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.
AT HAND" (1 Pet. 4:7). AT HAND" (James 5:8).
"about to be (mello) a resurrection of the dead"(Acts 24:15).
"about to" (mello) come (Acts 24:25). about to (mello)judge the world in rigtheousness" (Acts 17:31). ABOUT TO (mello) come" (Mat. 12:32).
Quote:
The writer of Hebrews makes it clear that in THAT day the old age was about to end and the new age was about to begin..
Jesus said "NOW is the judgment of this world; NOW the ruler of this world is about to be (mello) cast out" (John 12:31)..
This is incorrect. Jesus was speaking to a crowd in John 12:31 about predicting His own death. This is what John 12:30-33 says in reference to Jesus predicting His own death:
"Jesus said, "This voice was for your benefit, not mine. Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this will be driven out. But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself." He said this to show the kind of death he was going to die."
You have to look at scriptures within the context and timeframe of which they are being spoken. If you leave out the before and after scriptures that pertain to the subject, then that is misleading. Jesus was speaking to a crowd telling them of things to come.
In response to the crowd's questions about why Jesus would be "lifted up" after His death He said to them:
John 12:35-36 "You are going to have the light just a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, before darkness overtakes you. The man who walks in the dark does not know where he is going. Put you trust in the light while you have it, so that you may become sons of light."
There is absolutely nothing in any of the scriptures you quoted proving that all has already come to pass. Quite the contrary. If you look at the "at hands" and the "about to's" in the scriptures you quoted, that gives no indication of anything except that it will happen sometime in the future. Since 1000 years is like a day to the Lord, then there is no way Preterist's belief that everything has happened already is a legitimate, concrete, absolute certainty of a theory.
The book of Revelation is a special kind of prophecy called apocalypse (the first word of this book in Greek is the word "apocalypse" often translated "revelation").
Apocalyptic literature uses many fanatastic symbols and numbers to picture things for people - but things that should not be taken literally. For example, in Revelation 21 the street of the heavenly Jerusalem was made of pure gold and it was like transparent glass (v21b). Gold is not transparent so Revelation itself shows us this description can't be taken literally. Instead the description is meant to tell us that the street will be unbelieveably beautiful.
Likewise the numbers in Revelation are often symbolic.
Seven = the number of holiness.
Ten = the number of completeness.
Twelve = the number that symbolizes believers.
For example, Revelation 7 when the number of those in heaven with God is given as 144,000, that isn't a literal number because there will be many more than 144,000 people with God in heaven after the Last Day. Later in Revelation that number is said to be so many that no one can count them. So we know from Revelation itself that the number 144,000 is not to taken literally. Rather 144,000 is a combination of multiples of 10 and 12 and thus symbolizes the complete (10) number of believers (12).
In Revelation 20, the number 1000 is a multiple of 10 x 10 x 10. It isn't a literal number, but it symbolizes the complete number of years that this world will last. Jesus bound Satan when he died for our sins (Rev 20 2-3). The first resurrection is believers coming to faith, and the second death (hell) will have no power over them. Those who only take part in the second resurrection at the end of the world will suffer the second death. When the full number of years (1000 years) God planned for this earth have been completed, Satan will be thrown into hell (Rev 20:10). To say that Jesus will reign on earth for a 1000 years before the judgment contradicts two literal statements of Scripture: 1) that no one will know when the day of judgment will be, and 2) that the day when Jesus comes again will be the day of judgment. Those two literal statements of Scripture show us that the 1000 years mentioned in Revelation 20 is apocalyptic symbolism.
When the full number of years (1000 years) God planned for this earth have been completed, Satan will be thrown into hell (Rev 20:10).
To say that Jesus will reign on earth for a 1000 years before the judgment contradicts two literal statements of Scripture:
1) that no one will know when the day of judgment will be,
2) that the day when Jesus comes again will be the day of judgment.
Those two literal statements of Scripture show us that the 1000 years mentioned in Revelation 20 is apocalyptic symbolism.
NOTE:
Jesus used symbolic language to describe himself as the Word, the Bread of Life, Living Water, the Good Shepherd, the Vine, the Gate, etc., we must understand his words symbolically. He was using pictures to help us understand more about him. When he speaks literally about his death paying for our sins and his resurrection assuring us that we will rise again, we must understand him literally.
We always need to read what is literal in Scripture literally, and to read what is symbolic in Scripture symbolically. To fail to do this leads to wrong interpretations of God's Word. The same is true in the book of Revelation. If we take something literal that is apocalyptic symbolism, we will not be interpreting it properly.
Last edited by twin.spin; 05-24-2008 at 08:27 AM..
The book of Revelation is a special kind of prophecy called apocalypse (the first word of this book in Greek is the word "apocalypse" often translated "revelation").
Apocalyptic literature uses many fanatastic symbols and numbers to picture things for people - but things that should not be taken literally. For example, in Revelation 21 the street of the heavenly Jerusalem was made of pure gold and it was like transparent glass (v21b). Gold is not transparent so Revelation itself shows us this description can't be taken literally. Instead the description is meant to tell us that the street will be unbelieveably beautiful.
