where exactly did preterist beliefs orginate [Archive]

Mandy

7th June 2002, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by parousia70
Isaiah 52:10a
The Lord has made bare His holy arm In the eyes of all the nations;

Mandy, Isaiah states here that Gods arm was seen by the "eyes" of all nations.

When did this ocourr?

Surely such a monumental global event of God's actual arm being seen by every eye of everyone of every nation would have been recorded in History.

If, however, you believe this to be metaphore, what scriptuaral basis do you have for interprating "every eye shall see" in polar opposite fashion to "seen by the eyes of all nations"?

I can find none.

LOL!

I think you make a big mistake spiritualizing verses that are plainly literal. I believe that Jesus meant His return to be literal and physical, simply because He said He would be seen. Also every other verse that says He will be seen, Acts 1:11, Matt. 24:30, Mark 14:62, Rev. 1:7.

Job 19:25 For I know [that] my redeemer liveth, and [that] he shall stand at the latter [day] upon the earth:

Job 19:26 And [though] after my skin [worms] destroy this [body], yet in my flesh shall I see God.

1John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

parousia70

7th June 2002, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by Mandy

LOL!

I think you make a big mistake spiritualizing verses that are plainly literal.

Mandy, are you saying Isaiah 52:10 is not plainly literal?
Why not?

As far as Job19:25 goes,It was fulfilled in Jesus first advent for Jesus the redeemer DID stand on earth in the last days. the Bible plainly says so:

Hebrews 1:1-2
1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;

On to Job 19:26:
Here is a literal translation of Job 19:25-26:

"For [or "Yet"] I know that my Kinsman-Redeemer [or "Avenger" or "Vindicator"] is living, and at last He shall arise [or "stand"] on the dust [or "earth"]. Even after they surround [or "destroy"] my skin, yet this: From [or "without"] my flesh I shall see God...." (Job 19:25-26)

...and at last He shall arise [or "stand"] on the dust [or "earth"]...

In this statement, Job could have been prophesying of a time after his death when God would vindicate and deliver him. (Job 3:21-22; 6:8; 7:5-10,15-16,21; 14:14; 16:18; 17:1,13-16) Or Job could have been prophesying of a day within his lifetime when God would vindicate and deliver him. (Job 10:9; 13:15-21; 11:20-22; 23:10; 17:9; 23:10; 29:1-25; cf. Ps. 3:7) Either interpretation is possible.

...Even after they surround [or "destroy"] my skin....

Who were "they?" "They" could have been the "worms" and "dust" that were "covering" Job's skin while he was yet alive, (Job 7:5) or they could have been the "worms" and "dust" of the grave. (Job 17:14; 21:26; 24:20) Or "they" could have been God's "troops," i.e., Job's accusers and former friends who were "encompassing" him and who could not, metaphorically speaking, get enough of his "flesh." (Job 10:17; 16:13; 19:12-20,22; 30:1-15; 31:31; Ps. 14:4; 27:2) Any of these interpretations is possible.

...From [or "without"] my flesh I shall see God...

Here Job could have meant, "from the vantage point of my flesh," that it to say, "looking out from my flesh I shall see God." Or Job could have meant, "from outside of my flesh," that is, "free from my flesh I shall see God." Either interpretation is possible.

In light of the above possible interpretations, there are four basic possibilities as to the meaning of Job's prophecy:

1. Job expected to die from his afflictions, and to be delivered and vindicated at a non-fleshly resurrection at the Last Day.

2. Job expected to die from his afflictions, and to be delivered and vindicated in Sheol.

3. Job expected to be vindicated and delivered from all his afflictions, and to see God within his own lifetime, before he died, while still in his flesh.

4. Job expected to die from his afflictions, and to be delivered and vindicated in a "resurrection of the flesh" at the Last Day.

Due to the difficulties in translating this prophecy, expositors and translators have rendered Job's meaning in these four different lights. Which position one takes depends not simply on one's skill as a translator or on one's understanding of the overall meaning of the book of Job, but to an extent on one's personal eschatological presuppositions.

All preterists reject #4, which option incidentally enjoys the least amount of scholarly support, and is the only option that contradicts the preterist view. (This option is also quickly eliminated when we see that Job explicitly denies a resurrection of the flesh in Job 14:7-12.)

On to 1 John 3:2

John saw Christs resurected flesh Body, yet still claimed he did not know what our body would be like, even though it would be Like Christs. This indaicates that The body Christ was resurrected in is not the Body that Christ had after the ascention. Christ was not resurrected in a glorified Body, His return was in His glorified body, the Glory of the father. Flesh no more.

Wildfire

7th June 2002, 03:37 PM

Preterism came from Jesus Christ?

Please. Those who believe that statement should read the REVELATION of Jesus Christ, that was written for his servants, to <reveal> to them: the unfolding process of his return.

To fear the Lord, is the beginning of having wisdom.

Wildfire

parousia70

7th June 2002, 04:15 PM

Originally posted by Wildfire
Preterism came from Jesus Christ?

Please. Those who believe that statement should read the REVELATION of Jesus Christ, that was written for his servants, to <reveal> to them: the unfolding process of his return.

Wildfire

actually it's "the Revelation of Jesus Christ, Which God gave him to show his servants what must shortly take place."

Preterism came from Jesus Christ, who placed the fulfillment of "all things written" at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD.(Luke 21:20-22), which is exactly what preterists believe.

In fact, you could even say Jesus is a preterist!

Wildfire

7th June 2002, 04:50 PM

Parasuoi, you must understand what Jesus was revealing (and later to John in Revelations) at the mount of Olives, what would happen before his return. This phrase "what would shortly take place" has been instructed for us NOT to be taken literally.

Please read Luke 12. It is important to understand the meaning behind the bridegroom and those who are watching for him.

But of the times and seasons, brethren ye have no need that I write unto you.
For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord cometh like a thief in the night.
For when they say Peace and Security; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
But ye, brethren are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.
Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day; we are not of the night or of darkness.
Therefore let us NOT SLEEP as do others, but let us WATCH and be sober.

