|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/1/2008 11:45:04 PM
|
|
|
Sinner-Saint
Posts: 499
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sooner
...one does not make a case against Reformed Theology by positively using Calvin and Gill. One does not say they are not a dispensationalist then use the dispies material to lay out ones eschatology.
Bovine blossoms.
The man did his research. Others have done theirs. His is not outside theirs. It is useful information and saved me the time to look up where I had done mine in my writings.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/1/2008 11:49:59 PM
|
|
|
Sinner-Saint
Posts: 499
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline
|
Now sooner - not only can you not rely upon a one-word eschatology to buttress your assertions - which you still have not shown...
But you have some major problems in how you're putting out the end-times.
Not only do you mix up the times for the Great Tribulation between Christian and Jew, you have not even accounted for the start of the one 'seven.'
Besides that, it might behoove you to investigate all the relevant passages which do speak about the anti-Christ.
Then you can rightfully elaborate on the midpoint Abomination and show where all the specific and unique events surrounding it have been already accomplished!
< Message edited by Sinner-Saint -- 3/2/2008 12:17:13 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 1:04:00 AM
|
|
|
SandyWings
Posts: 46
Joined: 2/21/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sinner-Saint
No, there are two points to my noting the terribly great war you Preterists like to point to was judged so insignificant as to not reasonably disturb the general peace of Rome!
First - the battering of Jerusalem was nothing like major conquests. In fact, it was rather pitiful. The Romans totally out-gunned the Jews and systematically tore down their defenses, but the rebellious faction was so ardent in their cause they refused to admit the cause was lost.
Instead, they became petty tyrants and increased the suffering of the citizenry in all the horrible ways Josephus describes.
Secondly - even during peaceful times, there are wars.
War continues.
That is IN prophecy for this age until the end - FACT.
And it is part and parcel with our history - FACT.
You can say it's all been done already and it still won't make it so. You can not conclusively show how all of prophecy was fulfilled much less just what Jesus said in the Olivet Discourse!
I disagree. Jesus' words in His Olivet discourse shows beyond a shadow of a doubt, that He would return in that generation.
When one tries to assert anything extra-Biblical, like wars happening on earth after AD70, or any history of Rome or Jerusalem thereafter, they lose all Biblical credibility.
Mark 13:21-23
21 “Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or, ‘Look, He is there!’ do not believe it. 22 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 23 But take heed; see, I have told you all things beforehand.
There can be no doubt that this is audience relevant, again.
Jesus is speaking directly, & in person, to His disciples. What significance would it be to them for Jesus to tell them beforehand, if the disciples weren't the ones He was speaking to to take heed?
Then the parallel scripture in Mt. 24:23-28
23 “Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There!’ do not believe it. 24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand.
26 “Therefore if they say to you, ‘Look, He is in the desert!’ do not go out; or ‘Look, He is in the inner rooms!’ do not believe it. 27 For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 28 For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.
And the "eagles" were the emblems of the Roman soldiers.
The Scripture speaks for itself. That's why I do not believe in the traditional dogma that says we(Christians) go to "heaven" in some undefined state after death. And then await till the "end of the world" when Jesus comes- then there will be a resurrection of the flesh!
First of all, flesh & blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. God gives us a spiritual body as he pleases when we die. There's no "flesh" to be retrieved at the end of human history!
I believe Jesus returned just like in Matthew above & of course, in other scripture.
Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.
Abraham's bosom was emptied In 70 AD & Hades was thrown into the Lake of Fire.
The OT saints had to wait in the grave until the general Resurrection. We do not have to wait in some kind of spirit/soul state after the Resurrection took place.
We are in His kingdom now. This is the only earth we will have, & I know with that reality, I am in agreement with even the seculars, to make the most of this life on earth.
There are many positive Christians who do a commendable deeds for the kingdom of Christ. Helping the less fortunate, bring others to Christ. In all endeavors, giving to others, & to making the best future possible for the successive generations.
