U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-13-2008, 12:15 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 2,186,172 times
Reputation: 274

Advertisements

There is little disagreement among Christians that Christ would return after His first advent, death, burial, resurrection and ascension. The disharmony always revolves around the timing of this event. When does the NT itself clearly state that the coming of Christ would take place?

No position is without its difficulties, but a rapidly growing number of Bible students and scholars believe that the dispensational premillennial view is plagued with irreconcilable difficulties created by their refusal to accept clear time indicators presented by our Lord and His inspired Apostles. These difficulties include especially the numerous time statements found throughout the NT--statements dispensationalism either ignores or redefines!

Let's begin with Christian love for the brethren, open minds and without reading anything into the verses and let us consider in context what is taught in the Scriptures first of all from Matthew through Paul's letter to the Romans. What did the Gospel writers and the Apostle Paul have to say about the timing of Christ's return?

Before Jesus sent the Twelve out to the "lost sheep of Israel," He gave them instructions on what they were to do and what they were to expect. That is the clear context of this passage. While there may be numerous applications to believers of all ages, the immediate and relevant teaching is first and foremost to those actual disciples to whom Jesus is then speaking! Can we all agree on this at least?

Here is the significance of the second person personal pronoun "you." Jesus is not directly addressing any other group of people than those disciples right there with Him. It is they whom he warns of impending severe persecution from the secular world of Rome and from their own countrymen!

Jesus told them to go to the lost sheep of Israel and preach that "the kingdom is at hand." They were to "heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out demons." They were to stay and grant peace only in those city which were worthy. They were being sent out "as sheep in the midst of wolves." They were to be delivered up "to councils." They were to be scourge in their synagogues." They were to be brought "before governors and kings" for His sake, "as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles." They were to be hated and persecuted. Jesus concludes by saying to them--"For assuredly, I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes."

Dear dispensationalist--considering the context and leaving behind any preconceived ideas, what is the plain meaning of this passage? Were you to know nothing of the Scriptures and you read this passage, what would be your first impression of it? Does not Jesus appear to be telling His disciples right there with Him that He was to come in their lifetime? Will you not at least admit that that is the reasonable sense in which anyone would first take it?

Do you accept that Jesus was saying the kingdom was at hand or near or about to come? If so, is that not the same sense in which James and John used that same word--"The coming of the Lord is at hand" (James 5:8); "The time is at hand" (Rev. 1:3; 22:10).

To those who wish to respond--please let's stick to the text and always present our beliefs with clear and sound biblical support and inasmuch as possible keep our emotions to a minimum. What I say to you, I say to myself. What saith the Scriptures?

In Christ, Preterist

p.s. Preterist comments are, of course, welcomed as well!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-13-2008, 04:10 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 2,186,172 times
Reputation: 274
NO dispensationalist has an answer? Hmmm?

Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2008, 04:48 PM
 
Location: Somewhere in the middle
600 posts, read 854,093 times
Reputation: 328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preterist View Post
NO dispensationalist has an answer? Hmmm?

Preterist
I think it's because there are more than enough threads in which preterists and dispensationalists alike have already posted their views on this subject. I've already stated this elsewhere but I will try again here. Those who post in these threads already have their minds made up and are not going to be convinced otherwise unless the Lord reveals to them that their position is wrong (period).

You have stated that you changed your position after you got into the word and studied the matter for yourself, correct? Is it not your claim that the Lord showed you through the scriptures that the preterist point of view is the correct one? If that is indeed the case then why can't you just allow the Lord to work in other's lives in the same way He worked in yours and also show them the error of their ways?

And I'm sorry to have to say this but I think you are more motivated by trying to convince others that you are right and they are wrong moreso than anything else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2008, 04:51 PM
 
9,502 posts, read 5,152,779 times
Reputation: 1037
I read Deb in Va response, and had a change of mind...
Deb you're correct. I hope that the Holy Spirit works in his thought process as well.
T.S

Last edited by twin.spin; 07-13-2008 at 05:14 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2008, 05:44 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 2,186,172 times
Reputation: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deb in VA View Post
I think it's because there are more than enough threads in which preterists and dispensationalists alike have already posted their views on this subject. I've already stated this elsewhere but I will try again here. Those who post in these threads already have their minds made up and are not going to be convinced otherwise unless the Lord reveals to them that their position is wrong (period).

You have stated that you changed your position after you got into the word and studied the matter for yourself, correct? Is it not your claim that the Lord showed you through the scriptures that the preterist point of view is the correct one? If that is indeed the case then why can't you just allow the Lord to work in other's lives in the same way He worked in yours and also show them the error of their ways?

