PDA

View Full Version : preterism??????



Steven
11-16-01, 09:27 PM
I was wondering if I could a few of you preterists to comment on a scripture,and a question for me? First the scripture is this;2 timothy2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred,saying that the resurection is already;and overthrow the faith of some......now my question is this;what happens to you after physical death?....what is your future hope?

Brandan
11-16-01, 11:52 PM
Steven,

The knowledgeable complete preterists here answered this somewhere in this thread: http://www.predestinarian.net/showthread.php?threadid=9

I recommend you read this thread in its entirety.. It's quite extensive, and should give you plenty of insight on preterist eschatology...

Steven
11-17-01, 12:45 AM
Hello kermie,thanks for the reply.
I think I see where preterism stands on the resurection question now,but I have another;daniel 9:27 when did this prince that shall come establish a 7 yr covenant with the jews? And when did he brake it?

Parousia70
11-17-01, 10:20 AM
Hi Steven,

A big argument is over who this prince is. In the 1769 KJV, the first prince is capitalized - Prince and the second is not. Unfortunately, not knowing the Hebrew, folks err and make a doctrine based on the translators' take. What they may not know is that the 1611 KJV had both of them as "Prince." It was changed later. The YLT (a really good word-for-word translation of the Textus Receptus/Masoretic) has this:


Daniel 9:25-26
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)


Daniel 9:25 And thou dost know, and dost consider wisely, from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem till Messiah the Leader is seven weeks, and sixty and two weeks: the broad place hath been built again, and the rampart, even in the distress of the times.

Daniel 9:26 And after the sixty and two weeks, cut off is Messiah, and the city and the holy place are not his, the Leader who hath come doth destroy the people; and its end is with a flood, and till the end is war, determined are desolations.


Clearly, in the word for word, he equates Messiah the Prince with the Prince that shall come.

In the KJV, we find that "the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city." Does the prince destroy the city? No, the people of the prince. In 70 AD, the people of the prince rebelled and went against the Romans. What happened? The city was destroyed. Did they do it directly? Well, no one knows exactly who torched the temple. But, either way, the actions of the Jewish people in Jerusalem brought down the fury of the Roman armies. Whether the Jews burned it or the Romans did is rather a moot point.

Daniel 9:26 - Another Look
Look at this from Dan 9:26.
"...and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."
Desolations are determined to the end of the war. At the end, when Jerusalem was destroyed is when the desolation ended.

From the YLT....


Daniel 9:27
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)


Daniel 9:27 And he hath strengthened a covenant with many -- one week, and in the midst of the week he causeth sacrifice and present to cease, and by the wing of abominations he is making desolate, even till the consummation, and that which is determined is poured on the desolate one.'

From the KJV...

Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week.
Jesus' Confirmed the covenant with the Jews for seven years...one week. The first half by his own earthly ministry, the 2nd half through His disciples ministry to the Jews. "Confirm" as shown by the YLT, means "strengthen." This says "Covenant." Not treaty. Covenant. What covenant?

Look at Daniel 9 again...

Daniel 9:3-4

Daniel 9:3 And I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplications, with fasting, and sackcloth, and ashes:

Daniel 9:4 And I prayed unto the LORD my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments;

Note that Daniel does not say to all Israel. He says to them that love him and that keep his commandments. So again, what covenant? It's a covenant that Jesus merely strengthened. It is the covenant that He gave to Abraham.

Genesis 22:18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

How would all nations be blessed through Abraham's seed? Through Jesus the Christ.

As you can See Steven, The covenant strengthened or confirmed is not at all referring to a 7 year "treaty" established between antichrist and the Jews only to be broken half way through. In fact there is nothing in the text that says anything about the ovenant being broken at all, ever. not to mention the 7 year time span is on the "confirmation" not the covenant. the Covenant itself is eternal.

Jesus Christ strengthened/confirmed the Covenant God had already established, and in the midst of the week, by his once for all sacrifice on the cross, put an end to the revelance and necessity of all other sacrifice and offering.

I hope this helps,
Peace in the Present Christ,
Peter

Jep
11-17-01, 11:59 AM
Hi Parousa,

“Daniel 9:26 And after the sixty and two weeks, cut off is Messiah, and the city and the holy place are not his, the Leader who hath come doth destroy the people; and its end is with a flood, and till the end is war, determined are desolations.

Clearly, in the word for word, he equates Messiah the Prince with the Prince that shall come.”

ME: I’m afraid you are using some faulty exegesis here, my friend. There are distinctly two different princes being discussed in the 9th chapter of Daniel. But this does not surprise us as Jesus Himself taught us that He and the antichrist would so resemble each other as to even deceive the elect if that is possible (Matt 24:24).

“In the KJV, we find that "the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city." Does the prince destroy the city? No, the people of the prince. In 70 AD, the people of the prince rebelled and went against the Romans.”

ME: If this is still Christ you are referring to, then when did the Christians rebel and destroy the city? These were Christ’s people, This never happened in our history. In fact there were no Christians near Jerusalem in 70 AD as far as we know. Surely you are not stating that the Jews were somehow the people of the Christ. They hated Him, persecuted Him and eventually killed Him.

“What happened? The city was destroyed. Did they do it directly? Well, no one knows exactly who torched the temple.”

ME: Josephus tells us exactly who torched the Temple. It was the Romans. These most certainly were not Christ's people either.


“..and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined." Desolations are determined to the end of the war. At the end, when Jerusalem was destroyed is when the desolation ended.”

ME: And when did this flood occur in 70 AD? This should tell you that this must be some future event because this has never happened.

“And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week.
Jesus' Confirmed the covenant with the Jews for seven years...one week. The first half by his own earthly ministry, the 2nd half through His disciples ministry to the Jews.”

ME: I’ll allow a theologian from the university of Texas to educate you in this area. We have no idea how long the ministry of Jesus was, but we know it didn’t last 3.5 years: “From a strictly historical perspective, then, we don't really know all that much about the ministry of Jesus. It might have been very brief, depending on which gospel you read, it might have been as short as only a few months or as long as three years,”

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/jesus/ministry.html

ME: And the ministry of His disciple lasted MUCH longer than 3.5 years. As best we can determine, Paul’s ministry ended in 68 when he was beheaded. This would put his ministry at around 22 years. It is thought that he spent 3 years in Spain alone. Finally we know that this covenant is to be made with the Jews and the Jews alone. The angel quite clearly tells Daniel this: “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city,”


http://www.gracefortoday.org/study_19A.html

ME: The fact is that Christ made no covenant with anyone for a 7 year period, much less the Jews. Strong’s defines the Hebrew word used here as: “confederacy, (con-)feder(-ate), covenant, league” in other words a group of people who unite for a purpose such as in a treaty or agreement. Christ never did this with anyone for 7 years.

“As you can See Steven, The covenant strengthened or confirmed is not at all referring to a 7 year "treaty" established between antichrist and the Jews only to be broken half way through. In fact there is nothing in the text that says anything about the ovenant being broken at all, ever.”

ME: But there is. Daniel 9:27: “And he (Antichrist) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week (Seven years): and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.” This covenant is made with the Jews and is quite obviously broken with them half way through. The NIV actually words this better: He will confirm a covenant with many for one `seven.' In the middle of the `seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing [of the temple] he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him. Do you really think that Christ is going to/did set up an abomination in His own Temple? Do you really think that Christ is going to/did come to an end that was poured out on Him? No. This is not Christ being discussed. Christ is still very alive today!

ME: And the separation of Messiah from this coming prince is quite clear in the scriptures: 26: “And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come (Antichrist) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;” Here two different entities are referred to.

ME: In the last seven years which are still to come, Antichrist rules by force and with demonic power and becomes a total terror to all that is holy for 3 1/2 of those years. Daniel and other scriptures tell us he first will come to the attention of the world when he makes a covenant (some sort of contract or peace treaty with the nation of Israel). He breaks that covenant in the midst of the week or after 3 ½ years (vs. 27). War results, Christians and Jews are viciously persecuted and the wrath of God is poured out upon the earth. During this final seven year period the Great Tribulation will come onto the earth and toward the end of this period the battle of Armageddon concludes this horrible era on the Day of the Lord and on this same day Jesus returns in all his glory to end our misery, or at least the misery of some of us.

Bible scripture confirms this seven year period of turmoil from cover to cover.

Twenty-one judgments will come upon the earth during this seven year period. These are the seal, trumpet, and vial judgments described in the book of Revelation.

