Signs of Last Days

[PetriFB]

If we start examining the signs preceding the coming of Jesus, then the words spoken by Jesus himself, in which He referred to the days of Noah and Lot concerning the generation experiencing the coming of Jesus, are a good starting point. He stated that the conditions just before His coming would very much resemble the societies of the time of Noah and Lot, and that before His coming, people would be as unprepared as then; in other words, history would in a way repeat itself.


http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Lastdays1

 

[preterist]

Of course all one has to do is read the Bible to see when the last days were:

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

 

[Green^Horn]

Of course all one has to do is read the Bible to see when the last days were:

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

you know it amazes me sometimes how you preterists can remain so willingly ignorant of the fact that we are still seeing days go by, how anyone can believe that the end of days came in 70ad completely eludes me, in fact i don't even think that you believe what you preach your own self, or if you do, then surely you haven't examined it with sound reasoning, its very simple, there was another day today, and its very likely there will be another tomorrow, and another the next day, and on going untill the last one, the one in which Jesus said he would raise us up, last means last, not 2000 years before last,

2Pe 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2Pe 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Savior:
2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
2Pe 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished.
2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
2Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

 

[preterist]

you know it amazes me sometimes how you preterists can remain so willingly ignorant of the fact that we are still seeing days go by,

Funny, preterist are equally puzzled how you dispies are ignorant of what the “last days†are and what they are the last days of.

Is it your view the last days were occurring in the 1st century and continue on?

how anyone can believe that the end of days came in 70ad completely eludes me,

Days of what? Answer this and then maybe you can understand.

Forgive us ignorant preterist for actually believing what the NT writers wrote. Forgive us for believing Peter when he said the end of all things were at hand, forgive us for believing James when he said the coming of the Lord was near, forgive us for believing John when he said the events of Revelation were near, forgive us for believing Paul when he said he was living at the end of the age. Please forgive us preterists for not “spiritualizing†away all the NT time indicators. Forgive us for not thinking Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsey are inspired.

in fact i don't even think that you believe what you preach your own self,

“Thinking†then, may not be your strongest asset.

or if you do, then surely you haven't examined it with sound reasoning,

It was before I actually studied the Bible that I held your view. I was like most and just sat in my Baptist pew and believed everything the preacher said and didn’t challenge it. It was when I decided to study this for myself that my view began to change.

its very simple, there was another day today, and its very likely there will be another tomorrow, and another the next day, and on going untill the last one, the one in which Jesus said he would raise us up, last means last, not 2000 years before last,

1.Again, perhaps you should understand the context of the “last daysâ€Â. At least learn the preterist view of what the context of the “last days†is, then you won’t have to build these straw men. Of course I know it makes you look so intelligent to knock down these straw men that you created, but we both really know differently don’t we??

2.I understand your desire to put 2000 year gaps in the words of the Prophets. You do so with Daniel and his 70 weeks, you do so with Jesus(Matthew16:27-28), you do so with Peter(I Pet. 4:7).

Let me help you with your interpretation of Peter:

The great Puritan John Owen wrote this:

'It is evident, then, that in the prophetical idiom and manner of speech, by heavens and earth, the civil and religious state and combination of men in the world, and the men of them, were often understood. So were the heavens and earth that world which then was destroyed by the flood.
' 4. On this foundation I affirm that the heavens and earth here intended in this prophecy of Peter, the coming of the Lord, the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men, mentioned in the destruction of that heaven and earth, do all of them relate, not to the last and final judgment of the world, but to that utter desolation and destruction that was to be made of the Judaical church and state
'First, There is the foundation of the apostle's inference and exhortation, seeing that all these things, however precious they seem, or what value soever any put upon them, shall be dissolved, that is, destroyed; and that in that dreadful and fearful manner before mentioned, in a day of judgment, wrath, and vengeance, by fire and sword; let others mock at the threats of Christ's coming: He will come- He will not tarry; and then the heavens and earth that God Himself planted, -the sun, moon, and stars of the Judaical polity and church, -the whole old world of worship and worshippers, that stand out in their obstinancy against the Lord Christ, shall be sensibly dissolved and destroyed: this we know shall be the end of these things, and that shortly." (Sermon on 2 Peter iii. 11, Works, folio, 1721.).

John Lightfoot

."That the destruction of Jerusalem is very frequently expressed in Scripture as if it were the destruction of the whole world, Deut. 32:22; "A fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.' Jer. 4:23; 'I beheld the earth, and lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light,' &c. The discourse there also is concerning the destruction of that nation, Isa. 65:17; 'Behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered,' &c. And more passages of this sort among the prophets. According to this sense, Christ speaks in this place; and Peter speaks in his Second Epistle, third chapter; and John, in the sixth of the Revelation; and Paul, 2 Cor. 5:17, &c. (vol. 2, pp. 18-19)

"With the same reference it is, that the times and state of things immediately following the destruction of Jerusalem are called 'a new creation,' new heavens,' and 'a new earth.' When should that be? Read the whole chapter; and you will find the Jews rejected and cut off; and from that time is that new creation of the evangelical world among the Gentiles.
Compare 2 Cor. 5:17 and Rev. 21:1,2; where, the old Jerusalem being cut off and destroyed, a new one succeeds; and new heavens and a new earth are created.

