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 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-21-2009, 01:18 PM
 
1,534 posts, read 1,637,313 times
Reputation: 267

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Preterist View Post
Greetings mshipmate: Would you please, in all fairness, stop saying that I am so sure I am right that I do not listen. Could you not be accused of doing the same thing? I do listen--to determine whether what is written is biblical. We all think we are right. So let's be fair, okay? The issue should be "What saith the Scriptures." Do we try with all the ability we possess to ascertain what a passage is really teaching by considering the full context, the audience relevance, and the historical setting? Are we willing to accept what a passage says whether or not it supports what we believe or have been taught?

And why must we use insults, mshipmate--"It's written plainly enough for a child to see and understand!" What type of congenial dialog is such a slam supposed to induce? Can we please be civil and let the Word speak for us?
Could I not accuse you of similar things when I post such passages as Revelation 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10 and Matthew 24:34? Was not John shown those things which were to shortly take place because the time was near? Is not that simple enough for a child to understand? What is my crime when I take the words at their plain meaning? What about Matthew 24:34--"THIS generation will by no means pass away till ALL these things take place." It that not plain enough for a child to understand? Let us be careful of what we accuse others lest we find ourselves guilty as well. Okay? I speak also to myself!

Yes, you are correct, the answer IS right there in 2 Thessalonians 1. Again, mshipmate, I ask repeatedly because in reality you really have not answer.

To whom was Paul writing? Was he not writing specifically to those very flesh-and-blood Thessalonians of his day? Who are the YOUs of this passage? Are we? No! Clearly Paul is not speaking to us. He is addressing the great persecutions and tribulation THOSE saints of THAT day are ungoing and none other. Yes, there are applications for us, but WE are not the primary recipients of Paul's words and WE are not the subject of his words. This is why I keep asking you. Is it not you who is not seeing? And I really, truly do not intend to be mean-spirited!

For whom was Paul giving thanks? For those very Thessalonians of his day! Who was enduring "persecutions and tribulations" according to Paul? Those very Thessalonians of his day! According to Paul's own words, to whom was God going to "recompense tribulation?" To those very first-century Jews who were troubling those very first-century Thessalonians! That is the context, mshipmate.

What was to be given to those very Thessalonians of Paul's day--relief (anesis--see 2 Cor. 8:13)! Who was to share in that relief? Paul said that those very Thessalonians would have relief "with us." Who are the "us?" Paul and Silvanus, and Timothy--and by extension, all saints of that generation! When was this relief for those very Thessalonians and Paul and Silvanus and Timothy to come? When the Lord Jesus was revealed from heaven with His angels! Those very Thessalonians and those very persecutors of those very Thessalonians had to be alive in order for the Lord Jesus to bring them relief at His coming!

Those very flesh-and-blood saints of that first-century day were to personally be given real, actual relief from their persecutions and tribulation AT the coming of the Lord Jesus from heaven with His angels! That is what the text says! In this we ourselves find comfort--as God gave them relief when He sent His Son along with the angels to THEM to rescue THEM from their persecutors and take vengeance upon their persecutors, so He upholds us and gives us relief in times of trial. Their is application FOR us but not fulfillment IN us!

The bottom line is that WE are not in the mind of Paul when he wrote his letters to the Thessalonians. Paul nowhere promised that the Lord Jesus would come to us to give us relief from our persecutions and tribulation--he promised that the Lord Jesus was going to come to THEM and give THEM (those of Paul's day) relief!

This is not a matter of insisting on being right as you put it. This is a matter of determining what the passage clearly says. In what way have I misunderstood Paul's words, mshipmate? Am I not taking him at his word? Is that my crime?

Sincerely and in the spirit of brotherly love and kindness, Preterist
Let me ask you a question. Okay? Did you ever watch the old T.V. show "Everybody Loves Raymond?" If you have then you know that Frank and Marie were always arguing with each other. In one particular episode Marie was 'ragging' on Frank as usual and Frank, in total frustration, put his fingers in his ears and sang (to the tune of "Camptown Ladies) "I'm not listening anymore, Doo Dah, Doo Dah!"

See that's what you make me want to do. Why? Because I have studied God's Word for many, many years now and the Holy Spirit in me confirms everything I've come to understand. God has given me 'eyes to see' and 'ears to hear.'

I understand why Paul used the personal pronouns of we, and our, etc etc. because I have prayed long and hard and stduied long and hard on the subject and God has showed me the 'whys' of His Word.

So you see, Preterist I don't need 'your' understanding. I don't need to 'argue' with you. The Holy Spirit and I have been doing just fine all these years and I plan on continuing to listen to God over ANY man, ever.