These judgments will discharge inconceivable and horrible war, atomic holocaust and ecological cataclysm.

Revelation 9:17-18 says “The horses and riders I saw in my vision looked like this: Their breastplates were fiery red, dark blue and yellow as sulfur. The heads of the horses resembled the heads of lions, and out of their mouths came fire, smoke and sulfur. A third of mankind was killed by the three plagues of fire, smoke, and sulfur that came out of their mouths.”
Revelation 14:20 continues “And blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.” According to Jack Van Impe Ministries, that is a river of blood 200 miles long -- the exact length of the nation of Israel.
Moses referred to this era as a time of "distress" occurring in "the latter days" (Deuteronomy 4:30). Jeremiah named it "the time of Jacob's distress" (Jeremiah 30:7). Daniel devoted almost his entire book to it and called it "a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time" (Daniel 12:1). Zechariah prophesies that two-thirds of the Jews will "be cut off and perish" during this horrifying period (Zechariah 13:8).

I call it the Great Tribulation--the time of absolute hell on earth! I hope you are preparing your family for this, because from what I see in my world around us, we are there. And think about this, my friend: If I am wrong you lose nothing, but if you are wrong you could lose everything. Yes, only for a few years. :) But why put your family through it at all?

Parousia70
11-17-01, 05:08 PM
Hi Jep,
again' i'll keep it short.

You said:
I’m afraid you are using some faulty exegesis here, my friend. There are distinctly two different princes being discussed in the 9th chapter of Daniel.

I just showed from the word for word (YLT) that the "Leader who hath come"(notice the clear past tense BTW) of verse 26 has no other anticident than "Messiah the Leader" of verse 25. the only difference comes in the 1769 KJV where the translator chose to de-capatalize the "P" on the 2nd prince. subsequently millions of Christians choose to make a doctorine based only on this translators take.

You said I used faulty exigesis, but do not offer any exegetic correction other than "your wrong". Please show, from the hebrew, How the "Leader who hath come"(past tense) is not "Messiah the Leader".

Next:

" But this does not surprise us as Jesus Himself taught us that He and the antichrist would so resemble each other as to even deceive the elect if that is possible (Matt 24:24)."

I scoured Matthew for any mention of "The Antichrist" and it just isn't there,anywhere. You clearly are importing it into the text to support your view. I do understand that you need to do that in order to make your eschaton work so I don't blame you for giving it the ole "college try" but it won't hold up to the microscope. LOL!

Next:

"The fact is that Christ made no covenant with anyone for a 7 year period, much less the Jews."

The 7 year time limit is on the "CONFIRMATION" not the covenant itself. Infact as previously demonstrated, the YLT renders it "Strengthend a covenant" a covenant can't be strengthened unless it is already in place! the Covenant is eternal. also, Please show scriptural precident for anyone but God making covenants with the Jews.

Peace, Peter

Steven
11-17-01, 09:29 PM
Hello parousia,nice to meet you!

Parousia,it seems jep thinks you have used faulty exegesis here,but I think its more like you have used a faulty bible,wich I might add presents a great challenge in itself.So lets see if I can poke some holes in this youngs literal translation.

Zechariah 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of olives,wich is before jerusalem on the east,and the mount of olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley;and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north and half of it toward the south.

My question to you is;has the mount of olives split down the middle,and part of it removed toward the north,and part of it removed toward the south,and left a great valley?

Next question;Zechariah 14:11 and jerusalem shall be safely inhabited....MY QUESTION IS THIS;When in the last 2000 yrs. has Jerusalem been safely inhabited?

Parousia70
11-17-01, 11:18 PM
Steven, Thanks for the response, I look forward to our discourse.

You said:
"I think its more like you have used a faulty bible,wich I might add presents a great challenge in itself.So lets see if I can poke some holes in this youngs literal translation."

Hehehe, well, go ahead and try but the YLT is a word for word, literal translation of the greek / hebrew texts, so any problem you have with Youngs, recognize then that your problem is with the original Greek/Hebrew itself, and I doubt you can poke any holes in those!

As for Zechariah, many things come to mind, not the least of which is the Bibles proven use of temporal imagry to convey greater spiritual truths.

For example:

Jesus told Nicodemus he had to be "Born Again" to enter the Kingdom. Old Nic couldn't quite grasp the greater spiritual truth Jesus meant because he could not let go of the temporal view he had of the term "born again" He thought he somehow had to come out of his mothers womb another time.

As far as Catyclismic imagry, we only need to look as far as the Prophet Isaiah. I'll use the more palatable NKJ for your comfort :-)

In Isaiah 24-27 we see the invasion of Israel by Nebuchadnezzar. He carries them away to captivity. Notice the language that he uses.

Isaiah 24:3-6 (NKJV) The land shall be entirely emptied and utterly plundered, For the LORD has spoken this word. 4 The earth mourns and fades away, The world languishes and fades away; The haughty people of the earth languish. 5 The earth is also defiled under its inhabitants, Because they have transgressed the laws, Changed the ordinance, Broken the everlasting covenant. 6 Therefore the curse has devoured the earth, And those who dwell in it are desolate. Therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, And few men are left.

Isaiah 24:19-20 (NKJV) The earth is violently broken, The earth is split open, The earth is shaken exceedingly. 20 The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, And shall totter like a hut; Its transgression shall be heavy upon it, And it will fall, and not rise again.

~~What I want you to see in these verses is how God refers to Israel as the earth. He says the earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly...the earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage; and the transgression thereof shall be heavy upon it; and it shall fall, and not rise again" (Verses 1,3,4,19,20) Notice how many times God referred to Israel as the "earth." This is apocalyptic language speaking of the destruction of the people of Israel.

In Isaiah 34 we have a description of the fall of Edom, notice the language that is used.

Isaiah 34:3-5 (NKJV) Also their slain shall be thrown out; Their stench shall rise from their corpses, And the mountains shall be melted with their blood. 4 All the host of heaven shall be dissolved, And the heavens shall be rolled up like a scroll; All their host shall fall down As the leaf falls from the vine, And as fruit falling from a fig tree. 5 "For My sword shall be bathed in heaven; Indeed it shall come down on Edom, And on the people of My curse, for judgment.

This is Biblical language to describe the fall of a nation. It should be clear that it is not to be taken literally. Lets look at one other OT use of this language.

Nahum 1 (NKJV) The burden against Nineveh. The book of the vision of Nahum the Elkoshite. 2 God is jealous, and the LORD avenges; The LORD avenges and is furious. The LORD will take vengeance on His adversaries, And He reserves wrath for His enemies; 3 The LORD is slow to anger and great in power, And will not at all acquit the wicked. The LORD has His way In the whirlwind and in the storm, And the clouds are the dust of His feet. 4 He rebukes the sea and makes it dry, And dries up all the rivers. Bashan and Carmel wither, And the flower of Lebanon wilts. 5 The mountains quake before Him, The hills melt, And the earth heaves at His presence, Yes, the world and all who dwell in it.

The subject of this judgement is Nineveh, not the physical world. This is the way God describes the fall of a nation.
None of these Temporal events... "Hills melting, heavens rolling up, earth utterly broken down, never to rise again, etc..ever took place in the physical realm, yet all these prophesies have long since been fulfilled.

Moving Specifically to Zechariah 14, take a look at vs 8-9
"8 And in that day it shall be That living waters shall flow from Jerusalem, Half of them toward the eastern sea And half of them toward the western sea; In both summer and winter it shall occur. 9 And the Lord shall be King over all the earth."

I'd like to ask you now, are not living waters fulfilled today in Christ or do we still have to wait for those? Is not Christ our Living waters? are not we who thirst free to partake in those living waters right now?
I believe the Bible is clear that Christ IS our living waters and we today, anywhere on earth can freely drink from them, and once we do, we shall never thirst again. (John 4:10-14)

Notice in the beginning of Vs 8 , it says "In that Day"... well Steven my friend, If Living waters are flowing through Christ Today, accessable to ALL who thirst, then "That Day" of Zechariah 14 is either here or behind us.

I Hope this helps,
Peace in the Present Christ,
Peter

Parousia70
11-17-01, 11:33 PM
Zechariah 14:4: "And His feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and the half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south."(Zech. 14:4).<<

It is this passage that futurists use to support their view that Jesus will touch down on planet earth and set up His millennial kingdom. Numerous times in the Bible we read of Jehovah "coming down" to meet with His people.