Jesus tells us plainly:

For the son of man (Jesus Christ) is as a man taking a FAR JOURNEY, (the allowance of time for repentance) who left his house, (earth) and gave authority to his servants, (follow my commandments) and to every man his work, (parable of talents) and commanded the porter to WATCH. (STAY ALERT/ for I am returning)

WATCH ye therefore: for ye know not when the MASTER (Jesus) of the house cometh. At even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning.
Lest coming suddenly he find YOU sleeping.
And what I say unto you, I say unto all.
WATCH.

Before his death, Jesus was explaining to his disciples <why> he must leave them. This was a sorrowful time, as indicated in chapter 14.

Yet, a little while, and the world SEETH ME NO MORE; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
AT THAT DAY ye shall know that I AM in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
Ye have heard how I said unto you, I GO AWAY, and COME AGAIN unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go to the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.
Hereafter I WILL NOT TALK MUCH WITH YOU: for the <Prince of this world> COMETH (satan), and hath nothing in me.

Wildfire

Auntie

8th June 2002, 01:11 AM

Originally posted by gwyyn

I was wondering when did the first preterist views orginate? Do you get all your evidence about the fulfillment of the first part of Revelations and Matthew 24 from Josephus?

I think the preterist view was originally from Josephus, and Josephus was not a believer in Christ. The seed of preterism was planted by a non-Christian.

gwyyn

8th June 2002, 01:37 AM

I know that they take alot of their history from Josephus and other early historians. Josephus was a Jew, who IMHO who rode the fence during the Jewish revolt. He tryed to get those in Galiee to revolt to no sucess, then after the whole ordeal he adopted a Roman name and lived among the Roman Empires.

hmmm kinda makes me suspicious of the guy, not a Church historian, maybe just a historian.

davo

8th June 2002, 02:39 AM

Originally posted by Auntie_Belle_Um
I think the preterist view was originally from Josephus, and Josephus was not a believer in Christ. The seed of preterism was planted by a non-Christian.

"I think" hmmm -well not enough. Mate you guys talk some dribble :( -or should I say lies. If you bothered to do any study you'd know that like premillennialism, some of the Church Fathers held to preteristic views. Not that they're the authority -Scripture is, and "fulfilled eschatology" harmonises a lot more with the scriptures than does Dispensational Futurism -for futurism is as current as the latest headline -"keep an eye on .... could he be the anti-christ???" Well heck why not -just tell him to stand in line. Or, "have you seen those latest troop movements -could this be it??" :sigh: What an embassement.

Is it any wonder that folk laugh at this stupidity. :(

davo

gwyyn

8th June 2002, 03:10 AM

I have been to the preterist hompage and read where the historic information came from that gives you the insight of what historic data confurs with the scripture! I have done my research, however your views still don't settle with me, as I still believe the Jews are still God's chosen people. We all can argue our views till we are all blue in the face and suffer severe pain in our hands from typing messages back and forth.

HOWEVER, I do not use my post to ridicule you and refer to you as an embarressment, nor do I tell you that you are stupid for your beliefs, so please be so kind and truly Christ like to refrain from doing this to others who disagree with you.

Just a thought

davo

8th June 2002, 03:46 AM

Well, take a breath and sit down. My thoughts were generated from the quote I quoted -and the embassement and stupidity were not aimed at any person -I was talking about "futurism" -as for your view on the Jews, I didn't say anything in my post about them. Besides you are welcome to believe as you do :rolleyes:

davo

parousia70

8th June 2002, 10:48 AM

Originally posted by Wildfire
Parasuoi, you must understand what Jesus was revealing (and later to John in Revelations) at the mount of Olives, what would happen before his return. This phrase "what would shortly take place" has been instructed for us NOT to be taken literally.

Really Wildflier? where is that instruction? Chapter and verse please.

In actuality, every time a time limit is placed on a prophesy's fulfillement, it is given to be taken literally, by how time realtes to MAN, not Spiritually by how tome relates to God.
Every time, without fail, always.
The Bible NEVER uses prophetic time allagoricly or spiritually. NEVER.

Originally posted by Wildfire
Please read Luke 12. It is important to understand the meaning behind the bridegroom and those who are watching for him.

But of the times and seasons, brethren ye have no need that I write unto you.
For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord cometh like a thief in the night.
For when they say Peace and Security; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
But ye, brethren are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.
Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day; we are not of the night or of darkness.
Therefore let us NOT SLEEP as do others, but let us WATCH and be sober.

Jesus tells us plainly:

For the son of man (Jesus Christ) is as a man taking a FAR JOURNEY, (the allowance of time for repentance) who left his house, (earth) and gave authority to his servants, (follow my commandments) and to every man his work, (parable of talents) and commanded the porter to WATCH. (STAY ALERT/ for I am returning)

WATCH ye therefore: for ye know not when the MASTER (Jesus) of the house cometh. At even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning.
Lest coming suddenly he find YOU sleeping.
And what I say unto you, I say unto all.
WATCH.

Before his death, Jesus was explaining to his disciples <why> he must leave them. This was a sorrowful time, as indicated in chapter 14.

Yet, a little while, and the world SEETH ME NO MORE; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
AT THAT DAY ye shall know that I AM in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
Ye have heard how I said unto you, I GO AWAY, and COME AGAIN unto you.
If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go to the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.
Hereafter I WILL NOT TALK MUCH WITH YOU: for the <Prince of this world> COMETH (satan), and hath nothing in me.

Wildfire

Wildflier, did you notice that in all the above examples, the person in question (all parables indicating Jesus) returns to "the exact same people he left!
In none of the passages does He return to their descendants, and in ALL of the examples, he returns within the lifetime of the people he left.

As you quoted:
"Ye have heard how I said unto you, I GO AWAY, and COME AGAIN unto you."

Could Jesus have made it any more clear?
He used the personal pronoun YOU 3 times in that short sentance to drive home the point!

Ye [the 1st century disciples] have heard how I said unto you [the 1st century disciples] I go away and come again unto you [the 1st century disciples]

Any 2000+ year gap has been inserted by the mind of man, not the word of God.

I'll stick to the word.

Auntie

8th June 2002, 11:36 AM

Originally posted by gwyyn

HOWEVER, I do not use my post to ridicule you and refer to you as an embarressment, nor do I tell you that you are stupid for your beliefs, so please be so kind and truly Christ like to refrain from doing this to others who disagree with you.

Just a thought

Gwyyn, I have discovered the value of the "Ignore Button". I use it sparingly, only for those few who continually bash and attack personally. I occasionally check their posts to see if they have had a change in their attitude. Life is too short to waste time reading words designed to hurt.