2 Peter 3:13: 'We, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth.' The heaven and the earth of the Jewish church and commonwealth must be all on fire, and the Mosaic elements burnt up; but we, according to the promise made to us by Isaiah the prophet, when all these are consumed, look for the new creation of the evangelical state" (vol. 3, p.453)

"That the destruction of Jerusalem and the whole Jewish state is described as if the whole frame of the world were to be dissolved. Nor is it strange, when God destroyed his habitation and city, places once so dear to him, with so direful and sad an overthrow; his own people, whom he accounted of as much or more than the whole world beside, by so dreadful and amazing plagues. Matt. 24:29,30, 'The sun shall be darkened &c. Then shall appear the 'sign of the Son of man,' &c; which yet are said to fall out within that generation, ver. 34. 2 Pet. 3:10, 'The heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat,' &c. Compare with this Deut. 32:22, Heb. 12:26: and observe that by elements are understood the Mosaic elements, Gal 4:9, Coloss. 2:20: and you will not doubt that St. Peter speaks only of the conflagration of Jerusalem, the destruction of the nation, and the abolishing the dispensation of Moses" (vol. 3, p. 452).

John Locke

"That St. Paul should use 'heaven' and 'earth' for Jews and Gentiles will not be thought so very strange if we consider that Daniel himself expresses the nation of the Jews by the name of 'heaven' (Dan. viii. 10). Nor does he want an example of it in our Saviour Himself, who (Luke xxi. 26) by "powers of heaven" plainly signifies the great men of the Jewish nation. Nor is this the only place in the Epistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians which will bear this interpretation of heaven and earth. He who shall read the first fifteen verses of chap. iii. and carefully weigh the expressions, and observe the drift of the apostle in them, will not find that he does manifest violence to St. Paul's sense if he understand by "The family in heaven and earth" (ver. 15) the united body of Christians, made up of Jews and Gentiles, living still promiscuously among those twp sorts of people who continueds in their unbelief. However, this interpretation I am not positive in , but offer it as matter of inquiry to those who think and impartial search into the true meaning of the Sacred Scriptures the best employment of all the time they have." (Ephesians 2:9-10, in loc.)

John Brown

'Heaven and earth passing,' understood literally, is the dissolution of the present system of the universe, and the period when that is to take place, is called the 'end of the world.' But a person at all familiar with the phraseology of the Old Testament Scriptures, knows that the dissolution of the Mosaic economy, and the establishment of the Christian, is often spoken of as the removing of the old earth and heavens, and the creation of a new earth and new heavens" (vol. 1, p. 170)

I realize in this world of Jack Van Impe and John Hagee these men may not be well known, so I will provide links so you can investigate these “heretics†yourself:

John Owen: http://www.apuritansmind.com/JohnOwen/J ... inPage.htm

John Lightfoot: http://www.swordsearcher.com/christian- ... tfoot.html

John Locke http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/l/locke.htm

John Brown: http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/John_George_Brown

 

[tim-from-pa]

Forgive us for not thinking Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsey are inspired.

I won't get into talking about end times stuff---- I did enough of that already, but I am curious as to why you keep bringing these guys up as if all of us mindlessly follow these guys. That in itself shows you have a single-tracked way of thinking and anything outside of it you deem in error or whatever. The first thing one has to do if they want to prove their point is to stop with the subjective assumptions---- that will not help your case if you believe guilty until proven innocent.

For the record, I believe these guys may even be false prophets. For a real laugh, I used to listen to Gene Scott (He also believed in end times and was very learned). Do a search on "youtube.com" for Dr. Gene Scott and one of his videos cussing up and down. That's my kind of preacher---- but you assumed the likes of us end-timers are a Tim LaHaye fan instead. I hope you do not reason the same way theologically.

 

[preterist]

I won't get into talking about end times stuff---- I did enough of that already,

Interesting, you read “end time†forums but choose not to participate?

but I am curious as to why you keep bringing these guys up as if all of us mindlessly follow these guys. That in itself shows you have a single-tracked way of thinking and anything outside of it you deem in error or whatever. The first thing one has to do if they want to prove their point is to stop with the subjective assumptions---- that will not help your case if you believe guilty until proven innocent.

Also interesting is that of all the points I made about the “last days†and 2 Peter, this is the one you choose to focus on. Greenhorn had every opportunity to comment on my reply or on the original post, instead he decided to take the low road of debate. If that is how he wishes to pursue this thread then I can also can play that game. Childish? Perhaps, but I find it somewhat entertaining.

For the record, I believe these guys may even be false prophets.

How so? Their view is prevalent in conservative evangelical churches all over the world. They come from the same eschatological cloth as Pentecost and Walvoord.

For a real laugh, I used to listen to Gene Scott (He also believed in end times and was very learned). Do a search on "youtube.com" for Dr. Gene Scott and one of his videos cussing up and down. That's my kind of preacher---- but you assumed the likes of us end-timers are a Tim LaHaye fan instead.

What’s an “end-timer� Gene Scott was quite a character. He had forgotten more than most ever knew. ( Not that I was a fan)

I hope you do not reason the same way theologically.

You can find out by actually discussing the subject. Perhaps start where I started, Hebrews 1:1-2.

 

[tim-from-pa]

Interesting, you read “end time†forums but choose not to participate?

Already you are wresting even what I am saying making it say totally something else just like the bible. I did not say in the least that I never participated. I'm talking about the end-times stuff in this thread because I wanted to focus on your comment about the guys you brought up. I debated a lot of this stuff already and I am not into redundancy.

Also interesting is that of all the points I made about the “last days†and 2 Peter, this is the one you choose to focus on. Greenhorn had every opportunity to comment on my reply or on the original post, instead he decided to take the low road of debate. If that is how he wishes to pursue this thread then I can also can play that game. Childish? Perhaps, but I find it somewhat entertaining.

I did not quote Peter. The other poster did and as I stated from the start, I was not going to debate the end times stuff in this thread. I wanted to know why you keep bringing up these types of guys in every end-time thread you participated in. As usual, you never really answered and just orally danced around.

What’s an “end-timer� Gene Scott was quite a character. He had forgotten more than most ever knew. ( Not that I was a fan)

Gene Scott believed in a pre-Trib rapture, he believed that Israel encompassed more than just the Jews as some nations originated from the Lost Tribes, he believed in the 7-year Tribulation, and the return of Jesus Christ to this earth. He is alike to the likes of the guys you quoted because he believed in a pre-trib rapture. But Gene Scott would have ripped into anybody if they called him a televangelist.