In most instances His coming is one of judgment; in no case was He physically present. Notice how many times God's coming is associated with mountains.

"And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. . . . Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another's speech" (Gen. 11:5, 7).

"So I have come down to deliver them from the power of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and spacious land, to a land flowing with milk and honey. . . (Ex. 3:8).

"Then Thou didst come down on Mount Sinai, and didst speak with them from heaven. . . (Neh. 9:13a).

"Bow Thy heavens, O LORD, and come down; touch the mountains, that they may smoke" (Psalm 144:5).

"For thus says the LORD to me, 'As the lion or the young lion growls over his prey, against which a band of shepherds is called out, will not be terrified at their voice, nor disturbed at their noise, so will the LORD of hosts come down to wage war on Mount Zion and on its hill'" (Isa. 31:4).

"Oh, that Thou wouldst rend the heavens and come down, that the mountains might quake at Thy presence*" (Isa. 64:1).

"When Thou didst awesome things which we did not expect, Thou didst come down, the mountains quaked at Thy presence" (Isa. 64:3).

In Micah 1:3 we are told that God "is coming forth from His place" to "come down and tread on the high places of the earth." How is this descriptive language different from the Lord standing on the Mount of Olives with the result that it will split? Micah says "the mountains will melt under Him, and the valleys will be split, like wax before the fire, like water poured down a steep place" (1:4).

"It was not uncommon for prophets to use figurative expressions about the Lord 'coming' down, mountains trembling, being scattered, and hills bowing (Hab. 3:6, 10); mountains flowing down at his presence (Isaiah 64:1, 3); or mountains and hills singing and the trees clapping their hands (Isaiah 55:12)."6

What is the Bible trying to teach us with this descriptive language of the Mount of Olives "split in its middle"? The earliest Christian writers applied Zechariah 14:4 to the work of Christ in His day. Tertullian (A.D. 190-220) wrote: "'But at night He went out to the Mount of Olives.' For thus had Zechariah pointed out: 'And His feet shall stand in that day on the Mount of Olives' [Zech. xiv. 4]."7 Tertullian was alluding to the fact that the Olivet prophecy set the stage for the judgment-coming of Christ that would once for all break down the Jewish/Gentile division. Matthew Henry explains the theology behind the prophecy:

The partition-wall between Jew and Gentiles shall be taken away. The mountains about Jerusalem, and particularly this, signified it to be an enclosure, and that it stood in the way of those who would approach to it. Between the Gentiles and Jerusalem this mountain of Bether, of division, stood, Cant. ii. 17.

But by the destruction of Jerusalem this mountain shall be made to cleave in the midst, and so the Jewish pale shall be taken down, and the church laid in common with the Gentiles, who were made one with the Jews by the breaking down of this middle wall of partition, Eph. ii. 14.8

You will notice that there is no mention of a thousand year reign. Yet, we are told that "the LORD will be king over all the earth" (14:9). So what is new about this language? "For the LORD Most High is to be feared, a great King over all the earth. He subdues peoples under us, and nations under our feet" (Psalm 47:2, 3). This is exactly what happened with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

Paul told the Roman Christians that "the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet" (Rom. 16:20). The church's adversary (Satan) were those Jews who rejected Jesus as the Messiah and persecuted His Bride, the church (see John 16:2). Jesus calls them a "synagogue of Satan" (Rev. 3:9).

Zecharaih 14 is long since fulfilled.
Peace in the Present Christ,
Peter

Steven
11-18-01, 01:25 AM
As to Zech.14:4

Genesis 3:8 And they heard the voice of the lord god walking in the garden in the cool of the day....

Gen. 3:21 Unto adam also and to his wife did the lord god make coats of skins and clothed them.

Exodus 33:9 the cloudy pillar descended and stood at the door of the tabernacle,and talked with moses.

Exodus 13:21 And the lord went before them in a pillar of a cloud to lead them the way,and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light......

Gen.32:24-30 for I have seen god face to face and my life is preserved.

This ought to be a good start at proving God has come down to this earth before,and clearly in the sight of men,not to mention jesus christ being one made "a little lower than the angels.


Not to mention the angels saying why do you stand here gazing up,for in like manner as you have seen him go you shall also see him return


I am not comfortable with the NKJV,NIV,RSV, nor any other bible but the KJV.

I do not read Greek,neither do I read hebrew,but I have a hebrew friend who understands it perfectly well,and he reads the KJV the same as I do.Personally I think the Greek that most people are using these days is quite corrupted.

Now as to my second question,when has it been safe to dwell in Jerusalem for the last 2000 yrs.

AND EVERY EYE SHALL SEE HIM

Parousia70
11-18-01, 10:03 AM
Hi Steven,
You said
"Not to mention the angels saying why do you stand here gazing up,for in like manner as you have seen him go you shall also see him return"

A couple things come to mind here:
This "Gazing steadfastly into heaven" Did the disciples see into heaven with physical eyes? In Acts 7: 55-56 we see this EXACT term used to describe Stephen "Gazing into Heaven" as he was being stoned to death, yet nobody else saw what he saw:

Acts 7:55 "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, 56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God."

Stephen "gazed into Heaven" with Spiritual eyes.

Next,
He was to come "In Like Manner as" we went "Into heaven", not as he "left the ground"

How did he Go "into Heaven"?
Hidden from the eyes by a cloud(vs 9)

Like manner as= Grk "tropos" Strongs #5158

Lest look at it's use elsewhere and we can gain a better grasp of what it means:

Mt 23:37
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together,(in like manner) as<tropos> a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!

Lu 13:34
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together,(in like manner) as <tropos> a hen gathers her brood under her wings, but you were not willing!

Does Jesus in these passages express a desire to sprout wings and feathers and scoop "all Israel" under his breast onto a nest of hay exactly the way a Chicken gathers her brood??

Of course not, don't be ridiculous.

Clearly the term "like manner as" <tropos> has more to do with "similar in some fashion" than "exactly the same in every detail"

If Acts 1:11 means his return was to be "exactly the same in every detail" as he left, then only the apostles would see him return, he would return as the humble servant and Judge no one, and his rewards would not be with him, for that is in "Like manner as" he left.

Every Eye shall see him AND EVEN THEY THAT PIERCED HIM.

Steven, they that peirced him are long since returned to dust, In order for this scripture to be true, His return must have happened within the lifetime of "They that pierced Him"

The Bible , And therefore Preterism, teaches that the secone coming of Christ happened "Shortly" after it was predicted. I simply choose to trust the Bible instead of the Newspapers.

I hope this helps,
Peace in the Present Christ,
Peter
PS, It has been safe to dwell in the New Jerusalem, The eternal presence of God, since 70AD. No man can prevent you or anyone from Gods Presence anymore. the Doors of the City are eternally open, and all who are called can safely come in and dwell there for eternity.

Oh...any comment about Living Waters being available through Christ today? do you believe they are, or do you believe we are still waiting for those?

Peace

Jep
11-18-01, 11:38 AM
“I just showed from the word for word (YLT)”

ME: There is really no such thing as a word for word translation from Hebrew into English, although I‘m well aware Young tried this. I believe that’s why his version seems so warped in many areas. One reason is that there are many words for which there is no single word that corresponds in meaning when considering both languages. Another reason is this: Seldom do we find any single Hebrew word that has only one paramount meaning. Therefore it is up to the translator and his bias in interpreting the meaning. As example Peter, If you and I translated a Bible, I’ll bet those dudes wouldn’t even read similarly. :)


“that the "Leader who hath come"(notice the clear past tense BTW) of verse 26 has no other anticident than "Messiah the Leader" of verse 25.”

ME: It doesn’t need an antecedent. It’s clearly two different people being discussed in 26. One is cut off and one is to come.

“the only difference comes in the 1769 KJV where the translator chose to de-capatalize the "P" on the 2nd prince. subsequently millions of Christians choose to make a doctorine based only on this translators take.”

ME: This translator was totally correct in his punctuation. He understood this was Messianic prophecy, and also understood the Prince Messiah should be capitalized and prince antichrist should not be. I see you side-stepped my questions to you, though. Why would Christ put an abomination to Himself in His own Temple? When did Christ come to an end as it is clear in the scriptures will happen to this second prince?

You said I used faulty exigesis, but do not offer any exegetic correction other than "your wrong". Please show, from the hebrew, How the "Leader who hath come"(past tense) is not "Messiah the Leader".