Wildfire

8th June 2002, 12:27 PM

parasouia, Gods word and instructions were not limited to only his disciples. Why did he tell them about the kingdom of heaven? Why did he wash their feet before he was crucified? So that they would do unto others as I (Jesus) have done unto you. It was important for them to understand his teachings; and when he had accomplished that task, and his work was done, he was killed.
The servant is not greater than the master, and greater is he (the Father) whom has sent me to you.
They were chosen to teach the works of Jesus and to spread the Word of God.

Feed my sheep.

We are the sheep, the bible is the Word of God. The bible was not written and published to the world during their lifetime. The word of God could only be heard by the disciples when they taught to the crowds, by moving from place to place.
When they began to write their letters, God kept their letters and words <safe> and they were translated into a book for US to read.
Where is our comforter?
Do you see, that Jesus was the master who was instructing his servants on how to teach us; all of us?
We are the generation to come.

Wildfire

parousia70

8th June 2002, 03:21 PM

I'm not sure I understand what point you are trying to make.

Is it that you believe everything in the Bible is meant to be only relevant to us today, and not to the generations that preceeded us?

There can be only one endtimes generation, and Jesus and the apostles all taught and believed that they were that generation.

Were they wrong?

Wildfire

9th June 2002, 09:21 AM

No, please, why do you hold firm to the belief that the disciples believed they were the end time generation? They had an important mission: to teach others the word of God, through his son Jesus Christ. Can you imagine what the world would be like today, if there was no bible published? If the letters that the disciples written- bearing witness to the son of God- were destroyed? There would be silence in this world. Blessed is he who has not seen and believes. They saw Jesus. They walked with him. They traveled with him. They learned from him. He was their <master>. And we (generations preceding and following, if God is willing) are also his disciples, when we gain the insight and share that knowledge with others.

The book of Revelation is interesting to study; there is a length of time involved, which increases near the seventh seal being opened. I believe it is important to have patience regarding time, because we are told that although we change and the world changes, God does not change. Yes, our ancestors before us were all part of the prophecy, as we are. They suffered wars, and disease and plagues. But at what point of the opening of the seals, are we? who am I to say, but God alone who knows the time and hour.
I am careful to watch, I encourage you too my friend.
Wildfire

parousia70

9th June 2002, 09:59 AM

Originally posted by Wildfire
No, please, why do you hold firm to the belief that the disciples believed they were the end time generation?

Because the Bible says so! I have this funny notion that what the Bible says is true.

Originally posted by Wildfire
They had an important mission: to teach others the word of God, through his son Jesus Christ. Can you imagine what the world would be like today, if there was no bible published? If the letters that the disciples written- bearing witness to the son of God- were destroyed? There would be silence in this world. Blessed is he who has not seen and believes. They saw Jesus. They walked with him. They traveled with him. They learned from him. He was their <master>. And we (generations preceding and following, if God is willing) are also his disciples, when we gain the insight and share that knowledge with others.

Of this I am again uncertain of your point.
Are you saying that IF Jesus returned already, we don't need to spread the Gospel?

Remember Wildfire, it's the "Everlasting Gospel to preach to them that dwell on the earth"

There is no "use by" or "expiration" date to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, It is eternal, without end, everlasting, and it's sole purpose is to be preached to them that dwell on the earth.

How do you figure that we are to ever stop preaching what was given to be preached forever?

Thunderchild

9th June 2002, 06:21 PM

What was told to the disciples immediately after they had seen Jesus ascend?????

parousia70

9th June 2002, 07:07 PM

Originally posted by Thunderchild
What was told to the disciples immediately after they had seen Jesus ascend?????

The disciples were told that Jesus would return in like manner as He entered heaven, and in Acts 1:9, we are told that he entered heaven "Hidden from the eyes by a cloud".

The angels didn't give the disciples any new Revelation. they did not tell the disciples anything Jesus didn't tell them first.

Jesus said he would return in the coulds, the angels simply confirmed Jesus own words.

parousia70

9th June 2002, 08:45 PM

Bump

Mike Beidler

9th June 2002, 10:15 PM

Originally posted by parousia70
Bump

I see this "bump" every now and then. What the heck is it?!?!?!

Mike Beidler

9th June 2002, 10:20 PM

Originally posted by parousia70
Bump

Ooooohhhhhhhh ... I SEE!!! Bumps the thread up to the top of the list!!! And I thought Parousia70 would have something good to say ... :D

Manifestation1*AD70

9th June 2002, 10:30 PM

parousia70

10th June 2002, 05:18 PM

Originally posted by Mike Beidler

Ooooohhhhhhhh ... I SEE!!! Bumps the thread up to the top of the list!!! And I thought Parousia70 would have something good to say ... :D

Well (blushing), comming from someone of your stature, I take that as a compliment.
Thanks!

prodigal

11th June 2002, 12:17 AM

Just to get this straight, you guys believe that Jesus was crucified, dead and buried, rose from the grave, ascended into heaven, took a seat at the right hand of God, and then in 70 AD, asked to be excused from the table and came back to earth and did what?

"The Lord said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." Ps 110:1

I love the image that verse conjures up. Jesus with his feet propped up on his enemies, reigning on the earth.

"See, the Lord is coming with fire, and his chariots are like a whirlwind; he will bring down his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire. For with fire and with his sword the Lord will execute judgment upon all men, and many will be those slain by the Lord." Isaiah 66:15,16

If you are saying that this has happened already, then you are sorely mistaken. However, one verse of prophecy that you are helping to fulfill is: "But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them-- bringing seift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute." 2 Peter 2:1,2

Also, if Jesus took his church away, how did the church continue? What about Timothy? Why was he not taken?

davo

11th June 2002, 01:28 AM

Originally posted by prodigal
Just to get this straight, you guys believe that Jesus was crucified, dead and buried, rose from the grave, ascended into heaven, took a seat at the right hand of God, and then in 70 AD, asked to be excused from the table and came back to earth and did what?

Well, not quite excused, it was all in God's plan and timing, for Jesus returned [not leaving them orphans] as He promised "to tHIS generation." -if you can believe Jesus, . Besides, what's a party without the guests :cool:

[i]Originally posted by prodigal
"The Lord said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." Ps 110:1

I love the image that verse conjures up. Jesus with his feet propped up on his enemies, reigning on the earth.