 

[preterist]

I did not quote Peter.

I didn’t say you did.

I was not going to debate the end times stuff in this thread.

But it’s an “end times†thread.

I wanted to know why you keep bringing up these types of guys in every end-time thread you participated in.

Really? At least be somewhat truthful.

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=28241

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=28234

As usual, you never really answered and just orally danced around.

Actually I did answer. Let me expound on it. Most of the pew-sitting Christians in America today get their eschatology straight from men just like Lindsey, LaHaye, Hagee and Thomas Ice. There is a reason they sell 100’s of millions of books. You don’t think they influence church thought? Most of the arguments I deal with come straight from their works.

Gene Scott believed in a pre-Trib rapture, he believed that Israel encompassed more than just the Jews as some nations originated from the Lost Tribes, he believed in the 7-year Tribulation, and the return of Jesus Christ to this earth. He is alike to the likes of the guys you quoted because he believed in a pre-trib rapture. But Gene Scott would have ripped into anybody if they called him a televangelist.

So I guess you would rather talk about Gene Scott than Hebrews 1:1-2? Just tell me why I should believe I am living in the last days when the writer of Hebrews said he was living in the "last days".

You see, I believe that most people believe we are in the last days because that is what they have been convinced of by those men, not becuase of their own study of scripture. PetriFB started this thread and has yet to respond. In fact, the only one challenging anyone else's ideas is me. I kinda thought that was the purpose of the forum.

 

[tim-from-pa]

You see, I believe that most people believe we are in the last days because that is what they have been convinced of by those men, not becuase of their own study of scripture. PetriFB started this thread and has yet to respond. In fact, the only one challenging anyone else's ideas is me. I kinda thought that was the purpose of the forum.

For the record, I believe something like "those men" (not that I agree with all they teach) and I did study scripture. On one study campaign I was on, it took me two years to go thru the entire bible, Strong's concordance and and took 6 thick notebooks of notes. (Obviously before computers were around :-D )

The problem is, I get the feeling you are lumping other posters in these forums with the likes of those that do not study on their own---- maybe they did study as I did. OK, OK, maybe you did not mention these names in "every" post, and we are often told not to use "always" and "never", but I will admit it has occurred enough times for me to remember it, including the same directed at me personally already.

As for Gene Scott, I don't mind talking about him because he taught the bible, and that guy had more knowledge in his little finger than you, me or most anyone else for that matter. And for the record, I stand where he does in believing the bible, not influenced by him, but before I heard about him, just in case you may jump to a similar conclusion that I was influenced by him.

 

[lecoop]

Preterist said,

Thinking†then, may not be your strongest asset.

:-D Your best post yet! ROFL!!!!!


Coop

 

[lecoop]

Preterist quoted:

John Brown

'Heaven and earth passing,' understood literally, is the dissolution of the present system of the universe, and the period when that is to take place, is called the 'end of the world.' But a person at all familiar with the phraseology of the Old Testament Scriptures, knows that the dissolution of the Mosaic economy, and the establishment of the Christian, is often spoken of as the removing of the old earth and heavens, and the creation of a new earth and new heavens" (vol. 1, p. 170)

Hmmm.

Genesis 6
17And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

I know that this is not speaking of "the dissolution of the Mosaic economy, and the establishment of the Christian," but it is Old Testament language. God warned that He would destroy everything that has the breath of life. He did just that! Now, what did Peter say?

2 Peter 3
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,

Paul agrees:

1 Corinthians 3:13
Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

What is Paul saying? Who is he saying it to? Don't even think this was for those in Jerusalem. Paul is telling us that the day is coming (sorry, but this did not happen in 70 AD) that all men's work will be tried by fire. What does this mean? It means that if we build great things on earth, but do nothing for eternity, and transfer nothing into the heavenly realm, and build nothing for the world to come, all, or everything we did, will be burned up, for it is God's intent, to destroy the earth with fire, just as He once destroyed it with water.

Peter says the same thing: the very elements of the earth will melt and burn. Not only the earth, but perhaps all of creation. Peter included the heavens. Does this mean only the atmosphere, or the universe? Since God is holding the very atoms together, it would be a simple thing for Him to just "let go." Notice the exact words of Peter: "the works that are therein shall be burned up." Again, if our work is limited to what is on the earth, buildings, creations of man, etc - it will all be burned up. That is why Jesus said that a wise man, will "Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations."

Men here on earth push their unrighteousness to the absolute extreme to lay of treasures for their retirement. Jesus is saying, that the true "retirement" is eternity. We are truly foolish if we don't take some of our money and use it to reach the lost, and get them ready for heaven. Then, our "retirement," or our time in eternity will be filled with joy, as the millions that we helped get born again, will be our friends forever! We then, should push our righteousness to the absolute extreme, to prepare for our "retirement!" Then the men of the world will NOT be wiser than we are.

There can be no doubt then, that there remains a "day of the Lord," still in our future. If one believes that the events of 70 AD fulfilled SOME of the prophecy, or was a FIRST fulfillment of some prophecies, that is fine. God always warns His kids of these kinds of things. The Christians were warned and escaped Jerusalem. However, it is just as clear, that some prophecies are yet to be fulfilled. The FIRE is coming! Will YOUR works be burned up, or will you have silver and gold transfered into your spiritual retirement account in heaven?