It's as plain as that. Especially a person that cannot see that Christ couldn't possible already have come. IF He had then I have to ask...why are people still in their flesh bodies instead of corruptible ones? Why is satan still 'alive' and well? Why is there STILL so much evil in the world? and last but not least, why isn't Jesus here, on the earth sitting on His throne and the elect ruling and reigning with Him?

When and if you can explain those things to my satisfaction then MAYBE we can talk again. Till then I pray you ask for 'eyes to see' and 'ears to hear'

Last edited by mshipmate; 02-21-2009 at 01:30 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-21-2009, 02:28 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,087,221 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richio View Post
Why did Timothy miss the rapture of 70AD?
He was martyred in 80AD or even 97AD.
Who says he was martyred in A. D. 80 or 97?

Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2009, 02:32 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,087,221 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilvan View Post
Preterist,

So you're saying the Bible is a Book of history and it is not really talking to us about the future?
wilvan: I am not saying that--the Bible teaches that. But so what? Is it not still of great and matchless value to us even though the fulfillment of prophecy is not for us?

The Scriptures are still and will always be profitable for doctrine, instruction, reproof, and correction! We could study its truth for eternity and still not come to a thorough understanding. In its pages we find truth and life and assurance of God's faithfulness. What more do we need?

Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2009, 02:33 PM
 
Location: Arizona
777 posts, read 1,274,126 times
Reputation: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preterist View Post
Who says he was martyred in A. D. 80 or 97?

Preterist
Google
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2009, 04:09 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,087,221 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deb in VA View Post
Wow Preterist, you've been busy in this thread. I knew you'd eventually get to my post and respond as you always do, with the same old song and dance about who Paul was writing to, etc. etc. blah blah blah. We've been through this before and you've been told by any number of people (including myself) that we believe you are wrong in your position that the Lord returned back in 70 A. D.

If you cannot see the things that are happening in this world, in this country, right now, TODAY, and how they correlate with what will be happening during the end times spoken of in the scriptures, then you are blind and I don't believe there is anything more that I, or anyone else, can say to you that will help you see that you are in error.

I pray the Lord will reveal to you the truth so that you will be prepared for what is about to come.
Deb in Va: The number of people who oppose me does not make me wrong! What is the substance of the arguments of those who oppose me?

What is happening in the world TODAY has no relevance to biblical prophecy IF those things were never intended to be fulfilled in our day. Why will you not recognize the truths of the time statements? I keep saying what I do because no one addresses these issues biblically and hermeneutically.

Respectfully, Deb in Va, your arguments are based more on feelings than on the teachings of the Scriptures. The entire chapter of Matthew 24 is not directed toward us. It was directed toward those very disciples with Jesus. Yet no one here who opposes my approach will acknowledge that. Jesus looked right at those very ones and said "When YOU see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet . . . ." Who are the "you," Deb in Va? If they were to see it (and they were), how is it possible for us to see it also? Those very disciples with Jesus were told that THEY would see the abomination of desolation. Yet you refuse to accept that and apply Jesus' words to our time. Without any malice of any kind, Deb in Va, I say that such an omission is error.

Jesus clearly said that all the things He spoke of in Matthew 24 to His disciples right there with Him would happen in His generation. He said, "THIS generation will by no means pass away till ALL these things take place." Every time Jesus used that expression (20 times!), without exception, He meant His contemporaries. Yet you will not acknowledge that--and amazingly find fault with those who take Him at His word and accuse THEM of error. It is those who give this expression a meaning contrary to how Jesus always used it who must justify their assertion that it means something else--something having no precedent!

What about 2 Thessalonians 1, Deb in Va? Paul wrote to those very Thessalonians and told THEM that THEY, who were being persecuted by the Jews and suffering tribulation at THEIR hands, would be given relief from that suffering WHEN the Lord Jesus was revealed from heaven WITH HIS ANGELS! There is no other way to reasonably look at this passage. Yet you want Paul's words to refer to our generation. We are not those Thessalonians, Deb in Va. What else did Paul promise to THEM? God was going to vindicate those very Thessalonians in their lifetime and bring tribulation upon those very ones who were then persecuting THEM when He came! That is the context. That is the audience relevance. Yet you will not accept that. In spite of the clear wording in 2 Thessalonians 1, you accuse me of error for taking the words at face value! Since He was to come to THEM and bring relief to THEM and take vengeance on those very ones who troubled THEM when He came, He had to come in their lifetime to accomplish these things! It is that plain! Yet I am accused of error!