That's the trouble with much [or most] of dispensationalism futurism -it relates more to fantastic imaginings than it does to scripture. The enemy that is under the feet of Christ is the separation of sin-death -He made reconciliation.

Originally posted by prodigal
"See, the Lord is coming with fire, and his chariots are like a whirlwind; he will bring down his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire. For with fire and with his sword the Lord will execute judgment upon all men, and many will be those slain by the Lord." Isaiah 66:15,16

Your quote from Isa 66 relates to the ending of the old covenant, being fulfilled in the new -typifing in prophetic language His judgment.

Originally posted by prodigal
Also, if Jesus took his church away, how did the church continue? What about Timothy? Why was he not taken?

Who said the Church was taken away??? That sounds more like a futurists idea. Did you know that as it was in the days Noah, so it was in Christ's Parousia -when judgment came it was the unrighteous that were taken out of the way -interesting thought hey. :wave:

As for Timothy, not being a dispensational futurist he new he was in for the long haul -and wasn't waiting around for some mythical rapture whose inception is not even 200 year old.

davo

prodigal

11th June 2002, 08:26 AM

Again, in 70 AD, Christ, according to heretical preterist views, came back and did what?

davo

11th June 2002, 08:47 AM

Originally posted by prodigal
Again, in 70 AD, Christ, according to heretical preterist views, came back and did what?

I beg to differ on your heretical tag [especially since you seem not to know much about the "fulfilled view"]. That aside: Christ consumated what He established through the Cross i.e., salvation :clap:

davo

parousia70

11th June 2002, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by prodigal
......according to heretical preterist views,.......

Heresey is indeed a strong charge.

Do you have any evidence to support it?

prodigal

11th June 2002, 10:50 AM

I am sorry. Maybe heretical is too soft a term. How about apostate ? Of course there can be no end to this if you infer certain "truths" from a non-contextual point of view. I do not subscribe to man's views on scripture. Man can, and does, twist scripture, to get his desired effect.

In the book of John, chapter 14, Jesus promises his disciples that he will come back for them after he goes to prepare a place for them. He then tells them again, "I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. " John 14:18,19

All of these guys he was talking to were martyrd, for their faith in God.

In John 17, Jesus prays to God, "I am coming to you now, but I say these things while I am still in the world so that they may have the full measure of my joy within them. I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. They are not of it. Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified. My prayer is not for them alone. I pray alo for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so thet the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave ;me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me ." John 17:13-23

Ask yourself why Jesus would tell them that the world hated them and was going to kill them and then say, "I'll be right back!" It is called encouragement. The world may destroy our flesh, but praise God, Jesus has overcome the world. Even Jesus did not know when he would return, but by saying soon he covered the bases. How long does a man live? While we live in the flesh, we will have troubles, "I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world ." John 16:33

jenlu

11th June 2002, 11:16 AM

I'm not a preterist...but prodigal...

Aren't you(man) reading into Jesus' words and twisting scripture to get a desired result...there is no evidence that he was "encouraging" them by saying the Day of the Lord was coming soon...within their generation...

And how, may I ask, did He cover His bases by giving them, as you seem to suggest, an abstract timetable for the Day of the Lord...Prophecy given to us by God, was done for one reason...to allow us to come unto Him...the abstractness you twist into it, does not allow that affect...

You also seem to think that Jesus, after His ascension, did/does not know when that Day would be...but after reading Revelations how would one come to that conclusion...but, beside that point, Jesus definitely knew what signs and prerequisite's(sp) that were involved for that Day while he was on earth as flesh...

If I were you I would step lightly on throwing around those words, because more often than not, we(me included) are just as guilty...

Auntie

11th June 2002, 11:50 AM

Originally posted by prodigal

I am sorry. Maybe heretical is too soft a term. How about apostate ? Of course there can be no end to this if you infer certain "truths" from a non-contextual point of view.

Prodigal,

Many people agree with you. Please read:
The Allurement of Hymenaen Preterism:
The Rise of "Dispensable Eschatology"
By Jim West
http://www.reformed.org/eschaton/index.html?mainframe=index_esch.html

The site is a real eye-opener to the truth about preterism:

"Satanic Pride"

The fifth reason for Hymanæn theology is Satanic pride, a desire to pass muster before men. Heretics love novelties. The pride in this case is not just opposing the resurrection theology of the Bible, but the craving to make a name for oneself--the desire to have the preeminence, that is, the spirit of Diotrephes ( 3 Jn. 9 ). The pride factor is particularly easy to spot in the Hymenæns, for they are obsessed with a resurrectionless preterism. It extends further than identifying oneself as a "preterist" on the guest registrar of the church. The Hymenæns are campaigning to "subvert" the Faith of others. Believing that they have discovered some new truth that has been hidden from the church for the last 2000 years, we can well understand their zeal. In Paul's last words to the elders at Ephesus, he wept, stating that after his departure, grievous wolves would enter in, and from even their own selves "shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them" ( Ac. 20:30 ). Since Paul was writing to Timothy who was probably in Ephesus, we can identify Hymenæus and Philetus as two of these invaders."

Acts6:5

11th June 2002, 12:32 PM

Tsk, tsk, tsk. :( . The "truth" of that particular paragraph is just a heaping mass of generalizations, falsehoods, and propoganda. This isn't directed at you, Auntie, but Mr. West. It doesn't open anyone's eyes to the truth of preterism, but rather, it's just another sleepy article that weighs down the eyelids with much error.

Truth that's been hidden for some 2000 years? Hmmm, dispensationalism and the majority of modern futurist thought comes to mind, eh? ;) Heck, every major futurist author that churns out another endtimes scenario claims they have figured out the apocolypse time-table that has been hidden for centuries.

For a real "eye-opener" check out two other articles on the very same site:

Matthew 24 (Part One.) http://www.credenda.org/old/issues/vol8/esch8-3.htmBy: Jack Van Deventer
Van Deventer (in two parts) examines this hotly debated prophetic portion of scripture.

Matthew 24 (Part Two.) http://www.credenda.org/old/issues/vol8/esch8-3.htm
By: Jack Van Deventer
Part two of Van Deventer's examination of Matthew 24.