Likewise the numbers in Revelation are often symbolic.
Seven = the number of holiness.
Ten = the number of completeness.
Twelve = the number that symbolizes believers.
For example, Revelation 7 when the number of those in heaven with God is given as 144,000, that isn't a literal number because there will be many more than 144,000 people with God in heaven after the Last Day. Later in Revelation that number is said to be so many that no one can count them. So we know from Revelation itself that the number 144,000 is not to taken literally. Rather 144,000 is a combination of multiples of 10 and 12 and thus symbolizes the complete (10) number of believers (12).
In Revelation 20, the number 1000 is a multiple of 10 x 10 x 10. It isn't a literal number, but it symbolizes the complete number of years that this world will last. Jesus bound Satan when he died for our sins (Rev 20 2-3). The first resurrection is believers coming to faith, and the second death (hell) will have no power over them. Those who only take part in the second resurrection at the end of the world will suffer the second death. When the full number of years (1000 years) God planned for this earth have been completed, Satan will be thrown into hell (Rev 20:10). To say that Jesus will reign on earth for a 1000 years before the judgment contradicts two literal statements of Scripture: 1) that no one will know when the day of judgment will be, and 2) that the day when Jesus comes again will be the day of judgment. Those two literal statements of Scripture show us that the 1000 years mentioned in Revelation 20 is apocalyptic symbolism.
When the full number of years (1000 years) God planned for this earth have been completed, Satan will be thrown into hell (Rev 20:10).
To say that Jesus will reign on earth for a 1000 years before the judgment contradicts two literal statements of Scripture:
1) that no one will know when the day of judgment will be,
2) that the day when Jesus comes again will be the day of judgment.
Those two literal statements of Scripture show us that the 1000 years mentioned in Revelation 20 is apocalyptic symbolism.
NOTE:
Jesus used symbolic language to describe himself as the Word, the Bread of Life, Living Water, the Good Shepherd, the Vine, the Gate, etc., we must understand his words symbolically. He was using pictures to help us understand more about him. When he speaks literally about his death paying for our sins and his resurrection assuring us that we will rise again, we must understand him literally.
We always need to read what is literal in Scripture literally, and to read what is symbolic in Scripture symbolically. To fail to do this leads to wrong interpretations of God's Word. The same is true in the book of Revelation. If we take something literal that is apocalyptic symbolism, we will not be interpreting it properly.
I believe that there are a lot of numbers and scriptures, especially in Revelation, that are symbolic. But I also believe that the interpretations of these are to be taken literally. Getting to the true interpretations of scriptures is the tricky part and can only be done through guidance of understanding through the Holy Spirit. The number 7 is obviously one of the most important numbers in the Bible. It represents so many different things, including the creation itself.
No one really knows for sure if that is a literal 7 days since God's timetable is so obviously not the same as ours, but He put it in terms we could understand, nonetheless. He created the days, nights and our measure of time, so wouldn't it make sense that we are to take it literally since He put it in measures of time that we could understand?
I think the 1000 years is literal, as we understand 1000 years. Since we are not to lean upon our own understanding, the interpretation of symbolisms can only be done through the Holy Spirit. It is relative to each person, so I think that is why there are so many different interpretations. Each mind and level of understanding is different for each person, and once we think we have been given the answer a lot of times people stop searching and demand that their interpretation is the only one.
I think there are some basics that cannot be disputed like Jesus being the Savior for all of mankind, but even so, that doesn't stop the debate about it. Some don't even believe that the Bible is God's Holy Word, so of course they would dispute the validity of Jesus Christ even existing much less being the Savior of the world. They want absolute, in your face proof of God's existance, but that totally negates the one thing God requires us to have....FAITH.
That's why it is so important to not become bogged down in one's own egotistical belief that they were led to a certain undisputable conclusion simply because they feel certain it came through the Holy Spirit. Maybe it did, and it was the interpretation that they needed at that particular time to understand something that was happening in their own personal life.
That's the miraculous thing about the Bible....you take away from it exactly what you need at that certain time because it is needed for growth and understanding. But Christians should never stop studying and searching, especially when it comes to interpretation. God allows us to see what we need to see and understand at that particular moment so we should always be open to receiving a different and just as applicable interpretation at some other time.
To be so sure of oneself and their own interpretation is arrogance and not Godly. It doesn't allow for growth or being able to represent God and Christianity in love as it was intended. No one has the key to what should be taken literally or symbolically from the Bible....no one. It's not for humans to point out with such certainty something that was written by God. If He had wanted us to do that, then we wouldn't even need to point it out because there would be no doubt, question, or debates about the Bible. It would be so crystal clear everyone would understand it completely.
Why didn't God just make it crystal clear so there wouldn't be all of this debate? Because humans need a mystery, something to intrigue them enough to inspire them to stay in the Word of God. God IS a mystery, so it only makes sense.