Keeping in mind- the world could end by man vs. man - blowing ourselves to pieces. But that is bc of man's free will.
Yes, the Bible says tomorrow is promised to no one. But I believe prayer is always the great intercessor. We have Christ now & all His blessings. We have the Holy Spirit who teaches & helps us in all things.
As far as the end of this age is concerned- It doesn't end! It is the Church age & the Church age never ends. It continues on. Here on earth & definitely for eternity.
Ephesians 3:20-21
20 Now to Him who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that works in us, 21 to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 9:52:49 AM
|
|
|
sooner
Posts: 133
Joined: 8/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: sooner
Prove it. Prove that Jesus had something in mind other than what Paul did:
You have already proven you don't know what I know and I said it is quite impossible for one person to be able to read another's mind and now you're making some insignificant point as to whether Paul and Jesus meant the same thing?
In other words you cannot show that Jesus had a different meaning in mind than Paul. It’s as simple as that.
Jesus said to do something, Paul said it was done but you say it wasn’t.
quote:
Paul is a man limited in his knowledge of the totality of existence.
Was Paul inspired to write the words he wrote?
quote:
And you want to say that Jesus is as limited as Paul was?
Where did I say such a thing? Must you lie to persuade yourself you won an argument?
quote:
And you want me to "read" God's mind after saying quite plainly that people can't read each other's mind and prove what I think?
No, I want you to read God’s Word. Secondly I never said “people can’t read each others mind”.
quote:
Now sooner - not only can you not rely upon a one-word eschatology to buttress your assertions - which you still have not shown...
Shown what? Yet you still will not answer my questions regarding the meaning of “en tachei” in Acts.
quote:
Besides that, it might behoove you to investigate all the relevant passages which do speak about the anti-Christ.
The only time “anti-christ” is found is in 1 & 2 John and it tells us what it is.
You seem to hold to a Historic Pre-Millennial view of eschatology, one that Spurgeon held to. Yet he even understood the Olivet Discourse to speak of the AD70 events:
"This portion of our Saviour's words appears to relate solely to the destruction of Jerusalem. As soon as Christ's disciples saw "the abomination of desolation," that is, the Roman ensigns, with their idolatries, "stand in the holy place," they knew that the time for their escape had arrived; and they did flee to the mountains." (Matthew: The Gospel of the Kingdom. . p. 215.)
Read more Spurgeon and less “Left Behind”.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 12:31:52 PM
|
|
|
parousia70
Posts: 163
Joined: 5/29/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sinner-Saint
Whoa there Nelly!
Who put the burr under your saddle?
I never said Christians had to render sacrifices to atone for their sins during the Millennium!
No, we wash our robes clean in the blood of the Lamb. Howsomevercomma, Ezekiel proscribes that there will be a resumption of the sacrificial system - which is still Law - in the Millennium.
That means Israel, reconstituted, will have to obey God's Laws.
Howsoevercomma is right!
Look, I've dealt with people like you before. You're part of that backwards, or "inverse" redemption crowd.
Contrary to scripture's assertion of Christ's sacrifice being "once for all time", you subscribe to the notion that Christ's redemptive work on the cross serves as only a temporary atonement for sins, and that human beings will one day be required to return to a Blood animal sacrificial system to Atone for their sins.
As I Said before, This teaching of yours that the Glorified Christ will REQUIRE humans to stand before him and render Blood animal sacrifices directly to Him for atonement of their sins renders His work on the cross as null and void.
The teaching of a reinstitution of this blood sacrificial system is a rebuke against the blood of Jesus Christ, and a cause for anathema according to the apostles. A return to this system is a falling away from salvation, according to the apostles. A falling from the grace of Jesus Christ.
