (HIS DISCIPLES, and that included John) to know when.It seems clear that at this point the disciples are thinking that their rule in the kingdom is related to Israel being restored to her sovereignty. But their power is not to come from political rule but by the Holy Spirit. What the perogative of the Father is about is something they would not have understand at this point - that Israel as a sovereign nation was not scheduled for restoration at all.

Jesus is redirecting them to the real concern they are to have as priests and kings in His kingdom.

Partaker of Christ
Jan 28th 2008, 01:18 AM
It seems clear that at this point the disciples are thinking that their rule in the kingdom is related to Israel being restored to her sovereignty. But their power is not to come from political rule but by the Holy Spirit. What the perogative of the Father is about is something they would not have understand at this point - that Israel as a sovereign nation was not scheduled for restoration at all.

Jesus is redirecting them to the real concern they are to have as priests and kings in His kingdom.

Sorry again, but again this is not the truth.

Jesus said it is not for you to know the times or the seasons.
Jesus knew what they were asking, and His answer confirms that it would happen, but it was not for them to know when.

Now if there was not a 'times' and a 'seasons' to come, then Jesus had lied or deceived.

Since Israel was restored in 1948, I guess He did not lie or deceived

Allegra
Jan 28th 2008, 03:09 AM
Sorry again, but again this is not the truth.

Jesus said it is not for you to know the times or the seasons.
Jesus knew what they were asking, and His answer confirms that it would happen, but it was not for them to know when.

Now if there was not a 'times' and a 'seasons' to come, then Jesus had lied or deceived.

Since Israel was restored in 1948, I guess He did not lie or deceived

Sorry, but you do not have a monopoly on the truth. Especially with dispensationalism.:B

First of all, Jesus did not confirm anything in his answer!
And by what he said during His ministry to the chief priests & elders (those representing the Jewish religious authority), it didn't look too hopeful.
Matthew 21:42-46:
42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:


‘ The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone.
This was the LORD’s doing,
And it is marvelous in our eyes’?[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2021:42-46;&version=50;#fen-NKJV-23863a)]

43 “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. 44 And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.”
45 Now when the chief priests and Pharisees heard His parables, they perceived that He was speaking of them. 46 But when they sought to lay hands on Him, they feared the multitudes, because they took Him for a prophet.
Also Mt.22:1,
The Parable of the Wedding Feast 1 And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said: 2 “The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son, 3 and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come. 4 Again, he sent out other servants, saying, ‘Tell those who are invited, “See, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatted cattle are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding.”’ 5 But they made light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business. 6 And the rest seized his servants, treated them spitefully, and killed them. 7 But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. 8 Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. 9 Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.’ 10 So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good. And the wedding hall was filled with guests.
11 “But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw a man there who did not have on a wedding garment. 12 So he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless. 13 Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022:1-14;&version=50;#fen-NKJV-23880a)] cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’
14 “For many are called, but few are chosen.”
Also
Matthew 16:24-28
24Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 25For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
26For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?
27For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
28Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.


Acts 8:12

12But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Revelation 11:15-19
Seventh Trumpet: The Kingdom Proclaimed


15 Then the seventh angel sounded: And there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdoms[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rev%2011:15-19;&version=50;#fen-NKJV-30882a)] of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever!” 16 And the twenty-four elders who sat before God on their thrones fell on their faces and worshiped God, 17 saying:


“ We give You thanks, O Lord God Almighty,
The One who is and who was and who is to come,
Because You have taken Your great power and reigned.
18 The nations were angry, and Your wrath has come,
And the time of the dead, that they should be judged,
And that You should reward Your servants the prophets and the saints,
And those who fear Your name, small and great,
And should destroy those who destroy the earth.”

19 Then the temple of God was opened in heaven, and the ark of His covenant[c (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rev%2011:15-19;&version=50;#fen-NKJV-30886c)] was seen in His temple. And there were lightnings, noises, thunderings, an earthquake, and great hail.[B]Footnotes:
Revelation 11:15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rev%2011:15-19;&version=50;#en-NKJV-30882) NU-Text and M-Text read kingdom . . . has become.
Revelation 11:17 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rev%2011:15-19;&version=50;#en-NKJV-30884) NU-Text and M-Text omit and who is to come.
Revelation 11:19 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rev%2011:15-19;&version=50;#en-NKJV-30886) M-Text reads the covenant of the Lord.The Mosaic age came to an end in AD70. Jesus handed up that kingdom to the Father.
In Luke 21:22 Jesus said, referring to the destruction of the Temple, etc.,
22For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written.