The study ends with this:

"In summary, though it is often not taught from the pulpits, Jesus' prophecies in Matthew 24 and the parallel passages of the Olivet Discourse are very adequately explained in preterist fashion as God's holy judgment against unbelieving Israel in A.D. 70."

Although the site does not support certain teachings in full-preterism, it does support partial-preterism (and it trounces dispensationalism).

This last quote from the site is especially telling:

"You don't often find scholarly books on eschatology in Christian book stores anymore. The booksellers are pushing "the world's going to end any moment" literature and have convinced bookstores into thinking that anything else is a departure from orthodox Christianity. These "chicken little" books are the prophetic equivalent of Christian romance novels: sensational, suspenseful, and highly questionable in terms of edification. Given the silliness of pop eschatology, I can hardly blame nonchristians for ridiculing those who profess Christ."

In Christ,

Acts6:5

jenlu

11th June 2002, 01:19 PM

Hey Auntie...

Mr. West seems to think that Matthew 24:1-34 is past...are you changing your toon on this...or do you just agree with his consistent preterist view and ignore what he said about the rest...

davo

11th June 2002, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by jenlu
Hey Auntie...

Mr. West seems to think that Matthew 24:1-34 is past...are you changing your toon on this...or do you just agree with his consistent preterist view and ignore what he said about the rest...

Hey jenlu -I wouldn't worry too much about any tunes being changed, running true to form it's just another in-depth response [which usually means: another cut n' paste] -probably read half and understood less :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Acts6:5
The study ends with this:

"In summary, though it is often not taught from the pulpits, Jesus' prophecies in Matthew 24 and the parallel passages of the Olivet Discourse are very adequately explained in preterist fashion as God's holy judgment against unbelieving Israel in A.D. 70."

Although the site does not support certain teachings in full-preterism, it does support partial-preterism (and it trounces dispensationalism).

This last quote from the site is especially telling:

"You don't often find scholarly books on eschatology in Christian book stores anymore. The booksellers are pushing "the world's going to end any moment" literature and have convinced bookstores into thinking that anything else is a departure from orthodox Christianity. These "chicken little" books are the prophetic equivalent of Christian romance novels: sensational, suspenseful, and highly questionable in terms of edification. Given the silliness of pop eschatology, I can hardly blame nonchristians for ridiculing those who profess Christ."

Now aint that the truth! oopppss, another cut n' paste :D :D

davo

Manifestation1*AD70

11th June 2002, 05:59 PM

Originally posted by jenlu
I'm not a preterist...but prodigal...

Aren't you(man) reading into Jesus' words and twisting scripture to get a desired result...there is no evidence that he was "encouraging" them by saying the Day of the Lord was coming soon...within their generation...

No evidence. :scratch: You futurist seem to have your own man made Bible that does not contain Jesus' words. What other evidence did the disciples need other then Jesus' promise to return before they had gone through the cities of Israel (Matthew 10:23). Jesus liked to keep things simile. One of the more astounding facets of preterism is the necessity to tell Christians thatthe Bible means what it says.

It is a good thing that the saints unlike christians today believed the words of Jesus, because they to would have been destroyed in the Day of the Lord.

Manifestation1*AD70

11th June 2002, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by prodigal
Again, in 70 AD, Christ, according to heretical preterist views, came back and did what?

We preterist must be on the right track. Why? Because when we tell the truth, our futurists brother go on the attack. This was true in Jesus'day and it is still true today. It feels good to be in the company of Jesus.

Didaskomenos

11th June 2002, 06:48 PM

I am consistently so amazed at people of the likes of prodigal and auntie, who completely miss the point of Christianity. To them, it is a fideism that means only the belief system they've been taught. They have no real regard for the Truth, and do not love it, for if they loved it, they would know it's bigger than whatever cookie-cutter doctrine Fundamentalism has handed them.

The point of Christianity is a lifestyle of serving God and one another. It is being Jesus to everyone you come in contact with, especially other believers. It's not having all the right doctrines about eschatology or bibliology. I've disagreed doctrinally with some of the most godly men I've ever known, who conveyed this with their lives. R.C. Sproul is one man who is conservative on many issues, and is well-regarded among many Fundies, but he's a preterist. No, you don't have to agree with everything they say to act respectfully towards them.

Christianity teaches holiness of lifestyle, not perfection of doctrine. Futurists AND preterists believe that, and all accusation of heresy and apostasy are nothing more than a ploy of Satan to divide his believers. Let's learn together. There is absolutely not one biblical reason to launch those kinds of accusations at one another.

Manifestation1*AD70

11th June 2002, 10:25 PM

Originally posted by Didaskomenos
I am consistently so amazed at people of the likes of prodigal and auntie, who completely miss the point of Christianity. To them, it is a fideism that means only the belief system they've been taught. They have no real regard for the Truth, and do not love it, for if they loved it, they would know it's bigger than whatever cookie-cutter doctrine Fundamentalism has handed them.

The point of Christianity is a lifestyle of serving God and one another. It is being Jesus to everyone you come in contact with, especially other believers. It's not having all the right doctrines about eschatology or bibliology. I've disagreed doctrinally with some of the most godly men I've ever known, who conveyed this with their lives. R.C. Sproul is one man who is conservative on many issues, and is well-regarded among many Fundies, but he's a preterist. No, you don't have to agree with everything they say to act respectfully towards them.

Christianity teaches holiness of lifestyle, not perfection of doctrine. Futurists AND preterists believe that, and all accusation of heresy and apostasy are nothing more than a ploy of Satan to divide his believers. Let's learn together. There is absolutely not one biblical reason to launch those kinds of accusations at one another.

Aman. Well said brother :clap:

jenlu

12th June 2002, 07:03 AM

Manifestation...

I think you got my point messed up...while I am somewhat a futurist in your eyes...I can completely see how Matthew 24 is past events...

This also goes to a point that not only the dispensational futurist don't really read (on this forum) what is being said...my point actually goes in favor of the preterist argument in this thread...it's mostly people of different leanings just spouting off without anyone actually stopping to take a look at what is being said...

prodigal was trying to twist (IMHO) the scripture to say when Jesus told the disciple's he was coming soon...that it was only for encouragement...He didn't actually mean it...read prodigal's last post...it might help in your understanding of my post...

to many people on the attack...try not to take differences in opinion as personal attacks...we don't even know you...(should go for everyone)...

davo

12th June 2002, 08:01 AM

Originally posted by jenlu
...while I am somewhat a futurist in your eyes...I can completely see how Matthew 24 is past events...