This is incorrect. Jesus was speaking to a crowd in John 12:31 about predicting His own death. This is what John 12:30-33 says in reference to Jesus predicting His own death:
"Jesus said, "This voice was for your benefit, not mine. Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this will be driven out. But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself." He said this to show the kind of death he was going to die."
You have to look at scriptures within the context and timeframe of which they are being spoken. If you leave out the before and after scriptures that pertain to the subject, then that is misleading. Jesus was speaking to a crowd telling them of things to come.
In response to the crowd's questions about why Jesus would be "lifted up" after His death He said to them:
John 12:35-36 "You are going to have the light just a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, before darkness overtakes you. The man who walks in the dark does not know where he is going. Put you trust in the light while you have it, so that you may become sons of light."
There is absolutely nothing in any of the scriptures you quoted proving that all has already come to pass. Quite the contrary. If you look at the "at hands" and the "about to's" in the scriptures you quoted, that gives no indication of anything except that it will happen sometime in the future. Since 1000 years is like a day to the Lord, then there is no way Preterist's belief that everything has happened already is a legitimate, concrete, absolute certainty of a theory.
DayoftheLord: I am so glad you want to consider the context of these verses. Anyone who has read my posts knows that I am a stickler for context!
First of all, let me deal AGAIN with the misunderstanding (conveniently) of 2 Peter 3. The key to this entire verse is WITH THE LORD! The purpose of this verse is to show God's faithfulness--that what He promises, He WILL do! There is nothing in this verse that negates the human understanding of time as God created it and placed us in it! WITH THE LORD, Who transcends time and Who is in no way bound by the time He created, a day is AS AS AS AS AS a thousand years. Nowhere does it say that a thousand years as we know them equal one day! And what about the flip side that futurists love to ignore. If, as you say, a day can be a thousand years, does it not, then, follow that a thousand years can equal a day? Perhaps your 1,000-year millennium is really only one day in duration? This verse cannot and must not by abused in order to negate the clear, God-given time statements in the Scriptures. NEAR means NEAR. ABOUT TO means ABOUT TO. AT HAND means AT HAND. All of these can and should be understood in the same way we use them in our everyday lives. God used these words to communicate with us--we are to take them in their normal, common, everyday senses.
Let's look up some of them because I find it interesting that these same terms (engus, engizo, tachos, mello) are translated in their usual way in those verses that have NO eschatological significance. But everything gets fuzzy and suddenly people can't understand normal meanings when things are couched in "future" events. Hmmm! Interesting!
Let's look at some of them. What did Jesus mean by "engus" in Matthew 24:32 when He was talking to His first-century saints right there with Him?
"YOU know that summer is NEAR." Did He mean to imply (after all He is the Lord to Whom a day is AS a thousand years) that summer could perhaps be thousands of years off? No! It was NEAR in the same sense that it is NEAR for us on June 1! Using this same word (engus) with that same meaning (He nowhere indicates that He is suddenly giving it a different meaning), Jesus tells them that His coming is NEAR! In case we might miss it, He adds--AT THE DOORS! (Mat. 24:33).
What did Jesus mean in Matthew 26:17 when His disciples asked about preparation for the Passover and He said, "My time is AT HAND" (engus). Was He not referring to His crucifixion which was very shortly to take place? Does this word here mean His time was perhaps thousands of years away? No! Engus means engus!
In Luke 19:11 the writer says that Jesus was "NEAR (engus) Jerusalem." Does that not mean close by? Was He really far away from Jerusalem? No! Words mean things. NEAR means NEAR! The very same word (engus) is used again in Luke 21:30 and 31 in the same way it is used in Matthew 24 and Mark 13 of the NEARness of Christ's coming and the Kingdom!
John writes (John 2:13) that "now the Passover of the Jews was AT HAND" (engus). That is why Jesus went up to Jerusalem where He found the wicked moneychangers in the Temple. Was the Passover NEAR in time or was it far off? It was engus--NEAR--in the same sense that His coming was AT HAND (James 5:8). A city is often said to be NEAR another city (e.g. Aenon is near Salim [see also John 3:23; 6:23; 11:18, 54; Acts 1:12; 9:38; 27:8]), Jesus walked on the water and came NEAR to the boat the disciples were in (John 6:19); events are said to be NEAR (e.g. Passover, Feast of Tabernacles [John 2:13; 6:4; 7:2; 11:55; 19:20, 42, etc). We cannot change meanings of words to suit our preconceived ideas! Again, NEAR means NEAR both in distance and time!
Paul speaks of the word being NEAR (engus--Rom. 10:8). He also taught that the believer is "brought NEAR [engus] by the blood of Jesus" (Eph. 2:13). Ephesians 2:17 is extremely interesting because here we have both the concept of "far off" (makran) and "near" (engus). God is not a God of confusion. If He wanted to convey to His inspired writers that the Lord's coming was far off (makran), why didn't He just say MAKRAN! Because that is NOT what He meant to convey. He meant to clearly convey that "the coming of the Lord is AT HAND"--NEAR (James 5:8)!
Philippians 4:5--"The Lord is AT HAND" (engus) not MAKRAN.