Jesus informs us when ALL of Israel's promises would find consummation.
Daniel speaks of this also, "When the power of the holy people has finally been broken" Some would shine like the stars, but some would rise to everlasting contempt.

If Jesus said ALL this would take place when the armies surround Jerusalem (eg-the fulfillment of all that has been written-concerning Israel in 70AD,) then it there is no more Holy Writ concerning Israel.
The Israel of today, the materialistic, literalistic proclamations of Zionism.

Hebrews 12:18-29 (Written about 60AD)
18You have not come to a mountain that can be touched and that is burning with fire; to darkness, gloom and storm; 19to a trumpet blast or to such a voice speaking words that those who heard it begged that no further word be spoken to them, 20because they could not bear what was commanded: "If even an animal touches the mountain, it must be stoned."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2012:18-29;&version=31;#fen-NIV-30217a)] 21The sight was so terrifying that Moses said, "I am trembling with fear."
22But you have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the judge of all men, to the spirits of righteous men made perfect, 24to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel. :kiss:
25See to it that you do not refuse him who speaks. If they did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, how much less will we, if we turn away from him who warns us from heaven? 26At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, "Once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens."[c (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2012:18-29;&version=31;#fen-NIV-30223c)] 27The words "once more" indicate the removing of what can be shaken—that is, created things—so that what cannot be shaken may remain. :saint:
28Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, 29for our "God is a consuming fire."[d (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2012:18-29;&version=31;#fen-NIV-30226d)] :pray::pray::pray:
[B]Footnotes:
Hebrews 12:20 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2012:18-29;&version=31;#en-NIV-30217) Exodus 19:12,13
Hebrews 12:21 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2012:18-29;&version=31;#en-NIV-30218) Deut. 9:19
Hebrews 12:26 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2012:18-29;&version=31;#en-NIV-30223) Haggai 2:6
Hebrews 12:29 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2012:18-29;&version=31;#en-NIV-30226) Deut. 4:24

Teke
Jan 28th 2008, 02:53 PM
Sorry but this is just plain wrong.
The disciples were asking about the 'physical' kingdom being 'RESTORED' to Israel.
They would not have been asking about the Kingdom of Heaven in you, because Jesus had already spoken plenty about that.

Had Jesus been referring to the 'kingdom within you', He would have answered 'When the comforter comes'
They knew that would be after only a few day's, so why then say;

Act 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power

Act 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.



Yes! He said It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power

So, I guess the Holy Spirit brought that to their remembrance.

Now again I ask the question, when was the 'physical' kingdom restored to Israel, that Jesus said, it is not for you (HIS DISCIPLES, and that included John) to know when.

One verse doesn't give understanding. But let's test your idea on this. Why did Judas betray Jesus? Because He wasn't going to restore Israel and be their earthly king. Did the disciples know why Judas betrayed Jesus? Yes they did. What did Jesus say to Pilate?

Jhn 18:33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?

Jhn 18:34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?

Jhn 18:35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?

Jhn 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Jhn 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Jhn 18:38 Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault [at all].


With that info, what scripture indicates to you that He is going to "restore" Israel on earth?

Mograce2U
Jan 28th 2008, 03:54 PM
Originally Posted by Mograce2U http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?p=1515881#post1515881)
It seems clear that at this point the disciples are thinking that their rule in the kingdom is related to Israel being restored to her sovereignty. But their power is not to come from political rule but by the Holy Spirit. What the perogative of the Father is about is something they would not have understand at this point - that Israel as a sovereign nation was not scheduled for restoration at all.

Jesus is redirecting them to the real concern they are to have as priests and kings in His kingdom.


Sorry again, but again this is not the truth.

Jesus said it is not for you to know the times or the seasons.
Jesus knew what they were asking, and His answer confirms that it would happen, but it was not for them to know when.