And again, what about John's words? What is the obscurity and the difficulty in the declaration to John that he was to be shown those things which were to shortly take place because the time was then near? Is that not clear? The entire book of Revelation is sandwiched between two occurrences of these time statements (Rev. 1:1, 3; 22:6,10). Yet you will not acknowledge them. The words are clear, yet I am the one accused of being in error!

What did Jesus say to those very disciples whom He was sending out to the lost sheep of Israel? He predicted that they would suffer tribulation and even death at the hands of those very Jews whom He condemned in Matthew 23! (see also Matthew 24). Those very disciples would not finish going through the cities of Israel before HE CAME! (John 10). Do we take the plain words of our Lord and distort them and give them a meaning He never intended? Who is the one in error?

Jesus told those same disciples right there with Him that some of them would not see death until they saw Him coming in His kingdom (Matthew 16:28). Are not the words plain, Deb in Va? Am I to be blamed for taking Jesus at His word? Is it proper to take His clear words and force them to mean that they were to see Him coming in His kingdom merely six days later at the transfiguration. Those who accuse me of error are the ones saying unapologetically that MOST of those people standing there with Jesus when He spoke those words were going to die within the next six days! Does that make sense? The most natural and reasonable way to understand Jesus' simple words is that some of those to whom He was speaking were not going to die before He came! Does not A. D. 70 make far more sense than six days later? He had to come in the lifetime of those very disciples in order for them to see His coming before they suffered death! Who is in danger of error?

It is also plain that Matthew 16:27 is closely connected to Matthew 16:28. Jesus has just stated that He was about to come "in the glory of His Father with the angels" at which time He would bring judgment. This coming in verse 27 is the same coming of verse 28--the coming some of those standing right there with Him were to see in their lifetime! Why do you find fault with the plain meaning of a passage?

When speaking to that very flesh-and-blood Caiaphas and the rest of the Sanhedrin, Jesus warned THEM: "Hereafter, YOU [Caiaphas and the rulers] will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven" (Mat. 26:64). In order for Caiaphas and those very ones who ruled the Sanhedrin in that day to see Him sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven, they had to have been alive! That is the most normal and natural understand of Jesus' words. Again, do we dare to place upon the Words of the Lord of glory a meaning He never intended? Why do you still find fault with those who take Him at His word and accuse them of being in error? What do His words clearly mean, Deb in Va?

James said "The coming of the Lord is at hand" (James 5:8). Is not the most natural, plain, common understanding of those words that His coming was near? Yet it is those who take these words in their natural and common meaning that are accused of being in error! It is, however, those who seek to give these simple and plain words an unusual and forced meaning who are the ones in danger of error.

In summary, Deb in Va, it is I and other preterists who are taking Jesus' plain and unambiguous words at face value in Matthew 10, Matthew 16, Matthew 24, and Matthew 26 (see also John 14).

Yet we are accused of error because we accept the words just as they are written--that is our crime! Tell me, Deb in Va, who are those who are making the word "near" mean "far." Who is giving the expression "this generation" of Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 a meaning totally unprecedented from the way Jesus always used it? Who is it that cannot place passages in their proper historical setting and give proper attention to the critical audience relevance? Who is it that cannot understand or refuses to understand the significance and impact of a simple personal pronoun (e.g. YOU). Who is it that makes everything about us and completely strips those saints of that day, who endured tribulation and persecution beyond anything we will probably ever come close to enduring, their rightful respect and humble admiration for standing firm in the face of horrendous adversity and trial? We do gravely dishonor them and their great example of faith and trust in the One Who delivered them!

Again, I couldn't care less how many people oppose me. The fact remains that no one has properly addressed the issues I have raised. Most responses to me are sorely lacking in Scriptural support and lean heavily toward pure emotion and a desire to have everything be about us! There are basically two approaches: empiricism based on emotion or objectivity based on fact. In other words, (1) do we read the plain time indicators and reject them because we cannot "see" the fulfillment or because the desires of hearts cannot accept that not everything is about us, or (2) do we read the plain time indicators, take them as they were intended, and accept the truths they convey in spite of our inability to "see." Do we walk by faith and truth and not by emotion and sight?

I will not cease asking: What saith the Scriptures? If that is a crime, so be it!

All the best in Christ, Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2009, 06:06 PM
 
5,747 posts, read 4,608,257 times
Reputation: 1855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preterist View Post
Deb in Va: The number of people who oppose me does not make me wrong! What is the substance of the arguments of those who oppose me?