If this be so [and I have no reason to doubt you] where do you fit a future Parousia in Matt24 -do you split verses 35 from 36 and insert a typical dispensational "gap" -prior being Jerusalems end, and post being the worlds end? Trouble is [if that's how you see it] that kinda makes for a dispensational 3rd Coming -He comes and judges Jerusalem, then later comes again and judges the world.

It is untenable [and wrong] to insert a false gap in here. If you read Luke's account of the very same end-time event there are factors occuring in Luke as a whole [one event] that magically get divided into two by this gap theory of Matt24 -any thoughts?

davo

parousia70

12th June 2002, 08:32 AM

Originally posted by prodigal

Ask yourself why Jesus would tell them that the world hated them and was going to kill them and then say, "I'll be right back!" It is called encouragement. The world may destroy our flesh, but praise God, Jesus has overcome the world. Even Jesus did not know when he would return, but by saying soon he covered the bases.

OK, So, what you are saying is that it's OK for Jesus to LIE as long as He does it to "provide encouragement" and "cover His bases"?

I must admit that I do agree with part of your interpratation, in that when Jesus used the the term "Soon" he meant it to be understood in the plain, literal, human sense of the term. Most futurists try to spiritualize away that meaning. You should be proud of yourself for holding firm to a "literal" interpratation about this.

Now, If we could just get you to re examine your assertion that Jesus Lied..............

jenlu

12th June 2002, 08:51 AM

davo

As of right now, the preterist view is bringing up some questions in my mind, but have yet to be convinced in scripture...So as of right now, I don't believe any of those verse's are talking about the 2nd Coming/Parousia...no gap...just not the 2nd Coming...

davo

12th June 2002, 06:53 PM

Originally posted by jenlu
As of right now, the preterist view is bringing up some questions in my mind, but have yet to be convinced in scripture...So as of right now, I don't believe any of those verse's are talking about the 2nd Coming/Parousia...no gap...just not the 2nd Coming...

Jenlu, if I'm reading you correctly, your: "I don't believe any of those verse's are talking about the 2nd Coming/Parousia" are you talking about Matt 24 that I refered to -like for example:

Matt 24:30-31 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Or, are you saying "that" in reference to Luke's account of the same event . If that's what you're thinking -what from the text tells you they are NOT the same event?

If neither in your opinion have to do with Christ's Parousia -but [i]just the destruction of Jerusalem -what scriptures then tell you of a future physical coming of Christ? [I can appreciate you may say something like Act 1:11 etc -what I'm asking is how do you handle the above scriptures specifically].

Hope all that made sense :)

davo

jenlu

13th June 2002, 07:53 AM

Well davo...

First I see verse 30 as saying the Son of Man in heaven taking His seat at the right hand of the Father...because of the events of 70 AD with the destruction of the old covenant and the beginning of the already victorious covenant...then I see verse 31 as Jesus sending His messengers (angels) to preach to the nations...and progressively over time as we die of flesh we are gathered unto him...what do you think of these verses...

davo

13th June 2002, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by jenlu
First I see verse 30 as saying the Son of Man in heaven taking His seat at the right hand of the Father...because of the events of 70 AD with the destruction of the old covenant and the beginning of the already victorious covenant...then I see verse 31 as Jesus sending His messengers (angels) to preach to the nations...and progressively over time as we die of flesh we are gathered unto him...what do you think of these verses...

Matt 24:29-31: 29Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Looking at verse 29 I'd say "Immediately" means what it says, and isn't to be stretched out like the dispensational "soon" etc -i.e., it's pretty much straight away. The "tribulation" being the conflagation that engulfed Jerusalem -in particular the Temple, being the massive civil unrest as a result of the religious and zealotry factions warring against each other [many were killed at this time -at their own hands]. The "sun moon and stars" coming to nought being the Hebrew hierarchy crumbling under divine judgment -typifying the final hours of the Old Covenant -about to end, as per Heb 8:13 [1Cor 7:29; 1Jn 2:17] etc.

Verse 30 is the promised coming in their generation as Jesus and the apostles taught. "Earth" is equally translated "Land" -so is seen in the immediate context of Israel, and so matches with the 12 "tribes" etc. The coming is in line with over biblical references to Yahweh's divine judgments -"on the clouds of glory." The fact that this judgment was occuring was the "sign" that Jesus had indeed taken His place on the throne -as Judgment was given to Him. The "many" that saw Him coming again were Jesus' contemporaries -Mt 26:64, Mt 10:23; 16:28, and naturally others of the time etc.

Verse 31 recapitulates what's gone before in the chapter about "going into all the world [the known world of their day -the Roman empire] in the sense of the angels [messengers with the Gospel] reaping that harvest that was "ready and white." Seeing this in terms being fulfilled in the 1st century doesn't in any way diminish from our sharing the good news of salvation in Christ -the only difference being that what they were coming into i.e., "fulness" we now have -what a blessing! The gospel is eternal Rev 14:6.

You mentioned not seeing the Parousia in Matt 24 -where do you see it?

davo

jenlu

13th June 2002, 12:20 PM

Davo...here goes...

as for 29...Immediately after the destruction of the temple(Jerusalem, ie tribulation) the lights went out for the Jews being God's special people(ie moon, sun and stars language is plain to me as the coming down of the kingdom given to the Jews)...

as for 30...it happened immediately too...(we both know that it definitely happened in the ascension into heaven), but the final act of destroying the temple which was part of Jesus' first coming (in my humble opinion)...was the sign that Jesus was on the throne...so that is where Jesus refers (in my opinion that is why He uses the phraseology "Son of Man") to Daniel 7:13-14 where it describe's Jesus in a similar way as coming "with the clouds of heaven"...and as you can see Jesus was heading in the wrong direction for it to be a parousia...or coming to earth...In Daniel he was approaching "the Ancient of Days"...I believe Jesus was describing that in verse 30...
that is why all the tribes of the earth mourned...although all the tribes of the "land" should be how it is read and we know that means Israel...of course they were mourning...they had lost the covenential status under the Law and the Temple...So Israel is seen as mourning immediately after the tribulation of those days...

verse 31...also immediately after the tribulation of those days...began the time when Jesus would send forth His messengers (angels is commonly used for messengers) to sound the trumpet(call of the Gospel, with reference to Numbers 10:1-10 and the year of the Jubilee) for the great gathering of His people from the whole world...I believe this to be reference to the entire world due to the fact he described it differently then saying the earth...this to me has to be referring to the whole world...It began immediately after the tribulation of those days and continue's until today...

davo

13th June 2002, 01:12 PM

Jenlu, I'm inclined to think that Dan 7:13-14 deals with Christ's ascension and the time following as his receiving of the Eternal Kingdom from His Father.