Now if there was not a 'times' and a 'seasons' to come, then Jesus had lied or deceived.

Since Israel was restored in 1948, I guess He did not lie or deceivedJesus' prophecy was that Jerusalem would be destroyed and the temple torn down - and it was. Now how can that be an indication that Israel was going to be restored to national sovereignty? While the disciples may have understood that a new order was in the making, they somehow thought it was still tied to Israel as a nation.

Jesus speaking about times and seasons which are in the Lord's hands is not a confirmation that undoes this prophecy by any means. What He is saying is that they need not worry about it - because this new order would progress regardless of what happens to Israel. That is why He refers them to the HOPE OF ISRAEL - the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit. That was the hope that Israel - except for the remnant - rejected. The very promise that was tied to their looking forward to Messiah's arrival.

The re-establishing of Israel in these days as a sovereign nation is not in any way tied to the promise which has already come. It was not the giving of land that tied them to the promise, but their hope in Messiah.

Israel in apostacy can hardly be said to be a "restoration" sanctioned by the Lord since it is not to faith and obedience. Any more than their plans to rebuild a temple and reinstitute sacrifices can be "of the Lord" whose spiritual temple is the body of Christ. The Lord is not working disobedience in a people who He "favors". Rather they are fitting themselves for destruction - like the rest of the world who rejects the Lord. It is their continued unbelief that has them hoping in an earthly kingdom - just like it was in the 1st century.

How many times did Moses deliver the people from Egypt? (once). And how many of them who were delivered entered into the promised land? (none). And what kept them out? (unbelief). The 2nd chance that was given to Israel was to her children, the rest all died in the wilderness. That is the pattern which scripture establishes. It is the faithful who are saved.

So whatever it is going on in Israel today, Jesus' words to His disciples still stands - God is working by His Spirit in His people and in no other. And that work is to gather men from all nations into His kingdom, which anyone in Israel is welcome to come anytime that they choose to repent of their unbelief and be saved. What modern Israel lacks is a faithful remnant, because obedience to the old order is not the requirement any more.

It is a hard truth that without faith in Jesus as their Messiah, they have no hope, whether they achieve their earthly kingdom or not.

Partaker of Christ
Jan 28th 2008, 04:16 PM
One verse doesn't give understanding. But let's test your idea on this. Why did Judas betray Jesus? Because He wasn't going to restore Israel and be their earthly king. Did the disciples know why Judas betrayed Jesus? Yes they did. What did Jesus say to Pilate?

Jhn 18:33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?

Jhn 18:34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?

Jhn 18:35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?

Jhn 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Jhn 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Jhn 18:38 Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault [at all].


With that info, what scripture indicates to you that He is going to "restore" Israel on earth?

But we are not talking about Christ's Kingdom (the Kingdom of Heaven).
It is a question about the 'kingdom of Israel' being **restored**

Many (including the disciples) expected (according to prophesy) that the kingdom of Israel would be restored. According to their understanding that would be when the Messiah would come. The disciples asked this same question, before Christ Ascended. He said "It is not for 'you' to know the times and the seasons". That also means that there will be a times and a seasons. He did not say 'You will know the answer when the Comforter will come to you' or that 'It will not happen'

Tell me; When the Roman army destroyed Jerusalem in AD70, why was the Roman army not totally destroyed?

Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
Rev 20:8 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.
Rev 20:9 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.

Or, was this in the year AD1070?

Teke
Jan 28th 2008, 04:30 PM
But we are not talking about Christ's Kingdom (the Kingdom of Heaven).
It is a question about the 'kingdom of Israel' being **restored**

Many (including the disciples) expected (according to prophesy) that the kingdom of Israel would be restored. According to their understanding that would be when the Messiah would come. The disciples asked this same question, before Christ Ascended. He said "It is not for 'you' to know the times and the seasons". That also means that there will be a times and a seasons. He did not say 'You will know the answer when the Comforter will come to you' or that 'It will not happen'

Tell me; When the Roman army destroyed Jerusalem in AD70, why was the Roman army not totally destroyed?

Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
Rev 20:8 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.
Rev 20:9 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.