ME: Funny, I thought that I offered exegetic correction. Anywho, Mr. Young somehow twists “shall” into “hath” which totally changes the tenses. How he got from shall to hath, only he knows, but it is incorrect and I can find no other translation that agrees with him. NIV: “the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary“:--NASB: “the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.” RSV: “the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary” -- KJV: “the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary” -- Darby: “the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;” -- And why are all the pages I find on Robert Young, Preterists pages. Was young a bit biased? Hmmmm.....

“I scoured Matthew for any mention of "The Antichrist" and it just isn't there,anywhere. You clearly are importing it into the text to support your view. I do understand that you need to do that in order to make your eschaton work so I don't blame you for giving it the ole "college try" but it won't hold up to the microscope. LOL!”

ME: I could have saved you the trouble if you had but ask me. Only the apostle John uses the term antichrist. However many Old and New Testament passages speak of him. Here is the scripture I was referring to: “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall give great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.” Do you not agree that false christs and antichrists are synonymous?

“The 7 year time limit is on the "CONFIRMATION" not the covenant itself. Infact as previously demonstrated, the YLT renders it "Strengthend a covenant" a covenant can't be strengthened unless it is already in place!”

ME: I really could care less how or where Young gets his rather strange translations. King James was quite correct to translate gabar to “confirm.” But again, why do you choose to read a version that’s so radically out of step with everyone else that translated the Bible into English? Observe: NIV: “He will confirm a covenant with many for one `seven.'“ -- NASB: “And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week.” -- RSV: “And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week;” (BTW, this is how Young should have translated it if he wished to use the “strong” or “strengthened” meaning of this word). -- KJV: “And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:” -- Darby: And he shall confirm a covenant with the many [for] one week.. Seems old Mr. Young just had many linguists who disagree with him, I guess. ;)

Parousia70
11-18-01, 01:09 PM
Jep,
"Here is the scripture I was referring to: “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall give great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.” Do you not agree that false christs and antichrists are synonymous?"

Absolutely I agree! and even beyond "false Christs" John plainly tells us that ANYONE who does not Confess that Jesus is the Christ is "antichrist".
What I disagree with is your assertion that This passage in Matt referrs to one single Mr. Antichrist Person, and you have not shown me incorrect here.

Next,
"It doesn’t need an antecedent. It’s clearly two different people being discussed in 26. One is cut off and one is to come."

So are you saying that after Christ was "Cut off" He is not also to be correctly referred to as "to come"? (and to those that look for Him, he shall appear a second time) They are clearly the same Prince.

Again, can you show any prior precident for anyone but God making covenants with the Jews?

Peace,
Peter

Parousia70
11-18-01, 01:37 PM
An outline for Jerry fallwells Liberty University Course on Preterism can be foundHERE (http://www.liberty.edu/courses/theo250/preterism.html)

Jerry fallwell teaching the Validity of Preterism!?
Will wonders never cease?
Peace

Steven
11-18-01, 09:47 PM
Hi Parousia

Parousia,it seems odd to me that you have yet to answer either one of my questions,so just incase you "accidently"became sidetracked I will give them again.

Q.1 Zech.14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of olives,wich is before Jerusalem on the east,and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west,and there shall be a very great valley and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north,and half of it toward the south.

Parousia,my question to you was not wether the statement of christ feet setting down on the mountain was literal or spiritual,but it was ,when did this geological occurence happen,and where is the great valley.

Q.2 Zech.14:and Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited. this question you never did respond too,so I will ask it again;When in the last 2000 yrs. has Jerusalem been safely inhabited?

Steven
11-18-01, 09:57 PM
Oh and parousia,p.s. It doesnt say new jerusalem,it says Jerusalem.

be careful not to add to the word of God

I will deal with your other quotes later,first I would like you to answer my two questions tho,if you please.

Parousia70
11-18-01, 11:54 PM
Steven,
I Have answered both Questions Honestly and In Good faith, you just didn't like the answers, as I suspect you will not "like" any answer that does not agree with your view. It's OK, I understand your reluctance and Am not offended. You are my brother in Christ and I love you for it. Thank God our salvation is not dependant on understanding and adhearing to the CORRECT eschaton!!

The "Geologic event" as you put it is not Geologic at all, but a temporal representation of a GREATER spiritual REALITY. You make the same mistake Nicodemus Did, denying the LITERAL aspect of SPIRITUAL fulfillment. Again, it's ok, I understand and am not offended :-) If the Mountain MUST Physically SPLIT in order for the prophesy to be fulfilled, then we MUST physically pass through our Mothers womb a second time to be "BORN AGAIN" and the Hills of Isaiah 55:12 must have actually physically "Burst into Song" and the Trees must have Physically "Clapped their Hands" ( I suppose, as a "physical literalist" you'd have to believe the trees sprouted actual Physical hands TO Clap)

As I previously posted in greater detail, to answer your question,The picture of the Mountain splitting represents the GREATER spiritual TRUTH that Jesus destroyed the dividing wall between Jew And Gentile, Just as the Picture of being "Born Again" represents the GREATER SPIRITUAL TRUTH that we need to surrender our lives to Christ, in essence, begin anew IN Christ.

You said:
"It doesnt say new jerusalem,it says Jerusalem."

Ok, Help me out then. In the futurist view, when will it be safe to dwell in the current Jerusalem? Sometime before the "New Jerusalem" comes right? From what I understand of your view here, It MUST be safe to dwell in the current jerusalem sometime before the New Jerusalem Comes. When do you forsee this happening and how long after it begins until the New Jerusalem comes?

So, what about those Living waters? Are we still waiting for those to be fulfilled? or are they Literally fulfilled in Christ today?
It's a simple question i think, not too complicated. they either are here now, accessible to all who thirst, or they are not yet available. Which do you think? Perhaps you see the Waters Available to us through Christ today as Inferior and / or, only temporary until the "Better" Living waters of Zech 14 come. Is that it?

Peace In the Present Christ,
Peter

Steven
11-19-01, 01:52 AM
Parousia,if the mountain must literally split then we must literally pas through the womb again; one must needs to rightly divide the word of truth between literal and spiritual.

When will it be safe to safely inhabit jerusalem; when christ returns to destroy the armies of the world who are gatheed around jerusalem to destroy it and the people(the battle of armigeddon.


parousia my problem in understanding you is that your answers dont make sense to me,there are plenty of literal things prophecied in the bible wich historical documentation proves really happened.

Not all in the bible is spiritual, much of it is literal,and many times both may apply to a statement,such as the ressurection,wich is both spiritual and literal....such as the story of christ raising lazarus from the dead,christ told mary lazarus would live again ,maries reply was yea my lord i know he shall live again in the ressurection,but christ wasnt talking about the future ressurection wich mary so believed in he was talking about then and there,he also talks about a spiritual ressurection wich occurs when one recieves the spirit of christ into them.

again the word must be rightly divided between literal and spiritual


heres a brief run down on some things i believe,they might help you to better understand where i am coming from.

i believe in eternal security for the child of god

i believe in dispensation

i believe that there are both spiritual and physical seed to abraham

i believe the physical seed will once again dwell safely in there homeland

i believe that salvation is through the election of grace

i believe the spiritual seed will forever dwell in new jerusalem,wich i believe is a literal city

i believe in a literal ressurection of every human body that has ever been or ever will be

i believe there are two judgements,one for rewards to the bride,and another for all other men

and i believe in a literal millenial reign of christ here on this earth.

i believe i am part of a spiritual kingdom now,i believe that right now i only have an earnest on what god is going to give me in the future

i believe in a literal new heaven and new earth


this is where i believe the dispensation stands,the church,the rapture,the great tribulation,the 2nd coming of christ,the millenial reign of christ,the end of the present heavens and world,the judgement,the new heaven and new earth.

Parousia,dont think i dont understand the spiritual aspect of the scriptures,i understand them well,i also understand that the literal and spiritual must be carefully and rightly divided.

most f all i believe in a literal resurrection,like paul says ,if there is no ressurection ,eat drink and be merry for tommorrow we die,without the literal ressurection there is no hope,what is your hope?

Odyssey
11-19-01, 09:32 AM
Steven,

How do you handle all of the NT teaching that Jesus was 'about to' come to them? That His coming to them was 'soon'? That the events of Revelation were not to be sealed because 'the time (was) at hand'? That Jesus said he would return before his disciples died? That Paul preached the judgment and resurrection was 'about to' take place?

Are these things to be interpreted literally (i.e., naturally) or spiritually (i.e., poetically)?