So was or is the Lord "slack" in not fulfilled all these things within the first generation of the church? Not according to Peter. He has great patience for all to come that are willing. As I have said several times, for those that insist that all these things were fulfilled in 70 AD, and will then be surprised to see them finished in our future, they will just have to ask Jesus what He meant by "at hand." What did Peter say to those that don't believe in any more future events, such as "where is the promise of His coming?" (We are STILL waiting for his glorious appearing.) Peter reminded them that God views time a little differently than we do. For God, it has only been two days since the church started! :-D

Coop

 

[Green^Horn]

Funny, preterist are equally puzzled how you dispies are ignorant of what the “last days†are and what they are the last days of.

ahh, what does this term "dispies" mean? i keep seeing you preterists use this term to describe everyone who disagrees with you, therefore i'm lead to believe it might be a good thing, because i consider almost anything that disagrees with preterism to be a good thing, and as for what the last days are of, perhaps you should tell me what they are of, since you are so much better at thinking than i am, i kinda always thought that last meant last as in no more to follow, and day meant the time it takes for the earth to make 1 revolution in respect to the sun, kinda like "and the evening and the morning were the first day" (first as in opposite of last), but since you have found my thinking ability to be so flawed, why don't you go ahead and tell me how i should think, and what i should think they are of.

Is it your view the last days were occurring in the 1st century and continue on?

its not just "my view" but a plain and simple fact that days still go by, therefore simple logic and common sense dictate that the last one hasn't happened yet, (not much thinking required here)

Days of what? Answer this and then maybe you can understand.

days of anything, you name it, the only thing that ended in 70ad is 70ad itself at the end of the last second of the last hour of it, but since you preterists have so much trouble with the word "last", i doubt you will get this one, but i'll try and help you as much as i can tho, lets see, the jews were not destroyed as you preterists claim, since they're are many jews still around that one's obvious, israel is still there, rome continued on, absolutely nothing of any importance happened in 70ad at all, except the lives that ended then, and the jewish temple which was already desolate was destroyed, the only prophetic thing that 70ad marked was Jesus's words "There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

Forgive us ignorant preterist for actually believing what the NT writers wrote.

then try believing this,
Joh 6:39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
Joh 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

and to put the term "the last day" into it's proper context, which should be obvious to even a child, we can go back to the beginning, and see what God himself considered the first day to be, and from that we should be able to conclude what the last one is

Gen 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

no days before this point-->first day - - - - - - last day<--no days after this point, simple

Forgive us for believing Peter when he said the end of all things were at hand,

my birthday is "at hand" too, but it will not be here untill it arrives,

forgive us for believing James when he said the coming of the Lord was near, forgive us for believing John when he said the events of Revelation were near,

my sister lives "near" me, but not in the same house

forgive us for believing Paul when he said he was living at the end of the age.

2Ti 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2Ti 3:2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
2Ti 3:3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
2Ti 3:4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
2Ti 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
2Ti 3:6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
2Ti 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

obviously Paul believed this was yet future, or else he would have started it off like this:

"This know also, that in these last days perilous times have come.

WOW!!! all that by just changing 2 little words, would i make a good preterist or what? LOL

Please forgive us preterists for not “spiritualizing†away all the NT time indicators.

i think in order to obtain forgiveness one must first stop doing the thing they are wanting forgiveness for, like trying to make others believe that last doesn't mean last, and day doesn't mean day, but spiritualized into meaning something else, oh and lets not forget the "heaven and earth thing" that you preterists try to spiritualize into meaning Jerusalem and jewish customs and ordanances or however it is ya'll put it

Forgive us for not thinking Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsey are inspired.

LOL ok, you're forgiven

“Thinking†then, may not be your strongest asset.

LOL, that is the first thing you've said yet that i can agree with, and you're absolutely right, its not, but fortunately it doesn't require very much thinking on my part to expose the lies of preterism,

It was before I actually studied the Bible that I held your view.

ahh i'm sorry but you seem to "think" you know alot about me, and from all the mud slinging you've done in just one post, it's obvious to me that you've never held my view, you seem to "think" that i got my "view" from these guys "Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsey" who i had never heard of untill i started visiting christian forums, and i've never read either of them, and i don't guess i ever will, so just to let you know, i got the view i hold regarding the Bible from reading the Bible itself, i'm a poor fellow, raised by a poor family, we could never afford all those fancy false doctrine books you mention, i'm neither preterist nor futurist, neither pre mid nor post trib, i believe the Lord will come back at the "last day" and raise us up just like he said he would, and i've found that none of the modern day "ISM's" that i've read about fit that category, i didn't even know all those false doctrine "ISM's" existed until i started visiting these christian forums about 3 years ago, they remind me of fast food restaurants, with a new item on the menu every time you visit it seems,

I was like most and just sat in my Baptist pew and believed everything the preacher said and didn’t challenge it.

well i guess thats where we differ then right there, after i got old enough to know what was going on, i listened to the preacher (my dad in most cases) and if i already knew the scripture he was preaching on, if it was right i said AMEN, if not i just shook my head, and if i didn't know the scripture he was preaching i went home and studied it until i did know it well enough to agree or disagree, and we had quite a few arguments, some i won, some he won

It was when I decided to study this for myself that my view began to change.

ok so you left off the "Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsey" false doctrine books, now if you would just lay aside the preterist false doctrine books too, and start over, you might get somewhere this time.

1.Again, perhaps you should understand the context of the “last daysâ€Â. At least learn the preterist view of what the context of the “last days†is, then you won’t have to build these straw men. Of course I know it makes you look so intelligent to knock down these straw men that you created, but we both really know differently don’t we??

LOL, my brother has been a preterist for 25 years, my cousin even longer, and my uncle taught the false doctrine to them, it has spread like a cancer throught my family, and i would guess i know even more about the false doctrine than you do, and the only strawman i'm knocking down is preterism, but its an easy task,

2.I understand your desire to put 2000 year gaps in the words of the Prophets. You do so with Daniel and his 70 weeks, you do so with Jesus(Matthew16:27-28), you do so with Peter(I Pet. 4:7).

