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.
I fellowship at a Baptist church (where the "rapture" is commonly taught), but I do not believe in a "secret" rapture. I believe in the second coming of Jesus. I'm afraid that a lot of Christians who are looking to get out of here before any serious trouble comes to pass are in for a shock.
From what I've (quickly) read about preterism, though, I don't go along with that, either.
But I do know that when Jesus comes for his bride, He's coming for me. I really don't care when He does it, just that He does it! And if persecution comes in my lifetime, I'm not going to be surprised.
How do you know whether or not your agree with preterism if you've only read about it "quickly?" Is that fair? Either study it thoroughly before you judge it, or don't even take a position for or against it.
Why do you believe anything you believe, Luvvarkansas?
To LIMIT God to a PARTICULAR generation...........how disrespectful, and puffed up..........me, me, me, my, my, my, I, I, I! What I interpret, what I understand, whatI want Him to be, whenI want Him to be, How I want Him to sound and whatI want Him to say!
How about hearing, believing and obeying what He says and that it is well with your souls? To know and believe He is God Almighty and all power belongs to Him? And that If He says He's COMING AGAIN, SO SHALL IT BE?
That He is GOD ALL BY HIMSELF and whether you believe it or NOT, that would'nt change HIS nature, His nature being TRUTH!! SO, if He said it, it is so. That HE CANNOT lie...............................FINAL ANSWER!!!
Behold, He cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him and they also which pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so. Amen (Revelation 1:7)
THEY ALSO, yes, that PARTICULAR GENERATION and they also, they also!!!!!! I plan on being included in the "they", I don't know about YOU, but we all have our assignments, so..............carry on!! (emphasis added mine).
He said He was coming again SOON back in the first century. For someone who wants to stand up for God's character and rightly state that He cannot lie, why do you, then, make of Him a liar by not accepting that He said He was coming back then and He did!
What part of being busy do you not understand? I don't live on the boards,
You're right, Blue. You did and I apologize.
Quote:
Did you happen to read my comment that I don't consider myself a pre-tribber?
You're right, again. I did read that and again I apologize. As I received a warning for trolling (ironically, for something having nothing to do with the rapture!) I will try to keep my language less inflammatory in the future (humility bubbling out of Thrill's ears).
Blueberry, I read your posts and you sound a real practical, down-to-earth person. I see where you're coming from and I agree a debate would at best be divisive and at worst a downright waste of valuable time. Consider my offer withdrawn.
Last edited by thrillobyte; 06-19-2009 at 09:10 AM..
Reason: additional material
Do you agree that (a) usury is an abomination, and (b) usurers shall surely die, their blood (blame) be upon them? (FYI - usury is not excessive interest, but ANY interest, in money, for the use of money. Almost all religions denounce usury. Aristotle condemned it as the worst way to rob mankind.)
My understanding of usury from a Christian POV is that it's okay to use it when dealing with unsaved as long as one stays within the confines of the law. It's NOT okay to use it against your fellow Christian. That is why Jesus said "if the servant beat his "Fellow Servants" in Matthew what was it...Matthew 25?
Greetings again, Eusebius. Where is the pre-tribulation rapture clearly taught in the Scriptures? Where do we read about a tribulation and a rapture in the same passage?
Preterist
Hi Mr. P.
The tribulation is only for the sons of Jacob, otherwise it is called Jacob's Trouble. It is not for us of the nations. When Christ returns for them He meets then ON the mount of olives.
When we meet Him we meet Him in the air. The reason the Israelitish saints do not meet him in the air is because they remain on the earth to set up the 1000 year kingdom.
The reason we meet Him in the air is because we are to be transported into the heavenlies.
A similar question can be asked of you:
Where in Thessalonians does it state on the same page that we meet the Lord after the tribulation?
How do you know whether or not your agree with preterism if you've only read about it "quickly?" Is that fair? Either study it thoroughly before you judge it, or don't even take a position for or against it.
Why do you believe anything you believe, Luvvarkansas?
Preterist
How? Because of this statement I saw first thing on a preterism web site:
"Preterism is the belief that all Bible prophecies, including those concerned with the return of Christ, resurrection of the dead, rapture, judgment, and arrival of the kingdom of God, came to complete fulfillment in a.d. 70......"
I don't agree with that. As for your question why I believe anything I believe, the answer is the Bible and the Holy Spirit.
As I said before, I do not believe in a secret rapture, but really.... if someone is trusting in Jesus for their salvation and is truly God's child, does it really matter what they believe about end times? Whatever is going to happen is going to happen, and God will take care of His own. All this endless debate and attacking each other serves no good purpose. That's the way I see it.