Grace to you,

jak

Steven
11-19-01, 09:15 PM
Hello jak

Jak,lets start with an illustration; It is appointed unto every msan to die once,then the judgement.

Does this mean that every man goes to the judgement immediately after dying? No it doesnt.


Next,jak i wish you would have posted scriptures to your quotes,it would have made them easier to deal with,but since you havent i will deal with them best i can.

As to your last question on how this things should be interpretted.They should be interpretted literally without a time line.

Now as to the preaching that the time is at hand; The time is at hand,it has been for 2000 yrs,wich is a very short time in the scheme of things"a day is as a thousand yrs and a thousand yrs as a day with god.

Now as to your question about this generation not passing away before all these things being fulfilled? I believe for what you would want it to mean it would have to be taken out of its intended context.

First lets deal with the question of whom the olivet discourse deals with!

Matt.24:3 The disciples ask christ what shall be the sign of hisd coming!

Now the jews always asked god for a sign,fact is the bible says they required a sign 1 cor.1:22.
The church doesnt require a sign,we have faith in place of signs and miracles.

So i believe the signs god gives the jews in matt.24 are for the great tribulation,and the jews who go through it.


Matt.24:32-34 Ok lets start with verse 32;Now learn a parable of the fig tree,when his branch is yet tender,and putteth forth leaves,ye know that summer is nigh.

Matt.24:33 this verse just tells the jews,that when they see all the afore mention things happen,then his return to the earth in power and glory is imminant.

Matt.24:34 Verily a say unto you this generation shall not pass til all these things be fulfilled.

Now who is this generation?

Answer the generation that sees these signs come to pass.

Now just in case you are referring to Mark 9:1 I will deal with it as well.

Mark 9:1 Verily I say unto you that there be some of them that stand here;wich shall not taste of death,till they have seen the kingdom of god come with power.

Now I fully believe this verse is refering to the day of pentecost when the comforter was sent to dwell in the children of god.

1Thess.1:5 For our gospel came not unto you in word only but also in power,and in the holy ghost......

So you can see that this is a spiritual reference addressed to the bride of christ,not addressed to the nation of israel as a whole like Matt.24:34.

Again we see just another case of rightly dividing the word of truth between literal and spiritual


I hope I have adequately dealt with your questions.If I have not,maybe you could quote some scriptures and I will do my best to deal with them.


Steven

Jep
11-20-01, 07:44 AM
Hi Peter:

“Absolutely I agree! and even beyond "false Christs" John plainly tells us that ANYONE who does not Confess that Jesus is the Christ is "antichrist".
What I disagree with is your assertion that This passage in Matt referrs to one single Mr. Antichrist Person, and you have not shown me incorrect here.”

ME: I am only using this scripture to show that “even the elect” can be deceived if we allow this to happen. This man to come is called antichrist not antigod. Therefore it is Christ he is to be the antithesis of. And it is Christ that he is to resemble. Here is a page that describes the similarities between the two:

http://www.tests4.com/Documents/Bible_Prophecy/Antichrist_part2.htm

“So are you saying that after Christ was "Cut off" He is not also to be correctly referred to as "to come"? (and to those that look for Him, he shall appear a second time) They are clearly the same Prince.”

ME: He’s not coming again to destroy His own Temple, or to place abominations into it. Why would He want to do that? He’s coming to rule from within it. Also, He will not come to an end, as is predicted will happen to this second prince. And the city of Jerusalem did not end with a flood as predicted in the Daniel scriptures, but by fire. This should tell you this has nothing to do with 70 AD.

“Again, can you show any prior precident for anyone but God making covenants with the Jews?”

ME: Sure. Sorry. I remember this question and seem to have inadvertently over looked answering it. But they did not make written agreements in the Bible days to my knowledge. Those are of our modern times. The first one was with the UN in the late 40’s when Israel became a nation. Then again as follows: November 22, 1967, October 22, 1973, September 17, 1978, March 26, 1979 with the UN and Egypt concerning Israeli/Egyptian relations. September 14, 1993, (Israel-Jordan-US), July 25, 1994
October 26, 1994 - Preamble and Articles, concerning Israel-Jordan. Israel/Syria: May 31, 1974--December 14, 1981. Israel/Lebanon (Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon), March 19, 1978, April 26, 1996. Israel/Palestinian: More that 20:

http://www.ariga.com/treaties/ip.htm

Odyssey
11-20-01, 07:57 AM
Steven,

First of all, I agree that the Bible should be interpreted literally. I don't think anyone is disputing that. However, I don't think we are agreeing in what the term means. I believe that both of us are interpreting literally. I believe that there are different types of literature in the Bible. Some of it history, some geneology, some songs, some poetic, some apocalyptic, etc. Each one of these types are to be interpreted literally within there genre. That is, poetic language should be interpreted literally as poetic language. History should be interpreted literally as history. However, the way poetry is interpreted literally is different that literally interpreting history. The types of literature must be taken into account.

It has been shown over and over again within other threads that every time god gave a time reference for prophecy to be fulfilled, it happened exactly when he said it would. Without fail. So, why, all of a sudden, do those time statements within the NT become elastic? That is, why do they have no meaning? It is an inconsitant hermenutic to state plainly.

With that stated, that is why the appeal to 2Pet.3 is unjustifiable. If we look at every other place that god gave a time statement to people he used their understanding of time--not his. Again, without fail. For example, when god told Noah that after seven days it would begin to rain, and once it started it would continue for forty days and nights, how was Noah supposed to understand that? That he was just supposed to live like it was going to happen when god said it would? Everything else about that passage came to pass the way god said it would but the final act may or may not happen when god said it would? God forbid! We read in Gen.7 verse 10, 'nd it came about after the seven days, that the water of the flood came upon the earth.' And 'And the rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights' (v.12). This is the pattern. This is the way of god. He gives time statements to people in their understanding of those things. This is consistant throughout the entire Bible.

The only time 2 Peter 3 is used is when people have to dance around the clearest statements of the NT. For someone who thinks the Bible should be interpreted literally, all of a sudden, literaly interpretation goes out the window! When Peter wrote, 'The end of all things is at hand' he didn't really mean that. It wasn't at hand. It was really thousands of years in his future. When Paul wrote that god was going to crush Satan's head 'shortly', he, too, didn't mean shortly. He meant thousands of years in the future. When he preached that the judgement was 'about to come' and that the resurrection was 'about to' take place (judgment = Acts 17.31; 24.25; 2Tim. 4.1; resurrection = Acts 24.14-5--Check these out in the Greek), he really didn't mean that. He meant thousands of years in his future. So, they were wrong about the times in which they were living. The HS that was supposed to lead and guide them in to all truth didn't do his job? I find that hard to believe. The HS only lead them in some things but not others?

Concerning your interpretation of Matthew 24: I did interpret it by the generation which would see those things. Everyone of them, without fail, took place within Christ's generation. He even told the disciples--not us but the twelve--'when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place' (vv.33-34). If Jesus was referring to some unknown generation, (as some claim), he would have said, 'that generation will not pass away...' Do a study of the phrase 'this generation' and see if Jesus ever used it to mean a generation other than his own.

Concerning Pentecost as the fulfillment of Matt.16.27-28: There is no way that this was fulfilled by Pentecost. Again, the 'literal' interpretation forbids it. First, Jesus 'did not come' it was the HS. In fact, he said that if he left, he would send the HS. The descent of the HS proves that this was not the 'coming of the Son of Man' but proof that he went away. Second, there were no 'angels' at Pentecost. There was no 'glory of the Father' at Pentecost. There was not a judgment at Pentecost. And lastly, 'some of those who (were) standing (there)' did not die before Pentecost--only one did (Judas). Again, the literal interpretation asserts that more than one disciple would have died before Pentecost. That, along with the other things mentioned above, proves that this was not Pentecost to which Jesus was referring. Every instance of the phrase 'coming of the Son of Man' refers to the Second Coming.

Grace to you,

jak

Steven
11-21-01, 12:53 AM
Hello jak

First of all I dont interpret the bible,it says what it says,and if there is any interpretting done,it is done by my father whos word it is.

Jak you make the point that if God says something will occur in 7 days it will occur in 7 days,I agree,but he does not say the kingdom is at hand in 7 days,or in 100 days,it just says the kingdom is at hand.

For this reason jak your time argument has no legs to stsand on.

Matt.24:2 occured in approximately 70 a.d.