Hebrews 8:13--The first covenant which became the first because of the coming of the second and the old covenant that was made old because of the coming of the new was "READY" (engus) to vanish away. It's vanishing was AT HAND, NEAR.
Revelation 1:3; 22:10--"The time is AT HAND"--NEAR not MAKRAN (far off).
There are other uses of this near concept in the verb engizo--NEAR. Again, it ALWAYS speaks of places or events or times being NEAR. ALWAYS!
John the Baptist and Jesus Himself taught that the kingdom was AT HAND (engizo)--Matthew 3:2; 4:17; 10:7)
Jesus spoke of His hour being AT HAND or NEAR and of His betrayer being AT HAND or NEAR (Mat. 26:45, 46; Mark 14:42).
When the disciples who were right there with Him saw "Jerusalem surrounded by armies," THEY were to know that "its desolation" was NEAR"--A.D. 70![engizo--Luke 21:20)]. Furthermore, those same disciples, contemporaries of Jesus and standing right there with Him, were told to "lift up YOUR heads, because YOUR redemption draws NEAR (engizo--Luke 21:28). That is the context that you want me to concentrate on. Jesus is talking to His disciples right there with Him about things that were to soon happen to THEM! The verses before and after bear this out! Notice the first verse of chapter 22--"Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew NEAR (engizo--same word as 21:28)! Both words mean the same thing--NEAR!
DayoftheLord: I am so glad you want to consider the context of these verses. Anyone who has read my posts knows that I am a stickler for context!
First of all, let me deal AGAIN with the misunderstanding (conveniently) of 2 Peter 3. The key to this entire verse is WITH THE LORD! The purpose of this verse is to show God's faithfulness--that what He promises, He WILL do! There is nothing in this verse that negates the human understanding of time as God created it and placed us in it! WITH THE LORD, Who transcends time and Who is in no way bound by the time He created, a day is AS AS AS AS AS a thousand years. Nowhere does it say that a thousand years as we know them equal one day! And what about the flip side that futurists love to ignore. If, as you say, a day can be a thousand years, does it not, then, follow that a thousand years can equal a day? Perhaps your 1,000-year millennium is really only one day in duration? This verse cannot and must not by abused in order to negate the clear, God-given time statements in the Scriptures. NEAR means NEAR. ABOUT TO means ABOUT TO. AT HAND means AT HAND. All of these can and should be understood in the same way we use them in our everyday lives. God used these words to communicate with us--we are to take them in their normal, common, everyday senses.
Let's look up some of them because I find it interesting that these same terms (engus, engizo, tachos, mello) are translated in their usual way in those verses that have NO eschatological significance. But everything gets fuzzy and suddenly people can't understand normal meanings when things are couched in "future" events. Hmmm! Interesting!
Let's look at some of them. What did Jesus mean by "engus" in Matthew 24:32 when He was talking to His first-century saints right there with Him?
"YOU know that summer is NEAR." Did He mean to imply (after all He is the Lord to Whom a day is AS a thousand years) that summer could perhaps be thousands of years off? No! It was NEAR in the same sense that it is NEAR for us on June 1! Using this same word (engus) with that same meaning (He nowhere indicates that He is suddenly giving it a different meaning), Jesus tells them that His coming is NEAR! In case we might miss it, He adds--AT THE DOORS! (Mat. 24:33).
What did Jesus mean in Matthew 26:17 when His disciples asked about preparation for the Passover and He said, "My time is AT HAND" (engus). Was He not referring to His crucifixion which was very shortly to take place? Does this word here mean His time was perhaps thousands of years away? No! Engus means engus!
In Luke 19:11 the writer says that Jesus was "NEAR (engus) Jerusalem." Does that not mean close by? Was He really far away from Jerusalem? No! Words mean things. NEAR means NEAR! The very same word (engus) is used again in Luke 21:30 and 31 in the same way it is used in Matthew 24 and Mark 13 of the NEARness of Christ's coming and the Kingdom!
John writes (John 2:13) that "now the Passover of the Jews was AT HAND" (engus). That is why Jesus went up to Jerusalem where He found the wicked moneychangers in the Temple. Was the Passover NEAR in time or was it far off? It was engus--NEAR--in the same sense that His coming was AT HAND (James 5:8). A city is often said to be NEAR another city (e.g. Aenon is near Salim [see also John 3:23; 6:23; 11:18, 54; Acts 1:12; 9:38; 27:8]), Jesus walked on the water and came NEAR to the boat the disciples were in (John 6:19); events are said to be NEAR (e.g. Passover, Feast of Tabernacles [John 2:13; 6:4; 7:2; 11:55; 19:20, 42, etc). We cannot change meanings of words to suit our preconceived ideas! Again, NEAR means NEAR both in distance and time!
Paul speaks of the word being NEAR (engus--Rom. 10:8). He also taught that the believer is "brought NEAR [engus] by the blood of Jesus" (Eph. 2:13). Ephesians 2:17 is extremely interesting because here we have both the concept of "far off" (makran) and "near" (engus). God is not a God of confusion. If He wanted to convey to His inspired writers that the Lord's coming was far off (makran), why didn't He just say MAKRAN! Because that is NOT what He meant to convey. He meant to clearly convey that "the coming of the Lord is AT HAND"--NEAR (James 5:8)!