What is happening in the world TODAY has no relevance to biblical prophecy IF those things were never intended to be fulfilled in our day. Why will you not recognize the truths of the time statements? I keep saying what I do because no one addresses these issues biblically and hermeneutically.

Respectfully, Deb in Va, your arguments are based more on feelings than on the teachings of the Scriptures. The entire chapter of Matthew 24 is not directed toward us. It was directed toward those very disciples with Jesus. Yet no one here who opposes my approach will acknowledge that. Jesus looked right at those very ones and said "When YOU see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet . . . ." Who are the "you," Deb in Va? If they were to see it (and they were), how is it possible for us to see it also? Those very disciples with Jesus were told that THEY would see the abomination of desolation. Yet you refuse to accept that and apply Jesus' words to our time. Without any malice of any kind, Deb in Va, I say that such an omission is error.

Jesus clearly said that all the things He spoke of in Matthew 24 to His disciples right there with Him would happen in His generation. He said, "THIS generation will by no means pass away till ALL these things take place." Every time Jesus used that expression (20 times!), without exception, He meant His contemporaries. Yet you will not acknowledge that--and amazingly find fault with those who take Him at His word and accuse THEM of error. It is those who give this expression a meaning contrary to how Jesus always used it who must justify their assertion that it means something else--something having no precedent!

What about 2 Thessalonians 1, Deb in Va? Paul wrote to those very Thessalonians and told THEM that THEY, who were being persecuted by the Jews and suffering tribulation at THEIR hands, would be given relief from that suffering WHEN the Lord Jesus was revealed from heaven WITH HIS ANGELS! There is no other way to reasonably look at this passage. Yet you want Paul's words to refer to our generation. We are not those Thessalonians, Deb in Va. What else did Paul promise to THEM? God was going to vindicate those very Thessalonians in their lifetime and bring tribulation upon those very ones who were then persecuting THEM when He came! That is the context. That is the audience relevance. Yet you will not accept that. In spite of the clear wording in 2 Thessalonians 1, you accuse me of error for taking the words at face value! Since He was to come to THEM and bring relief to THEM and take vengeance on those very ones who troubled THEM when He came, He had to come in their lifetime to accomplish these things! It is that plain! Yet I am accused of error!

And again, what about John's words? What is the obscurity and the difficulty in the declaration to John that he was to be shown those things which were to shortly take place because the time was then near? Is that not clear? The entire book of Revelation is sandwiched between two occurrences of these time statements (Rev. 1:1, 3; 22:6,10). Yet you will not acknowledge them. The words are clear, yet I am the one accused of being in error!

What did Jesus say to those very disciples whom He was sending out to the lost sheep of Israel? He predicted that they would suffer tribulation and even death at the hands of those very Jews whom He condemned in Matthew 23! (see also Matthew 24). Those very disciples would not finish going through the cities of Israel before HE CAME! (John 10). Do we take the plain words of our Lord and distort them and give them a meaning He never intended? Who is the one in error?

Jesus told those same disciples right there with Him that some of them would not see death until they saw Him coming in His kingdom (Matthew 16:28). Are not the words plain, Deb in Va? Am I to be blamed for taking Jesus at His word? Is it proper to take His clear words and force them to mean that they were to see Him coming in His kingdom merely six days later at the transfiguration. Those who accuse me of error are the ones saying unapologetically that MOST of those people standing there with Jesus when He spoke those words were going to die within the next six days! Does that make sense? The most natural and reasonable way to understand Jesus' simple words is that some of those to whom He was speaking were not going to die before He came! Does not A. D. 70 make far more sense than six days later? He had to come in the lifetime of those very disciples in order for them to see His coming before they suffered death! Who is in danger of error?

It is also plain that Matthew 16:27 is closely connected to Matthew 16:28. Jesus has just stated that He was about to come "in the glory of His Father with the angels" at which time He would bring judgment. This coming in verse 27 is the same coming of verse 28--the coming some of those standing right there with Him were to see in their lifetime! Why do you find fault with the plain meaning of a passage?

When speaking to that very flesh-and-blood Caiaphas and the rest of the Sanhedrin, Jesus warned THEM: "Hereafter, YOU [Caiaphas and the rulers] will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven" (Mat. 26:64). In order for Caiaphas and those very ones who ruled the Sanhedrin in that day to see Him sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven, they had to have been alive! That is the most normal and natural understand of Jesus' words. Again, do we dare to place upon the Words of the Lord of glory a meaning He never intended? Why do you still find fault with those who take Him at His word and accuse them of being in error? What do His words clearly mean, Deb in Va?