Or, was this in the year AD1070?

Scripture doesn't teach Christians to look for a restored Israel. It teaches of the faith by Abraham and all nations blessed in that faith.


Gal 3:14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.


Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.


Hbr 11:16 But now they desire a better [country], that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.


Abraham's faith was never for a restored Israel.

Partaker of Christ
Jan 28th 2008, 05:06 PM
[/i]

Jesus' prophecy was that Jerusalem would be destroyed and the temple torn down - and it was. Now how can that be an indication that Israel was going to be restored to national sovereignty? While the disciples may have understood that a new order was in the making, they somehow thought it was still tied to Israel as a nation.

Jesus speaking about times and seasons which are in the Lord's hands is not a confirmation that undoes this prophecy by any means. What He is saying is that they need not worry about it - because this new order would progress regardless of what happens to Israel. That is why He refers them to the HOPE OF ISRAEL - the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit. That was the hope that Israel - except for the remnant - rejected. The very promise that was tied to their looking forward to Messiah's arrival.

The re-establishing of Israel in these days as a sovereign nation is not in any way tied to the promise which has already come. It was not the giving of land that tied them to the promise, but their hope in Messiah.

Israel in apostacy can hardly be said to be a "restoration" sanctioned by the Lord since it is not to faith and obedience. Any more than their plans to rebuild a temple and reinstitute sacrifices can be "of the Lord" whose spiritual temple is the body of Christ. The Lord is not working disobedience in a people who He "favors". Rather they are fitting themselves for destruction - like the rest of the world who rejects the Lord. It is their continued unbelief that has them hoping in an earthly kingdom - just like it was in the 1st century.

How many times did Moses deliver the people from Egypt? (once). And how many of them who were delivered entered into the promised land? (none). And what kept them out? (unbelief). The 2nd chance that was given to Israel was to her children, the rest all died in the wilderness. That is the pattern which scripture establishes. It is the faithful who are saved.

So whatever it is going on in Israel today, Jesus' words to His disciples still stands - God is working by His Spirit in His people and in no other. And that work is to gather men from all nations into His kingdom, which anyone in Israel is welcome to come anytime that they choose to repent of their unbelief and be saved. What modern Israel lacks is a faithful remnant, because obedience to the old order is not the requirement any more.

It is a hard truth that without faith in Jesus as their Messiah, they have no hope, whether they achieve their earthly kingdom or not.

The disciples already knew that Jerusalem would be destroyed, and that their house would be left desolate.

Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Mat 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Mat 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to show him the buildings of the temple.
Mat 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.
Mat 24:3 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?

So, why having known all this, did they then ask "when will you restore the kingdom to Israel"?

They then asked Him three questions:
1) when shall these things be?
2) what shall be the sign of thy coming, and
3) of the end of the world?

Did Jesus say 'It is not for you to know the times and the seasons'?

Was AD70 the end of the World?

The Evolutionist's are the ones bent on destroying Genesis
The Preterist's are the one's bent on destroying Revelations

Partaker of Christ
Jan 28th 2008, 05:10 PM
Scripture doesn't teach Christians to look for a restored Israel. It teaches of the faith by Abraham and all nations blessed in that faith.


Gal 3:14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.


Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.


Hbr 11:16 But now they desire a better [country], that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.


Abraham's faith was never for a restored Israel.

:hmm: I Never said it was?

It is to be a sign of the coming of our Lord, and the end of the world.

Teke
Jan 28th 2008, 05:17 PM
:hmm: I Never said it was?

It is to be a sign of the coming of our Lord, and the end of the world.

There was an end of an "age", but not the world. The former age ended with the beginning of the Messianic age (time of the Messiah). This is why the bible has an "old" and "new" testament. The testament is to the age.:)

Partaker of Christ
Jan 28th 2008, 08:54 PM
Sorry, but you do not have a monopoly on the truth. Especially with dispensationalism.:B

I did not claim to have any such monopoly?

If I tell the world that Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life, and that there is no other way to the Father except by the Son.
The World and all other religions will ask, If I have a monopoly of truth.



The Mosaic age came to an end in AD70. Jesus handed up that kingdom to the Father.
In Luke 21:22 Jesus said, referring to the destruction of the Temple, etc.,
22For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written.

Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Luke 21:23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
Luke 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Luke 21:35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.

It is the DAYS of Vengeance, not in that day

We are still in 'those days'



Jesus informs us when ALL of Israel's promises would find consummation.
Daniel speaks of this also, "When the power of the holy people has finally been broken" Some would shine like the stars, but some would rise to everlasting contempt.

If Jesus said ALL this would take place when the armies surround Jerusalem (eg-the fulfillment of all that has been written-concerning Israel in 70AD,) then it there is no more Holy Writ concerning Israel.
The Israel of today, the materialistic, literalistic proclamations of Zionism.


He didn't

Mograce2U
Jan 29th 2008, 04:59 AM
<snip>
Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Luke 21:23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
Luke 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Luke 21:35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.

It is the DAYS of Vengeance, not in that day

We are still in 'those days'A couple of things here. Who are the Gentiles in view? Is it not the ones who will trod upon the city? I know some say that it is when the full number of Gentiles come into the Church; but is that to be found in Luke's context? When the time of those Gentiles was fulfilled then the tables would be turned upon them - just like in the past when Israel faced judgment from God by her enemies. What is lacking in the NT however is any talk of Israel or those Gentiles being restored to their former position. And history shows us that Israel was scattered into the nations and the Roman empire fell not too long after that.

The other thing is the OT passage which is being quoted here - it is the rest of Isa 61 which Jesus quoted when He began His ministry.

(Isa 61 KJV) The spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; {2} To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn; {3} To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified. {4} And they shall build the old wastes, they shall raise up the former desolations, and they shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of many generations. {5} And strangers shall stand and feed your flocks, and the sons of the alien shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers. {6} But ye shall be named the Priests of the LORD: men shall call you the Ministers of our God: ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves. {7} For your shame ye shall have double; and for confusion they shall rejoice in their portion: therefore in their land they shall possess the double: everlasting joy shall be unto them. {8} For I the LORD love judgment, I hate robbery for burnt offering; and I will direct their work in truth, and I will make an everlasting covenant with them. {9} And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people: all that see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed which the LORD hath blessed. {10} I will greatly rejoice in the LORD, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels. {11} For as the earth bringeth forth her bud, and as the garden causeth the things that are sown in it to spring forth; so the Lord GOD will cause righteousness and praise to spring forth before all the nations.

Ch 62 continues on to speak of the glory that would come to the faithful remnant of Israel - in the FIRST ADVENT of the Lord. Jesus splits 61:2 because the first part is what He announces at the beginning (redemption), and left the rest later (judgment), til the end of His ministry. All of which was in the context of what the Day of Atonement was all about - the only feast which also contained a judgment as well as redemption. Both parts of this day of the Lord arrived just as was predicted.

We are not in nor looking for the days of vengeance to still come, because these days were for Israel. None of her feasts are still predictive (a shadow of things to come) because they have all been fulfilled in Christ.

Allegra
Jan 29th 2008, 06:34 AM
I did not claim to have any such monopoly?

If I tell the world that Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life, and that there is no other way to the Father except by the Son.
The World and all other religions will ask, If I have a monopoly of truth.
That may seem like an excellent rationale for you for something- but you are conversing with another Christian here. So saying that "that is not the truth" sounds dogmatic when one supports sensationalism. It's a lie. They are there to sell books, etc. Reading about the Roman/Jewish war will give you better insight AND revelation.



[quote] Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Luke 21:23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
Luke 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Luke 21:35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.

It is the DAYS of Vengeance, not in that dayThat's correct. The Great tribulation lasted 3 1/2 yrs. "In that Day" refers to the actual coming of the Son of Man, as lightning is seen from east to west. And it refers to the Resurrection day. And "The Last Day"-the same day as the end of the Jewish dispensation.

"whole earth" means "land." And the land refers in context to Israel.
The Gentiles were the Romans & only the pagan Roman empire.



We are still in 'those days'I thought you said you evangelized "the good news?" "The way, the truth & the life?"