Matt.24:5 started at the time of christ and still happening

Matt.24:6 still hearing of wars and rumors of wars

Matt.24:7nation against nation and kingdoms against kingdoms(civil wars),still happening

Matt:24:7 Famines,earthquakes,pestilences in diverse places,still happening.

In case you hadnt noticed all the things are occuring with greater intensity all the time.

Matt.24:8 All these are the BEGININGS of sorrows.

Matt:24:9 THEN,THEN,THEN,shall they deliver you up to be afflicted and killed,and ye shall be hated of all nations for my names sake.



The question is;who is you in this satement,answer; the jews.

Matt.24:10 We see the word THEN again.

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

World war 2 was far more horrendous then the carrying away of the jews,so was world war one,think of what world war 3 will be like!

Matt.24:22 and except those days should be shortened there should no flesh be saved.

Question; what would cause such a calimity that the days should need to be shortened,the sun not giving its light for a third part of it,and the moon not giving her light for the third part of it,answer the sun,for men shall be scorched with great heat,for ye shall see signs in the sun,the moon and the stars.

The truth is the sun has nevrer been a problem before but it certainly is getting to be one,and it will get worse,especially when they start blowing holes in the ozone layer with nuclear weapons during the great tribulation.


So we have things that have occured,things that are occuring,and things that will occur.Not all ids as you say,fullfilled,.

In the first place I never said Matt.16:27 had anything to do with the day of pentecost,i believe the scripture i was referring to was mark 9:1 and that absolutely has to do with the day of pentecost.


Matt.16:27 I will refer you to revelation 22:12 here we have the same thing said as in matt.16:27 and behold i come quickly,and my reward is with me,to give unto every man according as his work shall be.

Matt.16:28,Mark 9:1,Luke 9:27 All these verses are the same,just given by different persons and there account of what was said,all 3 verses have to do with the death burial and ressurection of christ and the establishment of the spiritual kingdom,wich occured on the day of pentecost,as to them seeing him coming in his kingdom,its spiritual sight.

Johm.14: Even the spirit of truth, whom the world cannot recieve,because it seeth him not.....


I have only as yet recieved an earnest on what the father has promised me,but when my entire being shall be caught up to ever be in the presence of jesus christ i shall be like him,i have a spirit now that loves him completely amnd perfectly,but my flesh hates him and is an enmity with him,this must be fixed so that i can be a completely holy and clean being as adam was before he fell,i greatl;y await that day,it is the hope of all my brethren,my own flesh is a vexation to me,it has a will of its own,that is contrary to what i love,the ressurection will free me of this vexation once and for all,i will never have a sinful urge or think an evil thought again,PRAISE GOD!!!

For the life of me.,i cannot see what hope the preterist has,if you please, could you answer one question for me,what will happen to you after you die?



Steven

Parousia70
11-21-01, 08:21 AM
Hi Steven, real quick:


You said:
"When will it be safe to safely inhabit jerusalem; when christ returns to destroy the armies of the world who are gatheed around jerusalem to destroy it and the people(the battle of armigeddon)."

So your position is that it will be safe to dwell in Jerusalem only after the 2nd coming has ocourred.

~~I agree

Lets see what scripture tells us about WHICH Jerusalem remains AFTER the 2nd Coming:

#1) Peter says the Day of the Lord/Thief in the Night occurs at the "passing away of the "heavens and earth!" (2 Peter 3:10)

#2) Paul says the Day of the Lord/Thief in the Night occurs at the second coming (1 Thess 5:2-5).

Acording to scripture, Once the Final Battle ocourrs, the Heavens and earth pass away and "JERUSALEM" comes down from heaven. (Rev 21:2) It is this HEAVENLY city of Jerusalem that remains AFTER the final battle is over.

Therefore I stand by my previous assertion that the Bible says It is the NEW, HEAVENLY JERUSALEM where it is safe to dwell. Not the Earthly, Temporal.

BTW, Any luck with those "Living Waters" yet?

Peace,
Peter

Parousia70
11-21-01, 09:41 AM
Steven,
you said:
"Parousia,dont think i dont understand the spiritual aspect of the scriptures,i understand them well,i also understand that the literal and spiritual must be carefully and rightly divided."

Rightly dividing the literal from the spiritual?

Please explain to me this idea that a spiritual fulfillment is somehow NOT literal?

Jesus said we must be born again, clearly it referrs to a spiritual rebirth not a physical one, HOWEVER, is it not a LITERAL rebirth none the less?

I would argue that the Spiritual realm is just as "Literal" a reality, if not MORE so than the temporal. The consiquences of our spiritual choices are eternal, the consiquences of our physical ones are not.

"Dividing" the literal from the spiritual, won't get you too far once you realize they are inseperable. Taking the "literal" out of the "spiritual" is an attempt to rob the spiritual realm of it's authority over the temporal. That , my friend, is an effort that will "come to nothing."

Peace,
Peter

Odyssey
11-21-01, 11:03 AM
Steven,

Concerning interpretation: So, when the Bible states that 'the woman' sits on seven hills, what does that mean? That there will be a woman whose back-side is big enough to cover seven hills?? When it states that a beast rises out of the sea with seven heads, etc., there will actually be a beast like that? Your stance is noble, but interpretation is a must for any bible student.

Concerning time: So, again, according to your view, when Jesus said, 'Are you still sleeping and taking your rest? Behold, the hour is at hand and the Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of sinners. Arise, let us be going; behold, the one who betrays Me is at hand' (Matt.26.45-46) he really didn't have 'a leg to stand on' because he didn't give an exact amount of time? God forbid. For the very next verse states, 'And while He was still speaking, behold, Judas, one of the twelve, came up, accompanied by a great multitude with swords and clubs, from the chief priests and elders of the people.' Therefore, just because an exact number of days is not given does not make the time statements useless. God has given them for a purpose. Think about what you are stating! The Holy Spirit instructed those people to write, 'the end of all things is at hand' but because He didn't give an exact moment in time, He 'doesn't have a leg to stand on'??? No, a thousands times no. If you go through the Bible and investigate every instance of god coming in judgment and the time statements used, god fulfilled them exactly when he said he would without fail. But now, because of our interpretation (and yes, Steven, you are interpreting Scripture) does not line up with what is plainly written by the Holy Spirit through god's chosen vessels, we have to make statements like the time statements 'have no legs to stand on.'

Concerning your interpretation of Matthew 24: This view will be found wanting if we consider:

1) Verse 3. After your statement that verse two found it's fulfillment in AD 70, the disciples asked, 'When will these things be...' What things? The destruction of the temple. They also understood that, throughout the history of the natural people of Israel, the destruction of the Temple was a sign of god's coming in judgment. Therefore, since Jesus was god, they associated His coming with the destruction of the temple. They also understood that because of 'Elijah' (i.e., John the baptist), and the announcement of the Kingdom of God, that the 'end of the age' would come and establish the kingdom of god. All of these things were known and understood by the Jewish people of Jesus day. That is why the disciples asked him the questions. Jesus told them that the temple would be destroyed and they wanted to know when and what would be the signs (if any) be to signify the event. Jesus, from verse 4 on, told them.

2) The term 'you': Does not refer to the Jews as a nation. No where in the text is that even remotely advanced. Everytime the term was used, Jesus was referring to the disciples specifically and the followers of Christ in general. Furthermore, that does not make it a general statement to be surpassed by eons of time! The term is personal. He was referring to them. When he told them, 'To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted' (Matt.13.11), he was not referring to Jews in general but to the disciples specifically. The same thing is in this passage. The disciples asked Jesus a question(s) and he answered them about things that they would see. To jump from a clear reference to the disciples to the Jewish race, is unjustified.