Daniel 7:13-14 I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. 14Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed.

His "coming to" isn't an action that gets suspended indefinitely in limbo -having received, He comes/returns, giving His saints the promised Kingdom [verses 18, 22 & 27]. And this is all in the time frame of that fourth kingdom -Rome.

This thought of Going [coming to] Receiving and Returning is reflected in Jesus' parable:

Luke 19:12 Therefore He said: "A certain nobleman [Christ] went into a far country [Heaven -to the Ancient of Days] to receive for himself a kingdom [authority] and to return [Parousia].

davo

jenlu

13th June 2002, 01:36 PM

Davo...

Don't you and I both put the events leading up to and including 70AD as part of the taking away of the kingdom from the Jew alone and giving it to a nation that produces fruit...but also you and I discern that in actuality this taking away, along with the defeat of his enemies including death, was definitely complete in the life, death, ressurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ...So we don't have a problem moving the time frame that cerainly did happen on the cross, at the tomb, and on the mount, to 40 years later...So allowing us to see that the destruction of the Temple was the "sign" of the Son of Man coming on the cloud of heaven... sitting at the Right Hand of God to recieve His Kingdom is applicable in my opinion for verse 30...

Though I do believe He came...just not in terms of the Second Coming...He came in judgement of the Jews and salvation of the true church...but, as of right now I do beleive there will be, if I can quote Chilton, "Paradise Restored"...that is as the growth of the Gospel throughout the age progresses, while he definitely conquered on the cross, in the tomb, and on the mount, He will conquer more and more and all His enemies will be His footstool...the last one being death...and by that I mean physical death...Like Adam was created not to die...I believe that will happen again on earth and Edenic Blessings will be restored to what they were before the fall...

davo

13th June 2002, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by jenlu
Don't you and I both put the events leading up to and including 70AD as part of the taking away of the kingdom from the Jew alone and giving it to a nation that produces fruit...but also you and I discern that in actuality this taking away, along with the defeat of his enemies including death, was definitely complete in the life, death, ressurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ...So we don't have a problem moving the time frame that cerainly did happen on the cross, at the tomb, and on the mount, to 40 years later...So allowing us to see that the destruction of the Temple was the "sign" of the Son of Man coming on the cloud of heaven... sitting at the Right Hand of God to recieve His Kingdom is applicable in my opinion for verse 30...

Salvation came through the Cross, not at the Cross. The out-working of salvation/righteousness was the "hope" of the Church -which they didn't yet have [Gal 5:5] -it came to fruition when Christ came. So I'm wondering how you can see a coming, but not see it as it is THE Coming.

Jenlu, you'll have to excuse me -I feel like I'm not quite answering your question -I'm on a night shift here and my brain isn't cranking up too well :sleep: .

I can understand where you're at -as you described your position early [I was there at one point].

PS: did you know that David Chilton embrassed "Full Preterism" some time before his death -he wrote "Paradise Restored" and "Days of Vengeance" as a partial preterist [futurist], and was rather scathing of the "full" postion to which he later subscribed.

davo

jenlu

13th June 2002, 02:24 PM

If you've been where I am, then you know how I see a Coming without it being The COMING...We both know God/Yahweh came many times in judgement/salvation in the O.T. in much the same way...

This is the first good discussion I've had with a full preterist that did not just blow me off...I just can't see how (like I did with the dispensational stuff...I mean it was like a light went off and I've thought this way forever...you know), at least right now, how your interpretation of those verses is correct...I'm not saying it isn't, but it isn't blasting me in the face like I said in parenthesis...It could be my lack of knowledge or it could be that I'm right...
I appreciate you conversing with me...I've got to head out for now too...hopefully will be able to continue this later today...

BTW...do you have any writing/tapes/any quotes of Chilton after his change in belief...I would like to see how he justified it...his books communicated well with me and it may help in my understanding of preterism...also, without these (not that I don't believe that you believe it) I would have no evidence of it actually happening...i know the "battle" between partials and fulls has been steamy and this would be a big hit to partials in my opinion...

Thanks again...

davo

13th June 2002, 02:50 PM

Originally posted by jenlu
If you've been where I am, then you know how I see a Coming without it being The COMING...We both know God/Yahweh came many times in judgement/salvation in the O.T. in much the same way...

I'm just about to go home. :) I may have been a bit presumptuous saying "I can understand where you're at," because I came through amill>postmill>partial pret>full pret -mind you it wasn't blinding light stuff for me, more a case of finding the evidence becoming overwhelming where I felt I needed to "get serious" [not saying you're not]. So it was more a journey -my final decision though was still a leap, as I didn't have all the "T's" crossed etc, but I didn't have that before anyway. I just found there was more "for" than "against" -and lots of "little" mystifying scriptures started to make contextual sense -"started falling into place."

I'll catch you later -in the mean time someone else may also read our posts and make some contribution and sense ;)

Blessings!

davo

jenlu

13th June 2002, 02:59 PM

tell me about those "little" mystifying scripture's...I believe I know what you are talking about here...thanks...

I know your heading home...my journey was disp/postmill(kinda partial...but like my story said I had become very disturbed with the time statements in the Bible for the last two years of my dispensational leanings...and when I found postmillenailism is was like a blast of light, but it did take much deliberation...talk to you later...

davo

14th June 2002, 04:10 AM

G'day jenlu -just passing, here's some links that might be of interest. :wave:

Foreword to ‘What Happened in AD70?’ By David Chilton:
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Preterism/chilton-david_p_01.html

Email correspondence by David Chilton:
http://ourworld.cs.com/preteristabcs/id88.htm

Mt 24 - Lk 17 comparative chart:
http://www.preteristarchive.com/images/Charts/im-luk17.gif

40 years in Typology:
http://www.preteristarchive.com/images/Charts/im-40yrs.gif

9 Preterist Audio Sermons by David Curtis:
http://www.audiowebman.org/bbc/audioyears/library.htm

davo

jenlu

14th June 2002, 09:35 AM

Thanks a lot davo...I've scanned through them and they look like they will be very helpful...