He didn'tYep. It's all in Matthew 24 & 25.
Heaven & earth passed away. This is symbolic. Heaven & earth didn't pass away literally. Prophetically, heaven & earth represents- the whole universe, political & religious. Heaven is always the symbol of government, the higher places in the political universe. "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away."(Mt.24:35) Here the Jewish power is represented as the heaven & earth, & the symbol denotes its passing away. "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished."
It was accomplished at the end of theocratic Israel in AD70. Or do you say we are still under the Law?

Partaker of Christ
Jan 29th 2008, 02:43 PM
A couple of things here. Who are the Gentiles in view? Is it not the ones who will trod upon the city? I know some say that it is when the full number of Gentiles come into the Church; but is that to be found in Luke's context? When the time of those Gentiles was fulfilled then the tables would be turned upon them - just like in the past when Israel faced judgment from God by her enemies. What is lacking in the NT however is any talk of Israel or those Gentiles being restored to their former position. And history shows us that Israel was scattered into the nations and the Roman empire fell not too long after that.

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.
Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.



The other thing is the OT passage which is being quoted here - it is the rest of Isa 61 which Jesus quoted when He began His ministry.

(Isa 61 KJV) The spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; {2} To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn; {3} To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified. {4} And they shall build the old wastes, they shall raise up the former desolations, and they shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of many generations. {5} And strangers shall stand and feed your flocks, and the sons of the alien shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers. {6} But ye shall be named the Priests of the LORD: men shall call you the Ministers of our God: ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves. {7} For your shame ye shall have double; and for confusion they shall rejoice in their portion: therefore in their land they shall possess the double: everlasting joy shall be unto them. {8} For I the LORD love judgment, I hate robbery for burnt offering; and I will direct their work in truth, and I will make an everlasting covenant with them. {9} And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people: all that see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed which the LORD hath blessed. {10} I will greatly rejoice in the LORD, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels. {11} For as the earth bringeth forth her bud, and as the garden causeth the things that are sown in it to spring forth; so the Lord GOD will cause righteousness and praise to spring forth before all the nations.

Ch 62 continues on to speak of the glory that would come to the faithful remnant of Israel - in the FIRST ADVENT of the Lord. Jesus splits 61:2 because the first part is what He announces at the beginning (redemption), and left the rest later (judgment), til the end of His ministry. All of which was in the context of what the Day of Atonement was all about - the only feast which also contained a judgment as well as redemption. Both parts of this day of the Lord arrived just as was predicted.

We are not in nor looking for the days of vengeance to still come, because these days were for Israel. None of her feasts are still predictive (a shadow of things to come) because they have all been fulfilled in Christ.

To say that the passage in Luke, is taken from Isaiah 61, is pure imagination.

There is a difference between 'days of vengence' and 'THE DAY OF VENGENCE'

Partaker of Christ
Jan 29th 2008, 03:07 PM
That may seem like an excellent rationale for you for something- but you are conversing with another Christian here. So saying that "that is not the truth" sounds dogmatic when one supports sensationalism. It's a lie. They are there to sell books, etc. Reading about the Roman/Jewish war will give you better insight AND revelation.

I never said I had a monopoly of the truth.
I did say, that is not the truth.

Act 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
Act 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

1) Were the disciples aking about the physical kingdom, being **RESTORED** to Israel? Yes or No

2) Did Jesus say 'It is not for you to know the 'times and the seasons'? Yes or No
3) Does that mean there will be a 'times and the seasons'? Yes or No
4) Is the 'times and the seasons' in the Fathers power? Yes or No

If it was not to be so, then it would not be in His power




That's correct. The Great tribulation lasted 3 1/2 yrs. "In that Day" refers to the actual coming of the Son of Man, as lightning is seen from east to west. And it refers to the Resurrection day. And "The Last Day"-the same day as the end of the Jewish dispensation.

"whole earth" means "land." And the land refers in context to Israel.
The Gentiles were the Romans & only the pagan Roman empire.


I thought you said you evangelized "the good news?" "The way, the truth & the life?"
Yep. It's all in Matthew 24 & 25.
Heaven & earth passed away. This is symbolic. Heaven & earth didn't pass away literally. Prophetically, heaven & earth represents- the whole universe, political & religious. Heaven is always the symbol of government, the higher places in the political universe. "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away."(Mt.24:35) Here the Jewish power is represented as the heaven & earth, & the symbol denotes its passing away. "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished."
It was accomplished at the end of theocratic Israel in AD70. Or do you say we are still under the Law?