You might as well tear the entire Book of Hebrews out of your Bible SS, since you clearly don't agree with it's primary tenant.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 3:00:11 PM
|
|
|
Sinner-Saint
Posts: 499
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline
|
Let's see, in the last four posts, all the Preterists have abandoned defending their eschatology and instead are pursuing side issues on the periphery.
Now back to my question:
When are you (all) going to show
how it all already happened?
So far the attempt to say it happens on one word - "soon," "near," or even "this" just hasn't cut it. If you want to build a coherent eschatology, you're going to have to incorporate Daniel, the Olivet Discourses, Revelation, and Paul's letters to the Thessalonians as the main columns and beams upon which to support your structure.
Propping up your eschatology on passages which are not in context just means your structure will be shaky.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 3:32:12 PM
|
|
|
sooner
Posts: 133
Joined: 8/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sinner-Saint
Let's see, in the last four posts, all the Preterists have abandoned defending their eschatology and instead are pursuing side issues on the periphery.
Now back to my question:
When are you (all) going to show
how it all already happened?
So far the attempt to say it happens on one word - "soon," "near," or even "this" just hasn't cut it. If you want to build a coherent eschatology, you're going to have to incorporate Daniel, the Olivet Discourses, Revelation, and Paul's letters to the Thessalonians as the main columns and beams upon which to support your structure.
Propping up your eschatology on passages which are not in context just means your structure will be shaky.
Sure, all of us will spend the next 6 months documenting every fulfillment and the historical background of that fulfillment.
You can't even absorb the simplest of concepts (time-statements) so why would anyone want to waste their time explaining every fulfillment of the Old and New Testament. Thats what books are for. I can point you to books that do what you ask, but if you never read them then what is the use. Expand your mind beyond Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye.
You can't even answer my question concerning 3 passages in Acts, but you want me to explain the whole Bilbe to you.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 3:37:26 PM
|
|
|
sooner
Posts: 133
Joined: 8/4/2005
Status: offline
|
One more thing, you are the king of diversion. People ask you questions or make statements about your position and you change the subject or ignore it all together. Parousia70 made an excellent statement about the logical conlusion of your position, yet you chose to ignore it and ramble on about proving it all happened. Why dont you deal with his statement:
As I Said before, This teaching of yours that the Glorified Christ will REQUIRE humans to stand before him and render Blood animal sacrifices directly to Him for atonement of their sins renders His work on the cross as null and void.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 3:53:19 PM
|
|
|
Sinner-Saint
Posts: 499
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline
|
Well when I've already answered the charge (which is repeated now in ignorance) I think to re-answer it is pointless.
Again, this thread is about Preterism versus Futurism, not what I think, believe, or hold to as to any and all theological positions including playing online Jeopardy!
You're going to have to answer why some seemingly troublesome passages are in Ezekiel and Isaiah which point to a future Millennium where just like after Christ's first Advent - the rules have changed!
You have your own set of questions which you have ignored as well from your interpretation of Jesus' Olivet Discourse and my criticism of your interpretation. That is at least on target inline with the purpose of this thread.
Show me where the one 'seven' started.
Show me the Desolator who set up the Abomination, the talking image in the Temple and proclaimed himself god.
In addition, since you Preterists like to say the one 'seven' ran consecutively to the seven and sixty-two 'sevens' without any gap in between ~ how is it that you can insert a gap of nearly four decades until half of it is done?
That is a major inconsistency within Preterism; you cannot develop a cohesive timeline.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 5:25:07 PM
|
|
|
sooner
Posts: 133
Joined: 8/4/2005
Status: offline
|
Where in Isaiah do you find your Millinnial Kingdom? Isaiah 65 & 66?
By the way this will be nearly impossible if you really believe what you said:
quote:
thread is about Preterism versus Futurism, not what I think, believe, or hold to
If we can't discuss what you believe then there really is no discussion only an interrogation on your part of us.