Philippians 4:5--"The Lord is AT HAND" (engus) not MAKRAN.
Hebrews 8:13--The first covenant which became the first because of the coming of the second and the old covenant that was made old because of the coming of the new was "READY" (engus) to vanish away. It's vanishing was AT HAND, NEAR.
Revelation 1:3; 22:10--"The time is AT HAND"--NEAR not MAKRAN (far off).
There are other uses of this near concept in the verb engizo--NEAR. Again, it ALWAYS speaks of places or events or times being NEAR. ALWAYS!
John the Baptist and Jesus Himself taught that the kingdom was AT HAND (engizo)--Matthew 3:2; 4:17; 10:7)
Jesus spoke of His hour being AT HAND or NEAR and of His betrayer being AT HAND or NEAR (Mat. 26:45, 46; Mark 14:42).
When the disciples who were right there with Him saw "Jerusalem surrounded by armies," THEY were to know that "its desolation" was NEAR"--A.D. 70![engizo--Luke 21:20)]. Furthermore, those same disciples, contemporaries of Jesus and standing right there with Him, were told to "lift up YOUR heads, because YOUR redemption draws NEAR (engizo--Luke 21:28). That is the context that you want me to concentrate on. Jesus is talking to His disciples right there with Him about things that were to soon happen to THEM! The verses before and after bear this out! Notice the first verse of chapter 22--"Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew NEAR (engizo--same word as 21:28)! Both words mean the same thing--NEAR!
Find one that teaches that engizo or engus mean anything except NEAR.
Preterist
I absolutely like to consider the context of all scriptures, just as you do. I think that is where all this bickering comes in.....not being open to the fact that any one scripture at any given time can be interpreted by an individual in many different ways, not just one. I believe the Bible is miraculous in the fact that one scripture can be so inspiring and what someone needs to hear or understand through the Holy Spirit for their particular need at that time.
That may be confusing to some, but I have experienced it time and time again. But of course, trying to figure out end time prophecy is a horse of a different color. Prophecy is cryptic, and folks should not be so quick to think they know ALL the answers. I feel certain in what I believe, but I sure wouldn't stake my life on it!!
But you have to understand that Pastors have a duty to teach to their congregations what they have learned and to be self-assured, so as not to confuse and seem less than credible. I don't think pastors or anyone in authority teaching God's word believes that it's so clear cut, but that is how they have to present what they believe because they have a responsibility to their churches to not be wishy-washy and to be confident in God and His Word. I sure wouldn't want to go to a church with a pastor who is telling me one week that Jesus has not come yet, and the next week he's saying "well, I don't know.....I think He might have already come and we missed the boat." Not too good for congregational moral and holding to their faith.
I don't see anything wrong with the different denominational beliefs....as long as the basic principle of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit is taught and that the only way to the Father and eternal life with Him is through Jesus Christ as our Saviour.
I actually understand where you are coming from, but there still is no proof that the context of NEAR is an actual nearness that we understand it to be....we just don't know because near is not in a certain time frame. And yes, it says in the Bible that to God 1000 years is as a day, and a day is as a 1000 years. I have actually argued that it's only been two days since Jesus died and rose again!!!! Just to prove the point that there is no way to pinpoint the time simply because we don't know what God means by near anywhere in the Bible unless after He said "near", it then happened, and was recorded in the Bible. But I bet if you go back and research when "near" was said and then when it actually took place in the Bible, none of the "nears" would equal the same amount of time.
I absolutely like to consider the context of all scriptures, just as you do. I think that is where all this bickering comes in.....not being open to the fact that any one scripture at any given time can be interpreted by an individual in many different ways, not just one. I believe the Bible is miraculous in the fact that one scripture can be so inspiring and what someone needs to hear or understand through the Holy Spirit for their particular need at that time.
That may be confusing to some, but I have experienced it time and time again. But of course, trying to figure out end time prophecy is a horse of a different color. Prophecy is cryptic, and folks should not be so quick to think they know ALL the answers. I feel certain in what I believe, but I sure wouldn't stake my life on it!!
But you have to understand that Pastors have a duty to teach to their congregations what they have learned and to be self-assured, so as not to confuse and seem less than credible. I don't think pastors or anyone in authority teaching God's word believes that it's so clear cut, but that is how they have to present what they believe because they have a responsibility to their churches to not be wishy-washy and to be confident in God and His Word. I sure wouldn't want to go to a church with a pastor who is telling me one week that Jesus has not come yet, and the next week he's saying "well, I don't know.....I think He might have already come and we missed the boat." Not too good for congregational moral and holding to their faith.
I don't see anything wrong with the different denominational beliefs....as long as the basic principle of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit is taught and that the only way to the Father and eternal life with Him is through Jesus Christ as our Saviour.