LOL, there you go assuming things about me again, i didn't put a 2000 year gap in anything, in fact i know for a fact that you can't find even one single post on the entire web in which i did, and the nearest i can calculate (i guess you'll attack my calculater now LOL) , Daniels 70 weeks were fulfilled when peter went to the house of Cornelius in the book of Acts, which ended the time alloted for Daniels people, but i guess you're gonna say it was 70ad tho, and you accuse me of inserting gaps, LOL

and as for the gap you accuse me of inserting in Mathew, i never did any such thing lets look at those 2 verses shall we? and i'll try to explain to you the way i see them:

Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

see the words "every man"? in this verse, those words are key to understanding the verse, you see this is where common sense and simple logic come into play, i am a man, making me one of the men that was mentioned here, he didn't say just a few men, or just the men that lived in 70ad, but he said "every man", and since i am a man, and i've not been rewarded yet according to my works, there's only one conclusion to be made here, "it hasn't happened yet"

Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

and this verse was fulfilled on the day of penticost in acts chapter 2, not 70ad,

Let me help you with your interpretation of Peter:

no need for any of your false doctrine books, Peter does a nice job of explaining it himself, as i've already posted.

I realize in this world of Jack Van Impe and John Hagee these men may not be well known, so I will provide links so you can investigate these “heretics†yourself:

and let me recommend to you the Bible, no false doctrine books needed.

 

[Vic C.]

Hi Green Horn,

Sorry for not really reading through your entire post, but this sort of stuck out:

preterist wrote:
Days of what? Answer this and then maybe you can understand.


days of anything, you name it, the only thing that ended in 70ad is 70ad itself at the end of the last second of the last hour of it,

Now, I'm not trying to speak for pret and I'm not defending preterism either. But I've been studying historicism and some very significant things happened in 70 A.D. I don't know, but many Christians are either ignorant to this or refuse to acknowledge it. In 70 A.D. the Temple in Jerusalem was utterly destroyed, putting to an end Temple sacifices. It was also the year of the Jewish Diaspora, the scattering of Israel throughout the world. Both were prophesized.

One more thing; it was the end of the Jewish revolt against Rome, which I might add, lasted exactly 3 1/2 years.

I'd say this all was pretty significant. 8-)

 

[Green^Horn]

Hi Green Horn,

Sorry for not really reading through your entire post, but this sort of stuck out:


Now, I'm not trying to speak for pret and I'm not defending preterism either. But I've been studying historicism and some very significant things happened in 70 A.D. I don't know, but many Christians are either ignorant to this or refuse to acknowledge it. In 70 A.D. the Temple in Jerusalem was utterly destroyed, putting to an end Temple sacifices. It was also the year of the Jewish Diaspora, the scattering of Israel throughout the world. Both were prophesized.

One more thing; it was the end of the Jewish revolt against Rome, which I might add, lasted exactly 3 1/2 years.

I'd say this all was pretty significant. 8-)

hey there, well actually i believe the temple sacrifices officially ended when Jesus was hanging on the cross and uttered the words "it is finished" after his perfect sacrifice no killing of any goats, even if it was such a pile of them that it mounted to the heavens, had any meaning any longer, i believe in types and shadows myself, the sacrificial system only served as a shadow pointing to Christ's ultimate sacrifice, when that which casts the shadow has come into full view, then the shadow is rendered insignificant,

and as for the Jewish Diaspora, 70ad only marked its beginning, not its end, Jesus said it was the beginning of sorrows, and indeed it was, and i suppose that in many parts of the world its still going on, but since israel became a nation again, their persecution serves to drive them back to israel now instead of away from it,

so again in my view the only thing that ended in 70ad is 70ad itself, and it was not mentioned in scripture anywhere that i can find,

and the temple itself Jesus had already said it was desolate long before 70ad, so it seems to me that the only thing significant about it that ended in 70ad is the temple itself marking Jesus's words "There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. " it was destroyed in 70ad but its usefulness ended at the cross.

i'm glad to see that you are studying historicism, as i do believe that it is the closes ISM you'll find to the truth by far, but even it has its flaws as well, before i got hold of a computer and got connected to the internet i had never studied it either, but when i found it and read about it, i found that it was almost exactly as i believe with few exceptions, the concept is right on, but the targets they tend to hit may be just a bit off, but i guess no one will ever know for sure untill this thing winds up,

 

[Vic C.]

so again in my view the only thing that ended in 70ad is 70ad itself, and it was not mentioned in scripture anywhere that i can find,

8-) I will admit, scripture does a great job (as it should) of preserving the progressive revelation of God from Genesis 1:1 to Rev 22:21, but doesn't specifically pinpoint dates in history. That is where Biblical Theology comes in. It is the system of determining doctrine incorporating a Biblical historical context.

Remember this passage?

Luke 24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
Luke 24:26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

That was Jesus explaining things in a historical context, to the two headed to Emmaus.

...and the temple itself Jesus had already said it was desolate long before 70ad, so it seems to me that the only thing significant about it that ended in 70ad is the temple itself marking Jesus's words "There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. "

Agree to a point, but Jesus also said, "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand (Matthew 24:15)

Early church fathers like Augustine, Clement and Jerome along with John Calvin, Isaac Newton, Adam Clarke, John Gill, Wesley, Spurgeon and a whole host of others understood this to mean the Temple destruction of 70 A.D.

but i guess no one will ever know for sure untill this thing winds up,

Amen to that! :angel:

 

[preterist]

ahh, what does this term "dispies" mean?

Dispensationalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensationalism


http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html

and as for what the last days are of, perhaps you should tell me what they are of, since you are so much better at thinking than i am,

So you have no definition? Then how do you know a preterist definition is wrong?

i kinda always thought that last meant last as in no more to follow, and day meant the time it takes for the earth to make 1 revolution in respect to the sun, kinda like "and the evening and the morning were the first day" (first as in opposite of last), but since you have found my thinking ability to be so flawed, why don't you go ahead and tell me how i should think, and what i should think they are of.

OK, I guess. Let me help you. Try to get the context to figure out what it is the last days of.


Gen 49:1 And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days.

It is the last days of the 12 Tribes, not planet earth or planetary motions. Context is always a good place to start.

its not just "my view" but a plain and simple fact that days still go by, therefore simple logic and common sense dictate that the last one hasn't happened yet, (not much thinking required here)

You are correct, no thinking required to come up with that explanation.

2Pe 3:16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable pervert, as also they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction).

the jews were not destroyed as you preterists claim,

Can you show me where any preterist claims all Jews were destroyed in AD70?

since they're are many jews still around that one's obvious, israel is still there,

So the Jews in Israel today are liked directly to the Jews of the Bible?

Encyclopedia Judaica Jerusalem (1971)
"It is a common assumption, and one that sometimes seems ineradicable even in the face of evidence to the contrary, that the Jews of today constitute a race, a homogeneous entity easily recognizable. From the preceding discussion of the origin and early history of the Jews, it should be clear that in the course of their formation as a people and a nation they had already assimilated a variety of racial strains from people moving into the general area they occupied. This had taken place by interbreeding and then by conversion to Judaism of a considerable number of communities. . . .
"Thus, the diversity of the racial and genetic attributes of various Jewish colonies of today renders any unified racial classification of them a contradiction in terms. Despite this, many people readily accept the notion that they are a distinct race. This is probably reinforced by the fact that some Jews are recognizably different in appearance from the surrounding population. That many cannot be easily identified is overlooked and the stereotype for some is extended to all - a not uncommon phenomenon" (Encyclopedia Judaica Jerusalem, 1971, vol. 3, p. 50).

Collier's Encyclopedia (1977)
"A common error and persistent modern myth is the designation of the Jews as a 'race! This is scientifically fallacious, from the standpoint of both physical and historical tradition. Investigations by anthropologists have shown that Jews are by no means uniform in physical character and that they nearly always reflect the physical and mental characteristics of the people among whom they five" (Collier's Encyclopedia, 1977, vol. 13, p. 573).

The Encyclopedia Brittanica (1973)
'The Jews As A Race: The findings of physical anthropology show that, contrary to the popular view, there is no Jewish race. Anthropornetric measurements of Jewish groups in many parts of the world indicate that they differ greatly from one another with respect to all the important physical characteristics." (vol. 12, page 1054)

“Because of the long and varied history of the Jews," says the 2001 edition of World Book Encyclopedia, "it is difficult to define a Jew. There is no such thing as a Jewish race. Jewish identity is a mixture of religious, historical, and ethnic factors." Thus, those who might have truly claimed to be of the genealogy of Abraham and of true Semitic origin became extinct as a discernible race, being replaced by the white Khazars of the Transcaucasus, none of whose ancestors, as Benjamin Freedman phrases it, have ever placed a foot in the land of Palestine. This causes a serious problem with modern Christianity's infatuation with the Jews and their "return to their Homeland," begging the question: How can one return to a place where they have never been?â€Â

the only prophetic thing that 70ad marked was Jesus's words "There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

Dan 12:7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, who was on the waters of the river, when he held up his right and his left hand to Heaven, and swore by Him who lives forever that it shall be for a time, times, and a half. And when they have made an end of scattering the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

Dan 9:26 And after sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself. And the people of the ruler who shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. And the end of it shall be with the flood, and ruins are determined, until the end shall be war.

Luk 19:43 For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side,
Luk 19:44 And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

Mat 22:2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
Mat 22:3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.
Mat 22:4 Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.
Mat 22:5 But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise:
Mat 22:6 And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.
Mat 22:7 But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.

my birthday is "at hand" too, but it will not be here untill it arrives,

my sister lives "near" me, but not in the same house

You’ve got to be kidding, but I know you’re not. The extremes to which people will go to avoid the obvious.

2Ti 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2Ti 3:2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
2Ti 3:3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
2Ti 3:4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
2Ti 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
2Ti 3:6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
2Ti 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

obviously Paul believed this was yet future, or else he would have started it off like this:

"This know also, that in these last days perilous times have come.

WOW!!! all that by just changing 2 little words, would i make a good preterist or what? LOL

Nice try, but why not examine the text a little closer :

2Ti 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

Why would Paul tell Timothy to “turn away†from such people if these people don’t show up for another 2000 years? It is because Paul was infoming him that the fact it was the last days ecause these people were already there.

And of course you continue to ignore the fact that the writer of Hebrews did in fact say these last days had arrived:

Heb 1:2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds,

oh and lets not forget the "heaven and earth thing" that you preterists try to spiritualize into meaning Jerusalem and jewish customs and ordanances or however it is ya'll put it

You mean preterist like John Owen? Ooops, I forgot. You don’t know who men like him are.


John Owen (1721)
'It is evident, then, that in the prophetical idiom and manner of speech, by heavens and earth, the civil and religious state and combination of men in the world, and the men of them, were often understood. So were the heavens and earth that world which then was destroyed by the flood.

Stanley Paher
"Several Biblical references show that the phrase 'heaven and earth' is a figurative expression to denote the Jewish economy, its religious society and government."