James said "The coming of the Lord is at hand" (James 5:8). Is not the most natural, plain, common understanding of those words that His coming was near? Yet it is those who take these words in their natural and common meaning that are accused of being in error! It is, however, those who seek to give these simple and plain words an unusual and forced meaning who are the ones in danger of error.

In summary, Deb in Va, it is I and other preterists who are taking Jesus' plain and unambiguous words at face value in Matthew 10, Matthew 16, Matthew 24, and Matthew 26 (see also John 14).

Yet we are accused of error because we accept the words just as they are written--that is our crime! Tell me, Deb in Va, who are those who are making the word "near" mean "far." Who is giving the expression "this generation" of Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 a meaning totally unprecedented from the way Jesus always used it? Who is it that cannot place passages in their proper historical setting and give proper attention to the critical audience relevance? Who is it that cannot understand or refuses to understand the significance and impact of a simple personal pronoun (e.g. YOU). Who is it that makes everything about us and completely strips those saints of that day, who endured tribulation and persecution beyond anything we will probably ever come close to enduring, their rightful respect and humble admiration for standing firm in the face of horrendous adversity and trial? We do gravely dishonor them and their great example of faith and trust in the One Who delivered them!

Again, I couldn't care less how many people oppose me. The fact remains that no one has properly addressed the issues I have raised. Most responses to me are sorely lacking in Scriptural support and lean heavily toward pure emotion and a desire to have everything be about us! There are basically two approaches: empiricism based on emotion or objectivity based on fact. In other words, (1) do we read the plain time indicators and reject them because we cannot "see" the fulfillment or because the desires of hearts cannot accept that not everything is about us, or (2) do we read the plain time indicators, take them as they were intended, and accept the truths they convey in spite of our inability to "see." Do we walk by faith and truth and not by emotion and sight?

I will not cease asking: What saith the Scriptures? If that is a crime, so be it!

All the best in Christ, Preterist
Preterist please read this article I think it will help in your understanding of the possiblities that you seem to overlook or ignore regarding the term this generation. It will also help in the term "YOU" not being directly related to the audience. PLEAAAAAAASE REAAAAAD it.

Critical Issues Commentary: A Solution to the Problem of “This Generation” in Matthew 24:34

Just in case you don't exsplain these uses of "YOU" 'The LORD your God will raise up a prophet for you' Jesus did not come to them who were in Moses time.

Deut. 18:15 and MAtt.23:25 - 'whom YOU murdered' That generation did not murder the prophtes.

CORPORATE IDENTITY.

Last edited by Shiloh1; 02-21-2009 at 06:17 PM.. Reason: forgot additional info
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2009, 06:14 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,087,221 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by mshipmate View Post
Let me ask you a question. Okay? Did you ever watch the old T.V. show "Everybody Loves Raymond?" If you have then you know that Frank and Marie were always arguing with each other. In one particular episode Marie was 'ragging' on Frank as usual and Frank, in total frustration, put his fingers in his ears and sang (to the tune of "Camptown Ladies) "I'm not listening anymore, Doo Dah, Doo Dah!"

See that's what you make me want to do. Why? Because I have studied God's Word for many, many years now and the Holy Spirit in me confirms everything I've come to understand. God has given me 'eyes to see' and 'ears to hear.'

I understand why Paul used the personal pronouns of we, and our, etc etc. because I have prayed long and hard and stduied long and hard on the subject and God has showed me the 'whys' of His Word.

So you see, Preterist I don't need 'your' understanding. I don't need to 'argue' with you. The Holy Spirit and I have been doing just fine all these years and I plan on continuing to listen to God over ANY man, ever.

It's as plain as that. Especially a person that cannot see that Christ couldn't possible already have come. IF He had then I have to ask...why are people still in their flesh bodies instead of corruptible ones? Why is satan still 'alive' and well? Why is there STILL so much evil in the world? and last but not least, why isn't Jesus here, on the earth sitting on His throne and the elect ruling and reigning with Him?

When and if you can explain those things to my satisfaction then MAYBE we can talk again. Till then I pray you ask for 'eyes to see' and 'ears to hear'
Greetings, friend mshipmate: Do you not see that I can say the same thing? I am 59 years old and have by the grace of God alone been a believer for over 40 of those years! I have no doubt in my mind, mshipmate, that you also have studied for many years and have sought the Holy Spirit's guidance. Yet without even knowing me, you seem to be implying that I have not also done so. Why can you not afford me the same respect you desire of me instead of assuming that I need my eyes opened so that I can see and I need my ears opened so that I can hear?
Could I not require the same of you?