I actually understand where you are coming from, but there still is no proof that the context of NEAR is an actual nearness that we understand it to be....we just don't know because near is not in a certain time frame. And yes, it says in the Bible that to God 1000 years is as a day, and a day is as a 1000 years. I have actually argued that it's only been two days since Jesus died and rose again!!!! Just to prove the point that there is no way to pinpoint the time simply because we don't know what God means by near anywhere in the Bible unless after He said "near", it then happened, and was recorded in the Bible. But I bet if you go back and research when "near" was said and then when it actually took place in the Bible, none of the "nears" would equal the same amount of time.
DayoftheLord: Did you look at any of the verses I posted? I did "research" when "near" was said--and the things that were said to be near were NEAR! Of course they weren't the same amount of time--but they were ALL within the understood framework of what would still constitute near.
We DO know what God means by near--NEAR means exactly how it was used in the Scriptures. It ALWAYS mean the same thing as you and I understand it to mean in our everyday lives.
NO NO NO NO--it has NOT been two days since Jesus died. Why do you say such a thing? It doesn't make sense to me. It has been more than two thousand ACTUAL years since Jesus died! Furthermore, that is not the point I was making nor is that the point Peter was making! I grow weary of futurists misusing 2 Peter 3 to justify abusing all of the clear time statements in the Scriptures. A day is AS a thousand years WITH THE LORD. A thousand years is AS a day WITH THE LORD. It does not say that WITH MAN a day EQUALS a thousand years or WITH MAN a thousand years EQUAL a day! What is the context? God is not bound by time--but we are. He placed us within it and created time and language that expresses time. NEAR means NEAR; ABOUT TO means ABOUT TO; AT HAND means AT HAND. These simple terms only give people trouble because taking them in their normal, everyday, intended meanings does not fit into futurists' preconceived ideas. Here is the flawed reasoning: Futurists make the claim and stand upon the claim that Jesus has not yet come. But James says His coming was then AT HAND. Therefore, the term AT HAND must not mean what we normally would take it to mean! James must have meant to say MAKRAN--far off! That is eisegesis and not exegesis!
Again, engus and engizo ALWAYS refer to those things and events that were to take place SOON. I gave you ALL of the uses of these Greek terms in the NT. They ALWAYS refer to those things that were then AT HAND. Without exception. Why will you not recognize that? Why do you insist on downplaying the significance of these clear time statements?
James said "The coming of the Lord is AT HAND" (5:8)
Peter said "The end of all things is AT HAND" (1 Pet. 4:7).
John was shown the things which were to then SHORTLY take place because the time was then AT HAND (Rev. 1:3: 22:10).
Please look at the verses I provided and tell me why anyone should not take the terms engus and engizo literally?
DayoftheLord: Did you look at any of the verses I posted? I did "research" when "near" was said--and the things that were said to be near were NEAR! Of course they weren't the same amount of time--but they were ALL within the understood framework of what would still constitute near.
We DO know what God means by near--NEAR means exactly how it was used in the Scriptures. It ALWAYS mean the same thing as you and I understand it to mean in our everyday lives.
NO NO NO NO--it has NOT been two days since Jesus died. Why do you say such a thing? It doesn't make sense to me. It has been more than two thousand ACTUAL years since Jesus died! Furthermore, that is not the point I was making nor is that the point Peter was making! I grow weary of futurists misusing 2 Peter 3 to justify abusing all of the clear time statements in the Scriptures. A day is AS a thousand years WITH THE LORD. A thousand years is AS a day WITH THE LORD. It does not say that WITH MAN a day EQUALS a thousand years or WITH MAN a thousand years EQUAL a day! What is the context? God is not bound by time--but we are. He placed us within it and created time and language that expresses time. NEAR means NEAR; ABOUT TO means ABOUT TO; AT HAND means AT HAND. These simple terms only give people trouble because taking them in their normal, everyday, intended meanings does not fit into futurists' preconceived ideas. Here is the flawed reasoning: Futurists make the claim and stand upon the claim that Jesus has not yet come. But James says His coming was then AT HAND. Therefore, the term AT HAND must not mean what we normally would take it to mean! James must have meant to say MAKRAN--far off! That is eisegesis and not exegesis!
Again, engus and engizo ALWAYS refer to those things and events that were to take place SOON. I gave you ALL of the uses of these Greek terms in the NT. They ALWAYS refer to those things that were then AT HAND. Without exception. Why will you not recognize that? Why do you insist on downplaying the significance of these clear time statements?
James said "The coming of the Lord is AT HAND" (5:8)
Peter said "The end of all things is AT HAND" (1 Pet. 4:7).
John was shown the things which were to then SHORTLY take place because the time was then AT HAND (Rev. 1:3: 22:10).
Please look at the verses I provided and tell me why anyone should not take the terms engus and engizo literally?
Preterist
I know ALL of the scriptures you quote, and I have discerned what they mean through the Holy Spirit. Like I told you in the other thread, you're wasting your time. You are so hung up on your version of the truth you can't hear or see what others are trying to tell you. I'm getting ready to start another thread, so you can go there and repeat the same argument over and over if you like. You should really check out the thread that Simple Living just started in the Christianity sub-forum and view the ENTIRE video.