Luke 16:17 declares that it 'is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fall.' Again, the Jewish society is meant. In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:18), Jesus declared, 'Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one title shall in no wise pass away till all things be accomplished.' All things needed to be fulfilled which had been written in the Psalms, Moses, and in the scrolls of the other prophets (Luke 24:44; see also John 17:4). The last of these temporal events would be the dissolution of the Jewish economy." (p. 152)
Do you really want to discuss the New Heavens and New Earth of Peter and how it relates to the New Heavens and New Earth of Isaiah and Revelation? If my memory serves me correctly, it is usually at this topic you leave and no longer want to play.

i got the view i hold regarding the Bible from reading the Bible itself, i'm a poor fellow, raised by a poor family, we could never afford all those fancy false doctrine books you mention,

You know what they say about the man that acts as his own Lawyer.

LOL, my brother has been a preterist for 25 years, my cousin even longer, and my uncle taught the false doctrine to them, it has spread like a cancer throught my family, and i would guess i know even more about the false doctrine than you do, and the only strawman i'm knocking down is preterism, but its an easy task,

You’re cancer ridden Uncle, cousin and brother would probably testify you haven’t done that great of a job of knocking down the strawman.

Daniels 70 weeks were fulfilled when peter went to the house of Cornelius in the book of Acts, which ended the time alloted for Daniels people, but i guess you're gonna say it was 70ad tho, and you accuse me of inserting gaps, LOL

So you agree with preterist, Daniel’s 70 weeks are fulfilled.

Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are decreed as to your people and as to your holy city, to finish the transgression and to make an end of sins, and to make atonement for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy.

Dan 9:26 And after sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself. And the people of the ruler who shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. And the end of it shall be with the flood, and ruins are determined, until the end shall be war.

If not AD70, when?

and as for the gap you accuse me of inserting in Mathew, i never did any such thing lets look at those 2 verses shall we? and i'll try to explain to you the way i see them:

Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

see the words "every man"? in this verse, those words are key to understanding the verse, you see this is where common sense and simple logic come into play, i am a man, making me one of the men that was mentioned here, he didn't say just a few men, or just the men that lived in 70ad, but he said "every man", and since i am a man, and i've not been rewarded yet according to my works, there's only one conclusion to be made here, "it hasn't happened yet"

Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

and this verse was fulfilled on the day of penticost in acts chapter 2, not 70ad,

Unbelievable, this is why you shouldn’t depend on just you and good ole dad for your interpretations.

Mat 16:27 For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He shall reward each one according to his works.
Mat 16:28 Truly I say to you, There are some standing here who shall not taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.

1.Verse 28 is tied to verse 27.
2.You have verse 28 being fulfilled 1000’s of years before verse 27. Amazing!
3.Because something didn’t occur the way you think it should be then you just claim “it hasn’t happened yet†despite what scripture indicates.
4.So the Son of Man coming in His Kingdom has occurred? Is this a different Kingdom than the one in Tomothy:

2Ti 4:1 Therefore I solemnly witness before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is going to judge the living and the dead according to His appearance and His kingdom,

At Pentecost Jesus tell us just the opposite of what you say:

Joh 16:7 But I tell you the truth, it is expedient for you that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Comforter will not come to you. But if I depart, I will send Him to you.

It was the Spirit that came on Pentecost!

You must also believe this was fulfilled:

Mat 26:64 Jesus said to him, You said it. I tell you more. From this time you shall see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of the heavens.

Unless this is a different coming of the Son of Man? Are you sure you’re not a preterist?

I guess this was fulfilled as well:
Mat 24:37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall be the coming of the Son of Man.

Or was this a different coming of the Son of Man?

How about this one:

Mat 25:31 But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He shall sit on the throne of His glory.

Was this at Pentecost as well?

You want a do over on Matt. 16:27-28??

 

[Green^Horn]

You know what they say about the man that acts as his own Lawyer.

yup sure do, they crucified him

You’re cancer ridden Uncle, cousin and brother would probably testify you haven’t done that great of a job of knocking down the strawman.

at least you admit its a strawman, thats more than i had hoped for, LOL

So you agree with preterist, Daniel’s 70 weeks are fulfilled.

yes, as near as i can reckon, they are fulfilled, i don't recall daniel inserting a 2000 year gap as futurists would have it, neither do i recall him inserting a 40 or so year gap as preterists would have it, the time alloted for daniels people ended when the gospel was preached to the gentiles, thus started the times of the gentiles:

Luk 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.

Unbelievable, this is why you shouldn’t depend on just you and good ole dad for your interpretations.

Mat 16:27 For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He shall reward each one according to his works.
Mat 16:28 Truly I say to you, There are some standing here who shall not taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.

1.Verse 28 is tied to verse 27.
2.You have verse 28 being fulfilled 1000’s of years before verse 27. Amazing!
3.Because something didn’t occur the way you think it should be then you just claim “it hasn’t happened yet†despite what scripture indicates.
4.So the Son of Man coming in His Kingdom has occurred?

1: the only thing that ties them together is the fact that they are on the same page, and your imagination
2: yes it is Amazing!
3: it didn't occur at all, as i've pointed out, already, the conditions were not met in 70ad, were you rewarded according to your works in 70ad? the answer is obvious, NO!
4: according to acts chapter 2 yes it has:

Act 2:29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us unto this day.
Act 2:30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
Act 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Act 2:32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
Act 2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
Act 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Act 2:35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
Act 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

it seems you've got your comings into his kingdom, and his returns to earths all mixed up, LOL, but being an x dispie or how ever you put it might do that to a feller, let me see if i can help you out a little as to where the kingdom is that he came in on the day of penticost:

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

Luk 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

At Pentecost Jesus tell us just the opposite of what you say:

Joh 16:7 But I tell you the truth, it is expedient for you that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Comforter will not come to you. But if I depart, I will send Him to you.

It was the Spirit that came on Pentecost!

oh was it?