I say this to you as I have often said to myself--be careful of that of which you accuse others lest perhaps you might find yourself guilty as well. I understand the passion behind your words and am not offended by your misunderstanding of me, but I really wish that you would seek to give the same consideration to me that you seek from me. I cannot count the number of times I have been accused of not being willing to change my mind by people who themselves refuse to change theirs!

I am sorry that you want to plug your ears and shut me out. I do not mean to offend anyone nor do I mean to be argumentative. I am simply after truth just as I believe you are. Of whatever anyone chooses to accuse me, may it never be said that I have not done my homework, that I have not presented the fruits of intense labor and diligence in the proper study of the Word. Sadly, and without any malice whatsoever and without any finger pointed at you, I believe that I am often falsely accused by those who operate by emotion and by what they have been taught, rather than by a sound hermeneutical and proper exegetical approach to the Scriptures. Having said all of that, I will gladly address your concerns, mshipmate.

Let me start by saying that you and I have disagreements because you and I have a completely different understanding of the natures of Christ's return, the resurrection and the judgment. If I were to understand Christ's coming in the way in which you do, it would, of course, be difficult to see the fulfillment. However, even in that case, we must look at what the Scriptures teach and not what we "see." Suppose Jesus had said in these exact words, "I am coming back to you in A. D. 70" but everything unfolded just as it has. What would be your response? Would you deny that Jesus said what He said because you cannot "see" the fulfillment? Or would you take Him at His word, inspite of what you cannot see?

Is it not possible, mshipmate, that you are misunderstanding the nature of His coming? You know the passages that speak of His coming with the sense of imminence and the sense of soonness. Do they not bother you? Does it not concern you that Jesus said "This generation will by no means pass away till ALL these things take place" (Matthew 24:1-34)--especially since he always used it in reference to His contemporaries? Does it not bother you even a little that He told His disciples that they would see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet (Mat. 24:15)? What about Matthew 10 and His promise to return to those very disciples before THEY had a chance to go through all the cities of Israel (Matthew 10:23)? What of those who were told that some of them wouldn't die until they saw Him coming in His kingdom (Matthew 16:28)? What did James mean "The coming of the Lord is at hand" (James 5:8). Why was John clearly told that he was to be shown the things that were to SHORTLY take place because the time was NEAR (Rev. 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10).

The entire NT is filled with the expectancy on the part of those first-century believers that He was coming back in their lifetime. That is the clear import of Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4, etc. ("WE shall be changed; WE who are alive; comfort one another with these words," etc.). THEY expected Him to come and rescue THEM from THEIR trials and tribulations. That was their comfort. Do you look at these passages and the many others and discard their impact because you cannot see the fulfillment?

Have you really studied the context of 2 Thessalonians 1? Does not Paul write to those very Thessalonians of his day that they personally would be given relief from their personal suffering in their lifetime WHEN the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven? What does that plainly say, mshipmate? Does not Paul also teach that those very persecutors and troublers of those very Thessalonians were to be themselves persecuted and troubled by God while they yet lived WHEN He was revealed from heaven?

mshipmate, I am asking questions of you someone once asked of me while I remained a pre-trib., pre-mil dispensationalist. I had read that passage for years but had never really seen what it was saying because I had been taught to understand that the Lord would come in a certain way. I did not see that in history, so I discounted what Paul was clearly saying in 2 Thessalonians 1.

Is it not possible, mshipmate, that you are misunderstanding (as I did) the true nature of the resurrection? I encourage you (and please I do so humbly knowing how prone I am myself to error) to reread 1 Corinthians 15 concentrating particularly on the historical setting, the reasons behind Paul's letter to the Corinthians, and the possible impact his words would have had on them. Does the Bible really teach an end-of-the-world, all-inclusive, rising of bodies out of graves? Does it?

Of particular interest to this discussion are the immediate subjects of Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4. In the former, Paul says "WE shall not all sleep, but WE shall all be changed. When? At the last trumpet--the same trumpet of Matthew 24:31 which was to sound at His coming in THAT generation and the same trumpet of the Revelation which was to sound within the events which John was shown which were to in his day SHORTLY take place because the time was then NEAR. When this resurrection that was to impact those very Corinthians took place, the saying "Death is swallowed up in victory" would be fulfilled. Does that mean that death ceased in the first-century, A. D. 70? Of course not.