I find it interesting that someone who is convinced of his own interpretation usually assumes the person who disagrees with him hasn't done any pertinent study. That's not just you, Preterist, but anyone with strongly held beliefs, especially beliefs that aren't in the mainstream, whether it be religion, education, politics, etc. Belittling others doesn't make one right; it just makes him/her arrogant. That's not necessarily directed at you, Preterist; it's just the tone I've noticed in most of the highly debated threads with entrenched sides.
It's also interesting in the Christian realm that the person who is not in the mainstream often claims superior knowledge, usually based on an understanding of Greek or Hebrew. That person totally discounts the possibility of a Sovereign God who is able to ensure His Word is accurately or adequately preserved and translated so the common man can read it and understand it for himself. Then the person with superior understanding claims others have not read their Bibles with discernment. Of course, only the enlightened know their history; let's not forget he/she picks and chooses the history just as he/she often picks and chooses Scriptures. It's easy to recognize in someone else, but not in one's self. Sometimes, the special knowledge comes from the heart or some other "supernatural" experience. Finally, let's not forget that the person who has seen the light finds it difficult to agree to disagree, but insists upon enlightening others at every opportunity even though the topic has been beaten to death. No answer will ever satisfy the enlightened, so endless and fruitless debates are raised ad nauseam.
That's good because I've read a Hal Lindsey book exactly once in my life--about 30 years ago--and I've read his column perhaps a handful of times over the past ten years because I was interested in what he had to say about a particular current event. I have two Chuck Missler books--one on aliens and one giving a brief overview of the books of the Bible. I have two textbooks on prophecy that I haven't read since college. I do have several books on biblical feasts because I wanted a deeper understanding of those holy days, plus I have a few books on more unusual topics like astronomy, time, and the cohesiveness of the Bible. The only pre-trib teaching I received at church was about 30 years ago--most pastors are afraid to touch prophecy.
I get my information from a wide variety of sources, newspapers included. I've been interested in prophecy for about a dozen years, and I've read up on just about any flavor you might care to mention, plus a few viewpoints that can't be pigeonholed in any category. I, myself, cannot be pigeonholed because I can actually understand where pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib, pre-wrath, preterist, and other viewpoints can be supported biblically, some better than others (in my opinion). I can even see multiple raptures in Revelation, and I was surprised to later discover that some people think there will be more than one Rapture! I think each of the popular prophecy positions has information that helps one to understand the Bible. Actually, the most compelling argument I've read showed how all the timelines have already been met (not in the preterist way, though) and the seals have been opened throughout history, so the only thing left to occur was the Second Coming, millennial kingdom, and a war or two--in other words, there probably wouldn't be 3 1/2 years or 7 years after the Rapture. Wouldn't that turn most of the current views on their heads?!
Basically, I'm pretty open-minded when it comes to prophecy. Since I think prophecy is best understood in hindsight, I haven't had the inclination to study any one view in great depth but I have studied them. I like to keep an eye on what all the different groups are saying because I think each can add to my arsenal of knowledge. I find the pre-trib group to be the best at trying to discern the times in which we live, so I probably spend more time with that group because it leads me to interesting news articles on events, places, and world leaders.
I'll admit, Preterist, that I've pretty much rejected your viewpoint because I don't think it is supported by the whole canon of Scripture and to "know" that Jesus returned prior to AD70 is a huge leap of faith I'm not willing to make. Furthermore, you state as fact that Revelation was written before AD70, neglecting to mention that many (most?) Bible scholars disagree with you. The fact is, no one can say with certainty when it was written. Your viewpoint pretty much insists that the church replaced Israel, negating all the promises God gave to the Patriarchs and to the nation itself. If God's covenant with them can be replaced, then His covenant with me can be replaced, too. Frankly, I don't see any Scriptural evidence to support the idea of God going back on His promises. In fact, the Bible says that God cannot lie, which many of his everlasting decrees would become if replacement theology were correct.
Mostly, I think it has something to do with looking through a glass darkly. As I said earlier, I think prophecy is best understood in hindsight. I also think God has sealed up understanding until the time of the end. Since many views can be supported biblically, it's not surprising there would be different interpretations. I don't think any of us will know for sure how things will play out until God makes it crystal clear. In the meantime, I'm willing to agree to disagree, and I'll keep spreading a wide net for information regarding prophecy.
I will admit that many people simply don't study for themselves and spout what others have said. However, I get pretty tired hearing that argument used whenever two parties are in disagreement, and I really don't like when opposing arguments are deliberately misrepresented and/or ridiculed. I also get extremely frustrated with Christians shooting at each other over the things they can't prove. There's nothing wrong with an honest, vibrant, even heated discussion. It could be a case of iron sharpening iron. Sadly, that's not what I see happening in this forum, which is why I rarely take part in the debates even if I have something pertinent to say. I won't waste my time talking to a brick wall.