And I'm sorry to have to say this but I think you are more motivated by trying to convince others that you are right and they are wrong moreso than anything else.
And you think "wrong!" I am interested in truth, Deb in VA. You said what you said because you do not understand the gravity of this issue. IF (and I believe He did) Jesus clearly said He was coming back at a certain time and did not, then He lied! The same is true of the inspired writers. Are you aware that there are many atheists and critics of Christianity who take this very issue and point their fingers at our Lord and say "Liar!" Even they recognize what Jesus was saying and promising. The view that Christ has not yet returned even though He promised He would return to those disciples in the first century, leaves Him wide open to such attacks! Critics call our Lord a false prophet, the apostles, false teachers, and Christianity a false religion. The teachings of such as Hal Lindsey, Jack Van Impe, Jerry Jenkins and others and those who follow them contribute to these unjust attacks.

I see a church today that is disengaged from the world around it. Many hope to simply "rapture" out and be done with it all. Do you not see a connection between the full-blown teaching of dispensational premillenialism and is escapist mentality and the condition our country today? The Church at one time had an impact on our society. Even Hollywood made its movies in a way that would not offend the churched!

Dispensational Premillennialism's beliefs create self-fulfilling prophecy. They teach that the world is getting worse and worse and do nothing or very little to curb the evil, and then say, "look, the world is getting worse and worse just as it is supposed to! Get ready. Jesus is coming soon to take us away!"

IF you have read my posts, you would know that I am motivated by encouraging others and myself to truly study God's Word and not be victims of deceit and false teaching. IF you have read the responses I have gotten from my posts, you would understand why nothing sways me! Most who answer are driven by simple "I thinks," "I believes," etc.

I simply want to study God's Word and have others study with me. My challenge to others has always been and always will be--prove me wrong with the Word of God and not with opinions and emotions!

Again, these issues are more far-reaching than I think you realize. We cannot simply agree to disagree when we are dealing with the words of Scripture! This is not about winning an argument as you have wrongly accused me, but about the veracity of Scriptures and the honoring of Jesus' words. I began this thread because I could not get any dispensationalist to deal with the actual words of the Bible! Furthermore, I am NOT trying to change the minds of those who are set in their beliefs. I am concerning about those who post and have their minds made up; I am seeking to correct their false teaching so that others who read their words will not be deceived by them!

Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2008, 05:47 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 2,186,172 times
Reputation: 274
I did not ask a difficult question. Can no dispensationalist deal with Matthew 10 in its simple context?

Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2008, 06:11 PM
 
3,761 posts, read 5,551,497 times
Reputation: 826
I will try to just at least discuss your topic or questions in the best way I know how. I am no Bible scholar, but I do know a little about the Bible. I have read and re-read your post as well as read and re-read Matthew 10. So, bear with me and let me ask you what you are saying. Are you trying to say that Christ was supposed to come back in the days of those particular disciples and did not do it? Could it be that they were the first disciples and that is what Jesus instructed them to do and we are also disciples who are carrying on what Jesus instructed his first disciples to do? Maybe I am way off base here, but I am doing my very best to try to discuss this with you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2008, 07:48 PM
 
68 posts, read 176,261 times
Reputation: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preterist View Post
I did not ask a difficult question. Can no dispensationalist deal with Matthew 10 in its simple context?

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

Paul writes, that the dispensation of the grace of God or commonly known as the church age, was given to him. A mystery that was now revealed through the Apostle Paul:

Ephesians 3:3-7 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

Paul clearly states the dispensation we are in. Maybe I'm wrong, but are you saying there is no dispensations? How do you get past this verse.

As far as Matt. ch. 10, Jesus is clearly talking to his disciples to go to the nation of Israel to win them to Christ. The Kingdom was at hand. If they would of accepted Him, Christ would of brought in the Kingdom. But they rejected Him and killed Him, their King.

Matthew 21:42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

Which led to Peter's Preaching:

Acts 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.

Peter let the house of Israel know that they just killed their King.

Now, it is true that during Paul's ministry, he thought that the return of Christ is "at hand". He believed it would be in his day. But the "Day of the Lord" would not be for "two days" or two thousand years. Jesus made it clear that no man knows the hour or day, but we know by the season's that the time is near. Many Bible scholars understand the "two days"

Hosea 6:2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.

The question is, when does the two days begin. Some believe at the baptism of Jesus, some Pentecost, some the Resurrection. In either case, that would put the Rapture and Second coming in this gereration.