We must consider the Jewish mind and the OT concept of death as sleeping with the Fathers. Where did they sleep and why? They died and went to Sheol (Hades) because heaven was not yet prepared for them. When Jesus died on the cross, He finished the transgression, made an end of sins (satisfied the penalty; He did not put an end to SINNING--big difference), made reconciliation for iniquity and brought in everlasting righteousness (Daniel 9)--We have been made the righteousness of God in Him! Jesus preached to those spirits in prison, those who waited for resurrection and freedom from Hades, about the victory He had won for them. When He returned in A. D. 70 to judge that apostate, murderous generation of Jews and to put an end to the power of the holy people (the Jews--Daniel 12), He provided the basis for all judgment of all people. Not all people were personally judged at that time, but the basis was established. Since that time the determination for the final destiny of all people, both righteous and unrightous was established. The dead without Christ go to hell; the dead in Christ go to heaven--individually at their deaths. The dead in Christ rose out of Hades first, then those who were then alive were caught up together with them to meet the Lord in the air. Note the personal pronouns in 1 Thessalonians 4. Paul said "WE who are alive." Can I prove that happened through some empirical evidence? No! But neither can you prove that it didn't!

Based upon your undertanding of the nature of the Lord's parousia and the judgment and the resurrection, I can clearly see how you could find it astounding that I would believe that those things had already happened.
But your understanding is not my understanding. Clearly Jesus said that He was coming back to those disciples of that day (you know the verses). Clearly, those apostles and saints of that day believed that He was coming back to rescue them--they longed for it; they expected it! But didn't every eye see Him, you might ask? Again, this verse (Rev. 1:7) is found within the pages of a book whose contents were determined to transpire shortly in John's day--the time was then near (1:3)--that includes every eye seeing Him and the tribes of the earth mourning because of Him (1:7)! Notice that with the every eye are those who pierced Him. The two are inseparable. It is an assumption that this verse is teaching that every eye of everyone who has ever lived will all at the same time as some end of the world scenario see Him. That is not what the verse teaches. The context is very Jewish and relates to those people of that time during which Jesus was pierced! Those who pierced Him would see Him and the tribes of the land of that day would mourn because of Him. Why? They will mourn at His wrath and vengeful coming which brought about the destruction of the Temple and city and their destruction, that is the holy people of God (Daniel 12). That generation of Jews and that generation only was guilty of all the righteous blood shed upon the earth (Matthew 23). In A. D. 70, through the instrumentality of the Roman armies, they were brought to justice and the Jewish nation ceased to exist. They "saw" His coming as clearly as their forefathers had seen it when He came in judgment against them! The end of the age of which the disciples asked Jesus (Matthew 24) came (the symbolic old heavens and earth of the Old Covenant)--and the age which was about to come was established forevermore (the symbolic new heavens and earth of the New Covenant in His blood).

As for Satan, he is NOT still alive and well. Why do you say that he is? Do you suppose wicked, unbelieving, sin-sick, unregenerate mankind needs Satan to work its evil and seek its lustful desires? What did Paul say to the saints at Rome--"The God of peace will crush Satan under YOUR feet shortly" (Romans 16:20). Satan would be crushed under THEIR feet and he was. He is a defeated enemy and has been thrown into the lake of fire with his demons.

Furthermore, there is no teaching that Jesus is ever going to sit upon an earthly throne. Again, anything that is snatched from the book of Revelation to refer to our future is erroneous. Revelation 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10 clearly provide the time frame for all the events of the Revelation--the things which were to shortly take place! When Jesus ascended, He returned to the glory which He had with the Father before the world began (John 17). There He remains. We go to Him; He does not come to us. Stephen saw Him at the right hand of the Father; Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin were told that they would see Him sitting at the right hand of power. He rules in heaven now!

In summary, you are amazed that I can believe that Christ has already returned not because I have shown you many passages which predicted that He would, but because you cannot "see" it. It is not such an amazing thing when you realize that I do not understand the Scriptures to teach your concept of His return. You believe (and wrongly I contend) that the resurrection involves physical, bodily resurrections out of graves
in an end-of-the-world scenario. Clearly, if that were my understanding as well, then it would be unthinkable for me to insist that the resurrection is past. But I do not believe the Scriptures teach such a resurrection as I have stated above. The same is true for the judgment. If I believed that the Scriptures teach an end of time, simultaneous judgment of all people who have ever lived, than certainly to believe that such an event is past would be ridiculous. But as I have explained above, I do not believe that the Scriptures teach such a nature of the resurrection as you present.