Why did Spurgeon, a non-preterist, see much of the Olivet Discourse fullied in the events of AD70? One can make the case that it isn't necessarily a preterist debate if even non-preterist see it as Spurgeon did.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 6:24:41 PM
|
|
|
Sinner-Saint
Posts: 499
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline
|
I don't think that discussing what Spurgeon did or did not believe is fruitful. If you want to trot out Spurgeon's ideas on what this or that book/passage/verse and/or word means in the Bible, then we can discuss it.
I don't think getting into where you think you know what I think is fruitful either. I am not on the observation table: we are contrasting Preterism with Futurism. I am "for" futurism, and I will argue against Preterism and for Futurism. I will tell you what I think about the Bible. We can examine what I think and what you think from what we each say.
Millennium passages can be found woven into Isaiah. The first I can think of off the top of my head is in Isaiah 2. Another is Isaiah chapter 11 going into chapter 12.
There is a break but the end-times are continued in chapter 13. This starts a section in Isaiah which goes through to chapter 30-35 depending upon whom you want to reference for commentary.
Now while Isaiah references nations of his time and you can say it's all been done before, so too will God take out His Wrath upon the nations in the futuristic end-times model. Jesus parallels Isaiah 13:5 in Mt 24:31 in gathering the Elect. I think Isaiah 13:5 reflects the Firstfruits of the Harvest: the 144,000. In Isaiah 13:6, the prophecy is pegged to the Day of the Lord.
But my point is that not only can I not find anything which matches what God will do in Isaiah to what happened in the first century - neither do we find the early church exclaiming that they have entered into any peace of God's Kingdom here on earth. I don't think the Millennium is made for the Church. I think the Church is gathered up at the end of this age. I think the Millennium is for Israel's Salvation, the same Israel which rejected God before too as well as the Remnant and their prodigy.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 10:26:30 PM
|
|
|
sooner
Posts: 133
Joined: 8/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
I don't think that discussing what Spurgeon did or did not believe is fruitful.
But posting what Thomas Ice and Tim Lahaye is?
If you want to trot out Spurgeon's ideas on what this or that book/passage/verse and/or word means in the Bible, then we can discuss it.
I did and you wanted nothing to do with it.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 10:59:37 PM
|
|
|
SandyWings
Posts: 46
Joined: 2/21/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sinner-Saint I will tell you what I think about the Bible. We can examine what I think and what you think from what we each say.
Millennium passages can be found woven into Isaiah. The first I can think of off the top of my head is in Isaiah 2. Another is Isaiah chapter 11 going into chapter 12.
That depends on one's definition of "millennium." The thousand yrs. is not literal. The Book of Revelation is not literal nor does it have a strict chronological sequence. In Rev.20, Satan is bound. This is the same as Matthew 12:27-29, when Jesus said if He drove out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Since that is exactly what He did, henceforth, all who were "for" Jesus were able to bind the strong man, as demonstrated when the 12 returned & said even the demons were subject to them.
2) The martyrs who had not taken the mark of the beast or worshiped his image were the disciples of the Lord in the 1st century. They were told in Rev.6:10, to wait a "little while" until the # of their brethren and saints would be killed as they were. This little while was now coming to an end. The apostles & disciples of the Lamb had fulfilled their earthly mission. And now we will soon see the reference to the rewards for the servants, the prophets, & the saints, & those who reverence His name, both small & great (7th trumpet) Same as the great white throne judgment- "And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the Book of Life." (Rev20:12) Satan's little while to fulfill his last evil deed."Woe to the inhabitants if the earth and sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath,because he knows his time is short" (Rev.12:12)
The "millennium" would end with the destruction of Jerusalem & the destruction of Satan. Paul said in Romans 16:20-"The God of Peace shall crush Satan under you feet shortly" Did you catch the power of that? The final defeat of Satan was near when Paul wrote Romans.