We must admit, however, that most of these positions have arisen out of a desire to understand Scripture. If one were to go to websites of each group, he would likely find compelling and biblical arguments in favor of the position. Many proponents have done extensive research--biblical, linguistic, and historical/cultural. To expect each and every follower to do the same is asking them to reinvent the wheel. It's generally sufficient to "pick sides" based upon whom one thinks has the best argument. To indicate they do so out of ignorance is insulting.
Quite frankly, I'm not usually willing to invest hundreds of hours or years of study into a topic that I consider a "minor" of theology. I'm certainly not willing to waste time debating it. I have spent hundreds of hours regarding prophecy because I think it is pertinent to the time in which we live, but I understand that others either don't have that amount of time or find better ways of spending it because they, too, consider it a "minor" and prefer to concentrate their efforts elsewhere.
Greetings, Blueberry: I find it disconcerting that no one can ever justifiably find fault with the blatant lack of study skills prominent in the Church today without being labeled arrogant. Blueberry, you have falsely represented my assessment of Bible prophecy as though it was grasped out of then air with no foundation in truth whatsoever. I speak from 60-years experience and from the fact that I was once numbered among those I now challenge concerning their improper approach to Scripture!
I have studied Greek and Hebrew--but I have always been reluctant to disclose that. I have only done so when posters have misrepresented the meaning and uses of words and expressions found in those languages. I have made it more than plain that I approach the knowledge I have gained in these languages from my seminary studies as totally inadequate to qualify me as a scholar, even though I graduated with high honors. I use them mostly for my own edification and personal Bible study. My study of the Bible languages has brought me a sense of humility as to the great diligence that is required to use them proficiently. The arrogance is not mine in this area, but belongs to those who habitually throw out meanings and nuances of Greek or Hebrew words they have attained from lexicons or other resources.
You can accuse me all you want, Blueberry, but I said the things I said about my fellow Christians (things to which I hold myself as well) not to ridicule them but to encourage them. It does not take much investigation in boards such as these (which I believe are representative of the condition with our churches) to ascertain that Christians for the most part lack basic Bible study skills. Please prove me wrong about this if you can. You claim that I and others ridicule the views of others and groundlessly accuse them of not having done "pertinent study," only because we disagree with them. That is totally untrue. How do we recognize when someone has not done "pertinent study?"
When I go through great lengths to investigate the background of a passage of Scripture to ascertain its historical setting, the authorship, the purpose of the author, and the meaning his words would have had on his original readers, I have every right to question the "pertinent study" of those who counter me with a string of verses taken out of context which they themselves compiled, or much more commonly, they copied and pasted. Why is that arrogance, Blueberry? You have brought into question my motivation. Let me restate it once again. We will never get at the truths of the Scripture unless and until we are taught how to study them. I place the blame less on those who post here and more on the leadership of our churches.
All I have required is that if someone is going to challenge my beliefs, they do so by presenting their counter position with the proper personal, in-depth, contextual, exegetically sound diligence necessary for correct understanding. Am I not to challenge those who do not do that--those who simply rip a verse or oftentimes many verses out of their contexts or copy and paste the thoughts of their favorite author or teacher to prove me wrong?
I only seek to encourage my fellow believers to know why they believe what they believe and to be open to the possibility that they might not be correctly understanding the Scriptures. I am not closed to that possibility myself. I constantly re-evaluate the things I believe when I approach the Scriptures, always questioning myself anew--"am I correctly understanding this?" Why do I do that, Blueberry, and why do I feel I have earned the right to challenge my dispensational fellow saints? For over twenty years I WAS a dispensationalist. I read only dispensational authors; I interpreted the Scriptures through the lenses of the perspectives I had been taught. I thought I was doing Bible study. What I was doing was constantly reading into the Word the things I had been taught by eschatology "scholars." If one is thoroughly indoctrinated to believe that the Bible teaches a certain thing, that is exactly what he will see when he "studies" the Bible.
All I have asked is that we clear our minds, step back from everything others have taught us, and look at the words of the Scriptures--as though we had never seen them before. THEN, if we find that they actually support what we have believed all along, we retain with confidence our positions. But, if we find that the Scriptures do not support what we have believed, we willing relinquish any wrong beliefs we have held.
Sadly, Blueberry, I have found that while I take the time to understand the beliefs of dispensationalism (an easy thing since I once held that perspective), those who disagree with me quickly judge what I say without really understanding what I am saying because they are not as open-minded as they claim to be. They pre-judge me to be wrong simply by the name I call myself. Their teachers have told them that preterism is heresy. With their minds already predisposed to that, whenever someone claims that a Bible prophecy they believe to be yet future has already been fulfilled, they attack like a mama lion protecting her cubs!