Whatever conclusions we draw, the fact remains that you are still left with the problem of the clear time indicators throughout the NT and the obvious expectations on the part of those first-century saints that Christ was coming to them in their lifetime. There are two approaches as I see it--(1) Jesus and the apostles use clear time indicators to show that He was returning in the lifetime of those of that generation. The nature of His parousia, the resurrection and the judgment must align with the time statements, or (2) the Scriptures teach a bodily, physical return of Christ at the end of the world along with the physical resurrection and judgment of all people. The clear time indicators must be ignored or redefined to fit such a scenario. I claim the truths of the former.

Blessings in Christ, Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2009, 06:16 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,087,221 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
This would invalidate the prophesy of the Christ and all that Jesus and his life and death have fulfilled. Sure you want to go there, Preterist?
Sorry, MysticPhD, I don't get your point! But I'm sure I'll want to go there!
Please spell it out. I'm not the sharpest crayon in the box sometimes.

Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2009, 06:19 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,087,221 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiloh1 View Post
Here is the other post w/ some modicifactions.

Paul also thought that he might not be alive at the return of the Lord and/or the rapture - I Thess.5:9-10. '...so that whether we wake or sleep we might live with him.'

Just because Paul hoped and made possible that the return and /or rapture occurred in his liftime is far different than saying he definately taught that these would occur before his death. That is not what the context teaches nor is it even sound exegesis.

Since no one (not even Jesus) knew when the connsummation of the end of the age began why is it so unreasonable for Paul to think that it could (not shall) have happened in his liftime? The timing of which is up to the Lord and for Paul to expect that it might happen is not proof of preterism.

The difference is between possibility and certainty (must happen in 1st century because Paul used WE).

Since The letter to the Thess. is Scripture why is it an unreasoble thing to assume that if the Lord did not come back in his lifteime that the WE refers to any and all christians (inclusive 'we' regarding the Body of Christ not just the Thess. and Paul) up and until that whenever that day or time happens? There is no grammatical nore literary reason why this should not be the case. You argument and logic is too restrictive and would say that Paul did not have in mind any other christians besides Him and the Thessolonians.

Now look at chapter 1, as many have pointed out the Lord did not come with his angles nor with flaming fire nor in an physical appearance with a bodily resurrection. Notice that those who troubled the Thess. were to be troubled with everlasting destruction (v.9) - that cannot happen with the tribulation - it is temporary and temporal. The word tribulation is better translated affliction and in the context it is everlasting. God is going to repay the ones who are aflicting them (and us and all Christians of all time) with everlasting affliction and destruction.

Also, mshipmate gave you a verse (Rev.6:10) Question - why are they still awaiting the vengence of God? The Book was written after 70 A.D. And even if it was not Paul died and is dead and was not alive at the return of the Lord as you suspossed in I Thess.4. with your WE argument. Give it up it is a weak argument.

Furhtermore, if Paul had taught the certainty of that fact then he was wrong for the bodily resurrection has not happened - and those who diminish that fact or spiritualize it - are false teachers just as Paul warned Timothy about in II Tim.2:17. Now I do not know if you are a full preterist or a partial (which is kinda of laughable) so I am not accussing you of being a false teacher since I have not heard you deny the physical return of Christ and bodily resurrection of believers.
Hi Shiloh1: Sorry, but I got involved in answering some other posts and now I'm out of steam--I especially do not have enough to handle all that you gave me. I like to take my time and I do like to consider everything that people post to me in spite of my being accused of not doing so.

I'll try to get back to you tomorrow if time permits. Have a great night in the Lord, Shiloh1!

In Christ, Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2009, 07:23 PM
 
5,747 posts, read 4,608,257 times
Reputation: 1855
Preterists said in post #117

'You believe (and wrongly I contend) that the resurrection involves physical, bodily resurrections out of graves
in an end-of-the-world scenario. Clearly, if that were my understanding as well, then it would be unthinkable for me to insist that the resurrection is past. But I do not believe the Scriptures teach such a resurrection as I have stated above.'

Preterist, how do you deal with Romans 8:18-24 (part.v.23). A future bodily resurrection, the firstfruits of the Bodily Resurrection of Christ is the Spirit. Cf. Eph.1:13-14.

How about I Cor.15:35-38, 44 '...How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come?...But God gives it a body as He pleases...'

Or how about Phil.3:21? 'Glorious body'

You are starting to worry me Preterist - to deny the physical resurrection is heretical. And since you teach somthing else you content that it is either past or that it does not exist both of which Paul condemed. II Tim.2:17-18; I Cor.15:12-14 - Paul here ties the physical resurrection of Jesus to our hope - a future physical resurrection from the dead fashione dto His glorious spiritual body.

Cannot be any clearer.
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 $104,000 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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top