I am a firm believer in we are in the last days. In stead of playing games at the foot of the cross, maybe we should spend more time in getting people saved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2008, 08:49 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 2,186,172 times
Reputation: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG77 View Post
I will try to just at least discuss your topic or questions in the best way I know how. I am no Bible scholar, but I do know a little about the Bible. I have read and re-read your post as well as read and re-read Matthew 10. So, bear with me and let me ask you what you are saying. Are you trying to say that Christ was supposed to come back in the days of those particular disciples and did not do it? Could it be that they were the first disciples and that is what Jesus instructed them to do and we are also disciples who are carrying on what Jesus instructed his first disciples to do? Maybe I am way off base here, but I am doing my very best to try to discuss this with you.
Thank you PG77 for your interest in this topic. I am delightfully surprised to find someone who reads my post not only ONCE but twice! Some have put me on their ignore list and others have openly admitted to only skimming my posts before lambasting and disagreeing with them! I do not demand that you agree with me--only that you let the Word of God say what it says and that we all, myself very much included, be willing to accept what it says in spite of any preconceived, long-held and precious understandings.

I did not mean to convey that I think Jesus said He was coming back to those disciples but didn't but that modern skeptics and accusers of the Church say that He said He was coming back to those disciples but didn't. I contend that in Matthew 10 and elsewhere Jesus said He was coming back in the lifetime of those disciples and indeed He did!

It was my purpose to have a dispensationalist in particular give me his understanding of Matthew 10 in its simple and clear context. When you read through Matthew 10, PG77, what was your very first impression of it apart from any preconceived ideas you might have? Will not a dispensationalist at least admit that Jesus SEEMS to be speaking directly to those disciples about specific things that were going to happen to them BEFORE His Parousia or coming? If one does not accept that Jesus was claiming to be coming back in the lifetime of those disciples, is there some plausible explanation for why He appears to be claiming that He would? In other words, what can be a reasonable explanation for Jesus' words--"You [the Twelve] will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes!"

What is the most fundamental and normal way to take such wording as is found in Matthew 10? You are correct that there are applications that can be made from this passage (e.g. Christians still suffer persecution and the message of the Gospel is still often rejected), but that is not the primary purpose of Jesus' words which were directed to those specific disciples about specific things that would happen to them and to others of their generation. We are first and foremost not the ye!

I look forward to hearing your thoughtful and biblical consideration of my questions.

In Christ, Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2008, 09:13 PM
 
3,761 posts, read 5,551,497 times
Reputation: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preterist View Post
Thank you PG77 for your interest in this topic. I am delightfully surprised to find someone who reads my post not only ONCE but twice! Some have put me on their ignore list and others have openly admitted to only skimming my posts before lambasting and disagreeing with them! I do not demand that you agree with me--only that you let the Word of God say what it says and that we all, myself very much included, be willing to accept what it says in spite of any preconceived, long-held and precious understandings.

I did not mean to convey that I think Jesus said He was coming back to those disciples but didn't but that modern skeptics and accusers of the Church say that He said He was coming back to those disciples but didn't. I contend that in Matthew 10 and elsewhere Jesus said He was coming back in the lifetime of those disciples and indeed He did!

It was my purpose to have a dispensationalist in particular give me his understanding of Matthew 10 in its simple and clear context. When you read through Matthew 10, PG77, what was your very first impression of it apart from any preconceived ideas you might have? Will not a dispensationalist at least admit that Jesus SEEMS to be speaking directly to those disciples about specific things that were going to happen to them BEFORE His Parousia or coming? If one does not accept that Jesus was claiming to be coming back in the lifetime of those disciples, is there some plausible explanation for why He appears to be claiming that He would? In other words, what can be a reasonable explanation for Jesus' words--"You [the Twelve] will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes!"

What is the most fundamental and normal way to take such wording as is found in Matthew 10? You are correct that there are applications that can be made from this passage (e.g. Christians still suffer persecution and the message of the Gospel is still often rejected), but that is not the primary purpose of Jesus' words which were directed to those specific disciples about specific things that would happen to them and to others of their generation. We are first and foremost not the ye!

I look forward to hearing your thoughtful and biblical consideration of my questions.

In Christ, Preterist
I can understand where a modern skeptic might look at that chapter and think that he did not come back as he said, but as you have stated, he did come back after the resurrection and saw those disciples. He did tell them a little while you will not see me and then again you would and then he would go back to the Father. However, modern skeptics do not read other parts of the Bible and just pick and choose what they want to be skeptical about.

Matthew 10:23 (last part) states: You shall not have gone over the cities of Israel until the Son of man be come. I think Jesus refers to the Son of man as Satan. Jesus is the Son of God.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top