Furthermore, Blueberry, just because a majority of "scholars" declare something to be true does not make it so. How many Christians accept without question the late date of the Revelation based solely on what these "scholars" have said? Why was I required to mention the majority position? You seem to be accusing me of intentionally leaving out pertinent information. There are many godly and knowledgeable men of God who have made sound and strong arguments for an early date. Are they heard? Do the late-date followers even bother to consider why others take an early date? No! They state their position as forcefully I stated my concerning the date, yet I doubt that you find fault with them! It is yet another example of people blindly following their teachers and leaders and claiming something to be false based not on their own private study but on the study of others.
Also, Blueberry, your assumption that I am wrong about the dating of the Revelation because it is the minority rule, demonstrates that you also have not taken the time to really understanding that position. When one willingly and openly accepts the clear time frame for the content of the Revelation found in both the first and last chapters of the book, he CAN know that it was written prior to the events of A. D. 70! Regardless of when one believes it was written, he MUST acknowledge that some time "shortly" after it was written, the events of the book transpired because the time for their fulfillment was THEN near! The entire contents of the book fit the Jewish world of that day not ours!
I have tried often to begin a study on this board in which we look at a book or a passage word by word, verse by verse. Within a few posts, the entire thread is hijacked by opinions and speculations. Little if no regard is paid to the principles of hermeneutics. If my refusal to tolerate such a neglect of proper exegesis is viewed as arrogance, so be it. I totally agree with you that God has made it possible for Christians, regardless of their education level, to understand His Word. Again, I have NEVER made my educational level a thing of superiority. Never! However, there are indispensable rules to studying that cannot and must not be neglected. Is that my crime, Blueberry--insisting on time-tested, proven rules of procedure in order to ascertain truth? Is it wrong to challenge those who copy and paste and who rip verses out of their contexts to learn and apply proper Bible study techniques?
Again, I speak from personal experience. I am not being arrogant--I was once like those I challenge here. I turned around and taught others the false assumptions I had received from others. I repent often for that and trust that God has undone the damage I did. Who was to blame for my misunderstandings? I was! I thank God for those who patiently taught me how to study the Bible objectively! If even one person on these boards heeds what I have been trying to get across in this regard, all the accusations and name calling against me will have been worth it. Disagree with me--that's fine. But do so through a personal, in-depth, contextual, and hermeneutically sound approach to the Scriptures. I will not apologize for requiring that. Thanks!
He said He was coming again SOON back in the first century. For someone who wants to stand up for God's character and rightly state that He cannot lie, why do you, then, make of Him a liar by not accepting that He said He was coming back then and He did!
carry on.................fulfill YOUR assignment, be it what it may.
PS: Before I go, what's your hope, if he already came and all things has been fulfilled? What's your Blessed Hope? What is left for you to continue on in? Or who?
FOR IF HE HAD COME ALREADY AND THIS IS IT FOR US, (AND THAT INCLUDES YOU), WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE OF BEING HERE?? Anyone's for that matter? To just live then die, no reason at all?
Last edited by Betsey Lane; 06-19-2009 at 11:43 AM..
He said He was coming again SOON back in the first century. For someone who wants to stand up for God's character and rightly state that He cannot lie, why do you, then, make of Him a liar by not accepting that He said He was coming back then and He did!
Where in the bible does it say He was coming back soon in the first century?
While it is true that they all had the expectation He was coming back soon, the fact is that there was a secret administration God brought about. There was a pause. Israel was set aside.
Then a door of faith was opened to the nations in spite of Israel being set aside . . . until . . . until the complement of the nations may be entering and thus all Israel shall be saved when Christ arrives out of Zion (Romans 11).
So Christ's arrival is put on hold until the complement of the nations enters.
How? Because of this statement I saw first thing on a preterism web site:
"Preterism is the belief that all Bible prophecies, including those concerned with the return of Christ, resurrection of the dead, rapture, judgment, and arrival of the kingdom of God, came to complete fulfillment in a.d. 70......"
I don't agree with that. As for your question why I believe anything I believe, the answer is the Bible and the Holy Spirit.
As I said before, I do not believe in a secret rapture, but really.... if someone is trusting in Jesus for their salvation and is truly God's child, does it really matter what they believe about end times? Whatever is going to happen is going to happen, and God will take care of His own. All this endless debate and attacking each other serves no good purpose. That's the way I see it.
Luvvarkansas: That's your answer--"you don't agree with that? I also use the Bible and the Holy Spirit as the basis for my beliefs. Do you not think that you should spell out exactly why you disagree with the preterist statement by expounding on the Bible? Prove from the Bible wher preterism is wrong?
Let's start with just one verse, Luvvarkansas. What did Jesus mean when He said directly to His disciples standing right there with Him--
"When YOU see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet . . . " (Mat. 24:15). Please use only the context of Matthew 24 for your interpretation!
Thanks!
Preterist
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.
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.