Nothing you say or no amount of scriptures you quote will EVER change my beliefs of what the scriptures really say. Why is it so important to you to convince everyone that you are absolutely correct in your thinking? You might want to rethink why you are doing this. You should be more concerned about spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ and how people need to become saved, rather than arguing with other Christians about their beliefs who are here to do God's work and stop interfering with God's purpose for them.
I know ALL of the scriptures you quote, and I have discerned what they mean through the Holy Spirit. Like I told you in the other thread, you're wasting your time. You are so hung up on your version of the truth you can't hear or see what others are trying to tell you. I'm getting ready to start another thread, so you can go there and repeat the same argument over and over if you like. You should really check out the thread that Simple Living just started in the Christianity sub-forum and view the ENTIRE video.
Nothing you say or no amount of scriptures you quote will EVER change my beliefs of what the scriptures really say. Why is it so important to you to convince everyone that you are absolutely correct in your thinking? You might want to rethink why you are doing this. You should be more concerned about spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ and how people need to become saved, rather than arguing with other Christians about their beliefs who are here to do God's work and stop interfering with God's purpose for them.
DayoftheLord: Could I not accuse you of the same thing--of being so hung up on YOUR version of the truth that YOU can't hear or see what others are saying? That has never been my approach and anyone who follows my posts knows that no one tries harder than I do to provide proof for my beliefs from the Scriptures. Do you suppose I have always believed this way? You are wrong. I was once just like you--a staunch futurist. I used all of your arguments and I presented the same false futuristic errors that you now do. If I were so intent on not listening to what others say, nothing could have changed my mind. But in the end it was the Scriptures which proved to me the errors of my interpretations. It is not what YOU say that I need to hear but what God says and you have never laid out convincingly through solid Scriptural support any of the things you teach others here. Rarely do I notice anyone being challenged when making so-called statements of truth without a clear exposition of the Word of God which supports them.
Why do I do this, DayoftheLord? Do you think this entire issue is of no consequence and I just come here to cause trouble? You do not understand the nature of this issue and its far-reaching impact on our world and on the Church.
Futurism leaves the Church wide open to the attacks by skeptics and atheists. Let me explain.
Even atheists such as Bertrand Russell could see that the Bible taught that Jesus was to come back in that day. But according to the Church today, He still has not come--after promising those first-century saints that He was coming to them soon and that His coming was AT HAND. Jesus did not do as He promised ("Behold, I am coming quickly")--He is a false prophet! The disciples taught that Jesus was coming back in their day--But according to the modern "Church," He is yet to make an appearance--more than 2 thousand years later. The disciples were mistaken--they were false teachers! The Bible teaches the imminency of Christ's return--"the things which were then to SHORTLY take place," "The coming of the Lord is AT HAND"--but the Church today insists He has not yet returned. The Bible contains error--Christianity is a false religion!
It is the veracity of Jesus' words, the disciples' teachings, and the overall reliability of the Word of God that is at stake. So, no, I will not relent while error is taught in the church today and Christians cop out of the affairs of the world because they believe it is God's will that everything get worse and worse and one day soon they'll just be able to escape from it all through the "rapture!"
Again, I do not want to debate people's opinions. Personally I get sick and tired of all the "I believes" and the "I thinks" presented without biblical support. I have tried to encourage others to support EVERYTHING they believe with God's Word, but most posts contain nothing more than canned teachings that have been gleaned from churches, pastors and teachers.
I have just posted on your new thread in which you almost totally ignore the context of 1 Thessalonians 5. This is also typical with futurists. Every YOU means WE to the point that one would think that all of Scripture was written in a vacuum and had no significance at all to those first-century saints who suffered so immensely. What is the historical context of 1 Thessalonians, DayoftheLord? Who wrote it? To whom was it written? Why was it written? What was going on in the lives of the recipients? How would these first readers have understood the message? Are there other Scriptures that tie in with the one under consideration?
I am NOT closed to what others say and I do NOT refuse to hear. But I will not be persuaded by simple human arguments or statements of belief.
This is my policy and has always been my policy--WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURES! Furthermore, if you had discerned the meanings of these passages through the Holy Spirit, you would know the simple meaning of AT HAND!
Preterist
Last edited by Preterist; 05-25-2008 at 02:55 PM..
DayoftheLord: Could I not accuse you of the same thing--of being so hung up on YOUR version of the truth that YOU can't hear or see what others are saying? That has never been my approach and anyone who follows my posts knows that no one tries harder than I do to provide proof for my beliefs from the Scriptures. Do you suppose I have always believed this way? You are wrong. I was once just like you--a staunch futurist. I used all of your arguments and I presented the same false futuristic errors that you now do. If I were so intent on not listening to what others say, nothing could have changed my mind. But in the end it was the Scriptures which proved to me the errors of my interpretations. It is not what YOU say that I need to hear but what God says and you have never laid out convincingly through solid Scriptural support any of the things you teach others here. Rarely do I notice anyone being challenged when making so-called statements of truth without a clear exposition of the Word of God which supports them.