3) The 'tribulation': As this remains within the context of the fall of Jerusalem, the tribulation refered to here deals with that subject. During the seige, some of the most awful and horrific things occured. Read through the pages of Josephus and you will see what I mean. Furthermore, Moses refered to this event in his prophecy from Deuteronomy: 'So all these curses shall come on you and pursue you and overtake you until you are destroyed, because you would not obey the LORD your God by keeping His commandments and His statutes which He commanded you. And they shall become a sign and a wonder on you and your descendants forever. Because you did not serve the LORD your God with joy and a glad heart, for the abundance of all things; therefore you shall serve your enemies whom the LORD shall send against you, in hunger, in thirst, in nakedness, and in the lack of all things; and He will put an iron yoke on your neck until He has destroyed you. The LORD will bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, as the eagle swoops down, a nation whose language you shall not understand, a nation of fierce countenance who shall have no respect for the old, nor show favor to the young. Moreover, it shall eat the offspring of your herd and the produce of your ground until you are destroyed, who also leaves you no grain, new wine, or oil, nor the increase of your herd or the young of your flock until they have caused you to perish. And it shall besiege you in all your towns until your high and fortified walls in which you trusted come down throughout your land, and it shall besiege you in all your towns throughout your land which the LORD your God has given you. Then you shall eat the offspring of your own body, the flesh of your sons and of your daughters whom the LORD your God has given you, during the siege and the distress by which your enemy shall oppress you. The man who is refined and very delicate among you shall be hostile toward his brother and toward the wife he cherishes and toward the rest of his children who remain, so that he will not give even one of them any of the flesh of his children which he shall eat, since he has nothing else left, during the siege and the distress by which your enemy shall oppress you in all your towns. The refined and delicate woman among you, who would not venture to set the sole of her foot on the ground for delicateness and refinement, shall be hostile toward the husband she cherishes and toward her son and daughter, and toward her afterbirth which issues from between her legs and toward her children whom she bears; for she shall eat them secretly for lack of anything else, during the siege and the distress by which your enemy shall oppress you in your towns' (28.45-57).

Concerning the things that happened to the natural Jews in AD 70 and comparing them to what happened later: There is no comparison. At the fall of Jerusalem, they lost the covenant, the promises, the law, the kingdom, the temple, the city, etc. Even rabbis today state that AD 70 was the 'end of Biblical Judaism.' Their covenant, which was by far the most important part of their heritage, was forever removed those fateful days in the summer of AD 70. 'It will not be found any longer' (Rev.18.21).

4) The signs in the heavens: Your statements are simply untrue. The Bible uses such language over and over again, which Peter and I have cited and proved, to represent the fall of nations. These have not been addressed. We have shown how the exact same type of language was used and that those nations were judged but the signs were not physical. They were never intended to be physical. They are poetic references to the nations. Check the OT and history and you will see what we mean.

Concerning Matt.16, Mark 9, and Luke 9: These verses are tied to the previous verses. For the life of me I can not see how one verse out of a whole sermon is taken out of it's context to mean something else altogether. Jesus was refering to the 'coming of the Son of Man' in both verses. As you rightly stated, Matt.16.27 parallels Rev.22.12. However, in that same message, Jesus stated that some of the disciples would not die before the saw that event. Again, where is that at Pentecost? Who died? Where were the angels? Where was the 'coming of the Son of Man'? Where is the rewards? Why is there another magical dipensational gap between these two connected verses? The context does not negate such a gap but futurist interpretation puts one there.

Also, I showed that the coming of the HS was not the 'coming of the Son of Man in His kingdom' but was the proof that Jesus had gone away. Every reference in the NT that speaks of the kingdom states that it was still coming. That there was still a manifestation 'about to' be revealed. While I certainly agree that Pentecost was the beginning of the Church, it was not fully manifest until the fall of Judaism. Then, and only then, was Christianity seen as a separate entity.

The Christians community has made the words of their Saviour a mockery to the lost. 'Jesus didn't really say that.' 'That was not what he meant.' 'He was telling them about the nuclear bomb.' 'He was telling them about the internet and cyber-space.' It's no wonder Christians today have no respect. We have declared that our god cannot communicate with his own people!

Lastly, concerning what happens to me after I die: I won't die. I am now, forever with my god and king.

Grace to you,

jak

Steven
11-22-01, 04:35 PM
Interpretation: Jak,its like I told ya,I dont interpret anything,if there is any interpretting to be done the spirit of god does it for me.Jak when I pick up a bible im not studying it,im being taught of God what it says.Now you tell me one thing,God tells me another,who should I believe? I think im gonna go with God jak.

Time: Jak concerning your time is at hand argument,it still doesnt have a leg to stand on,time is at hand is a subjective statement,it means its close but does not delineate when.It just so happens some of the scriptures you quoted,where time is at hand was used happened very quickly,but the apostles didnt know exactly when it would happen until it did,now if he would have said the time is at hand we have thirty seconds you might have a leg to stand on with this argument,but since it does not,you dont.

Jak as to the rest of your statements regarding matthew 24,I think I am going to forego addressing that.It seems you have your mind made up on what thats talking about,and my mind is very made up.

Jak I do have a question for you tho; when God created adam,was adam a triune being,is God a triune being,and why would we be anyless than what christ is,when he ascended into heaven he took his physical body with him,nail holes, spear holes ,he cuts from the lashes on his back,gouges in his head from the crown of thorns,and bruises all about his face and body,so jak if christ went up to be with the father in his physical flesh,and it is stated that he would be the first of many brethren,then why not us if we are brethren?


Steven

Steven
11-22-01, 04:39 PM
Parousia,I am sorry I should have said,between phydsical and spiritual,and there certainly is a division from the physical body and the spiritual body.


Steven

Odyssey
12-01-01, 09:07 AM
Steven,

You should look at the tread on resurrection. This is being discussed there.

Grace to you,

jak

Parousia70
12-03-01, 09:10 AM
Steven,
If you are still with us, I wanted o comment on your questions about Hope.

My Hope lies with my savior Jesus Christ. Dosen't yours?

In your scenerio, since your only hope appears to be the resurrection, after you are resurrected will you have no more hope? will you miss having hope? does the resurrection strip you of the "hope" you so love?

I'd guess you'd say no, and I would agree.
Proverbs 13:12
"Hope DEALYED makes the heart SICK, but desire FULFILLED is a tree of LIFE"

The preterist has tradeed the sick heart of a delayed "Hope" for the Tree of Life of the "FULFILLED" desire, the Hope has been realized!

You don't hope for what you already have do you?
neither does the preterist.

You said something I found interesting:
"my flesh hates him and is an enmity with him,this must be fixed so that i can be a completely holy and clean being as adam was before he fell"

The thing about that is, Adam's flesh had the capacity to sin BEFORE he fell, otherwise he would have never fallen.
Adam's heart had the capacity for evil BEFORE the fall otherwise he would have never fallen.

We today ARE as complete and Holy as Adam was before the fall. We have the EXACT same capacity for sin and evil as Adam did BEFORE he fell.
We today can communicate as freely with God as Adam could BEFORE he fell.

Thanks to Christ's finished work, we HAVE been restored to the state before the fall.

Peace in the Present Christ,
Peter

Steven
12-03-01, 09:09 PM
Hi parousia


Adam did not have the old man to contend with before he fell,neither did Christ,fortunately Christ didnt fall,so he still doesnt have a sin nature.Christ arose from the dead in his origional flesh,and I will too! I am spiritually alive,but physically dead,as the bible describes it.One day,and it wont be long,I will be like Jesus Christ,alive both spiritually and physically.Men were created to be triune beings,the lost are missing a part of themselves,that would be the spirit of God.Im missing a part of myself that would be the flesh.God never left anything half finished,he is a God of completion.


If things are as you say they are,then we shall never be what God intended us to be,neither shall we be complete,always longing to be whole.


My great hope is the physical resurrection,WICH ABSOLUTELY WILL OCCUR,wether you believe it or not.

And I still have hope,because as yet I am not complete,but I know I soon will be!

Steven

Odyssey
12-04-01, 07:23 AM
But Steven you are missing the point entirely. The writers of the NT thought as you do. The believed and taught the the resurrection was 'about to' take place - that Christ was 'at the door' - that 'the end of all thigns (was) at hand.' What makes you think that those people, chosen by god to be the recorders of his 'god-breathed' word were mistaken and you are right? If we can't trust their interpretation of those things, why should we trust yours?

We are left with only two choices here: 1) Those events happened and we need to reassess our understanding of those terms, or 2) They did not happen and the writers were wrong in thinking so. It is that simple.

Grace to you,

jak

Brandan
12-04-01, 12:04 PM
Hi Jak,

Was curious if there are any writings (extra Biblical) that document the coming of Christ in 70 ad....

Also, how do you interpret the following (I apologize if I missed this somewhere....)

1 Thes. 4:16-18, (NASB), For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.
Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord.
Therefore comfort one another with these words.

[ EDIT Never mind about 1 Thes. 4:16-18... I found my answer in a search... http://www.predestinarian.net/showthread.php?postid=1088&highlight=trumpet+dead+cloud#post1088 ]

Odyssey
12-04-01, 02:37 PM
Kermie,

There are plenty of others more qualified than me to show you that. If you look at www.preteristarchive.com you can find those throughout the ages who have believed this. If you are looking for a historical document that states 'Christ second coming was in AD 70,' I don't know of any. However, that doesn't mean it didn't happen. The natural man does not see the things of god.