The martyrs cried for vengeance, God promised to avenge them speedily. Luke 18:8; same as Rev.6:9, when the martyrs are given white robes & told to wait for a "little while"
You are correct about Isaiah 2. In Isaiah 2-4. In fact, in Luke 23:28-31, Jesus applied Isaiah's last days prophecy of the Day of the Lord to the events of AD70. When Isaiah predicted the establishment of the kingdom, he was predicting the time of the resurrection. When Daniel & Ezekiel predicted the time of the resurrection, they were predicting the time of the kingdom. When Jesus, therefore predicted the coming of the kingdom, within the framework of the fall of Jerusalem (Luke 21:28-31), this was an implicit, but powerful declaration of the time of the resurrection.(Dan12,2,&7)
Isaiah 2:2, "in the last days," ;Daniel 12:4, "Time of the end"; Rev10:6-7, "No more delay"
Isaiah 2:2f, "Kingdom established"; Dan 12:13, "Time of inheritance" ; Rev.11:15, "Kingdom given to the saints, at resurrection."
Isa 2:10,19f) "At the Day of the Lord"; Dan12, Term not used but elements of that Day present; Rev.6:12f;16:14f, "Great Day of the Lord"
Isa.4:2, Day when "Branch of the Lord glorified"; - ; Rev19, Day of glorious coming of Christ.
Isa 4:2-4, Salvation of Israel's remnant.; Dan12:1, Salvation of Israel ; Rev 7:4-8,14:1f- Salvation of remnant of Israel.
Isa 4:3, Salvation of those in God's book; Dan12:1, Salvation for those in God's book.; Rev 20:12, Salvation for those in God's book.
Isa 4:4, Israel's salvation "by spirit of fire and judgment; Dan12-Those written in the book saved at the time of Great Tribulation-v1; Rev7:14, Salvation for those who come out of the Great tribulation.
Isa 4:6, Tabernacle of God is with man; Dan12:2,13), Reception of inheritance, eternal life; Rev 21:3, Behold the tabernacle of God is with men.
Isa 3:13-14,24f, Time when Israel is judged in the "war" Dan12:7, All things fulfilled when the power of the holy people destroyed ; Rev11:8;17-18) Time when the city that killed the Lord judged.
quote:
There is a break but the end-times are continued in chapter 13. This starts a section in Isaiah which goes through to chapter 30-35 depending upon whom you want to reference for commentary.
Now while Isaiah references nations of his time and you can say it's all been done before, so too will God take out His Wrath upon the nations in the futuristic end-times model. Jesus parallels Isaiah 13:5 in Mt 24:31 in gathering the Elect. I think Isaiah 13:5 reflects the Firstfruits of the Harvest: the 144,000. In Isaiah 13:6, the prophecy is pegged to the Day of the Lord.
Isaiah 13 is about the destruction of ANCIENT Babylon by the Medes. Not to be confused with Babylon- the mother of all harlots in Revelation.
That is a topic in itself. Or should I say-books!
quote:
But my point is that not only can I not find anything which matches what God will do in Isaiah to what happened in the first century - neither do we find the early church exclaiming that they have entered into any peace of God's Kingdom here on earth. I don't think the Millennium is made for the Church. I think the Church is gathered up at the end of this age. I think the Millennium is for Israel's Salvation, the same Israel which rejected God before too as well as the Remnant and their prodigy.
The concept of the New Heavens & New earth & New Jerusalem by Isaiah is poetry, comparing what was lost in the Garden to how salvation life would be through the Prince of Peace.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 11:29:05 PM
|
|
|
Sinner-Saint
Posts: 499
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sooner
But posting what Thomas Ice and Tim Lahaye is?
It was a valid word study. Do you only read who you want to listen to because of their eschatology?
Regarding Spurgeon, what he concluded about the one 'seven' being in the past does not prove anything - you have to look at what he was looking at and assess the reasons he gives to see if they carry any weight.
If you want to just throw his opinions up, I have to ask: so what?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 11:36:27 PM
|
|
|
Sinner-Saint
Posts: 499
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SandyWings
That depends on one's definition of "millennium."