Those who are not under Grace are under law.

Most of the rest of what you say is just made up drivel.

Mograce2U
Jan 29th 2008, 03:21 PM
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.
Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

The fullness of the Gentiles that comes in is not their coming to salvation, but Rome coming against the city. It was at that time that all Israel would be saved - when their blindness to what is going on prophetically is lifted. For the remnant this is salvation but for the others it is their judgment.

To say that the passage in Luke, is taken from Isaiah 61, is pure imagination.

There is a difference between 'days of vengence' and 'THE DAY OF VENGENCE'The thing that disturbs me most about those who say these things are still in the future, is that they must deny that the Lord accomplished what He died on a cross to do. Jesus came to save the lost sheep of Israel and He did. He was raised from the dead and ascended to heaven from where He avenged His enemies at which time He raised the OT saints from the dead and took them to heaven. But the hyper-literalist will have none of this as truth because they have not seen it with their own eyes. Go figure - who is it that has a problem with their understanding?

(Isa 66:5 KJV) Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.

Allegra
Jan 29th 2008, 06:14 PM
[quote]
Act 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
Act 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

1) Were the disciples aking about the physical kingdom, being **RESTORED** to Israel? Yes or No

2) Did Jesus say 'It is not for you to know the 'times and the seasons'? Yes or No
3) Does that mean there will be a 'times and the seasons'? Yes or No
4) Is the 'times and the seasons' in the Fathers power? Yes or No

If it was not to be so, then it would not be in His power I refer you back to my reply in post #129. Once again you want to pull this one verse out from context & analyze it all by itself, but Jesus' response is NOT a yes or no. One must give it further study (& comparing other scripture to this) to arrive at even the slightest possible reliable answer.

One of the most significant predictions of the restoration is found in Malachi 4:5-6. The Lord said Elijah was to come, and, "he will turn (apokatastasis) the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to the fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse."
Elijah, the restorer, was to urge Israel to "remember the Law of Moses." Thus, the framework of "restoration" was Israel. Jesus declared explicitly that John the Baptist was the anticipated Elijah/restorer (Mt 17:10-12).Yet it is obvious that John's work, was relational & spiritual, not nationalistic.
The spiritual nature of the restoration is indicated in Acts 3. Peter says, "repent, so that...He may send Jesus," The Second Coming was related to Israel's repentance, not national resurgence. Peter says God had sent Jesus to Israel to bless them, not in national restoration, but in turning them away from iniquity.(Acts 3:26)
Keep in mind now, that Peter was endowed with the Holy Spirit at this time, sent from the Father. Remember-"Who would teach them all things."
The work of Elijah was eschatological. He was to appear before the Great and Terrible Day of the Lord (Malachi 4:5-6)
Peter says the Parousia (Second Coming) could not occur until the promises of reformation had been fulfilled. The prophets are the Old Covenant prophets. The Old Covenant would remain valid until the time of reformation (eg. the time of fulfillment, Hebrews 9:6-10)
The Old Covenant system was symbolic (prophetic) of coming things(Heb.9:6-10)
The 1st Christians could see approaching-The Day of Christ's coming & appearing:
Hebrews 10:37:
37For in just a very little while,
"He who is coming will come and will not delay.(NIV)

37For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. (KJV)

Disagree with what the scripture says there? If so, try to disprove it.



Those who are not under Grace are under law.Actually, you're not even accurate with that one. The Law is/was exclusive to the Jews. Buddhists are not under grace, but they are not under the Law either.



Most of the rest of what you say is just made up drivel.I consider the source of such accusations! An unstudied person can only defend themselves with such "dribble" anyway.
Back up your position with more than one verse of scripture, as I have, for any of your arguments to hold weight!

threebigrocks
Jan 29th 2008, 06:57 PM
This thread is done. I ask that in further discussions of this nature, no matter where they may take place here, that we can remember that we are all on the same team and to do without the personal attacks.