Grace to you,

jak

PS: Even if there where no one else who believed this way, I still would just because of the teaching of the NT.

JesusFreak2K1
12-04-01, 10:01 PM
I have a question. How do you explain the war in the middle east? I mean, clearly this is a holy war. If Jesus came back already, then aren't we heading towards Armageddon? I'm not saying that it will happen next year, but it would seem that this too would be " close at hand." Any thoughts on this??

Odyssey
12-05-01, 05:49 AM
No. There were wars before AD 70 and after. The point Jesus was making was that his generation would see his return. That is what the NT consistently teaches. So, again, we are still left with the two choices.

The problem with the view in question is that it has the return prior to the 'Armageddon,' while Revelation has it after. Furthermore, John wrote that the things he witnessed 'must shortly take place' 'for the time (was) at hand' when he wrote that letter. Therefore, the events contained in it must have taken place 'shortly' after it was written and circulated.

Grace to you,

jak

Fledge
12-05-01, 08:45 AM
I'm curious.
Is there any non-christian historical accounts of Jesus' second coming? There are a great number of non-christian (other than the Bible) historical accounts of Jesus' birth and life and death. It made a great impact on the world. It was a defining moment in history, so you would think that there would be at least as much record of His second coming.
??

Odyssey
12-05-01, 08:56 AM
Fledge,

Look at a couple of posts earlier. I answered this question there.

Grace to you,

jak

Parousia70
12-05-01, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by JesusFreak2K1
I have a question. How do you explain the war in the middle east? I mean, clearly this is a holy war.

"Clearly this is a Holy war"

Hmmmmm.

I'm sorry but I do not share that "clarity" you speak of.

What about it makes you believe it is a "HOLY" war?

How do you define "Holy War"?

What makes one war "Holy" and another not?

Is it because of Jewish invlovement?

If so, then you would have to agree that WW2 was a "Holy War"
the dispensationalists of that day believed it was and believed it signified that the end was "at Hand" They were wrong.

Jesus said that there would be wars and rumors of wars but that they were NOT to be taken as a SIGN of ANYTHING.

The Palestinian ~ Jewish war is, by in large, Christless heathens fighting Christless heathens over dirt rights.

Nothing "Holy" about it as far as I can see.

Peace in the present Christ,
Peter

Brandan
12-05-01, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by Parousia70
The Palestinian ~ Jewish war is, by in large, Christless heathens fighting Christless heathens over dirt rights.

That seems to be my observation as well. Ahhh, the errors of Dispensationalism. I too was prey to this system of thought for a long time. Boy, would I love to see this heresy stamped out of the Church!

Steven
12-05-01, 09:15 PM
Hi Jak

Jak,you are right,the apostles did preach the same thing I do,And since they did not see the resurection take place,and I have not seen the resurection take place,I still preach the same thing they did,they were not wrong and I am not wrong,it is only your assumption that I am wrong,and your assumption is based on a misunderstanding of the scriptures.

The ressurection of all the physical bodies of those who were saved from Abraham to the end of the church age,will take place,and the time is at hand.Jak are you prepared so that the day of the lord doesnt overtake you as a thief in the night? If it overtakes you its because you werent resurected with the bride of Christ,and you will suffer the consequences of rejecting Christ.

Jak today is the day of salvation,if you will believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that christ died and arose from the dead to pay for your sins and to save you,you will be saved !




Steven

Steven
12-05-01, 09:20 PM
Hi Kermie

Kermie,you are not alone in wanting dispensationalism stamped out,but in order to do that one must stamp out the word of God and he has said the heavens and earth shall pass away but my word shall never pass away.....and oh by the way,the word dispensation is found in the bible,and altho it may be hard for you to believe,its not saying that dispensation is heresy.


Steven

Parousia70
12-06-01, 12:48 AM
Originally posted by Steven


Jak,you are right,the apostles did preach the same thing I do,And since they did not see the resurection take place,and I have not seen the resurection take place,I still preach the same thing they did,they were not wrong and I am not wrong.
Steven, since the apostles claimed it was "at hand, about to take place, near, coming soon" 2000 years ago, by the mere fact that you are saying it is "near, comming soon, about to take place, at hand" today, you are claiming the apostles were wrong.

You can't have it both ways. the same event can NOT, no way, no how be IMMINENT at 2 seperate times in history seperated by 2000 years. it was either imminent 2000 years ago as the apostles said it was, or it is imminent today as you say it is.

You don't mind if I choose the apostles words over yours do you?



The ressurection of all the physical bodies of those who were saved from Abraham to the end of the church age,will take place.

This you will need to back up with scripture.
any scripture that says "resurrection of the flesh" or "Physical resurrection" will do.
Take your time.

Peace in the Present Christ,
Peter

Odyssey
12-06-01, 08:03 AM
Steven:

Concerning the timing of things: How many times must we go over this?!? The chosen, called, appointed, annointed, apostles of our Lord wrote the 'god-breathed' Scriptures. They looked at their world and, becuase of the statements of Christ (Matt. 24 and its parallels), concluded that 'the end of all things (was) at hand.' That Jesus was 'ready to judge' - that he was 'standing right at the door.' That this judgment and the resurrection was 'about to' take place. The believed and taught this. Yet, for some reason, it did not take place? Do you see the problem? The HS was to lead them into all truth, but they misunderstood the coming of Christ? They misunderstood their own age? They misunderstood their world? Come on. We are questioning the apostles teaching on the second coming? Either they were wrong or not. There is no other answer, Steven. You can't both be right. They looked at their world around them and determined by the HS and the teachings of Jesus that His coming was 'about to' take place. They wrote, 'For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry' (Heb. 10.37). Again, (and again and again and again...) this is what they taught and preached and expected because of the express teachings of our Lord. Now don't you find it odd that if their generation wasn't going to see the Second Coming the HS would have told them? I mean, since he was leading them into 'all truth,' shouldn't he have told them that the Second Coming wasn't until thousands of years later? By your own admission, you believe that you are right, that the Second Coming is at hand. By this statement, believe it or not, you are declaring (along with the athiests) that Jesus, the apostles, the HS, and even god, were WRONG. Plain and simple.

You said that the apostles did not see the resurrection, how do you know? Because it wasn't the way you think it should be? Where is your proof that it didn't happen, even though the preached that it was 'about to' take place?

Lastly, why are you questioning my salvation? You may think it is your duty but you are way out of line here. If anyone should be looking at their beliefs, it should be you. You are trampling on the words of our Lord and the disciples.

Ask yourself honestly, how the apostles could have taught that the Christ's coming was 'about to' take place, if it didn't.

Grace to you,

jak

Brandan
12-06-01, 09:04 AM
Originally posted by Steven
Jak today is the day of salvation,if you will believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that christ died and arose from the dead to pay for your sins and to save you,you will be saved !

Hi Steven, I find this statement to be condenscending and a desperate attempt to gain the upper hand in the "debate". Are you claiming jak isn't regenerate? Does a proper understanding of pretribulational premillennial eschatology determine one's standing with God? This is a warning... please be careful with your choice of words.

Yours truly,
Brandan

Odyssey
12-06-01, 09:55 AM
Concerning the term 'dispensation':

1 Corinthians 9:17. 'For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.'

Ephesians 1:10. 'That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:'

Ephesians 3:2. 'If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:'

Colossians 1:25 'Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;'

The term is used for the dispersing of the gospel and does not deal with the idea of differnent sections of god's plan. That meaning is forced into the term by those who hold to this theology.

There were/are two differnent covenants of god to people: the Old Covenant (made exclusively with the natural nation of Israel) and the New Covenant (made with the spiritual nation of Israel consisting of all classes of people). This is what we find clearly addressed in Scripture:

'In that he says New, he has made the first old; but that which grows old and aged is near disappearing' (Heb. 8.13; check out the whole chapter. In fact, the whole letter addresses this issue of the two covenants).

'For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants...' (Gal. 4.22-24).

These referred to the two different ages within Scripture, 'this age,' i.e., the age in which they were living - the Old Covenantal age; and 'the age to come,' i.e., the New Covenant age. The OCA would finally end with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 'and shall be found no more at all' (Rev. 18.21), while the NCA is 'without end' (Eph. 3.21).

Grace to you,

jak