I use it as John uses it to describe the next age.
quote:
ORIGINAL: SandyWings
The thousand yrs. is not literal. The Book of Revelation is not literal nor does it have a strict chronological sequence.
Here is where I think the Amillennial crowd, the Post-Millennium crowd and the Preterist crowd as a subset is really disingenuous.
Saying Revelation is not literal, or alternately is all figurative, allows them to escape the hard work in understanding it.
Furthermore, within Revelation's many parallel accounts, it does describe a linear sequence-of-events.
The fact that you can't make out a strict chronological sequence is because of the nature of the parallel accounts within Revelation. Once you look for both a change of scene and of focus just as we use in movies to convey parallel action; each account provides a chronological sequence. The length of these sequences varies, but each is linear. While each parallel account tells a narrative, you cannot read the whole book of Revelation like a novel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 11:42:21 PM
|
|
|
Sinner-Saint
Posts: 499
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SandyWings
Isaiah 13 is about the destruction of ANCIENT Babylon by the Medes.
Unfortunately for your side of the argument, Isaiah 13 mentions the Day of the Lord. This is a specific and unique Day which heralds Jesus' parousia.
quote:
ORIGINAL: SandyWings
The concept of the New Heavens & New earth & New Jerusalem by Isaiah is poetry
No, it is repeated by John as being a condition after the Millennium.
Furthermore, Peter repeats it as a real promise:
2Pe 3:13 But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness.
Imagine a universe created by God which did not include His second law of thermodynamics!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/3/2008 1:03:24 AM
|
|
|
SandyWings
Posts: 46
Joined: 2/21/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sinner-Saint
quote:
ORIGINAL: SandyWings
Isaiah 13 is about the destruction of ANCIENT Babylon by the Medes.
quote:
Unfortunately for your side of the argument, Isaiah 13 mentions the Day of the Lord. This is a specific and unique Day which heralds Jesus' parousia.
No, not in Isaiah13. There were several Days of the Lord". They were all not just against Israel either.! This is definitely against Babylon, as in king Nebuchadnezzar Babylon. Read it again. God made Babylon great & to come against Judah, and God tooketh away also!
quote:
ORIGINAL: SandyWings
The concept of the New Heavens & New earth & New Jerusalem by Isaiah is poetry
No, it is repeated by John as being a condition after the Millennium.
Furthermore, Peter repeats it as a real promise:
2Pe 3:13 But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness.
quote:
Imagine a universe created by God which did not include His second law of thermodynamics!
The only new "universe there is is the 3rd heaven which we go to when we die.
St.Peter didn't say the material planet was going to burn up by fire. First of all, keep it in context. He said in the early days God sent the flood. But God didn't destroy the foundation of the world, just the wicked therein.
Fire prophetically & what St. Peter is preaching1
Fire Signifies fierce destruction, judgment while living, & that by the divine sanction of God. "For He is like the refiner's fire" to consume the dross.(Mal3:2) "For behold the Lord will come with fire, to render His anger with fury," (Isa 66:15) "For by fire and sword will the Lord plead with all flesh, and the slain of the Lordshall be many." Isa66:16)
And in Rev3, (this is really old stuff to me ie- even amils agree) The promise was to the New Jerusalem.
Rev14 has the firstfruits on Mt.Zion. This is heaven. Paul already said in Galatians. The Jerusalem that is above, not the earthly one at that time, being in bondage.
There is no proof for the Zionist/millenium POV from scripture. It's just not there. There's not even a mention in the few paltry verses in Rev. 20 of Jesus even being on earth for thousand yrs! The whole tribulation or even the "30-40+ yrs" in Revelation take up 19 chapters. For a thousand, there's like 2 verses which say nothing but destruction. That's bc Rev20 is a recap. It's not in order as if it were to be literal. There's nothing in Rev20 to describe any glorius time for anyone. No OT prophecy being described as being fulfilled in any way. The OT saints were hoping for the New Jerusalem, which is in heaven above. Mt. Zion. The City comes down prophetically at the resurrection then on Mt. Zion. The mother of us all-the New Jerusalem, which is free-freedom in Christ.