Joh 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
Joh 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever;
Joh 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
Joh 14:18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
Joh 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
Joh 14:20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.

looks like one and the same to me

your little act that you don't know the difference between his coming into his kingdom (which he said was not of this world) and his physical return is not working, you preterists share a common trait, none of you seem to know when you've been bested, the only reason i even respond to any of you is to expose the lies of preterism to the young ones who might be thinking of joining your ranks, that way at least they might have a fighting chance before you devour them,

just one other thing tho before i leave off, have you ever logically thought your false doctrine through to it ultimate conclusion? theres not one single promise that pertains to you, because if you're right, then every single one was fulfilled in 70ad, even this one:

Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

this is the same end of the world that you preterists falsely claim came in 70ad, and he never said he would go past the end, but "even unto"

so therefore once anyone reckons your false doctrine through, it leaves one with no hope at all, nothing is left, just a sense of ultimate selfrighteusness, and an overwhelming urge to deceive and corrupt others into believing the same nonsense,

 

[preterist]

yes, as near as i can reckon, they are fulfilled, i don't recall daniel inserting a 2000 year gap as futurists would have it, neither do i recall him inserting a 40 or so year gap as preterists would have it,
You didn’t answer the question, when was this fulfilled:

Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

When was the city and sanctuary destroyed if not in AD70?

Secondly:

Notice “desolations are determinedâ€Â. It was during the 70 weeks that it was determined that the City was to be destroyed because of the sins of the Jews, not that the city would be destroyed in the 70 weeks. No gap.

the time alloted for daniels people ended when the gospel was preached to the gentiles, thus started the times of the gentiles:

That’s right, the time for Daniels people ended in the 1st century. That’s why it is called the last days:

Gen 49:1 And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days.

The last days of the 12 tribes of Israel and His exclusive dealings with them.

1: the only thing that ties them together is the fact that they are on the same page, and your imagination

Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

It beyond laughable to think these verses are not connected. And even more laughable is you have verse 28 occurring before 27 by thousands of years.

it seems you've got your comings into his kingdom, and his returns to earths all mixed up,

Yet of all the verse I listed as the Son of Man coming, you refused to tell me which were for Pentecost and which were future. You obviously agree with partial-preterist who believe there many “comings of the Lordâ€Â.

you preterists share a common trait, none of you seem to know when you've been bested, the only reason i even respond to any of you is to expose the lies of preterism to the young ones who might be thinking of joining your ranks, that way at least they might have a fighting chance before you devour them,

Bested? Convince your own family first before trying to convince me. Have you “bested†them yet?

Why are you needed to expose “the lies of preterism� If preterism is so obviously false why do they need an expert like you to show them the way? I mean why would anybody think the coming of the Lord was near in the 1st century?

Jam 5:8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.


Mat 10:23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

Why would anybody think Revelation spoke to 1st century events?

Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Rev 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

Rev 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

Rev 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

Why would anybody think the Olivet Discourse is past?

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

No, it’s obvious these scriptures don’t mean what they seem to mean. So thank you for your work in Christendom but you’re really not needed.

just one other thing tho before i leave off,

I was afraid when I brought up possibility of discussing the New heavens and Earth of Isaiah, Revelation and Peter you would be exiting soon.

have you ever logically thought your false doctrine through to it ultimate conclusion? theres not one single promise that pertains to you,

Really? I don’t have my salvation? I have not attained immortality? I am not redeemed? All these things you must still be waiting for.

because if you're right, then every single one was fulfilled in 70ad, even this one:

Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

this is the same end of the world that you preterists falsely claim came in 70ad, and he never said he would go past the end, but "even unto"

Here is a question you won’t answer, whenever this is fulfilled in your view, will that mean Jesus will no longer be with you?

Jesus, knowing what was coming, promised to be with them even to the end of the age. It doesn’t mean He would ever stop being with them. But I guess you believe at some point in the future Jesus will no longer be with you. See, I told you you won’t answer my question.

so therefore once anyone reckons your false doctrine through, it leaves one with no hope at all, nothing is left, just a sense of ultimate selfrighteusness, and an overwhelming urge to deceive and corrupt others into believing the same nonsense,

A fitting way for you to end your irrational diatribe.

Pro 13:12 Hope put off makes the heart sick, but desire fulfilled is a tree of life.

 

[MrVersatile48]

Pre

Matt 24:34 meant THIS generation that started when Israel's 'fig tree put forth her leaves'

The signs of the end are described as birthpains - as painfully obvious - since 1948 we have indeed seen all forms of natural, social & spiritual disaster accelerate & intensify, just as birthpains always do - to bring on the Great Delivery of the Rapture (as in Matt 24:30-43, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:11 1 Corinthians 15:51-58 & Revelation 4:1), before the Great Tribulation starts in Revelation 6

It too will then follow the classic pattern of escalation from 25% of mankind in Rev 6:8 to a third in Rev 9:13-18 to total Armageddon in Rev 16-19 & Daniel 7 & Joel 3 & Zechariah 14

Try today's news bringing Russia & EU nearer to Ezekiel 38-39 & Revelation 13

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... 499#331499

"What can be shaken will be shaken"

Again saying that these signs of the times are painfully obvious

As in such increase in wars, revolutions, famines, earthquakes, volcanoes, epidemics, false prophets/teachers/messiahs/christs, occult revival, rapid expansion in travel & knowledge etc

Matt 24 is a summary of all of Bible prophecy

& there are far more prophecies about the endtime return of Christ than about His first Advent

Why?

Because ever since before the world began, God's focus has been on 'the consummation of all things'

Many related threads are linked from this lyric:-

BEFORE OUR EYES..

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=18604

Must go

Ian

 

[preterist]

Pre

Matt 24:34 meant THIS generation that started when Israel's 'fig tree put forth her leaves'

No, “this generation†meant the contemporaries of Jesus just like it did everywhere else it is used in the Gospels.

Try today's news bringing Russia & EU nearer to Ezekiel 38-39 & Revelation 13

Ahh yes, newspaper eschatology.