I have a question...for this question...let's say preterism is correct...I believe I've heard posters say that this age will last forever...as in the earth and human beings being born on earth forever...Do you believe this to be true?...if so, do you believe that this world will ever get back to it's original purpose as in the Garden of Eden...since the Garden was in fact on earth...I could see this happening? What do you think...?

davo

15th June 2002, 01:24 PM

Originally posted by jenlu
I have a question...for this question...let's say preterism is correct...I believe I've heard posters say that this age will last forever...as in the earth and human beings being born on earth forever...Do you believe this to be true?...if so, do you believe that this world will ever get back to it's original purpose as in the Garden of Eden...since the Garden was in fact on earth...I could see this happening? What do you think...?

Hi jenlu. I guess the "original purpose" of Eden was "relationship" with God. Wilful sin fractured that relationship and Christ's Coming was all about restoring that relationship. Focusing upon the "temporal" nature of things IMO misses the mark in the sense that we can become like Nicodemus who misunderstood the spiritual significance and essence of what "rebirth" was all about because he had a "temporal mindset."

I have no scriptural reason to believe God's good world will not be as Paul says -"world without end." I can see the real possibilty that through the grace of God humanity will continue to discover more and more how God's world works, and so through scientific means make "life" [physical] as we know it, better for all. How that will all work out I have no idea. Man because of sin has the tendency to corrupt the good that God gives -that's why this world will always need the Gospel, and why we will always have opportunity to share it.

davo

Manifestation1*AD70

15th June 2002, 09:52 PM

Originally posted by davo

Hi jenlu. I guess the "original purpose" of Eden was "relationship" with God. Wilful sin fractured that relationship and Christ's Coming was all about restoring that relationship. Focusing upon the "temporal" nature of things IMO misses the mark in the sense that we can become like Nicodemus who misunderstood the spiritual significance and essence of what "rebirth" was all about because he had a "temporal mindset."

I have no scriptural reason to believe God's good world will not be as Paul says -"world without end." I can see the real possibilty that through the grace of God humanity will continue to discover more and more how God's world works, and so through scientific means make "life" [physical] as we know it, better for all. How that will all work out I have no idea. Man because of sin has the tendency to corrupt the good that God gives -that's why this world will always need the Gospel, and why we will always have opportunity to share it.

davo

Good points davo. What most people miss in the Bible is that God never came to restore the earth back to it's original purpose. God came to restore man back into his presences. The Garden of Eden has taken on a much higher form. It called the heavenly.

Autumn

16th June 2002, 11:40 AM

Originally posted by gwyyn
I was wondering when did the first preterist views orginate? Do you get all your evidence about the fulfillment of the first part of Revelations and Matthew 24 from Josephus?

I believe that preterism originated with this man Spanish Jesuit Luis De Alcazar (1554-1613), although this is just info I found on the internet. He wrote Investigation of the Hidden Sense of the Apocalypse.

Manifestation1*AD70

17th June 2002, 06:59 AM

This is a post from Terry cz the second coming of Christ.

All of christianity is false. Your Jesus said in Matthews 10 :23 that he would return before his disciples went through the cities of Israel. That did not happen so he is a false prophet.

Againg You Jesus said in matthew 16:28 that his disciples would not die before he returned. That did not happen either which makes Jesus a false prophet.

Autumn

17th June 2002, 10:11 PM

Originally posted by Manifestation1*AD70
This is a post from Terry cz the second coming of Christ.

All of christianity is false. Your Jesus said in Matthews 10 :23 that he would return before his disciples went through the cities of Israel. That did not happen so he is a false prophet.

Againg You Jesus said in matthew 16:28 that his disciples would not die before he returned. That did not happen either which makes Jesus a false prophet.

This to me seems like he is looking at this strictly with human wisdom. Perhaps Christ did come in judgement when the temple was destroyed in 70 A.D., but I do not think that He came as most consider the "second" time. I don't see anywhere in the Scriptures where He says that He will only come a "second" time. I do not think that He has come in His glory, gathering His chosen from the ends of the earth.

Those passages can be interpreted different ways. I know the way that you interpret them, but if I interpret it a different way, it does not mean that Jesus is a false prophet. I know that He is not. I have faith, even if the Bible does not always make sense to me. God's ways are not my own...He speaks in Spirit, and because His ways are so great and beyond my own...it can be hard to pin Him down with my own thinking. I have faith. Whether or not someone thinks Him a false prophet. Perhaps they need to think that He came already the "second" time, because if they didn't they wouldn't be able to believe according to the way they interpret those verses. I hope that came out the way I wanted it to.

The important thing is that I love the Lord, and I have faith in Him.

MatthewDiscipleofGod

17th June 2002, 10:26 PM

Just got done reading those 2 verses and much more also and at what times they were said.
Both of those verses can easily refer to God rising from the dead and appearing to his disciples. He did return. He returned from the dead.

Much different though then the actually 2nd coming of Jesus. Hope that gives you something to think about and I didn't read the whole thread so I hope it has not already been posted. ;)

davo

17th June 2002, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by Project 86
Just got done reading those 2 verses and much more also and at what times they were said.
Both of those verses can easily refer to God rising from the dead and appearing to his disciples. He did return. He returned from the dead.

Much different though then the actually 2nd coming of Jesus. Hope that gives you something to think about and I didn't read the whole thread so I hope it has not already been posted.

G'day Project :wave: , since you read the passages you would have noticed that before the "Son of Man" comes Matt 10:23 -they were to be persecuted from city to city. You'll find a record of this in Acts, AFTER Christ's resurrection, but not before.

When the "Son of Man" came in His Kingdom in Matt 16:28, He came giving rewards as per verse 27. Both the scriptures speak of resurrection -but not Christ's, this was The Resurrection [with rewards] that was concurrent with The Parousia and The Judgment in AD70.

davo