Exactly. St.Peter puts the millennium theory to rest.
2Pet 3:10-13
The Day of the Lord
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.[a] 11 Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.
Footnotes:
1. 2 Peter 3:10 NU-Text reads laid bare (literally found)
The New Heaven & Earth follows the destruction of the apostate nation of Israel in the 1st century. Rev21 "Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and first earth had passed away."
The new heavens & earth that Peter, Isaiah speak of is the same language the Lord used.
The prophetic meaning of heaven & earth here is inescapable. Did you ever think in a million years that God would destroy even the "Old" LITERAL heaven? Never mind the earth for now, although in 2Peter3 - it proves that that's not so either. Would God destroy heaven? That concept & 2Peter3, was my most convincing realization which made me ultimately study & become a preterist.
Heaven & earth prophetically mean - the whole universe,politically & religious. Heaven is always the symbol of government, the higher places in the political universe. "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall never pass away." (Mt.24:35) [sound familiar? Rev.21?) Here the Jewish power is represented by the heaven & earth, & the symbol denotes its passing away. "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law, until all is accomplished."
Now if this were at the end of human history, instead of the end of the age (Jewish polity) Then we would still be under the Law.
Contrare to you saying that we say Revelation is figurative- let me correct you. Revelation is written in symbols. To "signify" is in the opening chapter. These symbols have prophetic meanings. They do not have hyper-literal meaning like a beast actually coming out of the sea, the dragon spewing a river on a woman trying to drown her, actual angels being stationed on the Euphrates river, literal stars falling from the sky, rivers becoming like blood, from anything else but to signify history that bodies would be in the waters!, etc.
That's the trouble with believing in the literal fulfillment of Revelation. These make up stories what the symbols are instead of what they're meant to be prophetically within the literal genre. By using this fiction, they can escape any acknowledgment of history, & just use future hype.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 3/11/2008 1:48:26 PM
|
|
|
parousia70
Posts: 163
Joined: 5/29/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sinner-Saint
Unfortunately for your side of the argument, Isaiah 13 mentions the Day of the Lord. This is a specific and unique Day which heralds Jesus' parousia.
Once again incorrect. There have been SEVERAL "Day of the Lord" events in Biblical History.
However, Even in the face of irrfetuable biblical evidence to the contrary, you maintain the position that there is only ONE "Day of the Lord" spoken of in scripture.
I posted this before (and you offered no refutation) so I'll post it again, if only for the benefit of our readers:
The desolation of Jerusalem by the Babylonians was a past "Day of the Lord." After it happened, the prophet Jeremiah tells us:
Lamentations 1:12
behold, and see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow, which is done unto me, wherewith the LORD hath afflicted me in the day of his fierce anger.
Lamentations 2:1
How hath the Lord covered the daughter of Zion with a cloud in his anger, and cast down from heaven unto the earth the beauty of Israel, and remembered not his footstool in the day of his anger
Lamentations 2:21
The young and the old lie on the ground in the streets: my virgins and my young men are fallen by the sword; thou hast slain them in the day of thine anger; thou hast killed, and not pitied.
Lamentations 2:22
Thou hast called as in a solemn day my terrors round about, so that in the day of the LORD'S anger none escaped nor remained
Note also that it was God who did the killing! Did anyone SEE Jehovah kill people? Was the prophet lying? Of course not. This is how the prophets spoke.
Furthermore, Ezekiel had foretold of this same Day of the Lord against Jerusalem which took place in the 500s BC, saying:
Ezekiel 7:19
They shall cast their silver in the streets, and their gold shall be removed: their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of Jehovah: | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