Why do I do this, DayoftheLord? Do you think this entire issue is of no consequence and I just come here to cause trouble? You do not understand the nature of this issue and its far-reaching impact on our world and on the Church.
Futurism leaves the Church wide open to the attacks by skeptics and atheists. Let me explain.
Even atheists such as Bertrand Russell could see that the Bible taught that Jesus was to come back in that day. But according to the Church today, He still has not come--after promising those first-century saints that He was coming to them soon and that His coming was AT HAND. Jesus did not do as He promised ("Behold, I am coming quickly")--He is a false prophet! The disciples taught that Jesus was coming back in their day--But according to the modern "Church," He is yet to make an appearance--more than 2 thousand years later. The disciples were mistaken--they were false teachers! The Bible teaches the imminency of Christ's return--"the things which were then to SHORTLY take place," "The coming of the Lord is AT HAND"--but the Church today insists He has not yet returned. The Bible contains error--Christianity is a false religion!
It is the veracity of Jesus' words, the disciples' teachings, and the overall reliability of the Word of God that is at stake. So, no, I will not relent while error is taught in the church today and Christians cop out of the affairs of the world because they believe it is God's will that everything get worse and worse and one day soon they'll just be able to escape from it all through the "rapture!"
Again, I do not want to debate people's opinions. Personally I get sick and tired of all the "I believes" and the "I thinks" presented without biblical support. I have tried to encourage others to support EVERYTHING they believe with God's Word, but most posts contain nothing more than canned teachings that have been gleaned from churches, pastors and teachers.
I have just posted on your new thread in which you almost totally ignore the context of 1 Thessalonians 5. This is also typical with futurists. Every YOU means WE to the point that one would think that all of Scripture was written in a vacuum and had no significance at all to those first-century saints who suffered so immensely. What is the historical context of 1 Thessalonians, DayoftheLord? Who wrote it? To whom was it written? Why was it written? What was going on in the lives of the recipients? How would these first readers have understood the message? Are there other Scriptures that tie in with the one under consideration?
I am NOT closed to what others say and I do NOT refuse to hear. But I will not be persuaded by simple human arguments or statements of belief.
This is my policy and has always been my policy--WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURES! Furthermore, if you had discerned the meanings of these passages through the Holy Spirit, you would know the simple meaning of AT HAND!
Preterist
That's pretty smug of you to assume you are the only one guided by the Holy Spirit and you're the only one to have received "the truth". You had your beliefs right the first time. I believe what has happened to you is exactly what you claim will never happen.....you WERE persuaded by simple human arguments and statements of belief.
I support everything I say with scripture. You're just not seeing it. And I think about nonbelievers when I post too, because they don't necessarily want to have scriptures quoted "at them" all of the time. They appreciate hearing why it is I believe what I do, hearing it from my heart and based on my testimony. Ok, that's it. I'm going to wait for your response in the other thread, and then I'm blocking ya. I feel love towards you and wish you all the best in Christ, but this is unproductive for the Lord.
In Matthew 16:28, Jesus said: "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Regarding this verse, Preterists boldly take the position that Jesus was emphasizing that some of them would still be alive and witness His Second Coming. However, this is not what Jesus was saying! In this verse, Jesus was referring to His transfiguration, which would take place six days later (Matthew 17:1-5). On that day, He took Peter, James and John. It was then that they beheld His glory and His majesty, when His face shone like the sun. Peter, who was there, indicates in 2Peter 1:16-18 that, at this holy mount, they witnessed the "power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" as follows
Here is just one of the many numerous passages that reveal when the "second coming" of Christ was to take place. This is the context: Jesus is the speaker of this passage, and His audience is His twelve disciples who are standing in front of him (Matthew 16:5-6,13,20-21,24). Put yourself in the place of those being addressed 2,000 years ago.
Matthew 16:27-28, "For the Son of man is about to come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There are some of those standing here, who in no wise shall taste of death, until they have seen the Son of man coming in his kingdom."
Notice how Jesus said that some of his disciples, who were standing right there in front of him, would not die until He came with his angels to reward every man according to his works (Revelation 22:12). But since this contradicts the belief that Jesus will come sometime in our future, many try to come up with excuses why this passage does not mean what it says. Whatever this event, it must meet all of the above criteria; not just one or two of them.
Some try to explain these verses as relating to the transfiguration, but the transfiguration was only six days later! None of them had died in that six day period, Jesus did not come with his angels, and he did not reward every man according to his works. Therefore, the transfiguration does not fit this passage.
Lets take 2 Peter 1 to the next few verses, 20-21:knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke [as they were] moved by the Holy Spirit.
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.
I believe what has happened to you is exactly what you claim will never happen.....you WERE persuaded by simple human arguments and statements of belief.
I feel love towards you and wish you all the best in Christ, but this is unproductive for the Lord.
Transfiguration
